How Regime Change Magic turned against the deep state Magicians?

Regime Change Comes Home: The CIA’s Overt Threats against Trump

By James Petras

January 20, 2017 “Information Clearing House” – The norms of US capitalist democracy include the election of presidential candidates through competitive elections, unimpeded by force and violence by the permanent institutions of the state.  Voter manipulation has occurred during the recent elections, as in the case of the John F. Kennedy victory in 1960 and the George W. Bush victory over ‘Al’ Gore in 2000.  But despite the dubious electoral outcomes in these cases, the ‘defeated’ candidate conceded and sought via legislation, judicial rulings, lobbying and peaceful protests to register their opposition.

These norms are no longer operative.  During the election process, and in the run-up to the inauguration of US President-Elect Donald Trump, fundamental electoral institutions were challenged and coercive institutions were activated to disqualify the elected president and desperate overt public pronouncements threatened the entire electoral order.

We will proceed by outlining the process that is used to undermine the constitutional order, including the electoral process and the transition to the inauguration of the elected president.

Regime Change in America

In recent times, elected officials in the US and their state security organizations have often intervened against independent foreign governments, which challenged Washington ’s quest for global domination.  This was especially true during the eight years of President Barack Obama’s administration where the violent ousting of presidents and prime ministers through US-engineered coups were routine – under an unofficial doctrine of ‘regime change’.

The violation of constitutional order and electoral norms of other countries has become enshrined in US policy.  All US political, administrative and security structures are involved in this process.  The policymakers would insist that there was a clear distinction between operating within constitutional norms at home and pursuing violent, illegal regime change operations abroad.

Today the distinction between overseas and domestic norms has been obliterated by the state and quasi-official mass media.  The US security apparatus is now active in manipulating the domestic democratic process of electing leaders and transitioning administrations.

The decisive shift to ‘regime change’ at home has been a continual process organized, orchestrated and implemented by elected and appointed officials within the Obama regime and by a multiplicity of political action organizations, which cross traditional ideological boundaries.

Regime change has several components leading to the final solution:  First and foremost, the political parties seek to delegitimize the election process and undermine the President-elect.  The mass media play a major role demonizing President-Elect Trump with personal gossip, decades-old sex scandals and fabricated interviews and incidents.

Alongside the media blitz, leftist and rightist politicians have come together to question the legitimacy of the November 2016 election results.  Even after a recount confirmed Trump’s victory, a massive propaganda campaign was launched to impeach the president-elect even before he takes office – by claiming Trump was an ‘enemy agent’.

The Democratic Party and the motley collection of right-left anti-Trump militants sought to blackmail members of the Electoral College to change their vote in violation of their own mandate as state electors.  This was unsuccessful, but unprecedented.

Their overt attack on US electoral norms then turned into a bizarre and virulent anti-Russia campaign designed to paint the elected president (a billionaire New York real estate developer and US celebrity icon) as a ‘tool of Moscow .’  The mass media and powerful elements within the CIA, Congress and Obama Administration insisted that Trump’s overtures toward peaceful, diplomatic relations with Russia were acts of treason.

The outgoing President Obama mobilized the entire leadership of the security state to fabricate ‘dodgy dossiers’ linking Donald Trump to the Russian President Vladimir Putin, insisting that Trump was a stooge or ‘vulnerable to KGB blackmail’.  The CIA’s phony documents (arriving via a former British intelligence operative-now free lance ‘security’ contractor) were passed around among the major corporate media who declined to publish the leaked gossip.  Months of attempts to get the US media to ‘take the bite’ on the ‘smelly’ dossier were unsuccessful.  The semi-senile US Senator John McCain (‘war-hero’ and hysterical Trump opponent) then volunteered to plop the reeking gossip back onto the lap of the CIA Director Brennan and demand the government ‘act on these vital revelations’!

Under scrutiny by serious researchers, the ‘CIA dossier’ was proven to be a total fabrication by way of a former ‘British official – now – in – hiding…!’  Undaunted, despite being totally discredited, the CIA leadership continued to attack the President-Elect. Trump likened the CIA’s ‘dirty pictures hatchet job’ to the thuggish behavior of the Nazis and clearly understood how the CIA leadership was involved in a domestic coup d’état.

CIA Director John Brennan, architect of numerous ‘regime changes’ overseas had brought his skills home – against the President-elect.  For the first time in US history, a CIA director openly charged a President or President-elect with betraying the country and threatened the incoming Chief Executive. He coldly warned Trump to ‘just make sure he understands that the implications and impacts (of Trump’s policies) on the United States could be profound…”

Clearly CIA Director Brennan has not only turned the CIA into a sinister, unaccountable power dictating policy to an elected US president, by taking on the tone of a Mafia Capo, he threatens the physical security of the incoming leader.

From a Scratch to Gangrene

The worst catastrophe that could fall on the United States would be a conspiracy of leftist and rightist politicos, the corporate mass media and the ‘progressive’ websites and pundits providing ideological cover for a CIA-orchestrated ‘regime change’.

Whatever the limitations of our electoral norms- and there are many – they are now being degraded and discarded in a march toward an elite coup, involving elements of the militarist empire and ‘in`telligence’ hierarchy.

Mass propaganda, a ‘red-brown alliance, salacious gossip and accusations of treason (‘Trump, the Stooge of Moscow’) resemble the atmosphere leading to the rise of the Nazi state in Germany .  A broad ‘coalition’ has joined hands with a most violent and murderous organization (the CIA) and imperial political leadership, which views overtures to peace to be high treason because it limits their drive for world power and a US dominated global political order.

James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York.

Click for SpanishGermanDutchDanishFrench, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

 Please read our  Comment Policy before posting –

When Was America Great?

Donald Trump ran for President on the slogan “Make America Great Again,” implying that America had been great once, but no longer is.

True to form, Hillary Clinton’s rejoinder was clueless.  America is great now, she would insist every chance she got — indispensably great, “exceptional” even.

Could there be a more empty-headed exchange of views!

After all, Trump was neither asserting nor implying anything; he was pitching a line to a demographic that he, advertising himself, wanted to target.  Therefore, no rebuttal was called for; least of all, one as inane as Clinton’s.

But, of course, she was pitching a line too.

A cottage industry has lately sprung up analyzing the pathologies of Donald Trump’s personality.  His public persona is inscrutable, however; it defies analysis for the simple reason that there is no there there.

Trump is a con man for whom reasons and evidence matter only insofar as they serve his purposes.   He is whatever he needs to be at the moment.

Meanwhile, Clinton took her lead from the Ronald Reagan, “morning in America” playbook.  The Gipper sold his snake oil by projecting a shallow, but infectious, optimism.  However, for that to work, a sunny disposition is required.  Hillary isn’t a good enough actor to pull it off.

All she could do was scare a lot of voters – a majority of them, it turned out — with the specter of the orange haired monster.  As for promoting herself, she was hopeless.

Moreover, her take on the morning in America meme only fed the hostility of her detractors.   How could it not?  In their minds, she represented the “elites” behind the losses they felt.

They were right about that.

Meanwhile, Trump knew exactly how to play his marks by making them think that he could restore a past that they look back upon with nostalgia.

In reality, though, Trump cannot do anything of the sort, and wouldn’t if he could.

This is why, before long, “Make America Great Again” will stick in the craw of Trump voters in much the way that Obama’s “hope and change thingee,” as Sarah Palin called it, still plagues disillusioned Obamaphiles.

Obama was vague about what he wanted people to hope for, and what changes he saw coming.  Trump is vague as well.

But it is obvious enough what he wants people to hear when he speaks of making America great — again.

Since Trump’s target audience was comprised mainly of people who are at least middle aged, it would be fair to say that his goal was to get them to think of post-War America as their personal Paradise lost.

This is nonsense, of course; but, by now, the span of time between the late forties and early sixties is remote enough to be looked back upon in ways that Trump could and did successfully exploit.


The man is anything but subtle.

He wanted his marks to yearn for a Golden Age in which hard working white men could make a decent living doing honest, productive labor in jobs that were not about to go away; and in which everybody else knew his or her place: blacks in the back of the bus, women standing by their men, gays in the closet, Hispanics in Mexico or Central America.

The pundits tell us that “Make America Great Again” is a dog whistle slogan – meaning that its meaning is audible to Trump’s target audience and no one else.   Like so much else that liberal pundits tell us, this is nonsense.  What Trump wanted people to hear was audible to everybody.

It is a noxious message, and a false one: even white men didn’t have it so good back in the day.

Nevertheless, as with much else that Trump says, there is something to it – just not what he intended.

For one thing, the political scene really was better in the Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy years.  Republicans were pernicious, of course, but no worse than Democrats are today.  And the New Deal spirit still survived in sectors of the Democratic Party.

Democrats now, especially since Election Day, are many times worse than they used to be.  Cold War Democrats had at least some measure of common sense and proportionality; Democrats today, for no plausible reason whatsoever, are hell-bent on taking the world to the brink of destruction, or beyond.

Hillary lost, but, within the ranks of the party she led, her Russophobic, neoconservative warmongering has taken on a life of its own.   Can any sane person not be nostalgic for a time when Democrats were better than that?

It is all well and good to question the “legitimacy” of Trump’s presidency.   There are so many questions that could be raised about that: voter suppression topping the list.

But Democrats cannot find it in themselves to do anything more edifying than blame those damn Ruskies.

This is not only preposterous; it is criminally reckless because all it does is prepare the public for war.

On this, “progressive” Democrats are as bad as the others; as bad even as Republicans like that perennial miscreant John McCain and his sidekick, Lindsey Graham.

Shame especially on “civil rights icon” and Clinton stooge John Lewis.  The guardians of the status quo now find it useful to place him on a pedestal, just as they find it useful to de-radicalize and then venerate Martin Luther King.

In exchange for the honor, he does them yeoman service – as when he conflated still unanswered questions about Russian hackers with the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s election.

Civil rights icon indeed; the man belongs in a museum.  Along with most of the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus, and nearly the entire membership of the incongruously named Progressive Caucus, he should just get out of the way.

Cold War Democrats were anything but “great,” but at least they didn’t make starting World War III their life’s work.

Trump obviously has no interest in transforming the Democratic Party for the better, and neither did voters who thought that a Trump presidency would make America great again.

Nevertheless, along with all the really bad stuff that Trump, and many of his fans, actually did have in mind, the nostalgia for the fifties and early sixties that he churned up does suggest a thought that is well worth taking on board — that neither Republicans nor Democrats need be quite as awful as they actually are.

Ironically too, Trump’s implicit appeal to post-War American values and norms helps sustain (small-r) republican ways of thinking about politics that are generally progressive and diametrically opposed to all things Trumpian.

From the sixteenth century on, there have been political thinkers in Western countries for whom ancient Sparta and the Roman republic served as political models.  What they esteemed was their egalitarianism (applicable, however, only to free male citizens) and their ideal of civic virtue, according to which the public good takes precedence over individuals’ private interests.

In the ideal world envisioned by republicans, small, mainly rural, largely self-sufficient households prosper together – with no one rich, no one poor, and everyone happy.

America’s founders were influenced by republican thought – Thomas Jefferson, most famously – and, early on, strains of republican thinking found a welcome home in the collective consciousness of the American people.

The fortunes of republican thinking have waxed and waned in the years that ensued, as has the appeal of republican values – in part because republicanism’s fortunes and capitalism’s are thoroughly intertwined.

(Small-r) republican societies may not be full-fledged capitalist societies, according to one or another account of what capitalism involves, but they are relevantly like mature capitalist societies in supposing private ownership of major means of production and market relations.  They therefore give rise to concentrations of wealth that undo the conditions for their possibility.

In this sense, their vision of ideal political-economic arrangements is utopian, unrealizable in real world conditions.  Full-fledged capitalism, on the other hand, is astonishingly resilient; and, as everyone nowadays understands, it is capable of sustaining enormous levels of inequality.

In the years that people in Trump’s target audience look back upon yearningly, the inegalitarian tendencies inherent in the logic of capitalist development were effectively held in bounds by circumstances that cannot now be reproduced, and by the sustained efforts of a political class for whom memories of the Great Depression of the 1930s remained vivid.  Those days are long gone.

Moreover, for nearly the entire post-War period, rampant, corporate and state sponsored consumerism has been militating against republican notions of civic virtue.

Even so, vestigial republican attitudes survive in the deepest recesses of the American psyche.   In recent years, there has even been a revival of republican political philosophy in respectable academic precincts.

Therefore, one plausible understanding of “Make America Great Again” would be to see it as a call for America to recover its republican roots – by building a politics around the notions of freedom, equality, and virtue associated with the republican tradition.

Needless to say, this is not what Trump was promising.   He stands for everything republicanism rejects.

Trump voters are obviously capable of believing almost anything, but it would strain even their credulity to see Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan as a call for equality, virtue, and the simplicity of manners and morals inherent in the republican ideal.

Perhaps this is why, to hear Trump and his defenders tell it, what has been lost that is worth restoring is not exactly the ways that American society accorded a semblance of homage to what republicans care about but something more pedestrian associated with it: the economic security that existed when manufacturing jobs abounded. That is what he claims he can restore.

But, of course, he cannot – not with what he is peddling.  He can only do what mountebanks generally do: sell crap to the gullible and the desperate, counting on the power of suggestion to keep them on board long enough for him not to be run out of town.

This is all he can do for much the same reason that social democrats, these days, cannot hold back the neoliberal tide: because capitalism cannot be transformed or even tamed by government fiat alone.

Marxists were spot on right when they maintained that far-reaching changes of the kind that are desperately needed nowadays can only come about through class struggle.  This is why, in the absence of a collective agent, able and determined to transform the underlying structure of capitalism itself, the broad contours of the status quo are regretfully secure.

Because neoliberal economic realities, and neoliberal state policies, have effectively reduced the labor movement to a shadow of its former self, leaving no functional equivalent in its place, this is indeed the situation we now find ourselves in.

Therefore, even if Trump wasn’t just blowing air – even if he really did want to restore manufacturing jobs — he would be unable to do anything of the kind.

Being both an opportunist and a showman, he will likely collude with a few of his fellow capitalists for a while — making them offers, at the taxpayer’s expense, that they cannot refuse.  But without a counter-systemic social movement leading the way, he cannot defy the inherent logic of the system.   No one can.

At this point in its development, that system has two major requirements, both of which militate against restoring anything like the conditions that, decades ago, created a large and secure middle class.  It requires consumers able and willing to spend enough to keep aggregate demand at acceptable levels; and it requires a domestic work force that that is insecure and poorly paid, and therefore quiescent.   These exigencies are at odds; precarious work situations and depressed wages depress consumption.

Neoliberals square the circle by transferring manufacturing jobs to low wage countries and then flooding the domestic market with goods that are so cheap that most Americans can still afford them.

Obviously, this “solution” doesn’t address any of the fundamental contradictions of neoliberal capitalism.  If anything, it exacerbates them.

Trump owes his election, in part, to the discontents it generates.  If those discontents continue, or intensify, he will have hell to pay.

Barring a radical change of course, the day of reckoning is sure to come; the only question is when.

If, in a vain effort to keep his supporters on board for as long as he can, Trump ratchets up more of the same – and what else could he do with the cabinet of dunces he has appointed, and without being a traitor to his class and to his own venality? – it could well come on his watch.

This will be wondrous to behold.

Had the Democratic Party not rigged the nomination process against Bernie Sanders, he would probably now be President, and he would find his efforts to restore the gains of the New Deal – Great Society era, and then to move beyond them, thwarted not just by the obstacles that (big-R) Republicans and rightwing Democrats (is there any other kind?) would put in his way, but by the same fatal contradiction.

The problem with Sanders’ “political revolution” was not just that it wasn’t radical enough or that it was too empire friendly; it was that, after the neoliberal assault on what little (small-d) democracy we had, there can be no fundamental changes at the political level without taking on capitalism itself.

But since Sanders was denied the nomination, that is a problem for another day.  Trump is the problem now.

Surely, at some level, many, maybe most, Trump voters have known all along that there is nothing he could do that would restore the economic security they crave.  They voted for him anyway, however.  That is how desperate they were.

And so, he won; and, as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow, the shit will hit the fan.

Notwithstanding the willful blindness that is so rampant in liberal quarters, the problem now, had Hillary not flubbed so badly, would be to keep her and her fellow Russophobic neocons and “humanitarian” imperialists from vaporizing the world.

But because he is such a loose cannon, and in so far over his head, what lies ahead with Trump seems even scarier than that – even on matters of war and peace.  If he does derail the War Party, then more power to him.  But he is no more to be trusted to use the American juggernaut, nukes and all, wisely than any normally immature adolescent boy chosen at random.

Expect turbulence ahead!  The time when it is still possible to postpone the inevitable choice between socialism – not the social democratic – Sanders version, but the real deal — or barbarism is fading fast.  Thank Trump for that.

ANDREW LEVINE is a Senior Scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What’s Wrong With the Opium of the People. He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park.  He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

More articles by:

الفيتو «الميثاقي» معكوساً لفرض قانون الانتخابات!

ناصر قنديل

– في مرة سابقة عام 2013 وعندما شعر تيار المستقبل أن تخديم مشروعه بالتمديد للرئيس السابق ميشال سليمان يستدعي الإبقاء على المجلس النيابي الحالي، لتسهيل مهمة التمديد الرئاسي على مجلس ممدِّد لنفسه أصلاً ولا يخجل من التمديد كفعل تحت شعار احترام المهل الدستورية، وكي يضمن التوازنات النيابية ذاتها لتسهيل المهمة، لم يرفّ جفن الرئيس فؤاد السنيورة مرة ثانية بعد عام 2007 ومشهد التظاهرات التي يبشّره بمثلها التيار الوطني الحر ورئيسه الوزير جبران باسيل ما لم يتمّ إقرار قانون جديد للانتخابات يحقق صحة التمثيل بديلاً من قانون الستين، وأعلن الرئيس سعد الحريري أنّه وتياره سيقاطعان أي انتخابات، وتكفّل الفيتو الميثاقي بإطاحة الانتخابات وإطاحة فرصة إنتاج قانون جديد، ولاحقاً إطاحة انتخاب رئيس، وبذريعة غياب الرئيس إطاحة البحث بقانون جديد باستفزاز مناخ مسيحي عنوانه لا أولوية تسبق انتخاب رئيس جديد للجمهورية.

– اليوم يُشهر النائب وليد جنبلاط باسمه وباسم تياره الفيتو على أيّ قانون يعتمد النسبية، كاملة أو نسبية أو مختلطة. ويراهن على هذا الفيتو لإطاحة فرصة استيلاد قانون جديد للانتخابات وجلب اللبنانيين إلى بيت الطاعة الانتخابي الذي يشكله قانون الستين. وهو يعلم أن إحباط فرصة قانون جديد يعتمد النسبية الكاملة تحديداً، بعيداً عن تشويه سمعة النسبية بالمختلط، هذه المرة حيث تتوافر كل الآمال والضغوط النفسية والمعنوية اللازمة لولادة هذا القانون، ستعني حكماً إحباطها إلى وقت طويل، إن لم يكن إلى الأبد، فالعهد الذي يبدأ بالانهزام أمام قانون الستين في بدايته، ورغم قوة الاندفاعة المرافقة لهذه البداية ومهابة الرئيس وثوابته، والظروف الأقرب للنصر التي وصل فيها إلى بعبدا على حصان أبيض، لن يكون بيده القول إنّ الدورة الانتخابية المقبلة بعد أربع سنوات ستكون فرصة ثانية لبلوغ القانون المنشود.

– تقف القوى المتطلعة إلى قانون جديد داخل المجلس النيابي وخارجه في موقف المحرج بكيفية التصرف، والبحث بالآليات التي تتيح فتح كوة أمل لإبقاء المشروع في التداول بزخم وأمل، لكن الأشدّ عرضة للاختبار والحرج هو التيار الوطني الحر، الذي وعد الطامحين للتغيير بلسان زعيمه الذي صار رئيساً أنّ وصوله لرئاسة الجمهورية مفتاح لبنان الجديد، وأن العزم على الإصلاح والتغيير لدى رئيس الجمهورية يشكلان ميزان قوى كافياً لفرض مسار جديد على الحياة السياسية. وبالتأكيد يبدو الرئيس مخلصاً لقوله من خطاب القسم إلى خطابه الشجاع في كلّ ما تناوله أمام السلك الدبلوماسي، وهذا مبرّر التفكير مع الرئيس ومن موقع الوقوف في خندقه حول كيفية التصرف بوجه الفيتو الميثاقي لمنع التغيير. وهو قد يتحوّل تحت شعار الميثاقية إلى استدرار تضامن كتل لا تريد الوقوف علناً مع قانون الستين، لكنها تشكل مع صاحب الفيتو نصاباً كافياً يمنع فوز أيّ قانون جديد بالتصويت اللازم لتمريره، إذا قرّر الرئيس الاحتكام للدستور، بعرض المشاريع في مجلس الوزراء أو مجلس النواب للتصويت.

– قدّمت الانتخابات الرئاسية وعدم الخوف من الفراغ كفزاعة نموذجاً لبديل ثالث غير التمديد والقبول بالأمر الواقع تحت شعار التوافق. وببساطة كان خيار العماد ميشال عون لرئاسة الجمهورية مشروعاً مستحيلاً، أكثر استحالة من قانون يعتمد النسبية الكاملة في لبنان دائرة واحدة، ومن خارج القيد الطائفي وتشكيل مجلس للشيوخ عملاً بالنص الدستوري الصريح والواضح. ولو خُيّرت القوى التي كانت تعارض وصول العماد عون بين قبوله رئيساً مع قانون الستين، أو قبول قانون انتخاب على أساس النسبية الكاملة مع رئيس توافقي لاختارت الثانية، ومثلما يشبه العماد عون النسبية، يشبه الرئيس التوافقي قانون الستين، ولو قبل حزب الله تحديداً في مقاربة الملف الرئاسي بثانية تستبعد الفراغ وتخشاه، وارتضى أن يخضع للابتزاز بين قبول التوافق أيّ الستين أو التمديد، لما وصل العماد عون للرئاسة اليوم.

– لا يمكن مطالبة حزب الله بتكرار الموقف اليوم، وقد حمل ما حمل لوضع البلد على السكة بعهدة رئيس للجمهورية يثق به ثقة كاملة، ويدرك تلاقيَهُ معه بمفاهيم التغيير كلها، وخصوصاً اولوية قانون الانتخاب الجديد والعصري والمعتمد على النسبية الكاملة، كما انّ المخاطر التي يشكلها موقع الرئاسة على الحزب تختلف عن قدرته على التعايش بوجود رئيس ثقة، مع نتاج قانون انتخاب بائد وعديم النفع وشديد الضرر. والمنطقي أنّ ما يستطيع التيار الوطني الحر التعايش معه يستطيع حزب الله التعايش معه أكثر في أيّ قانون للانتخاب، سواء لجهة ما ينتجه من أحجام أو توازنات أو ما يحبطه أو يحققه من آمال.

– القضية قضية كثيرين، لكن بقدر ما ينهض لملاقاتها التيار الوطني الحر باعتبارها قضيته، فلدى الجميع فرصة القول في حال الفشل إنّ الذي فشل هو الرئيس والتيار، وإنّ ثمة فرصة ثانية مع سواهما، بينما لا يملك الرئيس والتيار التحدث عن فرصة ثانية إذا سلّما واستسلما للفشل هذه المرة. والحديث عن ثورة وعصيان في مكانه بقدر ما يقصد به بلوغ لحظة الاختيار بين الستين والتمديد فيكون الجواب بـ«لا» كبيرة لكليهما. ولدى السؤال: هل ترضون الفراغ بديلاً يكون الجواب ولمَ لا، سيكون أفضل من كلّ منهما ومن كليهما، فليبقَ لبنان بلا مجلس نيابي، ولديه رئيس جمهورية وحكومة يتمثل فيها الجميع، يسيّران أمور الدولة حتى تنضج طبخة قانون جديد للانتخابات، تقرّه الحكومة وتدعو اللبنانيين لتشكيل مجلسهم الجديد على أساسه، وليعتبرها من يشاء دعوة لحلّ المجلس النيابي واعتبار الحكومة بمثابة مؤتمر تأسيسي، أليست هذه هي الثورة الشعبية وما عداها هو تمهيد للاستسلام للفيتو «الميثاقي»؟

A Foreign Nation Did Interfere in a US Election: in 1980

A Foreign Nation Did Interfere in a US Election: in 1980

WAYNE MADSEN | 17.01.2017 | WORLD

A Foreign Nation Did Interfere in a US Election: in 1980

It was October and the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate was faltering in the polls after the Democratic National Convention. The Republican Party’s presidential candidate began negotiating with a foreign government to cook up a scheme to embarrass the Democratic candidate. The scheme was successful and the Democratic candidate went on to lose the election to a Republican candidate who was feared by many for his unorthodox stance on several domestic and foreign issues.

If one thinks the above description is about the recent 2016 election, he or she would be wrong. In 1980, Democratic President Jimmy Carter, running for re-election under the cloud of the U.S. embassy in Tehran having been seized by radical Iranian students and 52 members of its staff being held hostage, was trying desperately to pull off an «October Surprise» to salvage his presidency. Unbeknownst to Carter, the campaign of his Republican rival, Ronald Reagan, had secretly negotiated an «arms-for-no-hostages» deal with the Ayatollah Khomeini’s regime in Iran.

In return for the shipment of embargoed military items, including spare parts for Iran’s U.S.-supplied F-14 Tomcat fighter planes and Phoenix air-to-air missiles for the planes, before the November 4 election, the Reagan team was promised by the Iranians that Tehran would hold the hostages until after the November election. Upon Reagan’s defeat of Carter, Iran held true to its promise and did not release the American hostages until noon Eastern Standard Time on January 20, 1981, the very moment Reagan raised his hand to take the presidential oath of office.

Although the media today is rife with reports of so-called «treasonous» contacts between Donald Trump advisers and officials of the Russian government, the media was not to be found anywhere in October 1980 when the Central Intelligence Agency, working with the Reagan campaign, contracted with a U.S. merchant vessel, the «SS Poet», to deliver the U.S. military contraband to Iran. In 1980, vice presidential candidate George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan’s campaign manager William Casey secretly met with Iranian government officials, reportedly in Paris, and worked out the covert «arms-for-no-hostages» plan. The Reagan team was worried that Carter would beat them to the punch because of the White House’s own secret negotiations with Iranian representatives to have the hostages freed in October, giving Carter a much-need campaign boost.

The Reagan conspirators included, in addition to Bush and Casey, Robert Gates and Donald Gregg, the CIA’s moles inside the Carter National Security Council. Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, not happy with Carter’s human rights stance, may have given a «wink and a nod» to the treason. The entire caper was conducted without the knowledge of Stansfield Turner, Carter’s friend and U.S. Naval Academy classmate who served as CIA director.

The «SS Poet», a World War II-era U.S. merchant vessel, was at the center of the Reagan team’s treasonous plot. Little has been written about the fate of the vessel because the CIA arranged to have it sunk while outbound from the Persian Gulf after it delivered its weapons cache to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas. The ship was officially listed as «lost at sea» somewhere in the mid-Atlantic after departing from Philadelphia’s Girard Point marine pier #3 on October 24, 1980. The ship was ostensibly bound with a cargo of 13,500 tons of corn for Port Said, Egypt, but, in reality, had military equipment loaded in its rear number four cargo, contraband bound for Iran.

The crew of 34 U.S. citizens was declared «missing at sea» by a U.S. Coast Guard board of inquiry, which was under heavy pressure from the CIA to cover up the ship’s fate in the Gulf. The Reagan team sweetened the deal with a cash payment to Iran. Gates was said to have overseen the transfer of money to an Iranian bank account at Banque Worms in Geneva.

The Coast Guard report on the «Poet’s» disappearance was tainted by an individual who claimed to have been a former third assistant engineer on the vessel. A year after the «Poet» disappeared, the witness told the Coast Guard, after the Board of Inquiry had already issued its conclusion about the fate of the ship, that the vessel was not seaworthy. However, this individual later was discovered to have been an impostor, likely hired by Casey’s CIA, who never served on board the «Poet».

The CIA’s cover story, dutifully echoed by the Coast Guard, was the Poet sank without a trace in three minutes and without a distress call. One of the Poet’s previous trips, in the months prior to sailing to Iran, was to Israel. The vessel had been chartered by Hawaiian Eugenia Corporation, the Poet’s owner and a firm with murky CIA links, to sail to Israel. There is a strong possibility that the Israelis rigged the ship with explosives that would be detonated after its delivery of weapons to Iran on behalf of the CIA and Reagan-Bush campaign plotters.

There was a feeble attempt by certain remaining pro-Carter elements within the CIA and Justice Department to investigate the involvement of a foreign power – Iran – in the 1980 election. A March 16, 1981, memo written by then-unconfirmed Associate Attorney General Rudolph Giuliani to the Acting Criminal Division chief, John Keeney, which was titled «CIA Referral – Alleged Foreign Government Interference With 1980 Presidential Election», suggests that the CIA referred to the Justice Department certain evidence that there was criminal activity involving a foreign power in the 1980 presidential election.

Keeney and Giuliani agree to draft a letter from Deputy Attorney General Edward C. Schmults to the CIA to ask for a full report on the criminal referral. The CIA report, which was never written, would have been available to Justice personnel on a strict need-to-know basis. It can be assumed that after Casey took over at the CIA, he immediately quashed the investigation of the involvement of Iran in the 1980 election.

In any case, the investigation was stopped dead in its tracks. The Attorney General at the time of the Giuliani memo was Reagan confidante William French Smith. Smith’s special assistant at the time was David Hiller, who later became the publisher, president, and CEO of the Los Angeles Times. Hiller’s fellow special assistant for Smith was John G. Roberts, Jr., later nominated by George W. Bush to the Supreme Court as Associate Justice, followed by his nomination to be Chief Justice.

The «Poet’s» official charter to sail a cargo of corn to Port Said was oddly appended with a «war risk» clause, even though Egypt was not in a state of war. The only state of war that existed at the time was in the Gulf between Iran and Iraq. The charter also involved Universal Shipping Company, a CIA front company headquartered in Rosslyn, Virginia, along with other firms controlled by CIA weapons smuggler Edwin Wilson. Later convicted and imprisoned for smuggling weapons to Libya, Wilson, a «retired» CIA operative, contended that his weapons smuggling operations were carried out with the approval of the CIA.

There is an interesting current news peg to the story of the 1980 election and the «Poet.» The Iranian side in the «arms-for-no-hostages» conspiracy was led by the then-speaker of the Iranian parliament, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. He would later become a key cog in the Iran-contra scandal that almost brought down the Reagan administration. Rafsanjani died recently at the age of 82. Considered a leading Iranian moderate, Rafsanjani traveled widely throughout the United States prior to the Iranian revolution in 1979 and he may have served as a deep cover CIA asset. With his death disappears from the scene another witness to the treachery involving the disappearance of the «SS Poet».

When the CIA wants to advance a meme that a foreign nation interfered in a U.S. election, it can coax its puppets in the media to hype the story, as seen now with the frivolous allegations about Russia and the Trump campaign. However, when the Langley boys want to bury their own chicanery and skullduggery in election interference, as is currently the case with CIA and British MI-6 involvement in the 2016 election on behalf of Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton and as was the situation in 1980 with Iran and the Reagan campaign, the media dutifully follows.

The Winds of Change in the West

14-01-2017 | 08:23

The Winds of Change in the West

Darko Lazar

The influential liberal elites initially attempted to paint the outcome of last year’s US presidential race as proof of a functioning democratic political system.

Liberal ‘guru’ Francis Fukuyama wrote shortly after the election that, “Donald Trump’s impressive victory over Hillary Clinton on November 8 demonstrates that American democracy is still working in one important sense. Trump brilliantly succeeded in mobilizing a neglected and underrepresented slice of the electorate, the white working class, and pushed its agenda to the top of the country’s priorities.”

But today, the world is beginning to realize that Trump’s “impressive victory”, much like Britain’s decision to turn its back on the European Union, is part of a well-planned strategic shift by the west.

In both cases, the outcome is made to look like the result of ‘ordinary people’ taking to the ballot box and edging-out the competition.

And while this scenario may be possible, it is highly improbable.

The more likely scenario is that the two events – Trump’s victory and Brexit – are very much linked and are the result of deep schisms within the American and British political elites.

The grueling and merciless behind-the-scenes battles that unfolded during the race for the White House best exemplify these divisions. In that respect, Trump is not some lone warrior, but rather the face of one significant portion of the political elite in Washington, which had decided to abandon the liberal utopian agenda embodied by Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Meanwhile, the US is undoubtedly in the process of creating its own Perestroika. As such, both Trump’s win and Britain’s exit from the EU represent a pragmatic and well-planned response to the crippling economic and political crisis plaguing the western world.

The era of global dominance ends

The western political establishment was always divided between the US [in a broader sense, the Anglo-Saxon world, which also includes Canada, Australia, and New Zealand] on one side, and the European Union [which includes European states with Germany playing the role of a hegemonic power] on the other. Although serious cracks between these two poles began to appear during Obama’s second term in office, their so-called unity was guaranteed through the mobilization of ‘western allies’ against ‘Russian imperialism’.

However, deeper schisms existed at the core of each individual pole: in the US, the division between conservatives and liberals, and in the EU, between those favoring and those opposing Atlanticism.

These divisions were further exacerbated by a deepening crisis in the west, resulting in the crumbling of political unity, and the unstoppable decline of western military and economic might.

In his article titled, ‘Toward a Global Realignment’, Zbigniew Brzezinski argues that the US “is no longer the globally imperial power.”

“As its era of global dominance ends, the United States needs to take the lead in realigning the global power architecture,” the former US National Security Adviser writes.

In other words, Brzezinski asserts that the best Washington can hope for is to preserve its advantage over its rivals, but not its position of a global hegemon.

Time is running out

The crises in Ukraine and Syria, which exposed the west’s weaknesses, the financial crisis, which came to the surface in 2008, and the endless wars against ‘terrorism’ are the main contributors to imperial ‘overstrain’.

Under such conditions, the fall of the last modern empire becomes only a question of when, rather than if.

Time is running out for Washington to make a radical policy U-turn and abandon the project of liberal utopianism.

Deep divisions in the US involving politics, class, race and ethnicity became evident even during George W. Bush’s second term. Since then, racially motivated violence has exploded across the country.

During the same period, the crisis deepened on the other side of the Atlantic. The influx of migrants only added fuel to the fire, raising suspicions that it was part of another project of the liberal elite, designed to turn Europe into a ‘multicultural utopian society’.

Thus, the EU has not only seized to be an attractive model, but the future of its very existence has come into question. Today the potential disintegration of this bloc can be predicted with a great deal of certainty.

The opinion columnist for the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer, recently proclaimed that, “the European Union, the largest democratic club on Earth, could itself soon break up as Brexit-like movements spread across the continent.”

In his piece titled, ‘After a mere 25 years, the triumph of the West is over’, Krauthammer writes, “the autocracies are back and rising; democracy is on the defensive; the U.S. is in retreat… The West is turning inward and going home, leaving the field to the rising authoritarians – Russia, China and Iran.”

This is a short but nevertheless accurate description of the geopolitical reality, as Donald Trump prepares to take office on January 20.

America’s Mikhail Gorbachev

During his ascent to the post of president, Trump enjoyed the discrete and firm support from segments of the American political and economic elite, as well as a handful of intelligence agencies.

Faced with the new realities of the 21st century, these are the segments of the American establishment that have decided to survive, salvaging the remnants of the old empire.

Trump’s first and most important assignment is the consolidation of a new and fledgling America.

In the case that he fails, Trump could very well inherit the role played by Mikhail Gorbachev during the demise of the Soviet Union, and be remembered as the ‘administrator’ overseeing the deconstruction of the western empire.

Source: Al-Ahed News


Related Articles

The Truth About Russia ‘Hacking the Election’

December 12, 2016

More Anti-Trump Protests in New York, Miami, Los Angeles for Third Consecutive Day

November 12, 2016

anti-Trump protests

Demonstrators took to the streets in Miami, Los Angeles, New York and other US cities to oppose Donald Trump’s election as president for a third straight night of nationwide protests Friday.

People gathered in New York’s Washington Square neighborhood in lower Manhattan, some carrying enormous red balloons and placards with hearts and the words “peace and love.”

Others held signs reading “Your Wall Can’t Stand in Our Way” — a reference to the anti-immigration barrier the billionaire real estate baron has promised to build on the US border with Mexico.

The city’s local ABC affiliate said an estimated 4,000 people gathered at the site, while others descended on Union Square and marched through Midtown and still more converged outside Trump Tower.

The New York Police Department reported that 11 people had been arrested as of late Friday, the New York Times said.

Demonstrators said they wanted to show solidarity with those they felt may be targeted by Trump’s policies once he takes office in January, including Mexicans and Muslims.

“We’re here to support the people that Trump has insulted, to show our children that we all have a voice, and to stand up for people’s rights,” Kim Bayer, 41, told AFP.

Organizers plan another large demonstration in the same Washington Square location on Saturday, and more protests are expected across a number of cities over the weekend.

Meanwhile, about a thousand protesters took part in an apparently spontaneous demonstration in Miami, hoisting signs against racism and opposing the deportation of undocumented immigrants as they walked down Biscayne Boulevard.

At a small protest in California, about two dozen women wearing shorts and sports bras locked arms and staged a brief flash mob-style protest in the middle of a freeway south of Los Angeles Friday, causing traffic to come to a standstill.

Several of the women carried placards that read “Unity” as they marched down the four-lane freeway in Costa Mesa. Atlanta police estimated that the city’s largest anti-Trump protest yet drew more than 1,000 people Friday, according to local broadcaster WSB.

And in Philadelphia, some 250 people gathered for a rally against the president-elect, ABC affiliate WPVI reported. Further north in Boston more than a thousand people converged in the afternoon for a “Love Rally” against Trump’s divisive rhetoric, local media said.

Demonstrations also occurred in Detroit, Michigan; Dallas, Texas; Memphis, Tennessee; Orlando, Florida; and Raleigh, North Carolina.

Since Trump’s shock victory on Tuesday over Democrat Hillary Clinton, who had been widely tipped to win, thousands have protested in cities across the United States.

Source: AFP


Related Videos

Related Articles

Butt-Hurt Crying Hillary Voters Compilation

November 10, 2016

ترامب مرحلة جديدة في السياسة العالمية

Donald Trump wins presidential election

ناصر قنديل
– لا يتناقش إثنان في العالم حول المكانة التي تحتلها أميركا في صناعة السياسة في العالم، ولا أيضاً في حجم أهمية منطقتنا في السياسة العالمية، وحجم تأثرها بالسياسات الأميركية، ومثلما يدعو للسخرية التوهّم بوصول رئيس أميركي صديق ومناصر لقضايا شعوبنا ويريد الخير لبلادنا، في ظلّ المكانة التي تحتلها «إسرائيل» في صناعة السياسة الأميركية والمساحة المشتركة التي تجتمع عبرها مواقف المتنافسين على الرئاسة الأميركية، وطالما بلادنا تحمل راية الاستقلال الوطني، وتختزن ثروات وميزات تجعلها تحت عين الأطماع الاستعمارية لأيّ حاكم غربي، سيكون أيضاً مثيراً للسخرية أن يخرج المحزونون على خسارة هيلاري كلينتون والذين طبّلوا وزمّروا لها على مدى شهور، وربطوا دعواتهم لصمود الجماعات المسلحة في سورية وإطالة أمد حرب اليمن، بالرهان على وصولها إلى البيت الأبيض، ويعظون ويحاضرون في الحديث عن عنصرية دونالد ترامب الفائز بالسباق إلى البيت الأبيض، ويستعيدون خطاباته الداعمة لـ «إسرائيل»، وكلّ عاقل في بلادنا يعرف أنّ التغيير في مستقبل قضايانا يصنع هنا عندنا، وليس بالرهانات على مَن يسكن البيت الأبيض، وأنهم جميعاً متساوون في العداء لحريتنا وقضيتنا فلسطين، لكن هذا لا يجب أن يعطّل عقولنا عن قراءة الظواهر ورصد التغييرات، واستخلاص المعاني، فهي شروط يحتاجها مَن يبحث عن الفاعلية لحروبه، ومقاومته، ليعرف مَن هو العدو وما هي استراتيجياته، وخططه وخلفياته، ويقيس مدى تأثير مقاومته وصموده في صناعة تأثير يذكر في تغيير سياسات مركز القرار في الحرب، وهل نجح في إيصال رسالة اليأس والتعب إلى شعبه ونخبه وصناع القرار عنده، ليصير فحص الانتخابات الأميركية ونتائجها شيئاً يشبه قراءة بلغة تلفزيون الواقع في تقرير بيكر ـ هاملتون بعد الفشل الأميركي في حربي العراق وأفغانستان، أو تقرير فينوغراد بعد الفشل «الإسرائيلي» بسحق المقاومة في حرب تموز 2006 على لبنان.

– جرت الانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية كما سابقاتها، على إيقاع تحوّلات كبرى في العالم. فوصول بيل كلينتون عام 1992 كان بداية صناعة الحرب في أوروبا لوراثة سريعة لتفكك الاتحاد السوفياتي. وكانت حرب يوغوسلافيا وكان الدفع بتسريع ولادة الاتحاد الأوروبي كذراع سياسية اقتصادية ناعمة لاستيعاب دول أوروبا الشرقية الخارجة من تحت عباءة روسيا. ووصول جورج بوش الإبن كان التتمة الجمهورية لحروب الشرق، بعد الفوز بحروب أوروبا الخشنة والناعمة، ومن ضمنها الثورات الملوّنة التي حاصرت روسيا المنهكة. وجاءت حربا أفغانستان والعراق ترجمة للمروحة الجديدة للحرب الامبراطورية، وجاء الرئيس على قياسها، أما باراك أوباما فجاء على صهوة حصان الاعتراف الأميركي بفشل حروب الشرق الخشنة والرهان على الحرب الناعمة، وذراعها قدر من التفاهم مع إيران وآخر مع روسيا، لتمرير الذراع الثانية المتمثلة بخطف سورية من الجغرافيا السياسية للمحور الروسي الإيراني دون التورّط في حرب. والذراع الثانية أصابعها موزعة بين تزخيم مشحون بالدم والوعود والآمال للذاكرة العثمانية، واستنهاض للعصبية الإخوانية، عبر تثمير وتوظيف مكثفين لزواج مشاعر الغضب الشعبي وآلة الإعلام العملاقة من الجزيرة و«العربية التي جرى إعدادها وتجهيزها لهذا اليوم، واشتريت لها المصداقية على مدى سنوات لتصل إلى يوم ترفع فيه شعار الشعب يصنع ثورته، والشعب يريد إسقاط النظام، فيصل الإخوان إلى الحكم في مصر وتونس بانتظار سورية. هذا عدا عن المال المنفق بلا طائل في المخابرات والمؤامرات وصولاً إلى الحاج فايسبوك والسيد تويتر. والأصابع الأخرى لهذه الذراع هي استثمار وحشي لا يرحم لتنظيم القاعدة بكلّ مفرداته، للقتل وتعميم الموت، واللعب على حافة هاوية التقسيم والتفتيت وحروب الفتن، حتى تصرخ الشعوب وتنهك المقاومة وتسقط الأنظمة، وترتفع الراية البيضاء.

– في حصيلة ولايتَيْ باراك أوباما فشلت الحروب الناعمة، بسبب صمود سورية شعباً بوجه الفتن، وجيشاً بوجه الإرهاب والحرب، ورئيساً بوجه الترهيب والترغيب. ومع مسيرة الصمود السوري استنهضت قوى المقاومة ونهضت إيران وروسيا لمساندتها، منعاً للتغير المسموم للجغرافيا السياسية تحت عباءة الشعب يصنع ثورته ، وتداخلت المفاوضات بالمعارك، وجرى اختبار ألاعيب السياسة كلها، وبقي السؤال الأهمّ، بين معسكري الحرب في المنطقة، هل هُزمت أميركا؟ والهزيمة لم تعد فناء جيوش واستسلام الإمبراطور، كما في الحرب العالمية الثانية، بل تغيير الخيارات، ولجوء الشعوب عبر صناديق الاقتراع في ساحة صناعة قرار الحرب لإعلان تعبها ويأسها، وعزمها على الاهتمام أكثر بمعاشها، وسأمها من وعود معسولة بالمنّ والسلوى، وطلب المزيد من الصبر لأنّ الحرب تكاد تنتهي بنصر سيجلب عائدات يعمّ خيرها على الحكام والحلفاء والشعوب أيضاً.

– تعنينا الانتخابات الأميركية، بغير معيار مشوّه يريد الاطمئنان على وصول صديق للعرب لا ينقل السفارة الأميركية في فلسطين المحتلة إلى القدس، ولو زوّد إسرائيل بكلّ أدوات الموت والقتل والدمار، ومدّ أنابيب النفط الخليجي إلى موانئها. واليقين عند كلّ عاقل أنّ كلّ رئيس أميركي صديق لـ إسرائيل ضنينٌ بها، مسؤول عن حمايتها، ملتزم بتفوّقها العسكري. مقاربتنا للانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية، هي تماماً بالعمق من منطلق الاهتمام السعودي والتركي ذاته، ولكن بعكس الاتجاه. فما كان يعني الرياض وأنقرة ليس وصول هيلاري كلينتون بصفتها مَن سيمنح للسعودية وتركيا مكانة أميركا، بل في اللحظة السياسية التي حملها سلوك إدارة أوباما منذ توقيع التفاهم على الملف النووي الإيراني وصولاً لتوقيع التفاهم الروسي الأميركي مع روسيا، صار وصول هيلاري كلينتون أملاً بمواصلة الحرب وإنكار الهزيمة، وصار فشلها تكريساً للفشل والهزيمة، والنتيجة يقرّرها الناخب الأميركي، الذي يعنينا قياس خياراته، وطبيعة ودرجة التفويض الذي سيمنحه لحاكم البيت الأبيض، بحصيلة صمود جيوشنا ومقاومتنا وقيادة مقاومتنا ومحورنا المقاوم، وبفارق جوهري بيننا وبين السعودية أنها موّلت حملة كلينتون وربطت مصير سياساتها بما ستحمله الانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية، بينما لم ولن تكون قضيتنا أن نتبنّى وندافع عن وصول ترامب، وهو القلب الأسود العنصري، والحليف الموثوق لـ إسرائيل . كنا ولا زلنا معنيّين بمراقبة وتحليل مسار الصراع الرئاسي، باعتباره تعبيراً عن احترامنا لتضحيات شهدائنا بحماية ثوابتهم، لكن ببذل الجهد لمعرفة نتاج ما صنعته دماؤهم في تعبيد الطريق إلى النصر، فهل قال الأميركيون في صناديق الاقتراع هلمَّ إلى الحرب، أم تعبنا ونريد رئيساً يهتمّ بالداخل الأميركي؟

– الانتخابات الأميركية كما الاستفتاء البريطاني على الانسحاب من الاتحاد الأوروبي، تعبير عن تفكك آلات الحرب، وتعب شعوب الغرب، وميلها للانكفاء إلى دواخل بلادها، ورفع شعار الأمة العظيمة خير من الدولة العظمى ، ولو تبدّى التبدّل بكلّ فجاجة تشبه خطاب ترامب.

– أميركا الأكثر أميركية والأقل عالمية، كما بريطانيا الأكثر بريطانية والأقلّ عالمية، تناسباننا أكثر، مثلما هما علامتان على نتاج حروبنا ومقاومتنا وصمود أمتنا وشعوبنا وجيوشنا ومقاومتنا، مثلما أن تكون روسيا عالمية أكثر وروسية أقلّ علامة على فعل حقائق الصمود والثبات في إيصال رسالة أنّ هناك ما يستحقّ الرهان.

– لأنها أميركا سيعتاد الناس على عالم جديد مع أميركا بلا أنياب. سيتغيّر العالم كثيراً مع أميركا جديدة، تهتمّ بداخلها، أكثر مما تهتمّ لصناعة الحروب، وسيكون من حق الشعوب المضحّية أن تحتفل بعظيم إنجازها.

Has Russia Embarrassed the US or did the US Embarrass Itself?


By Richard Edmondson

The L.A. Times has published a piece complaining about alleged Russian efforts to influence the outcome of the presidential election and asserting, through unnamed officials, that such efforts are motivated by “personal animus” against Hillary Clinton. The Times also imputes on Russia’s part a desire to “raise doubts about the validity of U.S. democracy and leadership around the globe.”

The article, by Brian Bennett, is headlined, “Russian Hackers Seek to Embarrass the U.S. This Election Season.”

One’s initial, off-the-cuff response to such an allegation might be something like, “Well, if it’s true the Russians sought to embarrass the US, then looks like they’ve succeeded.”

But of course on the other hand, the US certainly hasn’t needed any help on that score, as it has done a thoroughly adequate job of embarrassing itself. Our support for terrorists, our endless wars, and our constant efforts at regime change in other countries–these alone have brought shame and disrepute upon our nation. But then you must add to that the ease with which our leaders publicly accuse others of war crimes and human rights violations–while they themselves bomb wedding parties and operate torture facilities–along with their seeming obliviousness as to how hypocritical they surely must sound to the vast majority of the world’s population while pompously making such accusations. So when you calculate in the “hypocrisy factor,” the stain upon our honor grows even worse.

Russia, after all, did not force the Obama administration to kill some 2,500 people in drone attacks just in its first six years in office; it did not demand that America leave the Guantanamo torture facility open; nor did it insist that we support Israel, to the tune of billions of dollars a year, while that country carries out  policies which meet the legal definition of genocide.

It also did not insist that we support terrorist groups in Syria while claiming to be fighting terrorism.

No. Russia wasn’t the responsible party. Our leaders did all these things, every one of them, on their own.

And they did even more.

It should be noted as well that US officials initiated a regime change in Ukraine, right on Russia’s doorstep, that threw the country into chaos and sparked a civil war. In fact, the infamous leaked phone conversation in which the State Department’s Victoria Nuland can be heard making an obscene reference to the EU is cited by Bennett as evidence of Russia’s aspirations at mortifying the US.

In February 2014, the Obama administration was embarrassed when a secretly recorded phone conversation between the U.S. ambassador in Ukraine and Victoria Nuland, a senior State Department official, was posted on YouTube.

The two officials could be heard privately picking who should be in the new government in Kiev, and at one point, Nuland used a four-letter word to dismiss slow-moving diplomats at the European Union.

Bennett goes on to assert that the intercepted call was “traced to Russian intelligence.” My own personal guess–and it’s just a guess, mind you–is that Russia probably did wiretap that conversation. Out of all the possibilities, they would seem to be the most likely candidate. But the fact that Russia monitored and released the communication–if it in fact did–is not so-much the embarrassing part. The embarrassing part is that two high-ranking US officials were plotting to overthrow a democratically elected government; the embarrassing part is that Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, were not fired when the recording was made public; the embarrassing part is that the US continued with its regime change operation until Viktor Yanukovych, the legitimate president of Ukraine, was finally overthrown nearly two and a half weeks later.

And yes, that’s the part of the story that Bennett left out–the Nuland-Pyatt conversation was uploaded to YouTube on February 4, 2014. Yanukovych wasn’t overthrown and forced to flee the capital until February 21. So the fact that Nuland and Pyatt were having a discussion on who was going to replace him at least two and a half weeks before he was actually overthrown proves the US had a hand in the coup. And if that’s not enough, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Nuland’s preferred candidate, did in fact end up becoming the new prime minister–sworn in on February 27, just six days after the change of government.

And this is what’s embarrassing to the US–not the recorded phone conversation–this and the fact that the regime change in Ukraine wasn’t the first time the US has overthrown a democratically elected leader. Not by a long shot sadly.

So now we have thousands of leaked emails containing embarrassing revelations about the Hillary Clinton campaign. Whether Russia is the source of these is totally beside the point. The embarrassing part is that people like the Clintons hold political power in America in the first place. Even before the emails were released, it was clear that Clinton had some ethics issues and that she had lied on a number of occasions. Yet America’s ruling elites worked to ensure that she got the nomination, and many still evidently want to see her in the White House despite the contentious accusations surrounding her. And obviously among these same elites there is a great deal of anger against Russia, whether justified or not.

Failing at something through the making of honest mistakes is generally not a cause for shame or embarrassment. What shames us–if we are capable of feeling shame–is when we engage in deceit or duplicity and our duplicitous behavior is found out and made known. Human beings of a certain temperament have a tendency to lash out in anger when caught up in situations like this, and that I think is what we are seeing now from America’s political establishment. The danger here, of course, is that if those in power in America succumb to the temptation to lash out, it could lead to a major world war.

Bennett gives a hint as to courses of action now being considered:

Possible responses include slapping new sanctions on Russia’s government or officials involved in the hacking, targeting a U.S. cyber attack on Russian networks, or expelling Russian diplomats and suspected intelligence operatives from the U.S.

He also quotes, rather ominously, a former Bush administration official as complaining that “right now there is no cyber deterrence…There is no payback.”

But perhaps the “payback” is already being synthesized and made ready for execution. On November 4, the very same day Bennett’s article appeared in the L.A. Times, NBC News reported on a US cyber attack being readied against Russia. Headlined “U.S. Govt. Hackers Ready to Hit Back If Russia Tries to Disrupt Election,” the article asserts that “U.S. military hackers have penetrated Russia’s electric grid, telecommunications networks and the Kremlin’s command systems, making them vulnerable to attack by secret American cyber weapons should the U.S. deem it necessary.”

The writers cite “top-secret documents” and an unnamed “senior intelligence official” as the source of the information.

The article has raised concerns in Russia, and according to RT, the Russian government has demanded an explanation.

Where all this may be headed is hard to say. It would be nice to think that US officials might be capable of grasping the fact that nations whose policies are virtuous and law-abiding have no reason to fear public embarrassment, and that these officials might seriously contemplate changing course accordingly. But that’s probably too much to hope for.

Satanic Frolicking or Just an Innocent Feast of Bodily Fluids?


Wikileaks Email Release Ties Podestas to
Controversial ‘Spirit Cooking’ Artist

Whoever first theorized that Wikileaks would save the most explosive and lurid emails for the final days before the election seems to have hit the nail on the head.

The Internet document leaking website has published an email sent to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta that included a forwarded dinner invitation from Marina Abramovic. The email was sent to Podesta by his brother, Tony Podesta.

Abramovic is a “performance artist” whose work has at times embraced the occult (as in the photo above), and who has also propounded something she refers to as “spirit cooking.” And indeed, the email Tony Podesta sent to his brother John includes a message forwarded from Abramovic in which she extends an invitation to attend a “Spirit Cooking dinner” at her home:

Dear Tony,

I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining?

All my love, Marina

Tony Podesta is founder of the Podesta Group, a lobbying firm whose client list has included Saudi Arabia. He has also worked on the campaigns of a number of prominent Democratic politicians, including Bill Clinton, and reportedly has close ties to the Obama White House.

The following tweet was posted earlier today by Wikileaks. The video in it  features Abramovic setting up what apparently is intended as an “art exhibit” promoting the novel idea of “spirit cooking.”

Continue here


U.S. Elections “November Chaos”: What You’re Not Being Told

Global Research, November 04, 2016

The FBI’s October surprise has thrown the 2016 election into November chaos.

But an examination of the trigger mechanism behind this event reveals a deeper layer of manipulation by the media and financial interests behind the election.

This is the GRTV Backgrounder with your host James Corbett.  

This Global Research TV report includes an interview with Prof. Michel Chossudovsky.


Homeless Trump Supporter Reportedly Found

 photo denscott2_zpsakpilriw.jpg

The homeless African-American woman attacked last week by a mob of politically correct crazies has reportedly been found. Reportedly her name is Denise Scott.

FOUND! Denise Scott has been located and is safe in Los Angeles with Christopher Mack, a man w… 

Photo published for Homeless Woman Guarding Trump Star

Homeless Woman Guarding Trump Star

After a recent vandalization of the “Trump Star” on Hollywood’s Walk of Fame, a homeless Trump supporter has posted herself on the premises  to guard against further damage. She was quoted as  say…

 Scott was attacked on October 24 while expressing her support for Donald Trump. In addition to holding signs for Trump, she reportedly was also attempting to protect his Hollywood Walk of Fame star which had previously been vandalized by a Clinton supporter. I put up a post about Scott yesterday, although at the time I did not know her name. But the post included a video reporting that Trump, after learning of the attack on her, had launched an effort to try and find her.

Scott was finally located by Christopher Mack, who runs a homeless outreach program on L.A.’s Skid Row. Reportedly the Trump campaign has been notified of the development.

Another development in the story is that a “GoFundMe” campaign has been started on Scott’s behalf that so far has raised more than $27,000. You can check it out here.

How They May Be Planning to Steal the Election


A software program has been detected that reportedly could enable one person to alter the outcome of next Tuesday’s election by causing voting machines to record votes in fractions rather than whole numbers. The system theoretically provides whoever controls it with the power to fabricate results not only state-by-state, but all the way down to the precinct level, and to leave no trace. Called “GEMS,” the program is reportedly already in place.

Biggest Election Fraud In History Discovered In The United States

Biggest election fraud in history discovered in the United States

Shocking video reveals secret software designed to rig elections

Vote fraud expert Bev Harris exposes electronic voting machines

by Jon Rappoport

October 31, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Okay. She finally did it. On Monday, Bev Harris (, the great investigator of vote fraud, appeared on the Alex Jones show and laid it all out. The GEMS vote-fraud system, “fraction magic,” the way the vote is being stolen. Not just in theory, but in fact. Listen to the whole interview and get the word out. Bev’s findings are staggering. Below the video is the original piece I did on this earlier this month.

High Alert: the election can still be rigged

Votes counted as fractions instead of as whole numbers

…[A]mazingly, the vote-rigging system it describes has not gotten widespread attention. The system can be used across the entire US.

As we know, there are a number of ways to rig an election. Bev Harris, at, is exploring a specific “cheat sheet” that has vast implications for the Trump vs. Hillary contest.

It’s a vote-counting system called GEMS.

I urge you to dive into her multi-part series, Fraction Magic (Part-1 here). Here are key Harris quotes. They’re all shockers:

“Our testing [of GEMS] shows that one vote can be counted 25 times, another only one one-thousandth of a time, effectively converting some votes to zero.”

“This report summarizes the results of our review of the GEMS election management system, which counts approximately 25 percent of all votes in the United States. The results of this study demonstrate that a fractional vote feature is embedded in each GEMS application which can be used to invisibly, yet radically, alter election outcomes by pre-setting desired vote percentages to redistribute votes. This tampering is not visible to election observers, even if they are standing in the room and watching the computer. Use of the decimalized vote feature is unlikely to be detected by auditing or canvass procedures, and can be applied across large jurisdictions in less than 60 seconds.”

“GEMS vote-counting systems are and have been operated under five trade names: Global Election Systems, Diebold Election Systems, Premier Election Systems, Dominion Voting Systems, and Election Systems & Software, in addition to a number of private regional subcontractors. At the time of this writing, this system is used statewide in Alaska, Connecticut, Georgia, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Utah and Vermont, and for counties in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming. It is also used in Canada.”

“Instead of ‘1’ the vote is allowed to be 1/2, or 1+7/8, or any other value that is not a whole number.”

“Weighting a race [through the use of GEMS] removes the principle of ‘one person-one vote’ to allow some votes to be counted as less than one or more than one. Regardless of what the real votes are, candidates can receive a set percentage of votes. Results can be controlled. For example, Candidate A can be assigned 44% of the votes, Candidate B 51%, and Candidate C the rest.”

“All evidence that [rigged] fractional values ever existed [in the GEMS system] can be removed instantly even from the underlying database using a setting in the GEMS data tables, in which case even instructing GEMS to show the [rigged] decimals will fail to reveal they were used.”

“Source code: Instructions to treat votes as decimal values instead of whole numbers [i.e., rigging] are inserted multiple times in the GEMS source code itself; thus, this feature cannot have been created by accident.”

A contact who, so far, apparently wishes to remain anonymous states the following about the history of the GEMS system:

“The Fractional vote [rigging] portion traces directly to Jeffrey W. Dean, whose wife was primary stockholder of the company that developed GEMS. He ran the company but was prohibited from handling money or checks due to a criminal conviction for computer fraud, for which he spent 4 years in prison. Almost immediately after being released from prison he was granted intimate access to elections data and large government contracts for ballot printing and ballot processing.”

power outside the matrix

I see no effort on the part of the federal government, state governments, or the mainstream press to investigate the GEMS system or respond to Bev Harris’ extensive analysis.

It’s not as if media outlets are unaware of her. From, here is an excerpt from her bio:

“Harris has been referred to as ‘the godmother’ of the election reform movement. (Boston Globe). Vanity Fair magazine credits her with founding the movement to reform electronic voting. Time Magazine calls her book, Black Box Voting, ‘the bible’ of electronic voting… Harris’s investigations have led some to call her the ‘Erin Brockovich of elections.’ (… Harris has supervised five ‘hack demonstrations’ in the field, using real voting machines. These have been covered by the Associated Press, the Washington Post, and in formal reports by the United States General Accounting Office…”

So far, her analysis of GEMS seems to be labeled “too hot to handle.” Press outlets prefer to report the slinging of mud from both Presidential candidates’ camps. Meanwhile, the actual results of the coming elections—including Congressional races—appear to be up for grabs, depending on who controls GEMS.

Update: From what I understand, each state government appoints a “consultant” to manage GEMS on election night. That person would be capable of rigging the vote.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Hillary Clinton: Wall Street’s Losing Horse? Constitutional Crisis? What’s the End Game?

Global Research, November 01, 2016

FBI clintonSince the release of FBI Director Comey’s Second letter to the US Congress, the presidential elections process has gone haywire, out of control. The bipartisan political apparatus is in crisis.

“I FBI director [James Comey] am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.” 

Two important questions:



In both cases, we are dealing with powerful interest groups.  CUI-BONO?

Has there been a shift in the Corporate Elite’s unbending support for Hillary Clinton? Or are the Elites divided?  This is something to be carefully investigated.

FBI Director Comey (image right) did not take this decision on his own. While he was described as responding to pressures from within the FBI, the crucial question is: Who are the power brokers behind James Comey? What mechanism incited him to take that decision?

Does he have a relationship with Trump?  Several media have even intimated that Moscow could have been behind Comey’s second letter. An absurd proposition.

The Trigger Mechanism

The trigger mechanism which incited the FBI Director to send a Second Letter to Congress was a report by the Wall Street Journal published four days prior to his October 28 decision.

On October 24, the WSJ revealed that “Clinton friend [Virginia Governor] Terry McAuliffe donated money to a [senior] FBI investigator’s wife when she ran for office” .

Governor Terry McAuliffe transferred the money on behalf of Hillary Clinton:

“Last night’s revelation that close Clinton ally Terry McAuliffe authorized $675,000 to the wife of a top official at the FBI, who conveniently was promoted to deputy director, and helped oversee the investigation into Clinton’s secret server  is deeply disturbing…

The fact that this was allowed to occur shows either outright negligent behavior by the FBI or a level of corruption that is beyond belief. The FBI needs to fully address these issues as soon as possible,The Wall Street Journal broke the story  on Sunday. The FBI has been under fire for not recommending indictment against Hillary Clinton.”(Breibart October 24, 2016)

Comey’s decision to send a second letter on October 28 (October Surprise) was triggered by the contents of the WSJ report, pointing to bribery of a police officer by Clinton and corruption within the FBI.

The donation went to the 2015 Virginia state Senate election campaign of Dr. Jill McCabe, who just so happens to be the wife of FBI official Andrew McCabe who – a few months later in January 2016–  was appointed deputy director of the FBI in charge of the Clinton Email investigation. How convenient (See WSJ, October 24, 2016).

Hillary Clinton had attempted to “buy legal immunity” by bribing a senior police official, a practice which has been widely applied by US organized crime. The only difference is that Clinton is a candidate to the presidency of the United States.  The Hillary “donation” received by Dr. Jill McCabe was not reported. According to official Virginia State records she declared a total of $256,000 dollars in campaign contributions.

Screenshot of FBI Press Release, January 29,2016

Andrew McCabe was Hillary’s Trojan Horse within the FBI.

Upon the release of the WSJ report, FBI Director Comey, responding to pressure from within the FBI, also with a view to protecting his authority and integrity, decided to release a second letter regarding the Clinton Emails.

His corrupt deputy director Andrew McCabe (image left) who was overseeing the Clinton investigation, sofar has not been fired.

“House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who told The Washington Post this week that Hillary Clinton would face “years” of potential probes if she won the presidency, has asked FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to provide documents about his wife’s 2015 campaign for Senate — a campaign that received financial support from Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D), a close Clinton ally. Chaffetz also tweeted Friday that the FBI would examine new emails related to the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private server.(Washington Post, October 28, 2016)

The trigger mechanism did not originate from FBI Director James Comey’s letter per se. It was the Wall Street Journal, mouthpiece of the US financial establishment, which revealed the fraud and bribery scheme: The wife of the Number Two Man at the FBI Andrew McCabe had received a large sum of money from Hillary Clinton, via the Governor of Virginia.

The timing of this decision less than two weeks before the elections was  crucial. But it was ultimately the WSJ (and those behind the release of the report on the Clinton-McCabe fraud) who determined the course of events.

Who on Wall Street was behind the WSJ report on the Clinton-FBI McCabe “bribe”, which served to trigger James Comey’s  letter?

The WSJ is owned by the News Corp conglomerate, one of the most powerful global media groups owned by the Murdoch Family Trust.

Rupert Murdoch is a firm supporter of Donald Trump. Murdoch and Trump met several times in course of last months:

The Murdoch-Trump alliance is the result of at least two private meetings between the billionaires this spring as well as phone calls from Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Murdoch’s view, according to those who’ve spoken with him, is that Trump is a winner whom the “elites” failed to take seriously. … In March, Murdoch tweeted that the GOP would “be mad not to unify” behind Trump. (Fox News)

In June, Trump meets up with Rupert Murdoch and his wife Jerry Hall in Scotland

Meeting in June in Scotland, source

Until recently, the US mainstream media have largely been involved in camouflaging the crimes committed by Hillary Clinton. Are we dealing with an About Turn?

The corporate elites are not monolithic. Quite the opposite. There are major divisions and conflicts within the ruling corporate establishment. What seems to be unfolding is a division between competing media conglomerates, with Murdoch’s News Corp Group (which includes the WSJ and Fox News) supporting Trump and the Time Warner -CNN Group supporting Clinton. In turn, these media conglomerates are aligned with powerful and competing factions within the corporate establishment.

Those who triggered the release of the WSJ report were fully aware that this would lead to a response by FBI Director James Comey, which in turn would contribute to weakening and undermining Hillary Clinton.

According to Donald Trump, This “Is Bigger than Watergate”.

The Clinton Campaign has responded by accusing FBI Director James Comey of breaking the law.

In many regards, the contents of the Huma Abedin Emails (released by the FBI) –which have been the object of extensive media coverage– is a red herring in comparison to the broader process of criminalization of the State system and party politics. It serves as a distraction: There is more than meets the eye. The Second letter pertaining to the Emails opens up a “Pandora’s box” of fraud, corruption, bribery and money laundering.

Sofar the media has concentrated on trivialities with a view to exonerating Clinton. The incriminating evidence of criminality contained in the WSJ report (i.e Clinton money paid to the wife of the Number 2 official in the FBI, who is investigating Hillary Clinton)  is not a media talking point, nor is the fraud underlying the Clinton Foundation’s money transactions.

The second letter by FBI Director Comey came as a Bombshell. Comey’s initiative points this time to the possibility that a candidate to the presidency of the United States be under criminal investigation by the FBI.

This does not solely pertain to the Email scandal, the FBI  “has an open investigation into the Clinton Foundation”, which constitutes a hotbed of fraud and money laundering. Moreover, a class action lawsuit was launched against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) “alleging fraud and collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign”. And a lot….(including mysterious deaths).

Act of Treason: Hillary Received Donations from the “State Sponsors of Terrorism” Who are Funding the Islamic State (ISIS-Daesh)

There is another important dimension.

While Clinton has acknowledged that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are providing money and support to ISIS-Daesh and other terrorists groups in Syria and Iraq, in an email, sent to John Podesta in 2014,

she  conveniently fails to mention that these two terror-funding states are both mega-donors to the Clinton Foundation. Qatar has given between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation and Saudi Arabia has donated upwards of $25 million dollars to the Foundation.” (See Baxter Dmitry, The Terrorists R Us, Global Research, October 29, 2016)

Saudi Arabia Qatar isis

A former Secretary of State (through here family’s Foundation) receives generous donations from the “State sponsors of terrorism” (Saudi Arabia and Qatar): This is an obvious act of treason by a senior US official and candidate to the presidency of the United States. 
Racketeering Charges under RICO
Moreover, according to Frank Huguenard (Global Research, May 30, 2016), the initial FBI investigation “has expanded well beyond violating State Department regulations to include questions about espionage, perjury and influence peddling”.
The Clinton Foundation as a crony money laundering entity is at the center of the FBI initiative, which could lead to a conviction under RICO racketeering charges:

Here’s what we do know.   Tens of millions of dollars donated to the Clinton Foundation was funneled to the organization through a Canadian shell company which has made tracing the donors nearly impossible.  Less than 10% of donations to the Foundation has actually been released to charitable organizations and $2M that has been traced back to long time Bill Clinton friend Julie McMahon (aka The Energizer).   When the official investigation into Hillary’s email server began, she instructed her IT professional to delete over 30,000 emails and cloud backups of her emails older than 30 days at both Platte River Networks and  Datto, Inc.  The FBI has subsequently recovered the majority, if not all, of Hillary’s deleted emails and are putting together a strong case against her for attempting to cover up her illegal and illicit activities.

A conviction under RICO comes when the Department of Justice proves that the defendant has engaged in two or more examples of racketeering and that the defendant maintained an interest in, participated in or invested in a criminal enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce.  There is ample evidence already in the public record that the Clinton Foundation qualifies as a criminal enterprise and there’s no doubt that the FBI is privy to significantly more evidence than has already been made public.

Under RICO, the sections most relevant in this case will be section 1503 (obstruction of justice), section 1510 (obstruction of criminal investigations) and section 1511 (obstruction of State or local law enforcement).  

As in the case with Richard Nixon after the Watergate Break-in, it’s the cover-up of a crime that will be the Clintons’ downfall.  Furthermore, under provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201, the Clinton Foundation can be held accountable for improprieties relating to bribery.  The FBI will be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that through the Clinton Foundation, international entities were able to commit bribery in exchange for help in securing business deals, such as the uranium-mining deal in Kazakhstan. (Frank Huguenard, Global Research, May 30, 2016),

Opposition to Hillary Clinton from within the Armed Forces

There is also evidence of resentment to Clinton from within the Armed Forces. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have expressed their opposition to the adoption of a “No Fly Zone” in Syria, which could lead to a war with Russia. Both the “No Fly Zone” as well as Hillary’s nuclear option “on the table” are the object of debate by America’s top brass. Referring to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran, Hillary said “we will obliterate them”.

What Happens if She is Elected? 

If elected president, Hillary’s criminal record would haunt her throughout her term in office, leading to the possibility of an impeachment. The presidency would become totally dysfunctional from the very outset, which her corporate sponsors including the defense contractors and Wall Street would prefer to avoid.

Inevitably Trump would launch one or more procedures pertaining to fraud at different stages of the election campaign, voting machines, etc. In the words of Donald Trump at a rally in New Hampshire:

“Hillary Clinton’s corruption is on a scale we’ve never seen before,…  We must not let her take her criminal scheme into the Oval Office.”

If Trump is elected president, there will also be attempts to unseat him, calling for his impeachment.

If both candidates are “dysfunctional”. Is there a Plan B?

National Emergency Measures, Martial Law? Continuity in Government (C.O.G.)

Unquestionably the entire US bipartisan political apparatus is in crisis including US foreign policy, marked by the breakdown of diplomacy, America’s military agenda and the unfolding confrontation with Russia.

While it is difficult to predict what might occur in the wake of the November 8 elections, the unfolding political impasse –coupled with rising geopolitical tensions in Syria, Iraq as well as Eastern Europe on Russia’s border– could potentially lead at some future date to the suspension of Constitutional government under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) HR 1540, signed into law by president Obama on December 31, 2011. Most media have failed to analyze the far-reaching implications of this legislation.

The present impasse in the electoral process is a crisis of legitimacy characterized by the criminalization of the US State, its judicial and law enforcement apparatus. In turn, Washington is committed to a hegemonic US-NATO “war without borders” coupled with the formation of giant trading blocks under the TPP and TTIP proposals.  This neoliberal macro-economic agenda has since the early 1980s been conducive to the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.

These developments coupled with a potential constitutional deadlock point in the direction of rising political and social tensions as well as mass protests throughout the US which could lead America at some future date into outright suppression of constitutional government and the imposition of “martial law”.

There are multiple  US “martial law” legislative procedures. The adoption of  the “National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), HR 1540) would be tantamount to a repeal of civil liberties, the surveillance state, the militarization of law enforcement, the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act.

All the components of  Police State USA are currently in place. They go far beyond government snooping of emails and telephone conversations.  They also include:

  • Extrajudicial assassinations of  alleged terrorists including US citizens, in blatant violation of the Fifth amendment  “No person shall. .. be deprived of life. .. without due process of law.”
  • The indefinite detention of US citizens without trial, namely the repeal of Habeas Corpus.
  • The establishment of “Internment Camps” on US Military Bases under legislation adopted  in 2009 .

Under the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (HR 645) the “Internment Camps” can be used to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.”

The FEMA internment camps are part of the Continuity of Government (C.O.G), which would be put in place in the case of martial law.  The internment camps are intended to “protect the government” against its citizens, by locking up protesters as well as political activists who might challenge the legitimacy of the Administration’s national security, economic or military agenda.

Democrats Step Up Campaign Against FBI Director

Global Research, November 02, 2016
World Socialist Web Site 1 November 2016

The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party continue to attack FBI Director James Comey for his letter to Congress October 28 announcing new “investigative steps” against the Democratic presidential candidate over her use of a private email server while Secretary of State.

The release of Comey’s letter has touched off a political and media firestorm, with Republican candidate Donald Trump claiming that Clinton is on the brink of indictment and arrest, while supporters of Clinton, both in the political establishment and the media, have criticized Comey for the timing of his announcement, only 11 days before the election.

While Clinton and her supporters have demanded that Comey clarify his vague, 166-word letter, the official FBI response has been to declare that there are so many emails found on a laptop belonging to former Representative Anthony Weiner, estranged husband of longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin, that it will be impossible to draw any conclusions about their significance or relevance to the Clinton email investigation until after the November 8 election.

This underscores the extraordinary character of Comey’s letter, which dropped a political bombshell on the eve of the vote, highly detrimental to Clinton, without any underlying factual underpinning.

The most significant response to the Comey letter has come from dozens of former Justice Department and FBI officials, from both Democratic and Republican administrations, who have denounced the FBI director for violating a longstanding rule that neither agency should make any politically sensitive announcement within 60 days of an election.

A bipartisan group of nearly 100 such officials signed a letter questioning Comey’s decision. Former attorney general Eric Holder was the most prominent Democratic signer, while former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson, from the George W. Bush administration, was the most prominent Republican.

Thompson and Jamie Gorelick, deputy attorney general in the administration of Bill Clinton, co-authored an op-ed column in the Washington Post Sunday under the headline, “James Comey is damaging our democracy.”

They wrote:

“Decades ago, the department decided that in the 60-day period before an election, the balance should be struck against even returning indictments involving individuals running for office, as well as against the disclosure of any investigative steps… A memorandum reflecting this choice has been issued every four years by multiple attorneys general for a very long time, including in 2016.”

They concluded,

“As it stands, we now have real-time, raw-take transparency taken to its illogical limit, a kind of reality TV of federal criminal investigation. Perhaps worst of all, it is happening on the eve of a presidential election. It is antithetical to the interests of justice, putting a thumb on the scale of this election and damaging our democracy.”

An op-ed column from Holder was published in Monday’s edition of the Post, declaring the Comey letter “a serious mistake.” Holder was responsible for the selection of the former Bush administration official, a registered Republican, to succeed Robert Mueller as FBI director in 2013, when Obama appointed him to a ten-year term.

Expressing the concern of former officials in both parties, Holder pointed out that the purpose of the policy of not making public announcements within 60 days of an election was to protect the FBI itself from being viewed as an instrument of partisan politics. Comey’s intervention in the election campaign on the eve of the vote has “negatively affected public trust in both the Justice Department and the FBI,” he warned.

The second line of argument pushed by the Clinton campaign and congressional Democrats is the claim that Comey was guilty of a “double standard” because he made public the renewed inquiry into the Clinton email server, but was silent on similar inquiries directed at the Trump campaign over possible connections to Russia.

Russia-baiting with a distinct McCarthyite odor has been the main response of the Democrats to the gusher of revelations coming from WIkiLeaks, which has obtained more than 50,000 emails hacked from the account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. Last week a new trove of emails documented the gross corruption of former president Bill Clinton in leveraging the Clinton Foundation charity to obtain lucrative speaking engagements before corporate and bank audiences.

Sunday’s New York Times carried an op-ed column from Richard W. Painter, former chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush White House from 2005 to 2007, raising the claim that there was an ongoing inquiry into Trump’s connections with Russia.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid cited the same concern in a letter Sunday to Comey, claiming, “It has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers and the Russian government,” and declaring, “The public has a right to know this information.”

In response to media inquiries, the innuendos from Reid became more brazenly provocative. His spokesman said that Reid could not disclose confidential information that had been given to him in closed-door briefs with senior intelligence officials: “The exact information is at the discretion of the national security community, but it is Senator Reid’s view that there is much more that can be said publicly than has been so far.”

Representative Adam Schiff, senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, was interviewed on NBC Nightly News Monday, giving full vent to the claims of Russian intervention in the US elections, which have been asserted by intelligence officials and the media for the past several months without offering the slightest evidence.

Press reports continue to provide new details of the raging crisis within the FBI itself over the Clinton investigation, with several field offices seeking a full-scale probe of the Clinton Foundation, and well as objecting to Comey’s announcement in July that there was no evidence of any crime being committed in Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.

The agents involved in the email server investigation knew as early as October 3 that the separate investigation into Weiner’s alleged sexually explicit text messages had uncovered an email trove linked to his wife, and thus indirectly to Clinton. FBI officials claim that Comey himself was not informed until October 27, the day before he sent the letter to Congress, meaning there was a period of more than three weeks during which the FBI was embroiled in internal discussions over what to do with the new material.

It remains highly uncertain what impact the FBI letter and subsequent media barrage will have on the outcome of the election. Twenty million people have already cast ballots in early voting in 38 states, including 3.6 million in Florida alone, about 40 percent of the state’s total vote from the last presidential election. Some key battleground states, such as Nevada and North Carolina, have also seen heavy turnout in early voting, while others, including Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, have no early voting, with nearly all ballots cast on Election Day.

On Being Aloof and Democratic

October 31, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

In recent weeks, the Democratic Party campaign went out of its way in its attempt to implicate the Republican candidate with misogyny and sexism. This agenda backfired completely.

We have been learning from recent polls that white women are now returning to Trump and they are not alone. It is possible that the attempt to present Trump as a sexual predator, practically, led the attention to Bill Clinton, his problematic sexual history and his gruesome affairs with the likes of arch paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.  Needless to mention, Hillary Clinton’s connection with Anthony Weiner hasn’t helped either. Hillary Clinton and her campaign leaders have somehow managed to forget that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

The question that arises here is, why has the Democratic Party fallen into such obvious traps? Why would they, themselves, sabotage their own project?

Hubris is the answer. The Democratic Party, in its current state is aloof. It is totally detached from the American social collective. It has invested in sectarianism, identitarian, and tribal politics.  It has become a mirror image of the Jewish political symptom. This is hardly surprising considering recent Jewish media  admissions that Clinton’s top five donors are Jewish billionaires.

Unfortunately, it is hubris that has brought disasters on Jews along their history. It is hubris that plagues progressives with detachment, presenting others as ‘reactionaries’.  It is hubris that threatens the Democratic party’s future. The Jews always seem so surprised by the sudden rise of anti-Semitism. I bet the leaders of the Democratic campaign were also in a state of a shock by the sudden boost of Trump in the polls last week.

Fixing the democratic party may be more demanding than one may be willing to admit. For this party to mend itself it needs to contemplate the prospect of a metaphysical shift. It must defy the illusionary Judeo-centric, tribal mind-set and reorient its path towards truly universal ethics.

The Failure of US Democracy

The Failure of US Democracy

The Failure of US Democracy

How The Oligarchs Plan To Steal The Election

I am now convinced that the Oligarchy that rules America intends to steal the presidential election. In the past, the oligarchs have not cared which candidate won as the oligarchs owned both. But they do not own Trump.

Most likely you are unaware of what Trump is telling people as the media does not report it. A person who speaks like this:

– is not endeared to the oligarchs.

Who are the oligarchs?

— Wall Street and the mega-banks too big to fail and their agent the Federal Reserve, a federal agency that put 5 banks ahead of millions of troubled American homeowners who the federal reserve allowed to be flushed down the toilet. In order to save the mega-banks’ balance sheets from their irresponsible behavior, the Fed has denied retirees any interest income on their savings for eight years, forcing the elderly to draw down their savings, leaving their heirs, who have been displaced from employment by corporate jobs offshoring, penniless.

— The military/security complex which has spent trillions of our taxpayer dollars on 15 years of gratuitous wars based entirely on lies in order to enrich themselves and their power.

— The neoconservartives whose crazed ideology of US world hegemony thrusts the American people into military conflict with Russia and China.

— The US global corporations that sent American jobs to China and India and elsewhere in order to enrich the One Percent with higher profits from lower labor costs.

— Agribusiness (Monsanto, corporations that poison the soil, the water, the oceans, and our food with their GMOs, hebicides, pesticides, and chemical fertilizers, while killing the bees that pollinate the crops.

— The extractive industries—energy, mining, fracking, and timber—that maximize their profits by destroying the environment and the water supply.

— The Israel Lobby that controls US Middle East policy and is committing genocide against the Palestinians just as the US committed genocide against native Americans. Israel is using the US to eliminate sovereign countries that stand in Israell’s way.

What convinces me that the Oligarchy intends to steal the election is the vast difference between the presstitutes’ reporting and the facts on the ground.

According to the presstitutes, Hillary is so far ahead that there is no point in Trump supporters bothering to vote. Hillary has won the election before the vote. Hillary has been declared a 93% sure winner.

I am yet to see one Hillary yard sign, but Trump signs are everywhere. Reports I receive are that Hillary’s public appearances are unattended but Trumps are so heavily attended that people have to be turned away. This is a report from a woman in Florida:

«Trump has pulled huge numbers all over FL while campaigning here this week. I only see Trump signs and sickers in my wide travels. I dined at a Mexican restaurant last night. Two women my age sitting behind me were talking about how they had tried to see Trump when he came to Tallahassee. They left work early, arriving at the venue at 4:00 for a 6:00 rally. The place was already over capacity so they were turned away. It turned out that there were so many people there by 2:00 that the doors had to be opened to them. The women said that the crowds present were a mix of races and ages».

I know the person who gave me this report and have no doubt whatsoever as to its veracity.

I also receive from readers similiar reports from around the country.

This is how the theft of the election is supposed to work: The media concentrated in a few corporate hands has gone all out to convince not only Americans but also the world, that Donald Trump is such an unacceptable candidate that he has lost the election before the vote.

By controllng the explanation, when the election is stolen those who challenge the stolen election are without a foundartion in the media. All media reports will say that it was a run away victory for Hillary over the misogynist immigrant-hating Trump.

And liberal, progressive opinion will be relieved and off guard as Hillary takes us into nuclear war.

That the Oligarchy intends to steal the election from the American people is verified by the officially reported behavior of the voting machines in early voting in Texas. The NRP presstitutes have declared that Hillary is such a favorite that even Repulbican Texas is up for grabs in the election.

If this is the case, why was it necessary for the voting machines to be programmed to change Trump votes to Hillary votes? Those voters who noted that they voted Trump but were recorded Hillary complained. The election officials, claiming a glitch (which only went one way), changed to paper ballots. But who will count them? No «glitches» caused Hillary votes to go to Trump, only Trump votes to go to Hillary.

The most brilliant movie of our time was The Matrix. This movie captured the life of Americans manipulated by a false reality, only in the real America there is insufficient awareness and no Neo, except possibly Donald Trump, to challenge the system. All of my life I have been trying to get Americans of all stripes—academics, scholars, journalists, Republicans, Democrats, right-wing, left-wing, US Representatives, US Senators, Presidents, corporate moguls and brainwashed Americans and foreigners—out of the false reality in which they exist.

In the United States today a critical presidential eletion is in process in which not a single important issue is addressed. This is total failure. Democracy, once the hope of the world, has totally failed in the United States of America.

Rigged Elections are an American Tradition

By Paul Craig Roberts

Do Americans have a memory? I sometimes wonder.

It is an obvious fact that the oligarchic One Percent have anointed Hillary, despite her myriad problems to be President of the US. There are reports that her staff are already moving into their White House offices. This much confidence before the vote does suggest that the skids have been greased.

The current cause celebre against Trump is his conditional statement that he might not accept the election results if they appear to have been rigged. The presstitutes immediately jumped on him for “discrediting American democracy” and for “breaking American tradition of accepting the people’s will.”

What nonsense! Stolen elections are the American tradition. Elections are stolen at every level—state, local, and federal. Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley’s theft of the Chicago and, thereby, Illinois vote for John F. Kennedy is legendary. The Republican US Supreme Court’s theft of the 2000 presidential election from Al Gore by preventing the Florida vote recount is another legendary example. The discrepancies between exit polls and the vote count of the secretly programmed electronic voting machines that have no paper trails are also legendary.

So what’s the big deal about Trump’s suspicion of election rigging?

The black civil rights movement has fought vote rigging for decades. The rigging takes place in a number of ways. Blacks simply can’t get registered to vote. If they do get registered, there are few polling places in their districts. And so on. After decades of struggle it is impossible that there any blacks who are not aware of how hard it can be for them to vote. Yet, I heard on the presstitute radio network, NPR, Hillary’s Uncle Toms saying how awful it was that Trump had cast aspersion on the credibility of American election results.

I also heard a NPR announcer suggest that Russia had not only hacked Hillary’s emails, but also had altered them in order to make incriminating documents out of harmless emails.

The presstitutes have gone all out to demonize both Trump and any mention of election rigging, because they know for a fact that the election will be stolen and that they will have the job of covering up the theft.

Don’t believe the polls that say Hillary won the Q&A sessions or the polls that say Hillary is ahead in the election. Pollsters work for political organizations. If pollsters produce unwelcome results, they don’t have any customers. The desired results are that Hillary wins.
The purpose of the rigged polls showing her to be ahead is to discourage Trump supporters from voting.

Don’t vote early. The purpose of early voting is to show the One Percent how the vote is shaping up. From this information, the oligarchs learn how to program the electronic machines in order to elect the candidate that they want.

The Rigging of the Election Campaign: World Champion Poker Player Accuses Hillary of Cheating

Global Research, October 22, 2016

%d bloggers like this: