Search

ElephantTail

The Musings of Mike Spindell

Search results

"James comey"

Before this Weekend, James Comey Was “Merely” a Biased FBI Director…..Why the Surprise?

Last month FBI Director James Comey appeared before a Congressional Committee and spoke about the premise behind the “Black Lives Matter” movement.

“Anecdotes, rather than statistical analysis, fuel America’s debate around policing, FBI Director James Comey pointed out during a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday.

Comey argued that the United States does not have enough information about police use of force against black people to have an intelligent discussion about it.

“All of those conversations are uninformed today. They are all driven by anecdotes because as a country, we simply don’t have the information to know: Do we have an epidemic of violence directed by law enforcement against black folks? Do we have an epidemic involving brown folks, white folks? We just don’t know. And in the absence of that data, we’re driven entirely by anecdotes. And that’s a very bad place to be,” Comey said to the committee.

Comey urged people to wait for the information before coming to a conclusion on whether there is an “epidemic of violence” in the country. Until the country has statistics, there is no way to tell if shootings against any group of people are up or down, he said.

“Nor can anybody else in this country. So to discuss the most important things that are going on in this country, we need information. And the government should collect it. I  can’t think of something that’s more inherently governmental than the need to use deadly force in an encounter during law enforcement work,” Comey argued.

Comey told the committee that the FBI has plans to build and maintain a database on deadly police shootings. He said to expect the database within the next year or two.”http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/28/fbi-director-says-black-lives-matter-uninformed-anecdotally-driven/

So let’s think about this.  The FBI director Comey when discussing an FBI database detailing police killings of people of color inHe said to expect the database within the next year or two.”  Now an “unoffical” database, put together by The Guardian, shows that in 2016 194 Black people were killed by police in America in 2016.  How curious is it that the The Guardian, with rather small resources, was able to put a database together and the FBI with virtual armies of statisticians is “one to two years” away?  By the time the FBI gets their act together,  perhaps more that 400 more Black people will be killed by police.  My sense is that Mr. Comey believes that within the next “one or two years” the issue will be mute, especially if “Law and Order” Donald Trump is elected.

Perhaps a more pertinent explanation for Director Comey’s attitude can be found here?:

“FBI director James Comey, in a speech to the University of Chicago Law School on Friday, gave voice to a controversial theory that scrutiny of police conduct and the threat of exposure through “viral videos” has generated a “chill wind blowing through American law enforcement over the last year.”

Comey’s description of “The YouTube Effect” as “the one explanation that does explain the calendar and the map and that makes the most sense to me” contrasts with the uncertainty of his remarks following a meeting with the nation’s law enforcement officials on October 7″  Here.

In essence James Comey is saying that videotaping police killings is harmful to police.  So I guess his attitude is “Police Lives Matter More Than Black Lives”.  Perhaps Comey’s “non- Partisanship” is a figment of the inside the Beltway’s pundit’s and news media’s imagination. Perhaps it explains his injecting himself into the Presidential Race this past weekend.  Now Comey’s  also entertained the notion that “All Lives Matter”. If that is the case perhaps he might be interested that the same database linked above (here) reveals that in 2016 886 people have been killed by police.  We wouldn’t even have this discussion though, were it not for the videotapes that James Comey decries.

comey-fbi-portrait

After Comey’s Demise There is One Only Important Question

James Comey did deserve to be fired,  but his firing at this point is frightening for us all, because it may mark the start of a Trump Coup. At this point, with the information available, the evidence of a connection between Trump and Russia is overwhelming.  Denial that there must be a high level investigation of this connection, in the light of all the revelations made public, is absurd.  Trump fired Comey after Senate testimony again brought focus upon the Russian intervention in our election and as has happened time and again, Trump has tried to change the narrative.  All over our news media today we will hear recapitulations of what is known of the Russian investigation thus far,  complemented with arguments pro and con as to the propriety of the firing.  Cutting to the chase though, I believe that Comey’s firing was an indication that Donald Trump is moving to dispense with the “Rule of Law” and thus rule this country autocratically. If I am correct then there is only one important question to be asked and the answer to it may be decisive in shaping the history of America in the years to come.

Will the Republican Majority in Congress act to rein in their President, or will they yield to their selfish interests?

All of the Democratic partisans in Congress may vehemently protest against the apparent usurpation of power by Trump and yet are unable to do anything to stop the coming Trump Coup simply because they are in the minority.  This discussion from last night’s Lawrence O’Donnell MSNBC show sums up in 6 minutes the problematic nature of the Comey firing and what it indicates:

Yet all of this negative publicity will accomplish nothing if the Republican majorities in both Houses of Congress choose to ignore it. This morning I heard Republican Senator Lindsey Graham say that this firing didn’t concern him, because the FBI was an organization composed of brave and independent investigators insulated from partisan politics. In my opinion The FBI Has Never Been What We Thought It Was and given its’ history will not protect us from a Trump Coup.  I believe that Donald Trump is a would be Fascist Dictator and  it makes me very afraid.

For me, the only question that will determine the future history of maintaining a Constitutional Republic in the United States, is whether the Republicans in Congress are patriotic and courageous enough to act against their partisan self-interest.  If they lack the integrity and the courage then we are in deep trouble and our only course is to redouble our efforts to resist.

 

Is Trump a Moron, a Racist or Just an Obnoxious Boor?

My answer to the question posed by my title is that Trump actually can be described by all three of those negative nouns.  Throughout the torture of Trump’s short presidency it seems clear that the majority of Americans would use at least one of those terms to describe their commander-in-chief.  One thing I’ve wondered about though is how this awful person, impersonating a world leader, is seen outside America, by other than the adoring Russians. Below I’m sharing an opinion piece by the Liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz in full, because not only do I think it has pertinent insights, but it also places them in an historical context that interests me.

Is Trump Really a ‘Moron,’ as Tillerson Said, or Just Racist and Obnoxious?

“Winston Churchill, savior of Western civilization and arguably the greatest British leader in history, had some dark sides that have receded in memory in the shadow of his epic stand against Adolf Hitler. Churchill was a white supremacist who opposed India’s independence, supported concentration camps in South Africa, viewed Arabs as degenerate horse thieves and backed Zionism, among other reasons, as an antidote to Jewish Bolshevism’s war on the capitalist West. Churchill was also a champion of eugenics, which aimed to improve the human race by weeding out undesirables, a view that was popular in both Britain and the U.S. until it emerged that the Nazis were taking it to its logical extreme. Several decades before that, however, Churchill advocated sterilization of the mentally disabled as well as their isolation in internment camps in which they would be prevented from reproducing.

Churchill was one of the main supporters of the Mental Deficiency Act legislated by the British Parliament in 1913, which replaced the 1886 Idiots Act. In addition to people whose moral corruption cannot be corrected, the Act defined three levels of mental deficiency: Worst off were “idiots,” who needed protection from themselves, then “imbeciles,” from whom society needed protection. and then the “feeble-minded,” those with the lightest mental impairment, who needed constant training and supervision in order to function in society.

The law allowed authorities to detain the mentally impaired and to intern them in homes, camps or so-called colonies: over 65,000 were interned in Britain and a similar number in the United States, although America also instituted mass sterilization of the mentally impaired, which the British did not. The United States had a similar, though not identical, classification of the mentally impaired, which was heavily influenced by the advent of IQ tests. “Idiots” were those with IQs lower than 25, “imbeciles” had IQs lower than 50, but the term “feeble-minded,” which was used in Britain, was replaced by another term coined in 1910 by psychologist Henry Goddard. Those with IQs from 51 to 70 would henceforth be known as “morons.”

All of these terms were eventually deemed to be derogatory and were removed from professional lexicons by the early 1970s, along with the general change in society’s attitude toward the intellectually disabled, as they are called today. The term “moron,” along with “idiot” and “imbecile,” joined the ever-growing stock of insults that include “stupid,” “dumb,” “cretin,” “ignoramus,” “nitwit,” “simpleton,” “numbskull” and the like. But the word “moron” is still pejorative enough that if forced U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to humiliate himself in front of the country on Wednesday after NBC reported that he had used it over the summer to depict U.S. President Donald Trump. In a rare appearance before television cameras, Tillerson praised Trump’s diplomatic wisdom with superlatives worthy of Bismarck, Metternich and Kissinger put together, though he noticeably refrained from denying that he had called Trump a “moron.” That task was left to U.S. State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert, who asserted that Tillerson wouldn’t use such language. Stephanie Ruhl, one of the NBC reporters with the scoop, admitted that Nauert was right: According to her sources, Tillerson hadn’t called Trump a “moron” but a “fucking moron.” True to the principle that one can always find an embarrassing Trump tweet for just about everything, New York Magazine promptly located the 2014 tweet in which Trump showcased a caricature of a Founding Father telling colleagues: “I keep thinking we should include something in the constitution in case the people elect a fucking moron.” Trump probably meant it as a dig at former U.S. President Barack Obama.

Ruhl maintained that not only had Tillerson used the offensive term to describe Trump, but that U.S. Vice President Pence, U.S. Secretary of Defense Mattis and then-Homeland Security chief John Kelly had to dissuade the secretary of state from resigning. Ruhl, whose report was published as Trump was making his way to a Las Vegas still reeling from the horrific shoot-out last Sunday night, said that Tillerson’s tirade came after Trump’s monumentally offensive speech in July to thousands of boy scouts, in which he dissed Obama, praised himself and seemed to be using sexual innuendo to describe the lives of wealthy people with yachts. Tillerson, who devoted many years of his life to the scouts movement as he was climbing to the top of Exxon’s corporate ladder, blew his top and called Trump a “moron” – and probably nastier things as well.

He wasn’t the first and won’t be the last, of course. Stupidity is one of the more easily accessible and widespread explanations for Trump’s behavior. It’s no coincidence, of course, that his election resurrected the futuristic cult classic “Idiocracy’ about a dumbed down America that chooses a loutish porn actor as president. It’s true that Trump has claimed in the past that his IQ is much higher than that of Obama or of comedian John Stewart, but in that case, he’s doing an excellent job of concealing his intelligence, as his visit this week to Puerto Rico showed.

Trump came to the island under a cloud of criticism over the federal government’s allegedly slow response to the destruction wrought by Hurricane Maria as well his own dismissive attitude toward Puerto Ricans and their leaders, which stood in stark contrast to the tone of his message in the hurricane-hit states of Florida and Texas. But rather than trying to cheer up Puerto Ricans, as he did in Texas, or console them, as he would later do in Las Vegas, Trump insulted the island’s residents on their own home turf. He told them they should be grateful they weren’t hit with a “real catastrophe” like Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005. He didn’t stop complaining about the drain of Puerto Rican recovery on the federal budget, which he didn’t even mention in Texas or Florida. And to cap it all off, Trump was filmed tossing out paper towels to his audience in a scene deemed by one broadcaster as “the least presidential ever.”

Some people ascribe Trump’s behavior in such events to obnoxious racism rather than stupidity. Prejudice and racial stereotypes are such a prominent feature of his personality, they maintain, that he just can’t keep them under lock. He has described himself as ‘the least racist person ever,” but since he launched his presidential run by describing Mexican immigrants as rapists and murderers, Trump has described Puerto Ricans as lazy, Muslims as wannabe terrorists, African-Americans as thugs, Jews as proficient with money and women as inferior sexual objects. It’s only among neo-Nazis, apparently, that Trump has found “some fine people.”

Others cite Trump’s sensational victory in the elections – assuming that it wasn’t all the result of a Russian sting operation – as proof of his political smarts. According to this view, all of Trump’s scandals, controversies, insults and inanities are but a ploy aimed at rallying his base, first to win the elections and then as leverage against the unruly Republican Party. Like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, Trump is a smart guy pretending to be a dunce. If that’s true, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be worried by Barak Ravid’s report on Wednesday that Trump told the United Nations’ secretary general that the prime minister is more problematic that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. If Trump is a “moron,” on the other hand, as Tillerson testified, then his words about Netanyahu should be taken as seriously as his assertions about Obama’s birth certificate, his support for Marine Le Pen in the French elections and his praise for the homicidal Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, who will have the privilege of hosting Trump next month.

The problem with the Trump-is-actually-clever theory is that his outlandish statements and unfounded assertions don’t just harm America’s international image or divide its own population – they often do the most damage to Trump himself. The U.S. president has shot himself in the foot so regularly that it is only natural to assume he may not be the sharpest pencil in the box. He fired FBI Director James Comey, a move which Steve Bannon described as the worst presidential mistake ever, but then made things much worse for himself by admitting, contrary to the official line, that he did so because of the investigation of his ties to Russia. Trump made sure that even if Special Counsel Robert Mueller didn’t collect enough evidence on the alleged collusion, he would always be able to nail Trump on obstruction of justice. The same is true of Trump’s ham-handed effort to concoct a cover story for his son Donald’s hitherto unreported meeting with a Russian lawyer with close ties to the Kremlin, which fell apart within hours. Or the time he undermined administration efforts to claim that his Muslim ban was anything but by confirming that this is exactly what it was. And so on and so forth.

Intelligence is no guarantee of success, of course. Jimmy Carter had an IQ of 176, but most Americans consider him to be the worst U.S. president in modern times. Trump came to the White House with less useful or general knowledge than his predecessors, but his uniqueness lies with the fact that he seems uninterested in learning. He disdains the mainstream media, doesn’t trust his intelligence briefings and seems to rely on Fox News and even loonier right-wing news sites for his basic information about the world. He has admitted that he often makes decisions without knowing the facts, not a trait usually associated with the astute.

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo wrote an article about Trump’s suspected dimness, which spawned the term “Trump’s Razor” after “Occam’s Razor,” of which Netanyahu is fond. Whereas Occam’s Razor stipulates that where there are several possible explanations for something, the simplest one is usually correct, Trump’s Razor says that where there are several possible explanations for something Trump has said or done, the stupidest is always the right one. But even if we assume that Trump is far from stupid, and definitely not a “moron,” most people would agree that both his election and his presidency are an insult to America’s intelligence, as well as the world’s.”

Trump Knows About “Fake News”…..It Was “Fake News” That Got Him Elected

The 2016 election was won by a person who ran a disgustingly racist campaign, was disliked and distrusted by the majority of Americans and whose fraudulent past was buried under the false mythology of his competence.  By the same token, Hillary Clinton was also a disliked and distrusted candidate,  as many pundits have opined in their post election analyses. That these pundits analysis is flawed can be seen in the following:

The fact is that Hillary Clinton wasn’t unpopular when she announced her decision to run in April 2015. If you look at the Gallup survey in March of last year, 50 percent of Americans had a favorable impression of Clinton, only 39 percent an unfavorable one. So there was clearly no deep reservoir of Clinton hatred among the general public at the time. On the contrary: Americans liked her; they liked her quite a bit.

Already by June, however, her favorability had not only taken a hit. It had plummeted. By July, according to Gallup, her favorability hit an all-time low with only 38 percent positively and 57 percent viewing her negatively — putting her 19 points underwater.”

Those paragraphs are from an article by Neil Gabler who detailed his view that our nation’s mainstream media has actually drummed up the hatred of Hillary Clinton,  less as a result of animus, but as the result of trying to create a seemingly even handed narrative.  I think his logic is compelling. Follow this link “How the Media Manufactured the Public’s Anger at Hillary Clinton” to understand Gabler’s logic.  My own premise is to take our phony, fraudster President at his word and understand that indeed “Fake News” is driving most of the political narrative in our country,  but to comprehend that he owes his current position solely to “Fake News“.

Journalist Eric Alterman, writing at Bill Moyers and Company , analyzes a scholarly study from Harvard titled: Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential ElectionAlterman’s piece appears in Salon headlined How conservatives manipulated the mainstream media to give us President TrumpAlterman concludes:

“Today we are living that disaster in the form of a president who is a racist, sexist, Islamophobic psychopath, and it is long past time that the members of the mainstream media woke up to the threat not only to their livelihoods, but to their entire reason for being. It’s a cliché, to be sure, but when it comes to a lie-filled media cloud, if you’re not part of the solution, then you are truly part of the problem.”

Alterman introduces the Harvard study’s conception of a media cloud as a device:

“to help us visualize the manner in which media is actually consumed. Because people tend to get their news in a haphazard way these days — picking up stories from Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, local TV, talk radio, cable, network news, newsweeklies, daily newspapers, and the websites that may or may not be part of a daily diet — it doesn’t make sense to simply treat media consumption as a matter of statistics. Sure, many sources — like this one, for instance — are far more trustworthy when it comes to facts and evidence than many others, but most news consumers do not make this distinction.”

The point is that we, the news consumers,  have a dizzying number of ways to get our news of the world today and our sources are far more diverse that the newspapers and television news outlets we define as the mainstream media. As he goes on:

“the media cloud project clarifies a number of points that ought to alarm anyone who cares about the future of American democracy and the ability of the mainstream media to cut through the massive layers of propaganda purposely created by far-right elements to confuse facts and undermine evidence. Indeed, what the cloud shows is that the mainstream media is much more likely to follow the lead of the liars than to challenge them.

Among the key findings of the report regarding the reporting of the 2016 election are:

  • On the conservative side, more attention was paid to pro-Trump, highly partisan media outlets. On the liberal side, by contrast, the center of gravity was made up largely of long-standing media organizations steeped in the traditions and practices of objective journalism.
  • Donald Trump succeeded in shaping the election agenda. Coverage of Trump overwhelmingly outperformed coverage of Clinton. Clinton’s coverage was focused on scandals, while Trump’s coverage focused on his core issues.
  • Attempts by the Clinton campaign to define her campaign on competence, experience and policy positions were drowned out by coverage of alleged improprieties associated with the Clinton Foundation and emails. Coverage of Trump associated with immigration, jobs and trade was greater than that of his personal scandals.
  • Immigration and Muslims/Islam were the two most widely covered substantive issues of the campaign.

What’s going on here is that conservatives are winning a war that liberals, centrists and, indeed, anyone who believes that politics should be tethered to recognizable reality don’t even know they are fighting. Racism and Islamophobia from outlets like Breitbart and the lunatic ravings of Infowars’ Alex Jones — which somehow make even Breitbart appear relatively reasonable — drove the news coverage of the election even in our most prestigious outlets. Twitter and Facebook were dominated by phony stories designed to discredit Clinton, and cable news, in its ceaseless quest for ratings and the advertising dollars that follow them, reinforced these priorities, allowing Trump surrogates to lie with impunity and without correction.”

What we saw then in the 2016 Election Campaign was the phenomenon of a Right Wing Propaganda Machine FOX News,  Breitbart and Infowars publicizing and scandalizing two factually ridiculous “Fake News Stories“.  The first Benghazi was a phony crisis that was manipulated by the aforementioned Right Wing Propaganda Machine and the manipulation included Congressional Hearings producing no culpable evidence but copious sensational news stories;  the mother of a Benghazi victim calling for criminal charges against Clinton at the Republican Convention; and even an adventure movie funded by a Right Wing Billionaire.  While from the beginning of this phony crisis, it was obvious that Clinton shared no culpability for the murdered foreign service officers,  the “Fake News” clamor laying blame upon Clinton forced the “mainstream” media outlets to cover the non-story. These news outlets hewing to their policy of even-handedness actually succeeded in advancing the “Fake News” about the Benghazi killings.  The falsified uproar created an impression of Clinton culpability that was not supported by the actual evidence and in their cowardly even-handedness,  our paragons of mainstream journalistic probity, help to create an unduly negative portrait of the Democratic candidate.

The Clinton E Mail Scandalwas the other over-hyped story that served to diminish the public’s view of Hillary Clinton.  Although it was publicly known from the outset that former Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice also utilized private servers,  the Right Wing propaganda outlets mercilessly hyped the story, forcing the mainstream media to cover it and thus giving equal time to the propagandist skewed version of what was there materially.  Such was the grandstanding of the propagandist claque and the cynical outrage of Republicans in Congress,  that the FBI investigated the case and Director James Comey found himself influencing the election as he tried to appear even-handed as well. As we now know there was nothing that compromised American security and the upshot was that this was another example of the “Fake Newsgot this unqualified con man elected.

Perhaps though, the biggest example of “Fake Newsthat led to the election of this disgusting person was the fact that our mainstream media, in their misguided understanding of journalistic ethics,  failed miserably in conveying the truth about who Donald Trump really was.  The stories of Trump‘s mistreatment of women,  his bigotry and his failures as a businessman were and have been available since the mid 1970’s.  Our mainstream media was nevertheless derelict in their reportage of Trump during the campaign,  allowing for the most part the falsehoods about his business acumen to go unchallenged and in doing so to foster his claim that as a businessman only he had the skills to “fix” our government.

Yet the worst aspect of the real “Fake Newswas that the election coverage of the Trump campaign and his outrageously simplistic platform, drowned out any attempt by the Clinton forces to get their own message across,  while at the same time enmeshing her in phony scandals of no real electoral import.  Covering the doings of this maliciously zany mountebank almost non-stop gave him the impetus and name recognition to prevail in the Electoral College.

For those of us of Progressive sentiments,  who are committed to resisting and replacing Trump, our task is daunting.  Unlike our opponents, we tend to rely on mainstream media outlets like the New York Times,  the Washington Post and in the information age most heavily on CNN, MSNBC and websites like HuffPost and Politico.  You will note that all of  those mentioned are profit making entities and as such succumbed to the Trump phenomena because it brought them great profit. While there is much that is positive to be said about the integrity of these outlets, they all seem to suffer under the misunderstanding that they must always act evenhandedly in reporting the news. By doing so they often set up situations of false equivalency,  the best example of which is reporting on a debate on evolution between a creationist and a biologist, as if each side was of equal value. Given the above I believe that a mainstay of our resistance and replacement must be understanding the “Fake Newscoming from the news source We trust, because of their reliance upon the idea that they must be evenhanded.

 

 

 

 

 

A Sad Tale of a Bad President: Trump Accomplishments After His First 6 Months

Let’s look back to last summer as a “Hero” arose to “Make America Great Again“:

Yes, it seems enough people believed that Trump was the “Only One Who Could Fix America“, that with the aid of Vlad Putin,  the bumbling of James Comey and an Electoral College that skews racist,  this incompetent boob got elected President.  Let’s look at the “accomplishments” of this Presidential fraud as presented by the conservative leaning Dallas Morning News,  which while deep in the heart of Red State Texas, endorsed Hillary Clinton.  This paper’s former Washington Bureau Chief Carl P. Leubsdorf outlined Trump’s achievements during his first six months in office  and this is what he found:

“President Donald Trump’s first six months have been defined by his often angry and tasteless tweets, his ham-handed efforts to denigrate and undercut the multiple investigations into Russian influence in the 2016 election and the stalemated legislative battle to repeal and replace Obamacare.

But Trump is right in saying he has significantly influenced government and the nation’s image — though much of his impact has been negative. His most significant clear-cut triumph was installing conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. He can take credit for slowing the inflow of illegal immigrants. And his impact has gone well beyond that:

FOREIGN POLICY

-Embraced autocrats in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Philippines, Egypt and abandoned longtime U.S leadership in seeking to enhance democracy and human rights.

-Insulted U.S. allies in Europe, especially Germany, and undercut longstanding U.S. treaty commitments.

-Compromised Israel’s intelligence sources.

-Spurred more divisiveness in an already divided Middle East by setting off a squabble between Saudi Arabia, a major U.S. ally, and Qatar, home of the region’s biggest U.S.  military base.

-Undermined U.S. global leadership on climate change by withdrawing from the Paris agreement, joining only Syria and Nicaragua as nonparticipants.

-Reversed decades of Republican support for free trade, ceding leadership in Asia to China by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and elsewhere by encouraging the British exit from the European Community.

DOMESTIC POLICY

-Proposed a budget with massive cuts that would shred the social safety net and cripple longstanding governmental functions.

-Created uncertainty in the nation’s health care system by sending inconsistent administrative signals and supporting legislation that could deprive millions of people health insurance coverage, undermine Medicaid health support for lower income Americans and give wealthy taxpayers a massive tax cut.

-Mismanaged the federal government by failing to fill many top spots and installing an inexperienced, dysfunctional White House staff.

-Expanded the policy of deporting dangerous illegal aliens by including many people with minimal records, stable jobs and American families.

-Created a commission to investigate his unproven allegations of voter fraud because he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

-Reversed decades of bipartisan cooperation in extending environmental preservation of national landmarks.

-Hired foxes to watch the chicken coops by filling his administration with arch conservatives, many with records opposing the very agencies in which they work, and curbing civil rights and environmental enforcement.

INSTITUTIONAL DAMAGE:

-Committed potentially impeachable offenses of obstructing justice that prompted appointment of a Special Counsel by firing FBI Director James Comey, because of his probe into possible Trump campaign collusion with Russia, and urging other intelligence officials to pressure Comey to halt the probe.

-Undermined the courts with denunciations of judges and their decisions affecting his administration’s policies, especially those curbing his hastily issued ban on Muslim travel from certain countries.

-Without evidence, accused former President Barack Obama of illegally wiretapping his phones.

-Repeatedly misrepresented his administration’s policies and trashed officials with whom he has disagreements, calling the  ousted Comey “a nut job,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer the “head clown” and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi an “incompetent.”

-Intensified racial and other divisions by reducing governmental civil rights guarantees and reversing protections for sexual and racial minorities.

-Violated his own self-proclaimed ethics laws by allowing officials to deal with issues affecting their former employers. Permitted multiple instances in which he and other family members benefit financially from his presidency.

-Waged a vendetta against news outlets subjecting his administration to scrutiny, calling the mainstream media the “enemy of the American people” and denouncing unfavorable stories as “fake news.” Undercut White House press institutions intended to facilitate dialogue between the presidency and the public.

Trump has failed so far to enact promised measures to increase economic growth, resulting in reduced long-term forecasts. Many economic numbers he touts exaggerate his impact and denigrate the carryover effect of positive Obama policies. Military progress against ISIS has not eased its terrorist threat.

The result: the least support for any new modern president, an exacerbation of domestic divisions, and unprecedented global disdain and embarrassment.”

Rather than “Making America Great Again“, this malicious and malignant person has done more harm to this country over a 6 month period than anyone in our long history,  other than perhaps the leader of the Southern Treason, Jefferson Davis.

The idea of a “Resistance” to Trump,  is not one born from partisan division, but from a deep love and thus patriotic feeling for our country.  If left unchecked, the harm this narcissistic incompetent  has inflicted upon our nation will endanger us all internationally;  subject us to a “Fundamentalist Sharia Law“;  oppress People of Color; destroy public education;  and strengthen the hold of Billionaire Oligarchs upon these United States. The most ironic aspect of this is that the “successes”  this fraud has achieved do not derive from a “Machiavellian Skill-set” because he is incapable of consistent thought,  but from the Right Wing ideologues and religious Fundamentalists that comprise his Administration.

The only clear choice for the majority of Americans who see this potential for turning our country into a feudal kleptocracy, eerily similar to Russia today, is to Resist this treasonous cabal and free ourselves of this malevolent clown who has stolen the Presidency and is corrupting our Nation.

 

So Trump Bombed Syria, Was It a Scam to Raise His Popularity?

Seymour Hersh is probably the most distinguished American Investigative journalist around today.  He became famous and won a Pulitzer Prize for exposing the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War.   Hersh recently wrote an article on the bombing of the Syrian airbase by Trump and the likelihood that the gassing of civilians was the result of an accident, rather than a vicious attack by Assad.  The article details that Trump knew about this before he ordered the bombing and that he refused to listen to his military and national security advisors when he ordered the bombing.  Most peculiar is that though Hersh shopped the article all around Western media, he was only able to publish it at a German news-site.

An article at Alternet by Jonathan Cook discusses why Hersh was unable to find a major news outlet to pay attention to this explosive and newsworthy story.

After Sy Hersh’s Bombshell Investigation, Why Won’t Media Tell the Real Story of Trump’s Military Strike in Syria?

If you wish to understand the degree to which the supposedly free western media are constructing a world of half-truths and deceptions to manipulate their audiences, keeping us uninformed and pliant, there could hardly be a better case study than their treatment of Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh.

All of these highly competitive, for-profit, scoop-seeking media outlets separately took identical decisions: first to reject Hersh’s latest investigative report, and then to studiously ignore it once it was published in Germany last Sunday. They have continued to maintain an absolute radio silence on his revelations, even as over the past few days they have given a great deal of attention to two stories on the very issue Hersh’s investigation addresses.

These two stories, given such prominence in the western media, are clearly intended to serve as “spoilers” to his revelations, even though none of these publications has actually informed their readers of his original investigation. We are firmly in looking-glass territory.

So what did Hersh’s investigation reveal? His sources in the U.S. intelligence establishment told him the official narrative that Syria’s Bashar Assad had dropped deadly sarin gas on the town of Khan Sheikhoun on April 4 was incorrect. Instead, they said, a Syrian plane dropped a bomb on a meeting of jihadi fighters that triggered secondary explosions in a storage depot, releasing a toxic cloud of chemicals that killed civilians nearby.

One might assume that an alternative narrative of the events would be of great interest to the media, given that Donald Trump approved a military strike on Syria based on the official narrative. Hersh’s version suggests that Trump acted against the intelligence advice he received from his own officials, in a highly dangerous move that not only grossly violated international law but might have dragged Assad’s main ally, Russia, into the fray. The Syrian arena has the potential to trigger a serious confrontation between the world’s two major nuclear powers.

But in fact, the western media were supremely uninterested in the story. Hersh, once considered the journalist’s journalist, went hawking his investigation around the U.S. and UK media to no avail. In the end, he could find a home for his revelations only in Germany, in the publication Welt am Sonntag.

Those of us who are both disheartened and enraged by the election of an unfit con man to the highest office in our nation are often to eager to grasp for what we see as hopeful actions on the part of people from our Intelligence and Military complexes.  Thus we now make a hero of James Comeywhose clumsy intervention in the past election may have won Trump the Presidency. My skepticism of the intertwining  of the mainstream media, U.S. Intelligence Agencies and our Military, to fool the American people dates back to the lies of the Vietnam War that killed 50,000 of our troops and hundreds of thousands Southeast Asians. 

It seems to me that those of us who are immersed in resisting our clownish, yet ominous President, should do all we can to develop a clear view of what is really going on. The Hersh article titled Trump‘s Red Line  begins like this and you can read the entire piece by following the link:

Trump‘s Red Line by Seymour Hersh

On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon.

The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives. Details of the attack,  including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.

American military and intelligence officials were especially distressed by the president’s determination to ignore the evidence. “None of this makes any sense,” one officer told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb. “We KNOW that there was no chemical attack … the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth … I guess it didn’t matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump.“

Within hours of the April 4 bombing, the world’s media was saturated with photographs and videos from Khan Sheikhoun. Pictures of dead and dying victims, allegedly suffering from the symptoms of nerve gas poisoning, were uploaded to social media by local activists, including the White Helmets, a first responder group known for its close association with the Syrian opposition.

The provenance of the photos was not clear and no international observers have yet inspected the site, but the immediate popular assumption worldwide was that this was a deliberate use of the nerve agent sarin, authorized by President Bashar Assad of Syria. Trump endorsed that assumption by issuing a statement within hours of the attack, describing Assad’s “heinous actions” as being a consequence of the Obama administration’s “weakness and irresolution” in addressing what he said was Syria’s past use of chemical weapons.

To the dismay of many senior members of his national security team, Trump could not be swayed over the next 48 hours of intense briefings and decision-making. In a series of interviews, I learned of the total disconnect between the president and many of his military advisers and intelligence officials, as well as officers on the ground in the region who had an entirely different understanding of the nature of Syria’s attack on Khan Sheikhoun.

I was provided with evidence of that disconnect, in the form of transcripts of real-time communications, immediately following the Syrian attack on April 4. In an important pre-strike process known as deconfliction, U.S. and Russian officers routinely supply one another with advance details of planned flight paths and target coordinates, to ensure that there is no risk of collision or accidental encounter (the Russians speak on behalf of the Syrian military). This information is supplied daily to the American AWACS surveillance planes that monitor the flights once airborne. Deconfliction’s success and importance can be measured by the fact that there has yet to be one collision, or even a near miss, among the high-powered supersonic American, Allied, Russian and Syrian fighter bombers.

You can finish reading this important article HERE.

A WordPress.com Website.

Up ↑