Pennsylvania State Legislature Holds Public Hearing on 2020 election

The 4-year (neoliberal) radicalisation of US media & Bidenites’ ‘unradical radicalism’

US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (L) talks with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) during a rally with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the US Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington, DC. (AFP photo)
In this file photo, Joe Biden speaks during a press conference at The Queen in Wilmington, Delaware on November 16, 2020. (AFP photo)
The 4-year (neoliberal) radicalisation of US media & Bidenites’ ‘unradical radicalism’
(Ramin Mazaheri is currently covering the US elections. He is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.)

Monday, 23 November 2020 6:50 AM  [ Last Update: Monday, 23 November 2020 7:01 AM ]

By Ramin Mazaheri

For four years The New York Times editorial page has been unreadable because into every column – no matter the subject – an anti-Trump diatribe was inserted. For the world’s many billions who think there actually are issues other than the president of the United States, their obsession was incredibly tedious.

It reminded me of how the World Socialist Web Site ends every column with a reminder that the only solution – no matter the subject – is Trotskyist revolution. At least they keep that at the bottom, so you can avoid it if you want.

The difference between the two is that one is openly opposed to neoliberalism and neo-imperialism, while the other censors any discussion of these enormously crucial and socially-devastating concepts.

Joe Biden recently made waves for snapping at a reporter asking a difficult question, and it reminded us of how very coddled he was during the presidential campaign. But a possible change from Sleepy Joe to Cranky Joe may or may not be a problem – that depends on if his apparent election win survives the judicial oversight of the vote, something which is supported by 46% of America (per a poll by The Economist) but 0% of their mainstream media.

The bigger potential issue – and it’s a global one, because foreign journalists often ape the US, in what Iranians have called for 75 years “Westoxification” (being intoxicated by Westernism) – is what the US media actually evolves into post-Trump (if he loses).

In one of the many positive unintended consequences of Donald Trump, the US media went from the slavish sucking up to power during the Dubya Bush era of “wars without bodybags”, to “everybody loves Obama (even though in 2012 he beat Mitt Romney just 51% to 47%), to rediscovering that the press is not actually merely the public relations team of the government.

If Biden wins, will the US mainstream media quickly revert to sucking up to power? Will it be still only softball questions for President Biden?

Or does four years of decent reporting – sadly combined with a concurrent journalistic era of hysterical fear-mongering, Russophobia, urging hatred of one’s differently-voting neighbour and a moral outrage which rested upon a wilful ignorance regarding what Trump supporters really believe – actually have an impact?

The question reminded of an ancient Chinese aphorism: “The murder of a ruler by his minister, or of a father by his son, is not the result of events of one morning or one evening.”

The radicalisation of fake-leftists into faker fake-leftists? Or will the US truly reform its imperialist ways?

The larger point of that aphorism is that actions have consequences, and that if we allow things to go too far down the wrong road an unjust ruler gets murdered, or a country becomes as incredibly internally divided as the US now is.

Journalists are supposed to be combative and even provocative, but the problem here is entirely with the never-stated ideology of Bidenism. (Please note that is entirely different from me writing: the problem is with the rabidity of the never-Trumper ideology.)

Because actions have consequences, we should grasp that Bidenism is not just a “return to (the 2015) normal” but also includes a vindictive, ever-more flaming evangelical insistence that US-led Westernism (neoliberalism and neo-imperialism) is the one true religion, which Donald Trump was heretically and treasonously wrong to even partially call into question.

Who are these unreadable new and old columnists of The New York Times? I can tell you what they are not: they are not journalists who openly denounce imperialism, the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the oppression of the Wall Street high finance class or the other key ideas which differentiate leftism from centrism and rightism.

No, the loudest Bidenites are people who are upset that Trump is now trying to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq; are upset that Trump did not bomb Syria; could not care less about the famine in Yemen; and who would not have expressed outrage at all for the assassination of Iranian anti-terror hero Qasem Soleimani if Barack Obama had killed him.

The idea that Biden’s foreign policy is going to be less belligerent than Trump’s is something based only on hope and not on the past four years (nor Biden’s 47 years in public service). Just look at how Bidenites are preparing to deal with Trumpers and ask yourself: is the neo-imperial hegemon really going to treat foreigners – especially Muslims in oil-rich areas – better than their very own neighbors?

Bidenites essentially want to criminalise working for Trumpism, censor Trumpist analyses, and make Trump the very first president to ever be prosecuted (what happened to the outrage of Trump’s calls to prosecute “crooked Hillary”?). These are all “radical” in the very worst sense of the word. The obstacle in implementing such radical policies is that Trumpism won at every level on November 3rd except the presidency, in a total concretisation and not repudiation of Trumpism, whether one likes that or not; the problem is that Bidenites at this time in 2016 were, incredibly, already talking publicly about impeaching the then-president-elect Trump, gutting their credibility.

These do not seem like the people who are going to herald a new era of tolerance for non-American ideas because they can’t even tolerate half of America’s ideas. Bidenism may turn out to be “Western universal values” on steroids because Bidenites realise there truly is a threat to the 2015 status quo, which they are obviously hell-bent on suppressing.

These do not seem like the people who are going to become more tolerant of those who do not accept America’s fake-leftist and divisive identity politics, which are entirely based around one thing: distracting from opposition to and the discussion of both neo-imperialism and neoliberalism.

Like Obama, will Biden get a Nobel Peace Prize for his election campaign?

Many of us are old enough to have seen the failure of this idea, currently held by many non-Americans, that the switching from a Republican to a Democrat will herald an entirely new era free from American belligerence.

The younger class may not remember the intense hatred Democrats had for George W. Bush, but the proof of it is in that shocking, totally unmerited Nobel. In 2013 Obama would be credibly quoted as saying, “Turns out I’m really good at killing people. Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.”

If things really do change for the better if Biden wins, journalists will have to have changed as well. Of course, we cannot expect their publishers and editors to allow them to be towards Biden but a fraction of how oppositional they were with Trump, but the younger generation of reporters have now been weaned on journalistic ideas which may prove hard for neoliberal and neo-imperialist forces to rein in.

However, the problem of their essential fake-leftism – of Bidenism – remains, no?

And this is a problem for journalists worldwide, who often read the US mainstream media and are so proud that they can understand a foreign language so well that they may fail to realise they are also imbibing Biden’s latent, never-stated neoliberalism and neo-imperialism; they are so happy Trump is gone they forget the corruption and anti-“universal values” stances which got him elected in the first place. 

The worry is that instead of a genuine move away from American rightism, journalists in the US and abroad only imbibe a key hallmark of Bidenism: intolerance for dissent and the refusal to engage in dispassionate conversation about vital societal issues. The worry is that they become accepting of Bidenism’s flaming insistence that Western liberalism is the only acceptable form of human society worldwide – this is all adds up to the “unradical radicalism” of Bidenism.

Journalists must be skeptical, but they must be accurate – refusing to report on the reality of American Trumpism is as bad as those Americans whose family relations who have become frozen because of their inability to tolerate their relative’s right to vote as they wish.

That’s an American problem, but the idea that Bidenism is actually an anti-imperial and anti-neoliberal movement, or that it will continue Trump’s relative drawdown of American forces worldwide – that’s something you’ve never actually heard from Bidenites.

Think you will (if Biden wins)?


The Fascist neo-left and the Trump Factor

Source

The Fascist neo-left and the Trump Factor

November 21, 2020

by Ghassan Kadi for the Saker Blog

Nearly three weeks after the American elections, Americans and the world in general, are still none-the-wiser; not knowing who really won and if the votes have all been legitimate or otherwise.

And the man who is supposedly trying to make America respectable again, yes, Joe Biden, started his ‘tenure’ ironically by presenting his own disrespect by breaking the law and declaring himself as ‘president elect’ and establishing an illegal entity in the name of the ‘Office of President-Elect’.

There are serious accusations that allege that dead people have voted, that boxes of late illegal ballots (all voting for Biden) suddenly appeared from no-where, that the Dominion machines have been deliberately rigged in a manner that favoured Biden, that ballot observers from the Trump camp were not allowed to scrutineer, and much more.

Whilst all of the above points are considered allegations from the legal point of view, the Democrat camp should not be concerned at all if it has nothing to hide. If anything, if it is serious about restoring America’s respect in the eyes of the world, it should encourage transparency and investigations that prove without a single speck of doubt that they are all false. But that same camp that refused the legitimate results of a Trump win four years ago and then fabricated stories like Russiagate and others, is now urging the whole world to believe that the alleged Biden win is legitimate and that there was no interference.

Apart from allegations, what each of us knows for fact is that the media, especially social media, especially Facebook and Twitter have been instrumental in restricting and censoring posts and comments that favour Trump. At the same time, they implemented a blackout relating to the serious allegations of corruption about Biden and his family. If this is not interference in the election results, then what is?

Given the reach and power of social media, and given that most people are not interested in fact-finding, Facebook and Twitter have been engaged in a deliberate campaign of choosing what they allowed to be published and preventing others based only and only on their political views vis-à-vis the American elections.

Once the dust settles one way or the other, if there is any justice left in this world, social media personnel who have forged and implemented those policies must face trial.

What is most ironic about this whole new world that is everything but brave, is that the filthy rich and corrupt are cloaking themselves with the attire of the Left. There is really nothing left of the original Left in today’s Left.

Many, if not most of today’s ”Lefties” are inclined towards the current version of the political Left without really discerning that much has changed since the days of Castro and Guevara.

Today’s Left does not represent the working class.

Today’s Left is not concerned with achieving social justice.

Today’s Left is not concerned with ending capitalism and feudalism.

Today’s Neo-Left, is the consortium of globalists who own sweat shops in developing countries. They are the war-mongers, the arms dealers, the foot soldiers of thought police and they insist that your six-year-old children and grandchildren must learn about subjects like gender fluidity instead of learning history.

The devolution of the former political Left has been taking place for at least three decades, since the collapse of the USSR perhaps and the emergence of the so-called ‘New World Order’. But the 2016 Trump election has fast-tracked the process. George Soros who has an axe to grind with Communism became overnight the principle benefactor of most post-USSR Left movements. For better or for worse, it was as if he wanted to make sure that he contained the Left in a manner that deviates it from its original ideology. But he is not alone, and he is probably not doing this only and only because of political conviction. His ‘bigger’ partners, whether he is aware of their presence or not, have got a much bigger fish to fry; the fish of global control.

But is globalism what it appears to mean or is it a new form of hegemony? Let us not get into this herein. This will be the subject of the next article. Enough to say that what seems to surface from the actions and agendas of globalists is that they are adamant about destroying Western values; including democracy.

When my wife and I were in Russia on the 70th Anniversary of Victory over Nazi Germany, we were in total awe watching the Eternal Regiment on Nevski Prospect in St. Petersburg. Men and women proudly, silently and dignifiedly marching carrying photos of family members who perished fighting the Nazi malice. What was most amazing was seeing young boys and girls giving flowers to the elderly as a mark of respect. This is because students in Russia study history. The young generations must never take for granted the privileges they have. If they do not understand and respect the sacrifices of their forebears, they will never be able to realize what their own obligations are for today and the future. Many Americans do not know what the 4th of July stands for any more than they know how many States there are in the Union. Children growing up in the West have no idea, no idea at all, how and why they live in affluent countries with public services and government-financed welfare.

And when the million man/woman march was over many hours after it started, we could not see a single empty drink can dumped on the street, not even cigarette butts. And then we remembered that a few days earlier when we were in Moscow admiring among other things, the subway/metro stations, we did not witness any evidence of vandalism or graffiti either on the carriages or in the stations.

A far cry from what we see in the West, because to be proud of who one is has become taboo in the West; courtesy the neo-Left and their henchmen.

Personally, I used to feel concerned of what the armed Right-wing Evangelicals might do if they have it their way. But despite their heavy public display of weapons, I didn’t see any evidence to show that they have taken to the streets for the purpose destroying shops and looting. In saying this, and I am not saying that the pro-Trump militias are incapable of perpetrating organized violence, but recently thus far they haven’t. If anything, with all the BLM-associated violence and the attacks Trump supporters have recently faced, the armed conservatives have thus far displayed a huge degree of self-control and abidance by the rules of the law. They argue that their presence is to protect private and public property, and evidence seems to stack up in their favour.

On the other hand, and despite the bias of mainstream media, videos have emerged showing BLM supporters not only looting, but also terrorizing those who disagree with them and refuse to put their fist up in show of support.

Today’s Neo-Left activists are the ones using Nazi tactics; not the other way around. They are the controlled opposition and the foot soldiers of the thought-police; and these are undeniable facts. If anything, the Trump factor has enhanced their exposure.

And if you resurrect Guevara and catapult him into today’s political world without giving him a crash refresher course, he would not know which side of the political divide is which. If anything, he may think that it is the other way around.

In the event of a Biden win that Trump’s supporters may see as unfair, they may be driven to become violent, I don’t know. What I do know is that I have seen serious and concerning rowdy violent behaviour from the Left that makes me now feel that I am more fearful of organizations such as Extinction Rebellion than I am from the armed Evangelicals.

When the late and great Martin Luther King Jr. made his historic ‘I have a dream’ speech, he did not dream of a day when angry mobs would use the excuse of human rights in order to loot and pillage, gang attack supporters of their political opponents, and break the law and Constitution.

And when John Lennon sang ‘Give Peace a Chance’ and ‘Imagine’, he was hoping that one day political leaders would take heed and start putting their hearts before what they can achieve militarily.

Among other things, the thing with Trump is that he is/was not a politician. What drove him from being a profiteering tycoon to a man who wants to end American wars in the world is not something I can explain or understand. Clearly though, even if he is merely running America as a corporation, he must realize that it is not in America’s interests to be constantly engaged in expensive wars that do not have any benefit for America itself. If this is pragmatism from a profit-and-loss business perspective, then I don’t have any problems with this. I want to see American troops pulling out of conflict regions in the world. They have no business in Japan, South Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq and my beloved Syria to name a few places.

The thing about Trump is that he is not even a typical die-hard Republican. The archetypal Republicans are not a bunch of ‘nice guys’ either. How can anyone forget the legacy of the GOP? How can we forget George W Bush’s war on Iraq and his lies about the alleged Iraqi WMD’s? And what about his gang of infamous neo-cons; Perle, and Wolfowitz; not to forget Cheney, McCain, and many more from the gung-ho Republican Right that invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq, killed at least a million civilians and only ended up creating more problems than the ones they claimed they needed to resolve?

Whether Trump wins or loses the legal battle against what looks like a huge body of evidence of electoral fraud at different levels, between now and January the 20th 2021, unlike what the social media brainwashers want people to think and believe, he is not a ‘presidential candidate’, he remains to be the President of the United States of America and he remains to be the Commander in Chief.

To this effect, in as much as the POTUS is domestically building up a huge legal case against the alleged win of Biden, he equally seems to be preparing for the worst-case scenario on international matters. He is working on the contingencies of losing by seemingly making serious efforts into ending wars and the presence of American troops overseas. May he be successful doing this if he is true to his word.

But Mr. President, if you really want to clean up the slate as much as possible in case you lose the legal battle against the corrupt who serve the Deep State, you must then remember that partial withdrawals do not end wars. A drawdown is not a withdrawal. Stand by your promise and let history festoon you as the man who ended all of America’s wars overseas. For even if you leave one soldier, yes Mr. President, one single American soldier on the soil of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, or any other place on earth where his presence is not legitimately requested by the people of that land, then you will be remembered in history as the man who faked withdrawals of American troops; and you despise fake actions Mr. President, don’t you?

Last but not least Mr. President, you must at least stop the oil theft from Syria, repeal the Caesar Act, and pardon Assange.

Assange Mr. President is the victim of your enemies. His ‘crime’ was to expose the dirty works of Hillary. How can you not drop all charges against him?

And Mr. President, should you win the legal battle and prove that your opponents have cheated the public, you MUST then clean up the swamp with an iron fist and a high pressure hose. Zuckerberg, the Clintons, the Bidens, CNN, as well as officials that helped fabricate stories about you. The whole gamut of filthy lying manipulators must face justice and the next four years will be a case of now or never.

The electoral issues are something for the American legal system to decide; provided that the system continues to have the power to reach a decision that is lawful and not dictated by the party machine of the Democrats, their cohorts and henchmen with Facebook, Twitter and Google being on the top of the list.

Martin Luther King Jr. would now be saying I’m having a nightmare, I am having a nightmare because in the name of social justice, in my name, protestors are attacked, shops are looted and elections are getting rigged.

The failings of the Neo-Left do not mean that the neo-Right, Trumpism, is always or even necessarily sometimes right by default. What is pertinent is that the choice between the former and traditional Right and Left has now morphed into a choice of discerning right from wrong, and it is the Neo-Left activists who are behaving like Fascists, courtesy the Trump factor.

Two similar claims, a whole world of different reactions

November 20, 2020 – 19:50

TEHRAN – As Democrats move forward with their efforts to remove Donald Trump from the White House, observers point to the similarities between the United States’ 2020 presidential election and that of Iran in 2009.

The U.S. November election has created fissures and divisions in the country that are rarely seen in recent American history. Former President Barack Obama has expressed concerns over these divisions, saying the election results, in which each candidate received more than 70 million votes, show the nation remains bitterly split.

“What it says is that we are still deeply divided. The power of that alternative worldview that’s presented in the media that those voters consume — it carries a lot of weight,” Obama said in an interview with CBS.

Obama has put the spotlight on what can be called “popular divides” or divides that split the American people into almost two equal groups, with each one “operating on just completely different sets of facts.”

But these divides are even more severe among politicians than ordinary people, a fact that Obama and his fellow Democrats try to sweep under the rug by highlighting the popular divides and favoring them over the political ones.

The Democrats are busy working to downplay Trump’s claims over what some Republicans call massive voter fraud in the living memory of the American people. And this stands in stark contrast to what Democrats did during the 2009 presidential election in Iran when they supported a losing candidate who raised eyebrows by declaring premature victory.

Declaring victory prematurely is only one of the similarities between the two Iranian and American presidential elections. On November 4, while the election results were not called in several key battleground states, Trump announced that he had won the election.

“You just look at all of these states that we’ve won tonight, and then you take a look at the kind of margins that we’ve won them by,” Trump told supporters at the White House. “This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election, frankly, we did win this election.”

The Democrats were quick to rail against Trump because of his remark. Joe Biden blasted the president’s remarks as “outrageous, unprecedented, and incorrect.”

“Donald Trump does not decide the outcome of this election. Joe Biden does not decide the outcome of this election. The American people decide the outcome of this election. And the democratic process must and will continue until its conclusion,” Biden campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon said in a statement.

While Democrats strongly criticized Trump for declaring victory prematurely, they strongly supported Mir-Hossein Mousavi, a presidential candidate in Iran’s 2009 presidential election who strongly protested the results of the election, accusing his rival then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of rigging the election to secure his reelection.

Mousavi had acted in a way quite similar to Trump, according to Hadi Seyed Afghahi, an expert on West Asia.

The expert said, “Mousavi declared victory even before the votes were counted, creating chaos in the country for nearly six months.”

At that time, Mousavi famously said that he “will not surrender to this dangerous posturing” in reference to what he called voter fraud.

Democrats, who were in power at the time, made efforts to exploit the voter fraud allegations made by Mousavi to impose their demands on Iran, according to Seyed Afghahi.

Mousavi was the first candidate in the Iranian election who did not believe his defeat. While the Iranian people were getting ready to celebrate the most glorious presidential election ever held in Iran, Mousavi declared victory prematurely in his first statement after the election. He said in this statement that he will not surrender to what he called voter fraud.

Mousavi declined to provide evidence to support his allegations. Instead, his wife, Zahra Rahnavard, used a jaw-dropping logic that laid bare the truth behind her husband’s allegations. Rahnavard is an ethnic Lur hailing from the Lur-populated province of Luristan and Mousavi is an ethnic Azeri Turk who has come from the Azeri Turkish-majority province of Azerbaijan.

In an interview with BBC Persian following the election, Rahnavard claimed that the Lurs and Turks were impossible to vote for Mousavi’s rival, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Because the Lurs would not let down “Luristan’s son-in-law” and the Azeri Turks would not let down “the son of Azerbaijan.” This kind of reasoning shocked many political analysts and prompted BBC Persian to delete the interview at a later time.

Rahnavrad’s logic of Luristan’s son-in-law seems to have resonated with some Americans who find it difficult to understand Trump’s logic in terms of refusing the result of the November election. Trump has shockingly asked why mail-in ballots came in favor of his rival Joe Biden while he spent months urging his supporters to vote in person and refrain from voting by mail.

“Last night I was leading, often solidly, in many key States, in almost all instances Democrat-run & controlled. Then, one by one, they started to magically disappear as surprise ballot dumps were counted. VERY STRANGE, and the “pollsters” got it completely & historically wrong!” Trump said in a tweet on November 4.

Apart from the voter fraud allegations surrounding the 2009 and 2020 elections in Iran and the U.S., the position of Twitter toward Iran and the U.S. was also strikingly different. Twitter has put on some of Trump’s tweets a warning label describing Trump claims as “unsubstantiated” or “disputed.” This is all while Twitter delayed a 90-minute maintenance operation to support unrest in Iran in the midst of the 2009 election mayhem.

Writing on the company’s blog on June 15, 2009, Biz Stone of Twitter said that the company will delay “a critical network upgrade” because of the “role Twitter is currently playing as an important communication tool in Iran.”

A day later, the Obama administration admitted that it asked Twitter to stay open to help unrest in Iran. According to The New York Times, a 27-year-old State Department official, Jared Cohen, e-mailed the social-networking site Twitter with an unusual request: delay scheduled maintenance of its global network, which would have cut off service while Iranians were using Twitter to swap information and inform the outside world about the mushrooming protests around Tehran. The request was made to Jack Dorsey, a Twitter co-founder.

In addition to Twitter, major American TV networks also cut short their broadcasts of President Trump’s speech from the White House briefing in which he claimed that Democrats were committing “fraud” and trying to “steal” the election. MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNBC, and NBC cut away from the president’s speech.

While these networks sought to muzzle Trump and prevent him from making his case for voter fraud, Iranian news media outlets stood in a queue to give a tribune to Mousavi to present his evidence.  But when the Judiciary moved to restrict Mousavi after he called for chaos, these very networks accused Iran of restricting freedom of expression.

These similarities and differences clearly show how the Westerners deal with abstract concepts such as freedom and democracy in other places. They suppress any allegations over voter fraud at home but they work their butts off to support such allegations in other countries. They abuse democracy to advance their interests at the expense of the stability and interests of other countries.

RELATED NEWS

‘Bidenism’ domestically: no free press, no lawyer, one-party state? (2/2)

‘Bidenism’ domestically: no free press, no lawyer, one-party state? (2/2)
Ramin Mazaheri is currently covering the US elections. He is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

November 15, 2020

by Ramin Mazaheri and cross-posted with PressTV

For months the United States’ corporate-dominated media has terrified everyone with promises of right-wing militias taking to the streets, but here’s the thing: the pressures currently being put on 70 million Trump supporters is exponentially raising the possibility of that actually occurring, not reducing it.

It is ghastly illuminating to see just how quickly – and with such disregard for modern human rights – both the elite and the highly partisan citizens of the United States are attacking those who refuse to fall at the feet of Joe Biden, and even before all the votes are counted in a very narrow and highly-disputed election.

It is not an exaggeration, as I will list them below, but the tactics being used to push Biden into office are akin to wartime, yet the US is most emphatically not at war – all this derangement is over merely trying to vote as equals. I am not reporting from 1917 USSR, or 1949 China, or 1959 Cuba, or 1979 Iran – there are no foreign armed forces meddling in a revolution/civil war.

“Bidenism” is most emphatically not a revolutionary force. It is openly and proudly the exact opposite: a return to the “normalcy” embodied in the 2015 status quo. Nor is the US at civil war, but it seems some never-trumpets are actually hell-bent on starting one rather than do what every nation does: rely on a calm judicial review when there is a contested and very narrow vote. There is simply no other way out for the US than to follow normal democratic procedures, even if their electoral process is routinely called the worst among the Western core democracies by Harvard think-tanks.

(The US goes one step too far, as usual – other nations at least wait until the votes are actually mostly counted until a candidate declares victory, unlike Donald Trump and Joe Biden.)

If this does turn out to be the “Biden presidential(-elect) era” the world can easily grasp what a terrible, very Trumpian start it is. Americans, I think, cannot.

It’s just very unclear what Americans in 2020 truly believe in anymore?

We know that many American elite don’t truly believe in free press or free speech:

Part 1 of this article, “CNN’s Jake Tapper: The foreman/overseer keeping all journalists in line” discussed how one of the nation’s top news anchors threatened lesser-privileged journalists with blacklisting if they don’t side with Biden immediately. His intimidation went uncommented upon/tacitly condoned by his top colleagues, when his pathetic careerism amid social instability should cost him at least some of his privileges.

Censorship is one way to prevent dissenting journalism, but informal censorship is another: The US doesn’t need formal government censors when their own journalists enforce such obvious suppression informally.

The goal of censorship is conformity. The US media which is corporate dominated – from the (fake) left New York Times to right-wing Fox News – is producing coverage which seemingly exclusively conforms to the false idea that it’s good journalism to exclude the massive number of Americans who feel the vote was not “fair and free”.

Since this troubled election began that number includes a stunning 70% of Republicans, per recent polls, but also independents and leftists. Since the election I interviewed both the Party for Socialism & Liberation and the Socialist Alternative Party (you have never heard of them because of the duopoly which strangles American elections) and both of them said the same thing: this is a terribly antiquated system in America, but in any democracy you count all the votes and litigate any contentious problems.

We know that many Americans don’t believe in the right to an attorney:

The anti-Trump and totally mainstream PAC/think tank The Republican Project has been lauded from the (fake) left to the far-right Washington Post for successfully harassing Trump’s Pennsylvania election lawyers into abandoning their client. The tactics used were not rhetorical and moral but mere intimidation, harassment and doxxing (releasing private information about people into public).

Trump is appalling, but does he not even deserve a lawyer?

Do people who associate with Trump, such as his lawyers, deserve such treatment? How far does this go – that’s the question those engaged in a witch-hunt are too fanatical to ask themselves.

Trump’s legal grievance is obviously supported by too large a democratic minority to ignore without causing lasting damage to the integrity of the American system.

By denying the right to an attorney these rabid anti-Trumpers do not technically betray the letter of their 1776 Revolution, that anti-imperialist event, but they certainly do seem to betray the spirit. It seems to violate the spirit if not the letter of the 6th amendment (ratified in 1791), which guarantees a lawyer in all criminal prosecutions, as well as the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th amendment (ratified in 1868).

Congratulations to rabid anti-Trumpers for being so very progressive that they have made it to just past the slavery era?

1868 is a good place mark for the mentality of US Democrats, who remain obsessed with race and totally untouched by any of the anti-imperialist and class-based analyses which began to prevail worldwide since 1917.

We know that some American lawmakers don’t believe in open elections:

Earlier this month I reported on the blacklist of Iranian media by the Bernie Sanders-affiliated Democratic Socialists of America, so we shouldn’t have expected much from this fake-leftist faction openly committed to working within the Democratic Party.

But many Americans were shocked that DSA’s most powerful member, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, actually doubled down when a tweet of hers suggested that lists should be compiled of pro-Trumpers who have committed no crime other than supporting not her party.

When top elected officials vaguely threaten citizens with “the idea of being responsible for their behavior over last four years” and their behaviour is just working for a democratically-elected candidate, what else is this but massively undemocratic intimidation? That would makes free elections in the future impossible.

AOC is seemingly advocating for a one-party state, without knowing it, perhaps, but incompetence is no excuse. It’s certainly another sign of the widespread hysteria of rabid anti-Trumpers.

Directly after AOC’s call sprang up the “Trump Accountability Project”, headed by former Democratic National Committee press secretary Hari Sevugan, which is seemingly looking to blacklist all those that worked for the (possibly) outgoing administration. Would Mr. Sevugan approve of a “Biden Accountability Project” in 2024 for Biden’s staff? Or is that a superfluous question because Democrats are preordained to rule in an unbroken, 1,000-year dynasty?

Why would anybody of merit want to go into public service anymore if they are just going to get blacklisted for doing so?

All the above: This is all wartime-era stuff.

And Chicago, where I am currently based, has been boarded up like it was wartime since the election. (And in August/September. And in May/June.)

It’s as if America can’t help but inexorably draw itself to conflict, because this is all totally self-imposed. This is not the 1960s – there is no peace movement here anymore.

America is acting like what it is: half-full of rabid imperialists

Of course, “neo-imperialism” means colonising your own nation for an international 1%, as the European Union – that supremely US-guided project; that project which is more American than even America – proves.

Of course America is in a state of xenophobia (hostility or fear towards different cultures or strangers) and witch-hunting: this is exactly what the Democratic Party has normalised via their failed Russophobia campaign since 2016.

Did they think they could just turn that off?

Many current Biden supporters failed to stand up against this phony campaign designed to deflect from the Democrats 2016 election failures (2020 saw an even bigger “Blue Wave” failure, but isn’t this anti-Trump supporter hysteria deflecting attention from that for now?), and the most vociferous of them are now aiming their pitchforks at the people who dared to vote differently. The problem is that there are so very many of such persons.

We should add that for four years on US social media this hate mongering has to be multiplied by millions, maybe even billions of time-wasting, venomous posts and spiteful “likes” about veritable political nonsense. It’s practically a justification for state-sponsored censorship, because what kind of society can be healthy towards their neighbors, much less foreigners, when there have these been daily witch-hunts in the phony online world?!

So these lists can go on and on, but our tolerance of such intimidation should not.

(And, yes, before Russophobia there was Islamophobia, and before that it was socialism-phobia, Blackphobia, Indianphobia, etc.)

What’s going on in America is that the most Trump-hating Democrats are acting exactly like what they are: not fascists, as is so often alleged of the other side in Western discourse, but imperialists, which is so rarely discussed in Western discourse.

Like Jake Tapper, they are not just careerists who aspire to outdo everyone in extremism in order to rule from atop the pyramid, they also want to believe they also have the moral high ground despite that. It is arrogance combined with a lust for power and a hysterical, unreasoning rage which comes from we know not where?

Half of the US is so hysterical about being doubted that they can’t recognise themselves in the mirror, but many of those they have colonised, blockaded, sanctioned, brutalised and impoverished sure can.

It’s absolutely appalling and the solution is not simply, “Say that Biden is the president.”

Any nation which has a culture willing to go to such lengths to get others to accept their view – rather than relying on reasoned, secure reflection and some sort of litigation or vetting process – is deeply messed up.

But, as the US proved with their murderous meddling in Iran’s 2009 election: many in the US don’t just not care about anyone’s else’s rules, judges or systems of conflict resolution – the 2020 election proves that many Americans don’t even care about their own.

They are the law-giver and the life-taker and the president-maker, because they say so. Better side with “they”, or else.

*************************************************************

Results are in: Americans lose, duopoly wins, Trumpism not merely a cult (1/2) – November 5, 2020

Results are in: Americans lose, duopoly wins, Trumpism not merely a cult (2/2) – November 6, 2020

4 years of anti-Trumpism shaping MSM vote coverage, but expect long fight – November 7, 2020

US partitioned by 2 presidents: worst-case election scenario realized – November 9, 2020

A 2nd term is his if he really wants it, but how deep is Trump’s ‘Trumpism’? – November 10, 2020

CNN’s Jake Tapper: The overseer keeping all journalists in line (1/2) – November 13, 2020

CNN’s Jake Tapper: The foreman/overseer keeping all journalists in line (1/2)

CNN’s Jake Tapper: The foreman/overseer keeping all journalists in line (1/2)

November 13, 2020

CNN’s Jake Tapper: The foreman/overseer keeping all journalists in line (1/2)
Ramin Mazaheri is currently covering the US elections. He is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

By Ramin Mazaheri and cross-posted with PressTV

CNN anchorman Jake Tapper is one of the most widely-seen journalists in the United States, and a recent tweet of his revealed just how very much careerism it takes to climb the ladder so high.

As the US mainstream media continued its unconstitutional and absurd insistence that both the presidential election is over and that discussion around it must cease, a miffed Tapper took to Twitter on November 9th and issued a clear threat designed to intimidate other journalists into silence on these subjects:

“I truly sympathize with those dealing with losing — it’s not easy — but at a certain point one has to think not only about what’s best for the nation (peaceful transfer of power) but how any future employers might see your character defined during adversity.”

I’m a journalist and I don’t think I’m reading between the lines here when I relate that what I just read is: Journalists should promote the idea that Joe Biden is the undisputed victor or else you will never move up the ladder, or possibly ever even get hired as a journalist again.

Tapper was lambasted by some – obviously for intimidation, enforcing groupthink, hindering free press and free speech, overstepping the bounds of a “fourth estate” which has no formal governmental role in deciding US elections, etc. – but it was mostly unaddressed and tacitly condoned by his MSM colleagues.

One thing that struck me about Tapper’s mindset is: As the French say about Americans – “C’est marche ou crève” (It’s march or die). Very, very true.

But what struck me most – as the previous sentence is old news – is: How will my younger colleagues take this?

Tapper’s threat probably caused a lump in the throat of every mid-20s American journalist who is well-steeped in the most necessary virtues a journalist needs – an insistence on accuracy as well as skepticism — but is also just out of college in a horrible job market, probably deep in tuition-related debt, in a field which is known for being perennially low-paid, who is likely expected to smile for the opportunity to work for free as an intern as there is so much job competition in this exciting field, and who is now realising that a questioning US free press extends for less than a week, per the very privileged and powerful Jake Tapper.

It’s huge incompetence and dereliction of duty if Tapper did not realise that he has responsibilities to defend other journalists during chaotic times, given his privileged position, and absolutely to not to attack and threaten them.

It’s beyond pathetic as a human to go around threatening those who disagree with you about politics, but focusing on Tapper’s role in the labor structure in our craft is more interesting because I think it says a lot about US work culture.

Careerism may be the true US (false, divisive, selfish, unpatriotic) religion

Given their total precariousness it’s hard to not be empathetic with a young journalist, in this age where nothing gets deleted (and when Americans are apparently so politically intolerant), who doesn’t want to take an unpopular position. They certainly have every right to expect those with labor seniority – and the many privileges that go along with that – to lead the way during tough and unstable times.

What’s interesting about Tapper’s tweet is how it also reveals his own mind: maybe this tweet is just Tapper talking to himself about how “employers might see” him, Jake Tapper?

Then the tweet becomes him thinking, “Now think about your job here, Tappy old boy. If Ted Turner says Biden won then who cares about the constitution and the 70 million Trump voters and electoral integrity and democratic checks and balances and the alienation, apathy, anger and abstention rushing to judgement in this already-disputed election might cause? Remember what newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst said: ‘You furnish the pictures, I’ll furnish the war’. So there’s nothing new here – we all do it. Crack the whip, Tappy old boy. How many times have they cracked the whip on you before they let you sit in the big boy chair?”

With that in mind Tapper dutifully sent out a tweet/whip-crack to keep all the other lower workers in line.

And lesser-privileged workers often do get unruly – perhaps they are complaining amongst themselves about increasingly-dangerous working conditions, or talking about the luxurious life of the boss when they haven’t had a raise in years, or they are muttering that the newly announced plans of action are cubicle-drone nonsense which will run the company into the ground, or in this case that many millions of Americans truly are contesting these election results and maybe we should honestly report that? Such anti-1% complaints are why the foreman/overseer so often issues a threat during unstable times (of getting fired, of not getting hired during the next season’s busy work periods, of getting railroaded by cops, etc.).

So we all know people like Tapper, because we have all worked. We all do not like the Tappers – he is a tool of the 1% at our jobs. It’s dangerous to go against the foremen and the Tappers, but the whole idea of post-1917-modelled societies is that we have safety in numbers.

And we do have numbers.

Which is why I can tell Tapper: Take his job and shove it.

(This is a reference to a famous American country song, and while crude: we are working in English here and need to speak their language.)

I don’t want to work at CNN. I don’t even want to be called by CNN for an interview about facts on the ground.

I will happily chitchat and discuss things informally with any journalist, but if you think I want to have to report to people like Jake Tapper, you are totally, totally wrong.

I can sure find a place with better foremen.

And I am hardly alone or exceptional – there are SO MANY great journalists who refuse the lure of careerism that I must use caps there. We are not alone, and Tapper doesn’t realise that: We have big enough numbers, too.

(And wasn’t US democracy especially concerned with minority rights? I guess not for what the Tappers claim is the minority presidential vote in the recent election.)

Tapper also thinks we are powerless – we are not powerless, either.

It’s entirely possible that Tapper is just such a blatant careerist that to him it’s both personally unthinkable and intolerable that others would not be covering the 2020 US election with future employment gains foremost in their minds.

That’s a significant statement to consider, and it is entirely to the demerit of Tapper he has even made us consider it. If he has made a mistake he should clarify it (which he has done yet – his follow-up tweet was nearly as bad as his first), but he still would get demerits because TV journalist are supposed to be clear and understandable the very first time around.

And the US is also just blatantly unstable, which Tapper’s tweet also reminds us:

Even though this is the third election in six which has come under major dispute, what’s not important is dispassionately answering long-standing domestic questions about the integrity of presidential elections, or ensuring ideals such as free press and free votes, but ensuring a “(peaceful transfer of power)”.

Tapper seems to view the US in November 2020 as such a powder keg that totally legitimate questions about the integrity of this election must be tamped down or the United States of America is finished, self-immolated, destroyed, etc.

Is Tapper is saying the US is too unstable to have a transparent vote? If so, that’s a huge, huge, huge problem with the American system.

I disagree: there has been no political violence on or since the election (despite the months of MSM fear-mongering about it). I think that’s a hysterical view which Tapper is manipulatively resorting to so that his candidate wins. Hysteria is the both the American word of 2020 and also a way to intimidate people – via emotional force.

I would finally conclude that it is a careerist view: Tapper wants, above all, power to smoothly transfer from one hand of the duopoly to the other (although it’s true that Trump is a latecomer to the duopoly). Despite all the economic catastrophe, coronavirus health catastrophe, the inner cultural catastrophe of this ongoing disputed election – Jake Tapper is doing just fine, so stop asking questions.

Many will continue to not do so, and we are safe in our numbers.

Lastly, some people may object to my use of “overseer” in the headline, which refers to pre-1917 times in the US (“foreman” refers to modern work culture): I think it’s important to place Tapper in his American historical-linguistic context because we need to be reminded of how careerism is not a 21st century phenomenon. The struggle of workers against unjust managers is something which goes back to the building of the Pyramids, but what would have been the point of using an Arabic word for “overseer”, which only a minuscule minority of readers would understand? The agricultural “overseer” is not used much anymore in America – because it brings up issues of slavery, and few White people can discuss that openly here, much to the chagrin of Blacks – but it is a necessary image to retain in the American consciousness and should not be obliterated from their current era, as pre-modern overseers did so much damage to the 99% for such a long period of time.

This type of pure nonsense is what passes for leftism over here when it is a huge waste of time and space. There are far, far huger issues, such as:

Clearly, Tapper does not believe, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, which is a summation of the thoughts of the French writer Voltaire by his English biographer Evelyn Beatrice Hall and repeated constantly by Americans: all these countries are huge, huge believers in free speech and free press. This makes us fairly question not the patriotism of Tapper but whether he is authentically championing the grassroots values of the broad nation which he is covering, which I believe is a primary role of journalism, because: don’t the elite have enough mouthpieces, already?

Tapper is not alone.

America is in such hysteria, and eliciting such hypocrisy, and is so dangerously divided that a second part in this series is required to address Tapper’s cohorts who think calling for a judicial review of a highly-contested vote merits such an incredible crackdown on human rights.

*************************************************************

Results are in: Americans lose, duopoly wins, Trumpism not merely a cult (1/2) – November 5, 2020

Results are in: Americans lose, duopoly wins, Trumpism not merely a cult (2/2) – November 6, 2020

4 years of anti-Trumpism shaping MSM vote coverage, but expect long fight – November 7, 2020

US partitioned by 2 presidents: worst-case election scenario realized – November 9, 2020

A 2nd term is his if he really wants it, but how deep is Trump’s ‘Trumpism’? – November 10, 2020

«نيويورك تايمز»: تعرّف إلى المرأة التي تعرقل الانتقال السلس للسلطة في أميركا

البناء

نشرت صحيفة «نيويورك تايمز» الأميركية تحقيقاً لمراسليها في البيت الأبيض، تناول العقبات التي يمكن أن تمنع الانتقال السلس للسلطة إلى فريق جو بايدن الرئاسي، وأبرزها ضرورة اعتراف مرشحة ترامب، إميلي مورفي، مديرة إدارة الخدمات العامة، بالرئيس المنتخب جوزيف روبينيت بايدن رسمياً لبدء نقل السلطة إليه.

الطريق إلى البيت الأبيض ليس مفروشاً بالورود

في البداية، ذكر معدّو التقرير، الذين غطُّوا السياسة الخارجية للرئيس ترامب وحصل اثنان منهم على جائزة بوليتزر في الصحافة، أنّ المسؤولين الانتقاليين للرئيس المنتخب جوزيف آر بايدن جونيور دعوا واحدةً من كبار الموظفين الذين عيَّنتهم إدارة ترامب يوم الإثنين إلى إنهاء ما وصفوه بأنه عرقلة غير مبرّرة للأموال التي ينص القانون الفيدرالي على ضرورة تدفقها إلى الفائز في الانتخابات الرئاسية.

وقال المسؤولون، الذين تحدثوا إلى الصحافيين على خلفية ما جرى مساء الإثنين، إنّ من غير المسبوق تقريباً لإميلي دبليو مورفي، مديرة إدارة الخدمات العامة، أن ترفض إصدار خطاب «التأكيد»، الذي يسمح لفريق بايدن الانتقالي ببدء نقل السلطة.

وبموجب القانون الأميركي، يجب على السيدة مورفي، رئيسة الوكالة المترامية الأطراف التي تحافظ على عمل الحكومة الفيدرالية، أن تعترف رسمياً بالسيد بايدن باعتباره الرئيس القادم لبدء انتقاله للسلطة. وقد مرت ثلاثة أيام منذ أن توقعت المؤسسات الإخبارية أنه الفائز في الانتخابات، ولم تقم السيدة مورفي بواجبها بعد.

وقال المسؤولون الانتقاليون إنّ تقاعسها يمنع فرق بايدن من الانتقال إلى المكاتب الحكومية، بما في ذلك المرافق الآمنة حيث يمكنهم مناقشة المعلومات السرية. ولا يمكن لفِرق العمل التابعة للرئيس المُنتخب في ظلّ هذا الوضع الاجتماع مع نظرائهم في الوكالات أو البدء في عمليات فحص الخلفية الخاصة بكبار المرشحين لمجلس الوزراء وهو الأمر الذين يتطلب وصولاً سرياً للغاية.

وأشار مسؤول في البيت الأبيض، كما فعل عديد من حلفاء ترامب، إلى أنّ الانتقال للسلطة بعد الانتخابات الرئاسية عام 2000 تأخر بسبب المعركة القضائية التي جرت بين حملتي نائب الرئيس آل جور وجورج دبليو بوش، حاكم ولاية تكساس آنذاك، على مدى عدة أسابيع.

وقال المسؤول سيكون من الغريب أن يرسل الرئيس ترامب نوعاً من الإشارة للسماح ببدء الانتقال في الوقت الذي لا يزال فيه منخرطاً في معارك قضائية. لكنّ مساعدي بايدن قالوا إنّ الخلاف في عام 2000 تضمّن ولاية واحدة فقط بحوالي 500 بطاقة اقتراع كانت تفصل بين الفائز والخاسر، وهو عدد أقلّ بكثير مما عليه الحال في المنافسة الحالية.

وفي كلّ سباق رئاسي آخر على مدار الستين عاماً الماضية، تحدّد الفائز في غضون 24 ساعة، كما قالوا ـ حتى مع استمرار الطعون القانونية وعمليات إعادة الفرز لأسابيع. وقالوا إنهم يدرسون «جميع الخيارات»، بما في ذلك اتخاذ الإجراءات القانونية المحتملة، لدفع السيدة إميلي مورفي للسماح بالبدء في انتقال السلطة.

من هي السيدة إميلي مورفي؟

يقول محرّرو التقرير إنّ السيدة إميلي مورفي، التي وصفت نفسها بأنها «متوترة قليلاً» في جلسة مجلس الشيوخ للتصديق على تعيينها والتي عُقدت في شهر أكتوبر (تشرين الأول) عام 2017، وقالت أيضاً إنها «لم تشغل هذا المنصب لتحتلّ العناوين الرئيسة أو تحقق الشهرة لنفسها»، اختارت حتى الآن الوقوف إلى جانب البيت الأبيض والسيد ترامب، ما يعني وقوفها حائلاً بين فريق السيد بايدن والانتقال السلس للسلطة.

«الغارديان»: بايدن فاز بالرئاسة…ما الخيارات القانونية أمام ترامب؟

ويرفض الرئيس ترامب الاعتراف بنتائج الانتخابات وتعترض حملته الانتخابية على النتائج في ولايات عدة. وأحجم معظم الجمهوريين عن الاعتراف ببايدن، ناهيك عن المُعيّنين في إدارة ترامب مثل السيدة مورفي. وبذلك، فإنّ نقل السلطة الذي يجب أن يتمّ أصبح عالقاً في مأزق. يشير التقرير إلى أنّ متحدثة باسم البيت الأبيض لم تردّ على الفور على سؤال حول ما إذا كان السيد ترامب على استعداد للسماح للسيدة إميلي مورفي بالبدء في الانتقال من دون تنازل من جانب الرئيس، في ظلّ شروعه في خوض معاركه في المحكمة.

إرث ترامب ما زال قائماً

وقال ليزلي داش، الذي كان من المقرّر أن يقود عملية الانتقال في وزارة الصحة والخدمات الإنسانية لو قُدِّر لهيلاري كلينتون الفوز بالرئاسة في عام 2016، إنه على الرغم من العمل المتقدّم الذي قام به فريق بايدن خلال الحملة، لا شيء يمكن أن يحلّ محلّ الوصول المباشر إلى الوكالات، وهذا مستحيل من دون موافقة السيدة إميلي مورفي.

وأضاف السيد داش: «أعتقد أنّ هذا (إرث) ترامب، وهو الآن يرسل إشارة واضحة إلى كل من لا يزال قائماً في الإدارة بأنه لا يزال يتعين عليك الوقوف إلى جانبي في مظالمي وشكواي التي رفعتها». ويعدّ توقف المرحلة الانتقالية جزءاً من رفض شامل للاعتراف بنتائج الانتخابات من جانب إدارة ترامب.

وفي هذا الصدد، أشار مسؤولون في مكتب شؤون الموظفين الرئاسيين في البيت الأبيض إلى أنهم سيفصلون المعينين السياسيين الذين يبحثون عن وظائف جديدة خارج الإدارة خلال هذا الوقت، بحسب ما ذكره شخصان مطلعان على المناقشات الداخلية. وفي مكالمة مع موظفين في الوكالة الأميركية للتنمية الدولية يوم الإثنين الماضي، وصف المسؤولون الانتخابات بأنها ما زالت جارية، وفقاً لتسجيل حصل عليه موقع أكسيوس الإخباري. وفي رسالة يوم الأحد الماضي من المركز غير الحزبي للانتقال الرئاسي، حذَّر المخضرمون في الإدارات السابقة، من أنه «في الوقت الذي ستكون هناك نزاعات قانونية تتطلب الفصل، فإنّ النتيجة واضحة بما فيه الكفاية إلى حد أن عملية الانتقال يجب أن تبدأ الآن».

ويعمل مساعدو بايدن منذ شهور على تطوير خطط انتقالية دقيقة لمساعدة الرئيس المنتخب على الوفاء بوعوده الانتخابية بسرعة. وفي هذا الشأن، تعدّ فرق المراجعة المُشكَّلة من أشخاص على دراية بكلّ وكالة فيدرالية بالغة الأهمية. وتتمتع السيدة مورفي بالسلطة القانونية «لبدء انتقال السلطة»، والإفراج عن 6.3 مليون دولار من الأموال الفيدرالية المخصصة في الميزانية لتحقيق هذا المسعى، وإتاحة قاعات المكتب (اللازمة للاجتماعات) وتمكين أعضاء الفريق الفائز من زيارة مكاتب الوكالة وطلب المعلومات.

ويشير محرّرو التقرير إلى أنّ كلّ هذه الإجراءات غالباً ما يُنظر إليها باعتبارها إشارة البداية الرسمية. وفي ظلّ الظروف العادية، عادةً ما يكون قرار السيدة مورفي مدفوعاً بخطاب التنازل الذي يصل من جانب الخاسر في الانتخابات، وهو وإنْ لم يكن أمراً قانونياً، لكنه يشير إلى أنّ كلا الجانبين يقبلان النتيجة. وفي عام 2016، اتخذ القائم بأعمال إدارة الخدمات العامة في عهد الرئيس باراك أوباما القرار في صباح يوم التاسع من شهر نوفمبر (تشرين الثاني)، أي بعد الانتخابات مباشرةً. ولكن لا يوجد نصّ محدّد يحدّد متى يجب على السيدة مورفي التصرف.

فريق بايدن يلتزم الحكمة والتأني

قالت باميلا دي بنينغتون، المتحدثة باسم إدارة الخدمات العامة، في بيان يوم الإثنين الماضي، «لم يتمّ تأكيد (فوز بايدن) بعد». وأضافت «ستواصل إدارة الخدمات العامة ومديرها الالتزام والوفاء بجميع المتطلبات بموجب القانون وسنلتزم بالسوابق الماضية التي أرستها إدارة كلينتون في عام 2000». وفي بيان سابق، قالت السيدة باميلا إنّ «مدير إدارة الخدمات العامة لا يعلن الفائز في الانتخابات الرئاسية»، وأضافت إنّ «مدير إدارة الخدمات العامة يتحقق من المرشح الناجح الظاهر بمجرد أن يتضح الفائز بناءً على العملية المنصوص عليها في الدستور».

وقال مساعدو بايدن إنهم يتوقعون أن تتصرف السيدة إميلي مورفي في غضون أيام قليلة، لكنهم مستعدون لاحتمالية أن يؤدي الضغط السياسي من الرئيس وحلفائه الجمهوريين إلى منع ذلك. وفي بيان نُشر على تويتر يوم الأحد الماضي، حثت جين بساكي، المسؤول الانتقالي، السيدة مورفي برفق على إصدار الإعلان.

من جانبها، كتبت السيدة بساكي: «الآن بعد أن انتهت الانتخابات على نحو مستقل لصالح جو بايدن، نتطلع إلى أن تقوم مديرة إدارة الخدمات العامة بالتأكيد بصورة سريعة على أن جو بايدن وكامالا هاريس هما الرئيس المنتخب ونائبة الرئيس المنتخب».

وتابعت: «يعتمد الأمن القومي والمصالح الاقتصادية لأميركا على إشارة الحكومة الفيدرالية بوضوح وبسرعة إلى أنّ حكومة الولايات المتحدة ستحترم إرادة الشعب الأميركي وتنخرط في انتقال سلس وسلمي للسلطة».

وكان المسؤولون الانتقاليون لبايدن أكثر تركيزاً ليلة الاثنين الماضي، قائلين إن إدارة ترامب تراجعت فعلياً عن الوعود التي قطعتها على مدار الأشهر الستة الماضية لضمان نقل مناسب للسلطة إذا فاز بايدن. وقال المسؤولون إنهم وقَّعوا ثلاث مذكرات اتفاق منفصلةـ بما في ذلك مذكرة وقَّعها مارك ميدوز، رئيس موظفي البيت الأبيض، حدّدت إمكانية الوصول (إتاحة الفرصة لاستخدام مكاتب البيت الأبيض) والأموال التي سيحصل عليها فريق بايدن في الأيام التي تلي الانتخابات. وقالوا إنه لم يُسمح لأي من تلك الأمور أن تمضي قدماً.

أدَّت جائحة فيروس كورونا المُستجد إلى أن مسألة المكاتب باتت أقلّ أهمية لفريق بايدن الانتقالي، الذي كان يلتقي في الغالب عن بُعد خلال الأشهر العديدة الماضية وسيواصل القيام بذلك، وفقاً لما ذكره مسؤول انتقالي. وهناك عدد قليل من الموظفين في المكاتب التي وفرتها الحكومة قبل الانتخابات. ولكن بمجرد أن تشير السيدة إميلي مورفي إلى أن عملية الانتقال يمكن أن تبدأ، ستُفتح أبواب هذه المكاتب وتُزوَّد بأنظمة الكمبيوتر التي تمنح الإدارة الجديدة إمكانية الوصول إلى الأنظمة والمعلومات السرية، بالإضافة إلى توفير موقع آمن لإجراء محادثات سرية.

وإذا لم يحدث ذلك في الأيام المقبلة، فإنّ لدى إدارة بايدن خيارات أخرى. إذ يمتلك المسؤولون الانتقاليون مساحة مكتبية خاصة يمكنهم الاستمرار في استخدامها، وسيواصل بايدن وفريقه العمل عن بُعد. وعندما التقى الرئيس المنتخب بمجلسه الاستشاري الخاص بالجائحة يوم الإثنين الماضي، كان في ولاية ديلاوير وكان أعضاء مجلس الإدارة مشاركين في الاجتماع عبر شاشة كبيرة، ويتصلون من منازلهم أو مكاتبهم.

«الإندبندنت»: لماذا لن يستطيعترامب التلاعب بنتائج الانتخابات الرئاسية؟

لكنّ المشكلة الأكبر، بحسب التقرير، ستكون في كيفية الوصول إلى الوكالات والمعلومات التي يحتاجونها لبدء تنفيذ أجندة بايدن. لكن الأشخاص المطلعين على انتقال بايدن قالوا إنّ هناك حلاً جزئياً: كان عديد من الأشخاص الذين لا يزالون يعملون في الوكالات الفيدرالية قريبين من مستشاري بايدن وربما يكون لديهم استعداد للعمل معهم لتوفير المعلومات غير السرية التي يحتاجونها.

لكنّ هذا لن يحلّ مشكلة الوصول إلى المعلومات السرية، ما قد يؤثر في قدرة فريق الأمن القومي التابع للسيد بايدن على الاستعداد لحالات الطوارئ التي ربما يتعيّن عليه مواجهتها بمجرد تولي المنصب. وقال المسؤولون الانتقاليون إنّ أحد القيود المحددة في الوقت الحالي هو أنّ السيد بايدن لا يستطيع الوصول إلى منشأة آمنة في وزارة الخارجية والتي تُستخدَم عادةً لتوجيه المكالمات الواردة من القادة الأجانب الراغبين في تهنئة الرئيس المنتخب حديثاً. ويُجرِي بايدن هذه المكالمات، لكن لم يُسمح له باستخدام وزارة الخارجية كما جرت العادة بعد الانتخابات السابقة.

ترامب يواصل هجومه والتاريخ لا يكذب

أشار التقرير إلى أنّ ترامب وحلفاءه انتقدوا الديمقراطيين ووسائل الإعلام الإخبارية لتصويرهم بايدن باعتباره الفائز قبل الانتهاء من الطعون القانونية وعمليات إعادة الفرز. لكن من الناحية التاريخية، لم ينتظر إعلان قرار التأكيد الذي يصدره مدير إدارة الخدمات العامة نتائج مثل هذه الطعون.

وفي عام 2004، انتهت عمليات إعادة الفرز في نيو هامبشاير وأوهايو بعد أن اتخذت إدارة الخدمات العامة القرار. وحُسِمت عدة ولايات بأقلّ من نقطة مئوية واحدة. وفي عام 2016، رُفِعت دعاوى لإجراء خمس عمليات إعادة فرز الأصوات بعد إعلان إدارة الخدمات العامة القرار، وأُجرِيت ثلاث عمليات إعادة فرز للأصوات في ولايات ميشيغان ونيفادا وويسكونسن.

إميلي مورفي… تاريخغير مُشرِّف مع الديمقراطيين

يعاود المحررون الحديث عن السيدة إميلي مورفي باعتبارها شخصية لم يكن من المرجح أن تكون في قلب مثل هذا الوضع المتفجر: إنها شخصية بيروقراطية متواضعة بدأت حياتها المهنية بصفتها موظفة جمهورية في الكابيتول هيل (المجلس التشريعي لحكومة الولايات المتحدة) وتعلن حبها لإصلاح المشتريات وإعادة التفاوض على عقود الإيجار. وقال الديمقراطيون الذين عملوا معها إنهم يتذكرونها بصفتها محترفة مجتهدة. لكن فترة عملها في إدارة الخدمات العامة، التي تديرها منذ شهر ديسمبر (كانون الأول) عام 2017، لم تَخْلُ من الجدل.

وفي عام 2018، خلُص أعضاء مجلس النواب الديمقراطيين إلى أن السيدة إميلي مورفي ضللتهم بشأن قرار وكالتها بإعادة النظر في الخطط الطويلة لمكتب التحقيقات الفيدرالي الخاصة بنقل مقره العتيق في شارع بنسلفانيا إلى منطقة حضارية أخرى. ووجد الديمقراطيون أنّ ترامب تدخل لإلغاء الخطة، ربما لأنه كان يخشى أن يقوم مطوّر تجاري بتحويل مبنى جيه إيدجر هوفر الذي جرى إخلاؤه إلى فندق ينافس فندق ترامب الدولي الخاص به الواقع على بعد مبنى واحد فقط.

ووجد المفتش العام في إدارة الخدمات العامة أنّ شهادة السيدة إميلي مورفي بشأن هذه المسألة إلى الكونغرس في عام 2018 كانت «غير مكتملة وربما تركت انطباعاً مضللاً بأنها لم تجر مناقشات مع مسؤولي البيت الأبيض في عملية صنع القرار» بينما كانت في الواقع قد أجرت تلك المناقشات، بما في ذلك خلال زيارة لها إلى المكتب البيضاوي في عام 2017.

كما خلُص الديمقراطيون في مجلس النواب إلى أنّ السيدة إميلي مورفي كانت بطيئة في تزويدهم بالوثائق والمعلومات الأخرى المتعلقة بتأجير إدارة الخدمات العامة لمبنى مكتب البريد التاريخي القديم في واشنطن، موقع فندق ترامب، لصالح منظمة ترامب.

«ساسة بوست»

Dr.SHIVA LIVE: MIT PhD Analysis of Michigan Votes Reveals Unfortunate Truth of U.S. Voting Systems.

Via The Saker

The recent divide in U.S. is due to decline of family values: professor

November 11, 2020 – 10:45

Source

By Mohammad Mazhari

TEHRAN – An American academic attributes the recent divide in the American society to the decline of family and religious values that have taken place in the country since 1963.

In an interview with the Tehran Times, Dr. William Jeynes, a professor of education at California State University, notes that the Americans are often not as tolerant of each other as was the case in past generations. 
“A likely cause of this is the decline of the family- and Bible-based- values that have taken place in the United States since 1963,” Jeynes says. “Since 1963, divorce rates skyrocketed, and the U.S. Supreme Court removed Bible-based character education out of the public schools.”


The following is the text of the interview:


Q: What did make the November 3 election a controversial issue?

A: Yes, the election in 2020 is controversial. However, it does not call into question whether the U.S. can preserve its democracy. Rather, what it does highlight is two facts. First, the American electoral system was not prepared to handle so many absentee ballots that resulted from COVID-19. It is apparent that the U.S. will need to reform its absentee ballot system so that it is more uniform from state to state. Especially controversial has been the issues of whether non-postmarked ballots that arrive up to three days after election day will be counted and whether ballots in which the signature does not appear to match the one on record should be counted. Second, President Trump is no doubt very angry that Hillary Clinton previously claimed that President Trump was an “illegitimate president” who, she claims, in essence, stole the 2016 election from her.
After the 2016 election, certain media outlets claimed that Russia was a primary force that made President Trump’s victory possible. Nevertheless, such an accusation requires a certain amount of proof. However, the Mueller hearings that followed never produced a sufficient amount of evidence. President Trump, after going through the emotional strain of those accusations, is now angered. He asserts that various suspicious events regarding ballot counting constitute fraud and make the 2020 election results illegitimate. Granted, there are numerous suspicious ballots counting events. However, the Trump Administration needs to present sufficient evidence that:  a) the events are systemic and not isolated individual events and b) that enough ballots were affected to have influenced the ultimate outcome of the election. That will be very difficult to achieve.

Q: Is Trump an exception in America’s history? Could he gain the hearts of millions of Americans?

A: President Trump is an unusual person, who has also been through a prodigious amount of stress from the Democratic- and media-accusations that the Russians helped him get elected in 2016. That combination of being an unusual person and the accumulation of stress and anger likely caused him to claim victory in the 2020 election prematurely. He should have said that there was a plethora of irregularities in the counting of absentee ballots that must be thoroughly investigated and corrected right away before he can accept the results of the election. Although President Trump’s approach is unique, reform to count absentee ballots more precisely is needed to prevent a repeat occurrence in the future.

Q: How can the U.S. bridge the recent gap, which has divided the country into two opposing poles?

A: It is very unfortunate that the Americans are often not as civil and kind to each other, as was the case in past generations. A likely cause of this is the decline of the family- and Bible-based- values that have taken place in the United States since 1963. Since 1963, divorce rates skyrocketed, and the U.S. Supreme Court removed Bible-based character education out of the public schools. Before the U.S. Supreme Court decisions, love, compassion, civility, loyalty, and respect were major moral pillars taught by teachers in the public schools. The behavior of many American adults towards each other reflects this absence of character education and family values. The only way to heal the divisions is to emphasize shared character once again- and family- values returning to American society.

“Since 1963, divorce rates skyrocketed, and the U.S. Supreme Court removed Bible-based character education out of the public schools. Before that, love, compassion, civility, loyalty, and respect were major moral pillars taught by teachers in the public schools.”

 
Q: Do you agree with this view that the Supreme Court has an outsized role in elections because it has become politicized? 
 A: The U.S. Supreme Court realizes it must do all it can to remain to limit its role in this political controversy. What is interesting is that the three Trump U.S. Supreme Court appointees believe in “judicial restraint.” This means that justices should avoid getting involved in these matters, except when it is absolutely necessary. Hence, unless the Trump Administration presents a great deal of evidence indicating corruption in counting absentee ballots, the U.S. Supreme Court will likely do their best not to order a “do-over” election in some states, etc. They will try to limit themselves to giving direction to what ballots arrived too late to be counted and similar issues.
 
Q: It seems that the president in the American political structure has vast authority that may tempt him to exploit the power for his own benefits. What is your comment?
 

A: Potentially that is true, but there is one quality that it is important for people to understand about Americans. Since our independence in 1776, U.S. citizens have never had a king, queen, emperor, etc. As a result, Americans have a deep distrust of one person having too much power. Built into the American system are “checks and balances” that will likely allow President Trump to “state his case,” but not “get his way,” unless there is widespread evidence of corruption in the counting of ballots. Either Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell or the U.S. Supreme Court will likely stop him before he goes too far. Instead, I believe the ultimate result will be the recounting of ballots, an investigation, hearings about possible fraud in counting late ballots, and President Trump will allow the transition to Joseph Biden becoming the next president.

Q: Don’t you think that electoral votes threaten the future of democracy in the United States? 
 

A: The Electoral College is designed to protect American democracy. It is specifically designed to protect areas of low population. Otherwise, politicians will only seek to fulfill the desires of people living in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, and Philadelphia, etc. It is much the same reason why in the United Nations, even nations with a low population such as Qatar and Liechtenstein each have one vote in the General Assembly. Some might say that the U.N. arrangement in the General Assembly is unfair, but the consensus is that this structure protects small nations. For example, one issue that is becoming a major one is that Southern California, a dry area, is draining the Colorado River beyond California’s border, which is reducing the water supply in 6 other states, which have lower populations than California. Should California be able to demand its way because its population is larger than all those six states combined? Americans would say “no,” that the people from other states have rights too. In so many countries, people in the main cities are very rich, but people living outside the cities are very poor. This is true in most countries around the world. The electoral college is designed to prevent this from happening. It is not a perfect system, but even the poorest families in America have 2 or 3 cars. This year, the vote count is very close between Joseph Biden and Donald Trump. Biden only has 50-51% of the vote, but his electoral advantage will probably be 55% or more. Usually, the electoral college system works well.

RELATED NEWS

هل يحضّر ترامب القوة للعدوان؟ أين وكيف…؟

العميد د. أمين محمد حطيط

ما إن تداولت وسائل الإعلام خبر هزيمة ترامب في الانتخابات الرئاسية وفشله في تجديد ولايته لأربع سنوات أخرى حتى وقبل ان تنتهي عمليات الفرز وتعلن النتيجة الرسمية بشكل نهائي قاطع، اقدم الرئيس الذي لم يتبق له في البيت الابيض سوى 70 يوماً فقط تنتهي في 20\1\2021 اليوم المحدّد دستورياً لانتهاء ولاية الرئيس، أقدم ترامب المكابر والرافض الإقرار بالهزيمة على إقالة وزير الدفاع مارك إسبر ودفع وكيل البنتاغون الى الاستقالة وتسريب خبر التحضير لإقالة كل من مدير المخابرات المركزية C.I.A ومدير مكتب التحقيق الفيدرالي F.B.I والذي يعد بمثابة وكالة الاستخبارات الداخلية، وأرفق التغييرات مع تسريبات إعلامية بالبدء بشحن الصواريخ والقنابل الذكية الى الامارات العربية ثم تنظيم جولة لوزير الخارجية بومبيو تشمل كلاً من فرنسا وتركيا والسعودية والإمارات العربية و»إسرائيل» مهّد لها بمؤتمر صحافي أهمّ ما اعلن فيه هو التأكيد على موقف ترامب بانّ الأمل بالفوز قائم لا بل حتمي، وانّ الدخول الى الولاية الثانية لترامب سيتمّ بسلاسة لأن ترامب لن ينقطع عن ممارسة الحكم.

إن تحليلاً لكل ما ذكر يقودنا الى استخلاص شيء أساسي مفاده بان ترامب يعيد تنظيم إدارته من أجل القيام بعمل ما عسكري أو أمني أو من طبيعة خاصة أخرى، وانه يريد ان يسند المهمة الى من يكون طوع بنانه ويلتزم بأوامره من دون نقاش او تردّد او تلكؤ والذي يعزز هذا التفسير هو انّ الإقالات المنفذة او المنتظرة برّرت أو تبرّر بصلابة أولئك المعزولين وعدم انصياعهم للرئيس، كما يوجب نظام عمل فريق «أمرك سيدي».

فإذا أخذنا بهذا التفسير أيّ الإعداد لاستعال القوة في مكان ما، فإنّ السؤال التالي سيكون أيّ ميدان سيختار ترامب لممارسة أفعال القوة تلك؟ وهنا سيكون منطقياً التفكير بالميدانين الأميركي الداخلي والدولي الخارجي.

ففي الوجه الداخلي يمكن أن يفسّر بنية ترامب بعد رفضه الإقرار بالهزيمة عدم تسليم السلطة الى من أكدت عليه صناديق الاقتراع بأنه الرئيس، وبالتالي سيتمسك ترامب بأصوات الـ 70 مليون أميركي (48% من المقترعين) الذين اقترعوا له ويستند الى قوة السلاح الذي انتشر بين المواطنين حتى فاق في آخر تقدير الـ 40 مليون قطعة سلاح، ويريد ان يأمن جانب القوى العسكرية والأمنية والقضائية حتى يطمئن الى نجاح الحركة الشعبية المؤيدة له والرافضة لخروجه من البيت الابيض. وبهذا تكون المناقلات والتعيينات بدءاً من رئيسة المحكمة العليا وصولاً الى من ذكر أعلاه، أعمالاً إعدادية لمسرح العمليات الرسمية والشعبية لتثبيت ترامب في موقعه بصرف النظر عما نطقت به صناديق الاقتراع. قرار يتخذه غير عابئ بما قد يقود إليه هذا التدبير من انفجار شعبي قد يؤدي الى حرب أهلية وتشرذم الدولة، فترامب يؤمن بأنّ الأكثرية البيضاء التي صوّتت له هي التي يحق لها أن تختار رئيس الولايات المتحدة فإن لم تجارِها الأكثرية الشعبية العامة فيجب ان يعمل برأي الأكثرية البيضاء كائناً ما كانت النتائج.

أما الوجه الخارجي لاستعمال القوة وهو الأخطر فإنه قد يكون بدافع الانتقام او تنفيذ ما تخلف عن تنفيذه رغم التعهّد به وسيكون في واحد او أكثر من مسارح عمليات أساسية أربعة، أولها منطقة الشرق الأوسط ضدّ محور المقاومة وإيران، والثاني في أميركا اللاتينية ضدّ فنزويلا وسواها، والثالث في الشرق الأقصى ضدّ الصين والأخير ضدّ روسيا.

ومن وجهة نظرنا ومن بين مسارح العمليات هذه نرجّح أن يكون الخيار المفضل الأول قائماً على المفاضلة بين الشرق الأوسط وأميركا اللاتينية مع ترجيح مؤكد للشرق الأوسط، خاصة انّ ترامب سيجد فيه ما يلائمه أكثر لشنّ العمليات الحربية او تبريرها، حيث إنّ نفقات الحرب ستؤمّن من أموال النفط الخليجي (البعض يقول بانّ السعودية مع دول خليجية اخرى دفعت سلفاً نفقات هذه الحرب وتلقت وعداً بتنفيذها من دون أن يحدّد تاريخ شنّها) وإنّ افتعال سبب مباشر لاندلاع شرارة الحرب أمر سهل في ظلّ النيران المستمرّ اشتعالها في المنطقة منذ 10 سنوات مع وجود 65 الف جندي أميركي في 54 قاعدة عسكرية منتشرة في المنطقة ـ ثم إنّ هذه الحرب ستحقق الامن لـ «إسرائيل» بشكل نهائي عبر تفكيك محور المقاومة وتدمير أسلحته الخطرة بكل مكوّناته، ومضيفاً الى تدمير سورية إيران وحزب الله. وستوفر فرصاً أكبر لصفقة القرن التي أعطت إسرائيل أكثر مما كنت تطلب. فإذا اختار ترامب هذا الاتجاه، فإنّ السؤال التالي سيكون: ما هو بنك الأهداف وما هي العمليات العسكرية والأمنية المحتملة التنفيذ؟

طبعاً، نستبعد الحرب الشاملة في المنطقة بما فيها الاجتياح البري والاحتلال كما حصل في العراق ونستبعد العمل الواسع النطاق على جبهات متعددة براً وبحراً وجواً، نظراً لأن التحضير القانوني والإداري والعملاني واللوجستي من ترخيص وتحشيد ونقل عتاد وتجهيزات غير ممكن في الوقت المتاح، ومع التأكيد على استمرار سياسة التدابير الإجرامية اللاشرعية التي تسميها أميركا «عقوبات» ومع احتمال تصاعد الحرب السبيرانية فاننا نرى ان القيادة الأميركية الملتصقة بترامب لتنفيذ نزواته وموجات عنجهيته وغضبه ستجد نفسها أمام رزمة من الخيارات العسكرية الميدانية التي تتجنب المواجهات البرية والقتال على الأرض ولذلك سيكون الاختيار مركزاً على واحد أو أكثر مما يلي:

1

ـ ضربات تدميرية للمنشآت النووية الإيرانية وللوجود المقاوم في سورية والعراق ولبنان.

2

ـ عمليات بحرية في الخليج ضد إيران مترافقة مع عمليات برية ضد الأهداف الاستراتيجية الكبرى.

3

ـ ضربة عسكرية مركزة ضد ما يوصف بالصواريخ الدقيقة لحزب الله في لبنان، مترافقاً مع التعرّض للوجود العسكري لمحور المقاومة جنوبي سورية.

4

ـ تنفيذ عمليات اغتيال واسعة على صعيد محور المقاومة وقادته.

هذه الفرضيّات ستدفع محور المقاومة، الذي كما اتضح من كلام السيد حسن نصر الله أمس، أنّ ما يجري واقع تحت نظر المحور ويأخذه بالجدية القصوى ويضعه ضمن دائرة الأعمال المحتمل أن يقوم بها ترامب بتمويل عربي خليجي وتشجيع إسرائيلي ولتحقيق رغبات شخصيّة، ولهذا فإن هذا التصور يدفع المحور لاتخاذ تدابير دفاعية شاملة من قبله وبكل مكوّناته، تدابير تكون على وجهين:

أ ـ الأول الدفاع السلبي لتجنب الضرر أو للحد من الخسائر للحد الأقصى عبر اتخاذ التدابير التي تعقد مهمة المعتدي وتحول دون الوصول الى أهدافه بيسر وسهولة، وطبعاً هذا الامر متخذ، ولكن قد يستلزم المزيد من الإجراءات، للتحسين والتفعيل أكثر.

ب ـ اما الثاني وهو الأهم والأفعل ويكون بالدفاع الإيجابي الردعي الفاعل عبر العمل المركز باستراتيجية «الهدف بالهدف المقابل». وهنا سيكون لدى محور المقاومة بنك اهداف واسع يشمل بالإضافة الى القواعد العسكرية الأميركية في المنطقة والاسطول البحري في الخليج بنك أهداف يشمل كامل المساحة المغتصبة في فلسطين المحتلة، والمراكز الاستراتيجية العسكرية والاقتصادية في الدول المموّلة للحرب فضلاً عن المعابر المائية في مضيق هرمز وباب المندب.

وفي كلّ الأحوال يجب أن لا يغيب عن البال أهمية الحرب النفسية التي ستسبق أي عمل وعدوان وترافقه وتستمر بعده خاصة أن العدو يتكئ عليها بشكل واسع، لكن محور المقاومة بات له الباع الطويل فيها حيث برع بها في العقدين الأخيرين الى حدّ انه بات يملك المناعة ضدّ سموم العدو ويملك القدرة للفتك بمعنوياته، خاصة بعد ان أكد في كلّ مناسبة ان العدو يمكن أن يطلق الطلقة الأولى، لكنه حتماً لن تكون له الطلقة الأخيرة، فهل يغامر ترامب بعمل جنوني غير محسوب ويتغيّر وجه المنطقة، ام انّ الدولة العميقة في أميركا ستمسك على يده وتلقيه خارج البيت الأبيض قبل تنفيذ قراره الانتحاري؟

أستاذ جامعي – باحث استراتيجي

A 2nd term is his if he really wants it, but how deep is Trump’s ‘Trumpism’?

Wednesday, 11 November 2020 8:10 AM  [ Last Update: Wednesday, 11 November 2020 8:18 AM ]

US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (L) talks with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) during a rally with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the US Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington, DC. (AFP photo)
US President Donald Trump (File photo)

By Ramin Mazaheri

A 2nd term is his if he really wants it, but how deep is Trump’s ‘Trumpism’?
Ramin Mazaheri is currently covering the US elections. He is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

The United States repeatedly has the worst elections of all the Western core democracies.

That’s not “Iranian meddling” but Harvard and their 2019 Electoral Integrity Index. They ranked US elections just 57th in the world.

One wonders how much further they will fall in this year’s ranking?

If we honestly ask if American elections have integrity I think everyone has the same answer, and it’s as serious as a heart-attack:

You don’t want to go there. American elections cannot withstand serious scrutiny.

So if President Donald Trump actually wants a second term, it’s likely there for the taking. He’ll have to ride out weeks of personal stress even worse than the televised Watergate hearings in 1973, but he won’t come out like Richard Nixon just for insisting that American elections finally get looked at honestly. 

I don’t think that Trump has engaged in vote fraud, but I must report that half of the US still believes that Democrats did. Mail-in balloting has unnecessarily stressed an already corruption-filled system, per Harvard. In a democracy it does not matter if perceptions of voter fraud run on partisan lines – if such perceptions are widespread they simply must be resolved satisfactorily.

Nobody has tested the integrity of US elections in recent memory. Not in even in 2000, when they rushed to install George W. Bush 37 days after the election. We later found that an unforgivable 14% of African-American votes had been questionably rejected in they key state of Florida.

Americans shouldn’t forget things like that, and many don’t. Many just permanently stay away from elections and encourage others to do the same.

Democrats want to pin all the blame for the current election mistrust on Trump, but such a view acts as if the world began in 2016.

This is an election system which could not stand serious scrutiny, and now it is cracking at the end of this year of unprecedented pressures.

Half the country is begging Trump: stress it further.

His supporters are asking Trump to be a martyr and refuse to concede

This is an absolutely history-making moment in time, and this hard-news journalist never resorts to such hyperbole: This is the moment when Donald Trump can choose between going down in history likely portrayed as a buffoon, or he can take on the establishment “Swamp” by forcing it to investigate allegations of structural corruption by elites.

It’s a stunning idea, and unthinkable to half the country here, who is being swamped with the insistence that Joe Biden is the president-elect even though the votes counting is still ongoing, even though he leads by a mere average of 21,000 votes over four states, and in an election which has been tainted by corruption accusations for months.

What they are applying as pressure is the cynical power of “inevitability”. Maybe Trump really did get fewer votes, so why put the nation through stress?

That common view should be rejected in favor of the martyrs who came before, such as the disenfranchised Black Floridians of 2000. And how long can honest reckonings be put off without destroying faith in the system? Destroyed faith in society has a price, and America has a problem with honest talk, but this is truly la chance for redemption.

That’s why Joe Biden’s early declaration was so reckless, self-interested and – in the worst sense of the word – Trumpian. Biden’s promised redemption is already false – he did not have faith in allowing the US system to play out.

It seems like a difficult task, but I contend that Trump has everything going for him – he has the one thing nobody really has, which is time. All Trump has to do is let the process play out: if he lost fairly, he will garner much credit for standing up for the common voter; if he wins the presidency, he’s a hero who reversed the tide.

Trump’s Achilles’ heel is that he cannot do this with dignity, but when every other election this century has been disputed, one person’s foolish behavior isn’t the main issue for American society anymore. 

There really is no rush: a new president doesn’t take over until January 20. But imperialists abhor a vacuum. They don’t know who is in charge and, thus who to follow, and thus who to plot to destroy. Imperialist cultures are exceptional and distorted like this in ways smaller countries can’t imagine.

This, “We’re the slave-master,” pride is also why a small country can take their time and get an election right, but the US is rushing to judgement no matter how many it disenfranchises. They know they have to constantly project total strength: every day they do not is another day the colonized will question the slave-master’s true power and abilities.

What is this 21st century “Trumpism” really? We are about to finally find out.

‘Trumpism’ isn’t the name of a proper political party – will one be found or is it over already?

Certainly, like the Yellow Vests in France, it was immediately and falsely slammed as xenophobic. That’s now a pathetic, false and boring argument: Trump won a greater percentage of minority votes than any Republican in 60 years. So we don’t really know what it is, due to this propaganda.

The reality is that their opposition to 1%-benefiting globalization, their demand for patriotic sovereignty and their opposition to 1%-benefiting “universal values” are the reasons for the corporate-mainstream vilification of both.

If Trump gives up the adjective of “Trumpian” Republican will no longer be necessary because the world’s oldest duopoly sucks the revolutionary spirit out of every third-party movement. I doubt you have heard of the “Bull Moose Party”, even though Teddy Roosevelt is on Mount Rushmore?

If Trump really stands his ground right “Trumpian” could shed its perceptions of xenophobia and be associated with a spirit of rigor and democratic egalitarianism. It would be a coup against the 1%’s efforts, and to win that Trump has to get absolutely crucified in the next three months.

We’ve never known just how serious about politics Trump is, no?

He used to be a reality-show star, but he has certainly put in a lot of work for four years. Key senators have said that Trump is within his rights to demand recounts and transparency. Now we will find out how fighting he is willing to do – he still has a ton of power.

Trump been vilified for four years, and revolutionaries are made, not born. Surely he is aware of the problems which those without power cannot possibly stand up to? He who is more aware is necessarily more responsible.

But how deep is Trump’s Trumpism?

It’s very easy to cynically say that Trump will only ever be a tool of the pro-Zionist camp, or that he is only in this to make money, or that all he seeks is fame or even infamy. Maybe all this is quite true, and he’s gone further than he ever imagined or even wanted to?

It doesn’t matter to me: The better point to make is that Trumpism is very real to its supporters. Like the Yellow Vests they actually do have genuine virtues. They see corruption and they want it out, but all they have is one vote each – they are not the president. 

Right now is the time if Trump shows he has learned how to be a public servant after four years, or if perhaps many are right to conclude that “democracy with American characteristics” is incapable of producing humble, selfless public servants, and only corrupt, self-interested ones. 

If Americans cannot have a transparent election they cannot possibly achieve even moderate progress: This is country which has opposed revolutionary tactics for 200+ years – everyone here is committed to reformism of the American system. If Trump does not make a stand here – if he bows to the forces of cynical inevitability – Trumpism remains half a personality cult, half a brand name and certainly half-finished at best. Trumpism will have made a point, but not a real impact.

The average American should not be punished – they have a right to free and transparent elections, and the whole world knows that they don’t get them. 2020 is yet another recent example. It seems unfortunate that it is up to Donald Trump to help him and her, but it is too early to judge: he may yet get added onto Mount Rushmore, as he hopes.

What is certain one week after their initial vote is that the US has had a vote, and a winner (two of them) – there is only one logical conclusion: concession/inauguration.

Until that happens it will be a steadily-increasing drip of chaotic news. That is not a bad thing for the world, nor one to be feared by Americans, but it is intensely feared by their 1%.

(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)


Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

www.presstv.tv

US partitioned by 2 presidents: worst-case election scenario realized

November 09, 2020

US partitioned by 2 presidents: worst-case election scenario realized
Ramin Mazaheri is currently covering the US elections. He is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

by Ramin Mazaheri and crossposted with PressTV

It’s impossible for the US presidential election to have gone worse for the empire: America now has two presidents.

That can’t be denied, yet their mainstream media is spinning like mad the idea that there is no problem: The election is over and that Democrat Joe Biden is the president-elect. This is likely a biased view, but it’s certainly terrible journalism. Journalists have the right to do whatever they want – project election winners, ignore half the electorate, talk about “partition” – but we have no legal power to decide who actually won.

Not only has a certainly narrow vote not been certified, but the votes aren’t even all counted yet. And it’s not as if this vote wasn’t already disputed for months in the public eye. And it’s not as if there were’t several hundred lawsuits filed before the vote even took place. And it’s not as if there won’t be many lawsuits dated after the November 3rd vote.

But to their clearly anti-Trump mainstream media: “Nothing to see here, move along.”

Seriously? American journalism in action is really something to see.…

The media keeps pointing out that all the lawsuits have failed so far, but it just takes is one and it goes to the top – the Supreme Court deciding this election continues to look not just possible but probable. The idea that American judges are mostly liberal rebels and not by-the-book conservatives is preposterous – they are judges, after all. Record absentee balloting and an incumbent who focuses on his rights and benefits first, last and always both remind us how very not by-the-book this election is.

The ultimate fault for the current “Avignon Papacy” situation – the Roman Catholic church had two popes for most of the 14th century – lays not with the media but with the candidates, and especially Joe Biden. For months he bemoaned the unpredictability of Trump, and yet Biden declared victory Saturday based merely on an AP projection. It was an incredibly self-interested, dangerous, destablising and confidence-shaking move to make – it was a very Trumpian.

If the very slim numbers (Biden is up by an average of just 30,000 votes in three different states) were flipped and Trump declared early the mainstream media would be up in arms, and rightly so. Biden continues to – as the first debate reminded us – willingly jump down to the Trumpian unpresidential gutter, and yet because Trump licks the gutter’s floor Biden is somehow given a free pass.

Red state/blue state now officially outdated: it’s Trumpism vs. ‘universal values’ holdouts

The former was based on two things: a nation divided by new wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as a nation with huge inequalities between rural and urban/suburban citizens (in access to technology, cultural influence and standard of living). It was rural Americans who fought in these wars of imperialism (and not mere revenge for 9/11), which drastically shaped the communities they lived in, thus making the divide especially inflamed.

However, in 2020 Texas almost flipped Democrat?! Arizona – the proud home of reactionary radical John “Bomb bomb bomb Iran” McCain – is currently flipping Democrat?! Several Great Lakes states have already flipped back and forth in the Trump era. Trumpism has – for better or for worse – obviously changed American politics in a major way because unthinkable realignments are happening, and this forces us to eject old paradigms if we want to understand what is going on here.

The new partition is “brazen imperialism” versus “soft imperialism”.

But here’s our dilemma: Which party represents which? That we pause is entirely the change to grasp in 2020.

Democrats have become the party which backs the Deep State, “humanitarian interventions”, “universal values” which are a code phrase for their preferred values, free trade (which benefits the rich the most), censorship and which evinces a dangerous evangelism and hysterical self-righteousness (as their failed three-year Russophobia campaign showed). Violent evangelism is forbidden in Islam, but not in the Protestant or Catholic West.

What can we call French President Emmanuel Macron’s unprecedented declaration that Islamophobia is now state policy but a hysterical evangelism in favor of Western secularism? It’s hardly as if secularism has produced more moral or just governance than in religious-inspired nations, yet Macron’s faith cannot be shaken no matter how many innocent people his anti-Muslim tirades get killed.

And who is more globalist, “universal values” and pro-European Union than “neoliberal strongman” Macron, no matter how many French Yellow Vests lose an eye just for insisting that neoliberalism means the colonisation of the average of Westerner by an international 1%, and also that the post-1991 EU is a “neoliberal empire”?

I broaden out the US experience because in the other Western imperialist nations we clearly see similar cultural movements – engaging in imperialism inherently produces exceptional and distorted cultures. Ex-Labor chief Jeremy Corbyn was just suspended by his own party for absurd anti-Semitism allegations because that is what hysterical imperialists do to those who don’t embrace 1%-led globalisation. It used to be that such denigrations were limited to conservatives, but Corbyn proves how flexible our analysis needs to be precisely because traditional Western paradigms have become outdated.

Trump has signalled the start of a new era: the Cold War ended in 1991, US unipolar dominance (and thus Western dominance) ran from 1992-2016, and Trumpism coincides with the Great Recession-era propelled return to a multipolar era.

The undeniable electoral rejection of a “Democratic Blue Wave” in favor of “Trumpian Republicans” – where Trump increased his vote totals with every ethnic group and gender except White males – shows that the concept of White male supremacism being the foundation of Trumpism is as false as the labels of anti-Semitism pinned on Corbyn and the Yellow Vests. Trumpism is something bigger: it certainly must now include the idea of a Western domestic rebellion against their politicians who have presided over (or caused) the establishment of our new multipolar era.

The digital era does not seem to lend itself to the values still required to thrive in rural areas, so far, but last week’s vote totals prove that we cannot say that Trumpism is simply a “red state” phenomenon anymore.

This is not new: heads are divided in the US metaphorically, and maybe soon literally

Trump is planning to hold “recount rallies”, to publish the obituaries of dead people alleged to have voted in the election, to sue various state election boards, and to generally keep refusing to play by the rules of the globalist/“universal values” dominated US establishment (which is the basis of Trump’s popularity). You might be shocked by all that, or oppose all that, but you cannot say that Trump supporters should be frozen out of how this election concludes unless you openly prefer unilateral declarations to democracy with checks and balances.

A concession speech by one candidate is not legally required, but it is obviously a cultural necessity. How long can US media pretend that the election is over even though there has been no concession speech?

That’s an incredibly dangerous question to ask, and undoubtedly terrible journalism, and more proof that this election could not have gone worse for Americans if it had tried.

What would have happened Saturday in Chicago if pro-Trump supporters had gone to Trump Tower, where all day and night there were hundreds of people celebrating Biden’s “victory”? I can tell you, as I was there: a whole lot of innocent young people would have gotten their heads split open.

That’s the danger Biden just caused, and which is being increased by poor journalism and which has only just begun.

Biden set off this era of two presidents rather than counselling patience and faith in the process amid crisis. Biden has also set the stage for dramatic domestic disillusionment with their electoral process and political structure. Trump voters are incensed, and Biden just trolled them even though the US mainstream media was already doing exactly that for him.

In 2009 the moderate candidate declared early in Iran’s presidential election and after periods of peaceful rallies and counter-rallies it got violent. America should have learned from Iran’s experience (shared by countless other examples in modern history) but apparently Biden is not smart enough despite 47 years experience as a public servant. Nobody ever assumes great public service and intelligence from Trump, and certainly not the virtue of forbearance, but Biden promised better yet failed to deliver on what he said was his Day 1.

Biden was supposed to be better than Trump, but this was the worst start possible.

He can smile for the cameras, and create a corona task force which can’t start until January 21, and ignore the calls to finish counting the vote and to certify it, but the simple reality is that 70 million Trump voters are not going away in 2020 any more than they went away after they won in 2016. They need to be understood – they were unexpected, at the very least, and seem to herald a new era, at the most.

Trump’s re-election would probably not be good for the same countries as in 2016 – Iran, Palestine, Cuba, Venezuela and any other of the few nations with a socialist-inspired revolution/movement – and so we see why leaders and diplomats from these nations especially want him gone: Trump cannot be reasoned with regarding these revolutionary (unique) nations. Who knows what a Trump second term would bring? But Biden continues to show plenty of worrying evidence that he plans to get away with the same unilateral nonsense Trump set the precedent for, rather than re-establishing basic decorum, concern for others and diplomacy. I examined this notion last month in an editorial titled, “US debate debacle shows Democrats will adopt Trumpian self-interest globally”, and Biden’s reckless premature declaration shows the idea has a worrying amount of merit.

Unilateral nonsense is not good for the American 99% or the 99% of any other nation. With two presidents, American nonsense has only doubled.

*************************************************************

Results are in: Americans lose, duopoly wins, Trumpism not merely a cult (1/2) – November 5, 2020

Results are in: Americans lose, duopoly wins, Trumpism wasn’t a cult of personality (2/2) – November 6, 2020

4 years of anti-Trumpism shaping MSM vote coverage, but expect long fight – November 7, 2020

Reflections on the colour revolution in the USA.

Reflections on the colour revolution in the USA.

November 08, 2020

by Francis Lee for the Saker Blog

The American ruling class as represented by its own nomenklatura have been guilty of the sins of the French Bourbons in a different age: ‘’They have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing.’’ (1)

I can hardly remember a US Presidential campaign/election carried out with virtually zero intelligent inputs and policies. It was as if it started at zero but then actually descended deep into minus territory. It was also clear from the outset that the same nomenklatura (or MICIMATT (2) – if you prefer) was solidly arrayed against Trump since the 2016 election when Trump defied all the media hype and had the temerity to win. From that day onwards a slow ‘colour revolution’ – i,e, putsches which had been successfully carried out by the US in various ‘naughty’ countries around the world – was operationalised and deployed against Trump. So for the entirety of his presence in the White House the sitting US President was the object of an unceasing campaign of character assassination, his loyalty to the US besmirched, his lack of education ridiculed, his manner boorish and clumsy, all of which shortcomings may have been to an extent justified, but he was never allowed to respond to a bogus narrative almost totally controlled by the MICIMATT complex.

THE AMERICAN CLASS SYSTEM

America and its advocates have always argued that America does not share the same class relationships, rigid social-hierarchies and history of class-struggles as has been the case in Europe. But even a cursory reading of American labour history will soon divest the reader of any such notion. Class struggles in the US have in fact been particularly vicious with the ruling elites being unrepentantly ruthless. For the established ruling elites Trump was an outsider, a voice of the hoi-polloi and decidedly not to the taste of the elite coalitions and ideologues of the F Scott Fitzgerald and Ayn Rand social/political strata. This has always been the case pretty much everywhere. To be sure, Trump was a semi-educated parvenu and many of his supporters may have also been somewhat deficient in this respect. But here’s the point. The worldview of the rich and famous was a perception of the world as they have and continued to experience it. In this respect being determines consciousness. This is the permanent social-political hierarchy that always and everywhere has existed from time immemorial but there are none so blind as those who refuse to see. Class struggle has been a continuous leitmotif throughout the ages and refusing this historical phenomenon doesn’t make it less so.

THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY

Contrary to the media-hype the US has never been either exceptional or indispensable. During the late twentieth-century and early twenty-first America had developed into an imperialistic hegemon, simultaneously repressing its own people and making war on and intimidating other nations. Indeed it has been at war for 95% of its existence. All of this is a matter of record but it is taboo in the US itself and in most of its vassals. The US is run by a ruthless coalition of oligarchs, not as it is claimed by the masses. But the rule of the oligarchs is anchored in the second tier of America’s class structure. In short in the emergence of a middle-ranking elite of professional and managerial types – ‘an outer party’ in Orwellian terms which is the crucial ideological basis for the ascendency of the oligarch ‘inner party’ – this two-tier structure constituted the greatest negation of US democracy.

This new cognitive elite was made up of what Robert Reich called “symbolic analysts” — lawyers, academics, journalists, systems analysts, brokers, bankers, etc. (Less complimentary referred to as ‘Bullshit Jobs’ by the recently demised David Graebner.) These professionals trafficked in information and manipulated words and numbers for a living. They lived in an abstract world in which information and expertise were the most valuable commodities.

Since the market for these assets is international, the privileged class is more concerned with the global system than with regional, national, or local communities. In fact, members of the new elite tend to be estranged from their communities and their fellow citizens. These social/political/cultural experiences then transmute and harden into ideological belief systems which, in behavioural terms at least, take on a life of their own. These professional groups send their children to private schools, insure themselves against medical emergencies … and hire private security guards to protect themselves against the mounting violence against them.

“In effect, they have removed themselves from the common life and contact with everyday ordinary Americans.” (3)

The privileged classes, which, according to the late Christopher Lasch’s expansive definition, now make up roughly a fifth, or quarter of the population, and are heavily invested in the notion of social mobility. The new meritocracy has made professional advancement and the freedom to make money “the overriding goal of social policy.” Lasch charged that the fixation on opportunity and the “democratization of competence” betrayed rather than exemplified the American dream. “The reign of specialized expertise,” he wrote, “is the antithesis of democracy as it was understood by those who saw this country as the ‘last, best hope on earth’”(4).

Citizenship was grounded not in equal access to economic competition but in shared participation in a common life and a common political dialogue. The aim was not to hold out the promise of escape from the “labouring classes,” Lasch contended, but to ground the values and institutions of democracy in the inventiveness, industry, self-reliance, and self-respect of working people.

Unfortunately Lasch’s observations may well have been correct but with the passage of time his prescriptions are actually becoming less pervasive than he contended since the publication of his book in 1995. The American ruling stratum have if anything gutted the United States of the (albeit limited) idealism of the 1945-63 period and a genuine commitment to a democratic polity but instead are committed to a ruthless, winner-take-all, greed-is-good, economic, and social barbarism. Herewith an interesting insight from one of F Scott Fitzgerald’s characters – Amory Blaine – in one of the earlier novels.

‘’I detest poor people’’, thought Amory suddenly. ‘’I hate them for being poor. Poverty may have been beautiful once, but its rotten now. It is the ugliest thing in the world. It is essentially better to be corrupt and rich than it is to be innocent and poor.’’ He seemed to see again a figure whose significance had once impressed him – a well-dressed young man gazing from a club window on Fifth Avenue and saying something to his companion with a look of profound disgust. Probably thought Amory, what he said was: ‘’My God! Aren’t people horrible!’’(5) Such has been and is a fortiori the view of their fellow countrymen by America’s haute bourgeoisie.

THE GREAT COUNTER-REFORMATION

At this juncture the US Presidential election has been a moment (important and significant in its own right) but situated in much broader global developments. As previously mentioned, (vide supra) the transient mini-enlightenment of the 1945-63 period, has given way, after the 1970s interregnum, into what can only be described as the great Counter-Reformation, a global process known as neo-liberalism or globalization or both. This Counter-Reformation was incubated in university departments, independent think tanks, political parties, Corporation Board Rooms, Global institutions such as the IMF, BIS, OECD, World Bank, WTO, financial books, journalists writing for broadsheet publications – The Economist, Financial Times, and Wall Street Journal – and various papers being added to the output. What they were saying was essentially BS, but unfortunately, they were able to dominate the narrative, since they owned the means whereby to do so.

At one time those ideologies which had offered people of the world the hope of making their own histories and ideologies which offered hope have declined and collapsed at an increasing rate in Western societies. This collapse is also the collapse of the Enlightenment, that reason and freedom would prevail as the paramount forces in human history. Alas this is no longer the case; since the 1980s at least the forces of darkness have been on an ever increasing and accelerating rampage which shows no signs of letting up. Leading the process has been the United States with Europe in tow. Globalization, Neo Liberalism is the new orthodoxy which all must obey.

This historical process has brought these trends to a head and been conspicuously evidenced in microcosm by the 2020 US Presidential election. All the forces of darkness were quite blatantly coming into the open conspiring to get their man elected, by all and any means possible. This was essential for their more ambitious project of world domination. This ruthless undertaking consists of a plan for the US to become world hegemon sitting atop of its empire. The Europeans have already thrown in the towel and the rest of the world will soon be brought to heel – for their own good of course – and the world will be set fair for peace and prosperity. Yeah, right!

If the US and its allies (read vassals) think that it can impose their hegemonic ambitions upon the rest of the world, then they are in for a rather rude awakening.

This is because the world is no longer living in the economic and political golden age from 1945-71. The centre of global wealth-creation derives from the unusual coalition which has shifted from West to East, more specifically from the United States to China, whilst the distribution of power within international institutions still reflects the very different world of 1945. This incongruity is bound to foment tension.

‘’Some anticipate a Thucydides moment. In his History of the Peloponnesian War 2500 years ago Thucydides wrote that ‘What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear that this caused in Sparta’ today we seem to be on the same path as the old and new powers clash… Just as Sparta could not expect always to be on top, so America and the West should not always expect to be the dominant powers.’’ (6)

In short this means that the West will have difficulties in imposing its 1945 geo-political and trade agenda on the rest of the world. The current international configuration as inherited almost unchanged from the end of the Second World War no longer corresponds to the economic and increasingly political realities. The rise of Asia has decidedly flipped the location of production and new wealth generation. This has been an irreversible moment.

BRETTON WOODS – DECLINE AND FALL

The twilight of America and the American century began as a measurable decline and by the end of the 20th century this had become unstoppable. Firstly, there was the financialization and hollowing out of the productive sector of its economy and, secondly, with its wars of choice and endless military adventurism both of which tendencies are gradually bankrupting the country. The facts are irrefutable. The Presidential contest of 2020 was the conjunctural moment in this process; everything changed when the veils of obfuscation were torn away and the corruption and decadence of the old order – the blob – were fully revealed. America’s ruling elites have become irreversibly transformed into a lumpen, parasitic, aristocratic class, ruling by manipulation, wealth and power. It has been noted that,

‘’Nothing is more wretchedly corrupt than an aristocracy which retains its wealth when it has lost its productive power and which still enjoys a vast amount of leisure after it is reduced to mere vulgar pastimes. The energetic passions and great conceptions that animated it heretofore leave it then, and nothing remains to it but a host of petty consuming vices, which cling about it like worms upon a carcass.’’ (7)

The Epstein affair anyone? Enough said.

NOTES

(1) The quote is attributed to Talleyrand in speaking about the restored Bourbon dynasty after the abdication of Napoleon, and subsequently used against the French socialists and others. It comes close to Einstein’s definition of insanity as doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results, though the Talleyrand quote gives us a reason for their repeating mistakes of the past over and over

(2) MICIMATT – Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex

(3) Christopher Lasch – The Revolt of the Elites –published in 1995

(4) Lasch – Op.cit.

(5) F Scott-Fitzgerald – This Side of Paradise – published 1920

(6) Phillip Mullan – Beyond Confrontation – published 2020 – p.xxv

(7) Alexis de Tocqueville – Democracy in America – Volume 2, p.220

America has fallen … and the East Trio is collecting the harvest أميركا سقطت… وثلاثيّ الشرق يراكم الحصاد

America has fallen … and the East Trio is collecting the harvest

Mohammed Sadiq Al-Husseini

Franklin Roosevelt says:

«Nothing happens in politics by chance, make sure that everything that happens was planned tohappen.

We don’t believe in coincidence at all, but we wanted to rely on one of their elders as we were going to explainit.

What happened and continues in the U.S. elections and in the course of crystallizing the new structure of government when the White Oligarchy in Washington is a vivid example that everything that happens in politics is carefully planned in the backcorridors.

The deep american hidden forces that brought Donald Trump to achieve their goals and after four years of confusion and setbacks, i realized that those who put him in the forefront failed miserably, and it became her duty to change her blond horse with a colored horse that might fix what his losing predecessor had corrupted…

The loss of U.S. President Donald Trump is no longer the issue, just as Joe Biden’s victory is no longer important, but more importantly, the unprecedented direction this election has taken, from the beginning of the campaign to thismoment.

America has shown what it is, as it has never been built before… Deep political and moral decline, total chaos and concern for all American citizens, conservatives andliberals…

Their terror has intensified from coming to their country, and some of them are now afraid of the origin of a unitedAmerica.

What has brought the United States to this level of uncertainty, divisions and differences, which are spreading among the categories and classes of the American people and their political elites,

And even the military, which was manifested in the preparation of the current U.S. Secretary of War, General Mark Esper, for his letter of resignation?

The reasons for this grim fate of American prestige, and indeed the state itself as a political entity, as we know it, are not only related to the character of President Trump, but to the failure of the deep American forces that brought him to the White House four years ago. Those forces that mistakenly believed that he was a successful businessman and media, and that he might be able to achieve the objectives of these hidden powers, namely the world’s major capitalist powers, namely (the objectives) of trying to regain U.S. unipolar control over the world, and to stop the rise of other international powers to take the lead of theworld.

But President Trump, who inherited a defeated administration in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then confirmed the defeats of this administration in Iraq, defeating ISIS in Mosul in 2017, and by regaining control of most of its territory, we say that this president has proved that he is unable to repair what the previous administrations have corrupted, even if he really intends to doso.

And so Trump’s failure to achieve any U.S. victory, which has a strategic nature, and not just a demagogic media nature that does not change the balance of power on theground.

Here are the most important aspects of his failure:

It has failed miserably to subject Iran as an emerging power, despite all the extreme sanctions and constant threats, of military aggression against it. Indeed, it has been a reason for them to redouble their efforts, many times, to build their own forces, economically and militarily, and to rely more and more on themselves, thus turning them not too long into a regional superpower that can address any regional issue or crisis in isolation.
It also failed to prevent the Iraqi armed forces from destroying the basic strengths of ISIS gangs in Mosul and other Iraqi provinces at the end of 2018, while he and his army were providing them with multi-form support in Iraq as well as in Syria.

Moreover, although it has bombed Syrian positions and installations more than once, and has joined forces with the efforts of its military base on the Palestinian territory (The Zionist entity), as well asthe efforts of nato claw in the region, Turkish President Erdogan, has failed to stop the advance of the Syrian army and liberate more Syrian territory.
.

Of course, the resounding American failure to overthrow Yemen and control it and the strategic sea entrances, despite tens of thousands of Saudi-Israeli air strikes and the participation of the United States, Britain and France in supporting the forces of aggression intelligence, as the steadfast National Yemen is approaching victory more than ever, while the son of Salman and ibn Zayed and their masters are blamed by the defeatdenied. The greatest failure, in the march of the undersecretary of american forces Donald Trump, is his failure to subjugate the Palestinian people and force them to accept what he called the Deal of the Century, and his failure to even bring the leadership of the Palestinian Authority into the Fold of the White House to declare the Palestinian people’s surrender to projects to liquidate their cause and end their demand for the liberation of their occupied homeland, Palestine. This surrender, which would have given American imperialism and its local descendants, from Zionists, new Ottomans and Arabs in the Gulf, full control over the capabilities of the entire Arab world and opened the way to a massive financial investment process, such as the one carried out by the United States in Europe after World War II and whose influence (the control of American capital over the economy and politics) continued almost absolutely to this day..

It must also be confirmed that Trump’s resounding failure, in the face of the Corona epidemic, despite his false and repeated accusations of the people’s China to spread the epidemic, that besides his failure to manage the epidemic crisis in his country, he has failed miserably in the face of China’s economic, political and military rise, and has failed to create a rift in the Alliance or Cooperation of Russia and China, in terms of joint action to endthe unilateral American hegemony over the world’s capabilities. This means that the hidden powers of america, which chose Trump to save the United States from the inevitability of losing its dominance over the world, have been omitted, because of their arrogance, racism and ignorance of policy philosophy and objective economic development laws, that the American crisis is far too deep to be saved by a tv presenter and a failed and bankrupt businessman, likeTrump…!

The roots of the grinding crisis, domestically and internationally, facing the United States, are not a crisis of ideologies, political programs or even distinct American strategies, between this party or that party, but a structural crisis, encompassing the entire international capitalist system, and can only be fixed through radical actions, which Washington has no room to implement for a variety of reasons that cannot be explainedhere.

The United States has wasted 30 years in waging wars of aggression, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and others, while Russia, China and Iran have focused all their efforts and financial capabilities, on scientific research and deepening knowledge, and creating a base for tremendous scientific and technological superiority, which has enabled it to outperform Washington in many military fields as well as to develop the domestic infrastructure of these countries, ensuring the continued implementation of long-term development projects, whether within those countries or in other countries and continents with which they have built or cooperated strongly, at alllevels.

It only needs to look at the recent Iranian move, coordinated with Beijing and Moscow, in Latin America, which was manifested in the recent visit of the Iranian Foreign Minister to Caracas, Havana and La Paz, and the joint cooperation projects discussed between the Iranian minister and officials of those countries. Long-term, including military-technical cooperation, i.e. the export of Iranian weapons and their manufacture in those countries after america’s fiasco not only to surround Iran, but also to stop its violence, which is expanding and is settling in its strategic space with all prestige and support.

The first rescue steps, which the next U.S. president must take if he is to reserve a significant seat in the new post-Trump international order, are to move away from policies of aggression and war, and to invest the bulk of the U.S. Department of War’s budget ($750 billion this year) in developing U.S. infrastructure and scientific research so that the U.S. economy is immune to collapse and competitive rather than superior. This is because the era of American superiority is gone forever and those who dream of the return of the world economy’s dominance to the throne of the world, as was the case from the end of World War II until the mid-1980s, it is delusional and dreamed of something that has become a thing of thepast.

Free trade competition, with growing international economies, is the only way to banish the spectre of collapse and disintegration of the state, the rest of the United States of America, not the arrogance, arrogance and racism of hidden American forces, both internally andexternally.

In conclusion, we come back and confirm that we are here, but we are reviewing America as it is in fact, and we never weave a picture of our imagination… This is her history.

Check it out with documents, numbers, documents, evidence and evidence…

They said the day they entered the land of Canaan and established the state of Israel on the day they built the first 13 settlements in the east of the so-called United States of Americatoday…

They were expanding and marching in all directions until they killed 112 million Latinos, i.e. indigenouspeople…

I think today they have lost all the momentum left to them and their reverse count ing began to disappear…

The main reason they lose all their morals… “But the nations of morality are not left, so they aregone.

أميركا سقطت… وثلاثيّ الشرق يراكم الحصاد

محمد صادق الحسيني

يقول فرانكلين روزفلت:

«لا شيء يحصل في السياسة بالصدفة، تأكدوا بأنّ كلّ ما يقع كان مخططاً له أن يقع».

ونحن إذ لا نؤمن بمقولة الصدفة أصلاً، لكننا أردنا ان نستند الى أحد كبارهم فيما نحن ذاهبون لشرحه.

ما حصل ولا يزال في الانتخابات الأميركية وفي مسار تبلور التركيبة الجديدة للحكم عند حكم الاوليغارشية البيضاء في واشنطن، مثال حيّ على انّ كلّ ما يحصل في السياسة إنما هو مخطط له بعناية في الأروقة الخلفية.

فالقوى الخفية الأميركية العميقة التي أتت بدونالد ترامب ليحقق لها أهدافها وبعد مضي أربع سنوات من التخبّط والانكسارات، أيقنت أن من وضعته في الواجهة فشل فشلاً ذريعاً في ذلك، وصار واجباً عليها تغيير حصانها الأشقر بحصان ملوّن لعله يصلح ما أفسده سلفه الخاسر…!

لم تعُد خسارة الرئيس الأميركي، دونالد ترامب، من عدمها هو الموضوع، تماماً كما لم يعد فوز جو بايدن هو المهم، وإنما الأهمّ هو المنحى غير المسبوق الذي اتخذته هذه الانتخابات، منذ بدء الحملة الانتخابية حتى هذه اللحظة.

فقد بانت أميركا على حقيقتها كما لم تبَنْ من قبل… انحطاط سياسي وأخلاقي عميق وفوضى عارمة وقلق يساور كل المواطنين الأميركيين من محافظين وليبراليين…

لقد اشتدّ رهابهم من الآتي لبلادهم حتى صار البعض منهم يخاف على أصل بقاء أميركا موحّدة..!

فما الذي أوصل الولايات المتحدة الى هذا المستوى من عدم اليقين والانقسامات والخلافات، التي تنتشر بين فئات وطبقات الشعب الأميركيّ ونخبه السياسية،

وحتى العسكرية، والتي تجلت في إعداد وزير الحرب الأميركي الحالي، الجنرال مارك إسبر، لرسالة استقالته؟

إنّ أسباب هذا المآل القاتم للهيبة الأميركية، لا بل للدولة نفسها ككيان سياسيّ، كما عرفناه، ليست مرتبطة فقط بشخصية الرئيس الأميركي ترامب، بقدر ما هي مرتبطة بفشل القوى الأميركية العميقة، التي أوصلته الى البيت الأبيض، قبل أربع سنوات. تلك القوى التي اعتقدت، خطأً، أنه رجل أعمال وإعلام ناجح، وأنه قد يكون قادراً على تحقيق أهداف هذه القوى الخفية، أي القوى الرأسمالية الكبرى في العالم، والمتمثلة (الأهداف) في محاولة استعادة السيطرة الأميركية الأحادية القطبية على العالم، ووقف صعود قوى دولية أخرى لتبؤّ قيادة العالم.

لكن الرئيس ترامب، الذي ورث إدارة مهزومة في العراق وأفغانستان، ثم تأكدت هزائم هذه الإدارة في العراق، بهزيمة داعش في الموصل سنة 2017، وباستعادة الدولة السورية السيطرة على معظم أراضيها، نقول إنّ هذا الرئيس قد أثبت انه غير قادر على إصلاح ما أفسدته الإدارات السابقة، حتى لو كان فعلاً ينوي القيام بذلك.

وهكذا فشل ترامب في تحقيق أيّ انتصار أميركي، له طبيعة استراتيجية، وليس فقط له طبيعة إعلامية ديماغوجية لا تغيّر في موازين القوى الميدانية شيئاً.

وإليكم أهمّ مناحي فشله:

فهو فشل فشلاً ذريعاً في إخضاع إيران كقوة صاعدة، رغم كلّ العقوبات القصوى والتهديدات المتواصلة، بالعدوان العسكري عليها. بل إنه صار سبباً في جعلها تضاعف جهودها، مرات عدة، لبناء قواها الذاتية، اقتصادياً وعسكرياً، والاعتماد على نفسها أكثر فأكثر، مما حولها في وقت ليس بالطويل إلى قوة إقليمية عظمى لا يمكن معالجة أيّ موضوع أو أزمة إقليمية بمعزل عنها.

كما أنه فشل في منع القوات المسلحة العراقية من تدمير القوام الأساسي لعصابات داعش، في الموصل وغيرها من المحافظات العراقية نهاية عام 2018، في الوقت الذي كان هو وجيشه يقدّم لتلك العصابات الدعم المتعدّد الأشكال في العراق كما في سورية. وهو ما يعني فشل السياسة الأميركية في تثبيت سيطرة داعش على سورية والعراق وتدمير الدولتين وتقسيمهما وإخراجهما من جميع معادلات الصراع في المنطقة.

يضاف الى ذلك أنه، ورغم قيامه بقصف مواقع ومنشآت سورية أكثر من مرة، وتضافر جهوده مع جهود قاعدته العسكرية على اليابسة الفلسطينية (الكيان الصهيوني)، وكذلك جهود مخلب الناتوفي المنطقة، الرئيس التركي أردوغان، قد فشل في وقف تقدّم الجيش السوري وتحرير المزيد من الأراضي السورية. وهو ما يعني فشل مخطط إسقاط الدولة السورية وتفتيتها وإنهاء استقلالها ووحدة أراضيها تمهيداً لنهب ثرواتها الطبيعية.

ولا بدّ طبعاً من إضافة الفشل الأميركي المدوّي في إسقاط اليمن والسيطرة عليه وعلى المداخل البحرية الاستراتيجية، رغم عشرات آلاف الغارات الجوية السعودية الإسرائيلية الإماراتية ومشاركة الولايات المتحده وبريطانيا وفرنسا في دعم قوى العدوان استخبارياً، حيث إنّ اليمن الوطني الصامد يقترب من النصر أكثر من أي وقت مضى، فيما يلملم إبن سلمان وابن زايد وأسيادهما أذيال الهزيمة المنكرة.

ويبقى الفشل الأعظم، في مسيرة وكيل القوى الأميركية الخفية دونالد ترامب، هو فشله في إخضاع الشعب الفلسطيني وإجباره على قبول ما أسماه بصفقة القرن، وفشله حتى في جلب قيادة السلطة الفلسطينية الى حظيرة البيت الأبيض لإعلان استسلام الشعب الفلسطيني لمشاريع تصفية قضيته وإنهاء مطالبته بتحرير وطنه المحتل، فلسطين كاملةً. هذا الاستسلام الذي كان سيمنح الإمبريالية الأميركية وأذنابها المحليين، من صهاينة وعثمانيين جدد وأعراب في الخليج، سيطرة كاملة على مقدرات العالم العربي بأسره وفتح الطريق الى عملية استثمارات مالية هائلة، كتلك التي نفذتها الولايات المتحده في اوروبا بعد الحرب العالمية الثانية والتي استمر تأثيرها (سيطرة رأس المال الأميركي على الاقتصاد والسياسة) بشكل مطلق تقريباً حتى وقتنا الحاضر.

كما يجب تأكيد فشل ترامب المدوي، في مواجهة وباء كورونا، رغم اتهاماته الباطلة والمتكررة للصين الشعبية بنشر هذا الوباء، اذ انه والى جانب فشله في ادارة الأزمة الوبائية في بلاده فقد فشل فشلاً ذريعاً في مواجهة صعود الصين الاقتصادي والسياسي والعسكري، كما فشل في خلق شرخ في التحالف او التعاون الروسي الصيني، على صعيد العمل المشترك لإنهاء الهيمنة الأميركية الأحادية على مقدرات العالم.

وهذا يعني أن القوى الخفية الأميركية، التي اختارت ترامب لإنقاذ الولايات المتحدة من حتمية فقدان هيمنتها على العالم، قد أغفلت، بسبب عنجهيتها وعنصريتها وجهلها بفلسفة السياسة وبقوانين التطور الاقتصادي الموضوعية، أن الازمة الأميركية اكثر عمقاً بكثير من ان ينقذها مُقدِّم برامج تهريج تلفزيونية ورجل أعمال فاشل ومفلس، مثل ترامب…!

إذ انّ جذور الأزمة الطاحنة، داخلياً ودولياً، التي تواجه الولايات المتحدة، ليست أزمة ايديولوجيات او برامج سياسية او حتى استراتيجيات أميركية متمايزة، بين هذا الحزب او ذاك، وإنما هي ازمة بنيوية، تشمل كل النظام الرأسمالي الدولي، ولا يمكن إصلاحها الا من خلال إجراءات جذرية، ليس لدى واشنطن مجال لتطبيقها لأسباب متعددة لا مجال لشرحها هنا.

لقد أضاعت الولايات المتحده ثلاثين عاماً في شنّ الحروب العدوانية، في أفغانستان والعراق وسورية وليبيا واليمن والصومال وغيرها، بينما ركزت روسيا والصين وإيران كل جهودها وقدراتها المالية،على البحث العلمي وتعميق المعرفة، وخلق قاعدة للتفوّق العلمي والتكنولوجي الهائل، الذي مكّنها من تحقيق تفوق على واشنطن في العديد من المجالات العسكرية وكذلك في تطوير البنى التحتية المحلية لهذه الدول، بما يضمن استمرار تنفيذ مشاريع التنمية الطويلة الامد، سواءً في داخل تلك الدول أو في دول وقارات أخرى بنت معها اواصر تعاون متين، على الصعد كلها.

ولا يحتاج الامر إلا الى إلقاء نظرة على التحرك الإيراني الاخير، المنسق مع بكين وموسكو، في أميركا اللاتينية، والذي تجلى في زيارة وزير الخارجيه الإيراني الاخيرة الى كل من كاراكاس وهاڤانا ولاباز، وما تمّ بحثه بين الوزير الإيراني وبين مسؤولي تلك البلدان من مشاريع تعاون مشتركة طويلة الأمد، بما في ذلك التعاون العسكري التقني، أي تصدير السلاح الإيراني وصناعته في تلك الدول بعد الفشل الذريع الذي مُنيت به أميركا ليس فقط في محاصرة إيران بل وفي وقف عنفوانها الذي تمدد وها هو يستقر في فضائها الاستراتيجي بكل هيبة وسؤدد.

وعليه فإنّ أولى خطوات الإنقاذ، التي يجب ان يتخذها الرئيس الأميركي القادم اذا ما اراد ان يحجز لبلده المتهاوي مقعداً يُعتد به في النظام الدولي الجديد ما بعد ترامب، انما تتمثل في الابتعاد عن سياسات العدوان وشنّ الحروب، واستثمار النسبة الأكبر من موازنة وزارة الحرب الأميركية (750 مليار دولار لهذا العام) في تطوير البنى التحتية الأميركية والبحث العلمي كي يصبح الاقتصاد الأميركي محصناً ضد الانهيار وقادراً على المنافسة وليس على التفوق. وذلك لأن عصر التفوق الأميركي قد ولى الى غير رجعة ومن يحلم بعودة سيطرة الاقتصاد العالمي على عرش العالم، كما كان الوضع منذ نهاية الحرب العالمية الثانية وحتى أواسط الثمانينيات من القرن الماضي، فإنه واهم وحالم بشيء اصبح من الماضي.

التنافس التجاري الحر، مع الاقتصاديات الدولية المتزايدة النمو، هو الطريق الوحيد، لإبعاد شبح الانهيار وتفكك الدولة، ما تبقى من الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، وليس المكابرة والعنجهية والعنصرية التي تمارسها القوى الأميركية الخفية، داخلياً وخارجياً.

في الختام نعود ونؤكد اننا هنا إنما نستعرض أميركا كما هي في الواقع، ولا ننسج عنها صورة من مخيلتنا ابداً… هذا هو تاريخها.

راجعوه بالوثائق والأرقام والمستندات والقرائن والبراهين…

هم قالوا عن أنفسهم يوم دخلوا مستوطنين قادمين من انجلترا إنهم دخلوا أرض كنعان واقاموا دولة «إسرائيل» يوم بنوا أول 13 مستوطنة في شرق ما يسمّى الولايات المتحدة الأميركية اليوم…

وأخذوا يتوسّعون ويزحفون بكلّ الاتجاهات حتى قضوا على 112 مليون من اللاتينيين أي السكان الأصليين…

وأظنهم اليوم فقدوا كلّ ما تبقى لهم من قوة اندفاع وبدأ عدهم العكسي للاختفاء…

والسبب الأساسي فقدانهم كلّ أخلاقهم… و»إنما الأمم الأخلاق ما بقيت فإنْ همُ ذهبت أخلاقهم ذهبوا».

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

Did President Trump Just Launch the Largest Sting Operations in US History Against the Corrupt Swamp of the Democratic Party?

Did President Trump Just Launch the Largest Sting Operations in US History Against the Corrupt Swamp of the Democratic Party?

November 07, 2020

by Peter Koenig for the Saker Blog

Remember when Donald Trump said before the 2016 Elections, he wanted to be President to clean up the swamp in Washington? Well, he may be just doing that. President Trump may have just launched a massive sting operation against the rotten flagrant corruption of the “Democrats”. He knew they were planning a massive election fraud, when they insisted on mail-in votes, similar to the absentee votes, and asked that the mail-in votes would be counted at the end.

Pretext for the mail-in votes was “covid” – social distancing, not getting near each other standing in line for voting. A perfect excuse, transformed into a massive voter fraud.

Between 3:30 AM and 4:30 AM, they “found” 140,000 mail-in ballots for Biden in Wisconsin;
Between 3:30 AM and 5:00 AM, they “found” 200,000 mail-in ballots for Biden in Michigan;
Between 2:00 AM and 4:00 AM, they found a million (1,000,000) mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania

All mail-in ballots “received” in the morning hours of November 4, way beyond the voting deadline. All for Biden, none for Trump
Reference video https://www.bitchute.com/video/KWGj0NtpPgsH/?list=notifications&randomize=false about minute 1’45”.

Republicans were not allowed to be near the ballot counting as observers, as is the common rule in election vote counting, that the opposition is present, to observe the counting process. Example given in Pennsylvania by former Mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, who denounces “fraud and corruption” in Philadelphia, his home town; see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9898bDivIl0&feature=youtu.be

And fraud and corruption has been going on in at least two more States, Wisconsin and Michigan, and possibly also in Georgia – and maybe others.

President Trump did not agree in principle with the mail-in vote from citizens withing the US, because that is usually not done. Absentee votes yes, from military and Americans living abroad, but not from US citizens living in the US. He finally agreed, but said these mail-in votes must have been received before the voting deadline – 3 November – and must be counted first.

However, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) decided differently, namely that the mail-in votes would be counted last. This leaves room for fraud, as these latter votes will most likely not be matched against votes already cast, nor will they be scrutinized with the rigor of validity the way the ballots cast at the polls are checked, so duplicate votes maybe possible. There have indeed been reports of “dead” people voting.

Trump had sizable leads in the key swing states Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, and also in Georgia – until the mail-in ballots arrived and were counted – see above. That’s when the pendulum swung to the other side, giving Biden the win.

Today, 7 November, it was announced that Joe Biden had “won” the elections with 290 electoral votes (270 needed), against 214 of Donald Trump.

The Trump Team must have suspected that fraud may be part of the “Democrats” strategy. They have planned a sting operation, assisted by the CIA. Each valid ballot distributed to the eligible voters has a small almost unrecognizable water mark. 

https://twitter.com/MediaRival/status/1324490206326738946?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1324515784924811264%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftruthbarrier.com%2Fsteve-pieczenik-in-bombshell-clip-pours-gasoline-on-watermark-hopes-patriots-divided-could-it-be-true%2F

Law suits are already under way in the three key swing states and more may follow. Recounts will be requested. On the basis of the recounts and the watermarks on the valid ballots, the level of fraud may be determined.

So, the election is far from over, and may end up like in 2000 in the Supreme Court for a final decision. But we are not there yet.

There are other dangers too.

Already now, street riots take place. Protests for or against Woke, the Blacks, the police… you name it. They are funded by disruptive forces, like the Soros Open Society Foundation and others, with similar objectives. More of such riots may ensue, the longer the final decision is postponed. Wouldn’t such social upheavals be a good reason to declare officially a state of emergency – merging into Martial Law?

That would be the ultimate example for the world to see a totally defunct and dystopian “Democracy”.


Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals such as Global Research; ICH; New Eastern Outlook (NEO) and more. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.
Peter Koenig is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

This is absolutely amazing: the EU leaders follow the Ziomedia and declare Biden the winner!!

This is absolutely amazing: the EU leaders follow the Ziomedia and declare Biden the winner!!

November 07, 2020

Dear friends,

When I saw this I could not believe my eyes: “European leaders congratulate Joe Biden, after media count declares him victorious in US presidential election“.

This is truly unheard of: foreign leaders declare a winner in a US election even BEFORE the vote count has been certified by US courts!!!  Talk about “interference in US elections” – this really takes the prize!

Yeah, I know, these EU knuckleheads also declared Guaido and Tikhanovskaia had won.  But let’s be realists here: it is one thing to declare some victor in small and extremely weak countries, and quite another to do that with the supposed Sole Hyperpower and Planetary Hegemon.

Wow!  Just wow!

We have to wonder what the point of these declarations are and I think the answer is obvious: put the maximal pressure on USSC Justices to accept the fait accompli (which, of course, is neither a fait, nor is is accompli, but nevermind that!).

Just the fact that the US Deep State has the power to force the EU leaders into that kind of blatant intervention is the best proof that there are no real democracies in the West – all we are dealing with is a transnational plutocracy.

Bottom line: the struggle for the liberation of the West from this gang of corrupt megalomaniacs is now on.  Yes, right now the resistance in the West looks very week, poorly organized and even very corrupt (just think of how corrupt the GOP is!).  But those who are familiar with Hegelian dialectical analyses will immediately see that this is an unstable situation which cannot and will not last.

The Saker

أزمة النظام السياسي الأميركي: هشاشة الديموقراطيّة؟ – أسعد أبو خليل

 الصفصاف

لو كانت هناك عدالة على هذه الأرض (أو في السماء)، لكان يحقّ لكل سكّان الأرض الإدلاء بأصواتهم في مسألة تقرير الرئاسة الأميركيّة، لأن أميركا تقحم نفسها في كلّ شؤون الدول، إلى درجة أنّها أرادت أن تحثّ نقولا فتّوش على أن يقطع روابطه مع 8 آذار، وهي كانت ترغب لو أنّ بيار فتّوش حنَّ على حليفها وليد جنبلاط بحصّة في معمله الشهير. يُقرّر الرئيس الأميركي في الشأن اللبناني، مثلاً، أكثر ممّا يقرّر الرئيس اللبناني نفسه (بعد نزع صلاحيّاته في «الطائف»). كذلك الخلافة في سلالات الطغاة الحاكمة في الخليج، لا تُقَرّ من دون ترجيح أميركي. ولا يزال محمد بن سلمان يتمنّع عن الاستيلاء على العرش بانتظار ترخيص أميركي صريح. لكن ليس لنا، شعوب العالم، أن نقرّر في مسألة اختيار إمبراطور الأرض. هذا الأمر متروك لفئة من الشعب الأميركي التي تختار أن يقترع، ومجموعها يكون أحياناً أقلّ من نصف هذا الشعب.

لم تكن نتائج الانتخابات الأميركيّة متوقّعة؛ استطلاعات الرأي كانت (في معدّلاتها على موقع «ريل كلير بوليتكس») تعطي لجو بايدن أرجحيّة بنسبة عشرة في المئة على، صعيد البلاد بأجمعها (أي الانتخاب الشعبي الذي يحتسب أصوات الاقتراع في كلّ البلاد)، كما كانت تُعطي بايدن أرجحيّة واضحة في «الولايات المتأرجحة» (أي تلك التي باتت تذهب في هذا الاتجاه أو ذاك، يوم الانتخاب، وتصبح هي العرضة لتنافس المرشّحَين). المؤشرات كانت لا تفيد دونالد ترامب (أو «طرمب»، حسب لفظ ألبير كوستانيان) على مدى أشهر. لكنّ النتائج (بصرف النظر عن شخصيّة الفائز التي لا تزال عرضة للتكهّن وتعداد الأصوات باليد، تماماً كما كانوا يفعلون في بداية عصر الانتخاب)، تُعمّق من الشرخ الذي يفصل بين وطنَيْن في أمّة واحدة. الحزب الجمهوري يصبح بازدياد حزب الذكور البيض (هو ينال أكثر من ثلثَيْ أصوات الذكور البيض، وتزداد النسبة عند هؤلاء الأقلّ تعليماً بينهم)، والنساء البيض اللواتي يخترن الحزب الجمهوري (بنسبة 58٪ لترامب، مقابل 43٪ لبايدن، فيما صوّتت النساء ككل بنسبة 56٪ لبايدن مقابل 43٪ لترامب). والتغيير الديموغرافي لصالح المهاجرين والملوّنين، يُنقص من حظوظ الحزب الجمهوري على المدى الطويل، ولهذا يعتمد الحزب على وسائل عديدة للحفاظ على أرجحيّته: 1) هو يعمد في الولايات إلى تصعيب عمليّة الاقتراع وتعقيدها (تماماً، كما كان الحزب الديموقراطي يستنبط في الولايات الجنوبيّة حتى الستينيّات، وسائل عديدة وامتحانات لتخفيض حجم الاقتراع للسود) عبر وسائل عديدة، لعلمه أنّ الملوّنين والفقراء – وهم الأقل اقتراعاً بين الطبقات الاجتماعيّة والأعراق – يقترعون غالباً لصالح الحزب الديموقراطي (زاد ترامب من نسبة تأييده بين السود الذكور، وإن قليلاً). كذلك، فإنّ زيادة إجراءات التسجيل قبل الاقتراع، هي حيلة استنبطها الحزبان الممثّلان لمصالح النخب الطبقيّة، تماماً كما أراد المؤسّسون الأوائل الذين اعتبروا أنّ اختيار الرئيس مسألة بأهميّة تفوق القدرة العقلانيّة للعامّة (من البيض الذكور طبعاً، لأنّ الآخرين كانوا مستثنين من العمليّة الانتخابيّة). 2) ينجح الحزب الجمهوري، خصوصاً في عهد ترامب، برصّ الصفوف العنصرية بطريقة لم تألفها البلاد من قبل.

كان هناك دائماً تساؤل في أوروبا، كيف لم تشهد أميركا ظاهرة «اليمين الجديد» (وهو اسم ملطَّف لظاهرة اليمين العنصري الإسلاموفوبي المتطرِّف). لكن سبب عدم ظهور حزب «يمين جديد»، لا يعود إلى غياب أفكار اليمين الجديد عن أذهان المقترعين، بل لأنّ النظام الاقتراعي القائم على الدائرة الانتخابية الواحدة (التي تعطي الفائز الربح المطلق، وهذا صحيح في احتساب الفائز عن كلّ ولاية في الانتخابات الرئاسيّة، حيث ينجح الفائز بأكثريّة الأصوات في ولاية كاليفورنيا، مثلاً، في الحصول على 55 صوتاً اقتراعيّاً ولا يحصل الفائز على الملايين من الأصوات الأخرى على أي من الأصوات الاقتراعيّة) تمنع تشكّل أحزاب ثالثة. يصعب جداً في ظلّ النظام الانتخابي الحالي تشكيل حالة اختراق من قبل حزب جديد، إن على مستوى مجلس النواب أو الشيوخ أو الرئاسة. لكنّ الحزب الجمهوري تكيّف مع تصلّب الفكر العنصري الأبيض عند الناخبين البيض، فبات يمثّل ظاهرة اليمين الجديد من دون إعلان تشكيل حزب جديد منشق عنه. تغيّر الحزب الجمهوري كثيراً عمّا كان عليه في عام 1980 مثلاً، وحتى قاعدته الانتخابيّة تغيّرت. كان الجنوب الأميركي معقلاً للحزب الديموقراطي، لكن مناصرة الأخير للحقوق المدنيّة في قانون 1965 بطلب من الرئيس لندن جونسون (وهو كان عنصريّاً على الصعيد الشخصي، مثله مثل معظم رؤساء أميركا، وفكرة أنّ ترامب هو أوّل رئيس عنصري، كما قال بايدن، هي فكرة مهينة للسود لعلمهم أنّ معظم رؤساء أميركا كانوا من المؤمنين جهاراً بنظريّة تفوّق العنصر الأبيض) دفعت بالبيض إلى الهجرة الكبيرة من الحزب الديموقراطي نحو الجمهوري الذي أصبح الحزب النافذ في الجنوب، وتخلّى عن إرثه كالحزب الذي يرتبط برمزيّة إعتاق العبيد من قبل الرئيس الجمهوري، إبراهام لينكولن.

يعمد الحزب الجمهوري إلى مخاطبة البيض، وتأجيج تعصّبهم (تماماً كما برع حزب «الكتائب» في مخاطبة التعصّب الطائفي لجمهوره وتخويفه من المسلمين على مرّ السنوات التي سبقت الحرب الأهليّة)، مستعيناً بلغة مرمّزة والتشديد على «النظام والقانون» الذي، منذ حملة ريتشارد نيكسون الانتخابيّة في عام 1968، بات مصطلح تخويف البيض من السود – وقد حوّل ترامب شعار «النظام والقانون» إلى لازمة في حملته الانتخابيّة الأخيرة. كما أن ريتشارد نيكسون خاطب الغرائز العنصريّة للبيض، باستعمال مصطلح «الأكثريّة الصامتة». وقد استعار ترامب في هذه الحملة الانتخابيّة من حملة نيكسون، وهو كان شديد الإعجاب به (وقد تسرّب إلى الإعلام أخيراً مراسلات بين ترامب ونيكسون، واللغة فيها لغة مُعجب برئيس سابق). والبيض يتبرّمون من المستقبل، ويحاولون إيقاف تقدّمه: وهذه الغضبة من المهاجرين التي عبَّر عنها ترامب لم تكن إلا حركة من «اليمين الجديد» العنصري الذي يعمّ دول أوروبا – لكن ربط العنصريّة في المجتمعات الغربيّة باليمين فقط، يغمط العنصريّة في وسط الوسط والليبراليّين وحتى اليسار المعادي للمهاجرين. إنّ العنصريّة الفرنسية والإسلاموفوبيّة، باتت تتجلّى في كلّ المروحة السياسيّة، ربما باستثناء الحزب الشيوعي الفرنسي.

واختيار بايدن مرشحاً للحزب الديموقراطي من بين دزّينة متنوّعة (في الجندر وفي العرق) كان عملاً مقصوداً. أراد الحزب الديموقراطي ترجيح كفّته عبر جذب العمّال الصناعيّين البيض في الولايات التي خسرتها هيلاري كلينتون في آخر انتخابات، مثل ميشيغن وبنسلفانيا وويسكنسون، وهي كانت تاريخيّاً ولايات العمّال الصناعيّين البيض الكاثوليك، وكانوا عماداً ثابتاً للحزب الديموقراطي. ونجح رونالد ريغان في جذب هؤلاء في انتخابات عام 1980، لأسباب متعدّدة بعضها عنصري: النقمة ضد سياسات البرامج الاجتماعيّة لم تكن إلا ثورة ضد ما يراه البيض من امتيازات للأقليّات والنساء (مع أنّ النساء البيض كنّ المستفيدات الأكبر من هذه السياسات). الحزب الجمهوري يؤجّل الخسارة الكبيرة التي ستلحقه عندما يصبح البيض أقليّة في البلاد، وهو يعاند ضد ذلك من خلال إجراءات كثيرة، منها إعادة رسم الدوائر الانتخابيّة بطريقة تحفظ للجمهوريّة الحفاظ على أغلبيّاتهم في الولايات، أو من خلال حضّ البيض على الاقتراع بنسب كبيرة، ومنها التحريض ضد المهاجرين والحدّ من التجنيس الذي يفيد الحزب الديموقراطي. وعمليّة إعادة رسم الدوائر الانتخابيّة وتشتيت أصوات الأقليّات تجري من سنوات وليس هناك من رادع لها، لأنّها حق من حقوق المجالس الاشتراعيّة المحليّة الخاصّة بكل ولاية. وهذه لعبة لعبها الحزب الديموقراطي وتمرّس بها، إلّا أنّه بات يعترض عليها متأخّراً لأنها تضرّه.

كانت نتائج الانتخابات الرئاسيّة مفاجئة، فقط لأنّ خللاً حلّ بوسائل الإعلام وباستطلاعات الرأي. استطلاعات الرأي ليست علماً، وهي لا تتفوّق إلا بدرجة قليلة عن خزعبلات وبلاهات ميشال حايك وليلى عبد اللطيف. ونسبة تأييد ترامب في عام 2016، كانت أقلّ في استطلاعات الرأي ممّا هي عليه يوم الاقتراع، وهذا الأمر تكرّر هذا الأسبوع بالرغم من وعود وتعهّدات من شركات الاستطلاع بأنّها أصلحت أخطاء منهجيّة وتقنيّة في الاستطلاعات الماضية (كانت الاستطلاعات مثلاً تقلّل من نسبة سكّان الريف والمزارعين في الولايات، وهذه المجموعة السكّانية تميل للحزب الجمهوري، والاستطلاعات تقلِّل من نسب الاقتراع للقاعدة الحزبيّة الجمهوريّة، أي الذكور البيض). لكنّ الأخطاء كانت فظيعة هذه المرّة: توقّعت الاستطلاعات تفوّقاً بنسبة 15% لصالح بايدن في ولاية ويسكنسون (بحسب استطلاع «ذي واشنطن بوست» وشبكة «إي.بي.سي») فيما نجح بايدن هناك بنسبة ضئيلة جداً. وحصل شيء مشابه أيضاً في ولاية مين، حيث فازت سوزان كولنز بمقعدها في مجلس الشيوخ بنسبة مريحة، فيما توقّعت الاستطلاعات خسارتها بنسبة كبيرة. استطلاعات الرأي لم تكن يوماً علماً، ولن تكون مهما تحسّنت تقنيّاتها، وهي أقلّ فائدة في دولة تنقسم بنسبة النصف بين فريقَيْن متصارعَيْن. ولقد ساهمت وسائل الإعلام في الإساءة إلى استطلاعات الرأي، لأنّها خلقت ثقافة شيطنة ضد ترامب، ما دفع بالعديد من أنصاره إلى إخفاء أهوائهم عن المستطلعين خشية وصفهم بالعنصريّين (ولهذا تاريخ معروف في الاستطلاعات الأميركيّة، ويرتبط بظاهرة «وايلدر»، وهو كان مرشحاً لمركز المحافظ في ولاية فرجينيا في عام 1990 وفضحت الانتخابات يومها أنّ نسبة البيض الذين اقترعوا له كانت أقل بكثير من النسبة التي أبلغت شركات الاستطلاع بنيّتها الاقتراع له). أي أنّ تأييد ترامب مكتومٌ في تبيانات الاستطلاع، وهذا شبيه بنسبة التأييد المكتوم لمارغرت تاتشر في بريطانيا في الثمانينيات، إذ أنّ الشباب كانوا لا يفصحون عن نيّتهم الاقتراع لها، لأنّ ذلك لم يكن محبّذاً في الجو الشبابي البريطاني يومها. هذه مشاكل لن تُحل في استطلاعات الرأي هنا، مهما تعقّدت وتشعّبت النماذج الحسابيّة التي تعتمدها وسائل الإعلام، وشركات الاستطلاع، في توقُّع نتائج الانتخابات. لم تخطئ حنة أرندت عندما قالت إنّ السياسة لا تكون في التوقّع، وليس هذا شأنها. وفي لبنان، هناك لـ8 آذار شركات استطلاع معتمدة، وهناك أخرى معتمدة لـ١٤ آذار، وهي قادرة على توقّع نتائج انتخابات ملائمة لكلّ طرف، كما أن شركة «زغبي» باتت متخصّصة في إنتاج نتائج استطلاعات رأي في العالم العربي، تتّفق مع مصالح وتوجّهات محمد بن زايد.

أراد الحزب الديموقراطي ترجيح كفّة بايدن عبر جذب العمّال الصناعيّين البيض في الولايات التي خسرتها هيلاري كلينتون في آخر انتخابات

لم يكن سقوط ترامب – لو تأكد – عفويّاً أو نتيجة تقلّبات هائلة وجذريّة في أهواء الرأي العام. النتائج كانت متقاربة، لو حسبتها من خلال الكليّة الاقتراعيّة أو من خلال النسب على مستوى البلاد. ولقد نجح ترامب في زيادة تحالفه الانتخابي: فهو وإن خسر نسبة ضئيلة من الرجال البيض (من62% في عام 2016 إلى 58% في هذه الانتخابات) فإن عوّض عن ذلك بتحقيق نسب إضافيّة طفيفة من تأييد اللاتين (نحو الثلث) ومن السود (الذكور بصورة خاصّة). لكنّ نسبته من تأييد القوات المسلّحة انخفض إلى 52٪ فقط، وهذا غير مألوف للمرشح الجمهوري. وهذا التقلّص يكشف حقيقة أسباب خسارة ترامب. لقد شنّت البنية العسكرتاريّة – الاستخباريّة حملة لا سابق لها ضده، وهو استهان بعدائها له لأنّه غير متمرّس في الحكم والعمل السياسي. لم يكن ترامب يعلم أنّ هناك أثماناً باهظة يتكبّدها من رصيده السياسي كلّ رئيس يحاول أن يشنّ حرباً ضدّ أجهزة الاستخبارات، هي تعمل في الخفاء ولديها من مخزون المعلومات ما يجعلها خصماً لا يُستهان به. لم يكن ترامب يعلم أنّ شنَّ حرب علنيّة وسريّة ضد 17 وكالة استخبارات ذات ميزانيّة سرّية بعشرات المليارات لها أكلافها السياسيّة والشخصيّة. من سرَّبَ وثائق ضرائب ترامب، بعد سنوات من إصراره على عدم الإفصاح عنها؟ هل هناك غير وكالات الاستخبارات هذه، التي لديها القدرة على النفاذ إلى أماكن حفظ هذه الوثائق؟ ثمّ من الذي سرّبَ هذه الوثائق قبل أسابيع فقط من الانتخابات الرئاسيّة؟ ما يُسمّى في مصر بـ«الدولة العميقة» (وهي أعمق هنا من أيّ دولة أخرى في العالم، لأنّها دولة الإمبراطوريّة المترامية الأطراف) لم تكن راضية عن ترامب، وتركيبة السياسة الخارجيّة التقليديّة (من الديموقراطيّين والجمهوريّين) خشيَت من أن يقود ترامب الإمبراطوريّة إلى حتفِها. لم يسبق في السنوات الماضية، أن حظي مرشّح بهذا الإجماع من قبل نخبة الحزبَيْن في السياسة الخارجيّة كما حظي بايدن، وهذا مؤشِّر إلى الانحراف الذي قاده ترامب في نظر هؤلاء.

ستعود قيادة إمبراطوريّة الحرب الأميركيّة إلى أيدٍ أمينة موثوق بها، وستحسِّن من مسار الإمبراطوريّة لضمان استمراريّتها. قادة القطاع الاستخباري – العسكري عبّروا عن الكثير من القلق في ظلّ إدارة ترامب. إنهاء حالة العداء مع كوريا الشمالية، مثلاً، كان مثاراً للقلق الذي تسبّبت به سياسات ترامب. إنّ حالات العداء التقليديّة ضرورة من ضرورات سياسة الإمبراطوريّة – وفي أي حال لم يُسمح لترامب بالمضي في سياساته المهادِنة لكوريا الشمالية، كما أنّه لم يُسمح له بسحب القوات الأميركيّة من أماكن مختلفة في العالم. نشر القوات ضرورة من ضرورات الإمبراطوريّة الحربيّة، والتهريب ضرورة للحدّ من التهديدات لمصالح قوة الحرب الأميركيّة. وقد خشي خصوم ترامب من خبراء الإمبراطوريّة من تفكيك «حلف شمال الأطلسي»، وذلك بحجّة التخفيف من نفقات الالتزام الأميركي. وكان ترامب على حق بأنّ اهتمامه بأولويّة تحسين الاقتصاد وتخفيض الأعباء الماليّة للسياسة الخارجيّة (باستثناء ميزانيّة الدفاع والاستخبارات) ستعود بالنفع المالي على أميركا.

فضحت الأزمات السياسيّة الأميركيّة في السنوات الماضية هشاشة الديموقراطيّة الأميركيّة. فقَد النظام السياسي الكثير من خواصه التي كانت أميركا تزهو بها بين الأمم، عن عراقة ديموقراطيّتها. التهديد الأكبر للنظام السياسي، برز في انتخابات عام 2000، عندما تقرّرت الانتخابات الأميركيّة في المحاكم وليس في صناديق الاقتراع. النظام السياسي يفقد شرعيّته، أو تصبح الشرعيّة مرتبطة فقط بتطابق الحزب الحاكم مع أهواء الناخب: الديموقراطي لا يرى شرعيّة خارج حكم حزبه، والعكس صحيح في حالة الجمهوريّين – أو هي أعمق في حالة هؤلاء. أنصار الحزب الجمهوري أكثر تعصّباً لفريقهم وأكثر استعداداً للجوء إلى الحيَل والخدع والطرق الملتوية للبقاء في السلطة. لم يكن أنصار ترامب يمزحون عندما كانوا يهتفون لولاية ثالثة له (التعديل الدستوري الثاني والعشرون يحدّد ولاية الرئيس بولايتَيْن فقط). وظاهرة ترامب ليست، كما يحاول الإعلام الليبرالي تصويرها، ظاهرة شخص واحد يمرّ مروراً عابراً في السياسة السياسيّة الأميركيّة. هي نتاج عوامل تحتدم في النظام السياسي، منذ التسعينيّات على الأقل. يكفي أن تعرف أنّ البيض الذكور لم يختاروا رئيساً من خارج الحزب الجمهوري منذ عام 1977، وهم بذلك يثورون على تحالف النساء والملوّنين في الحزب الديموقراطي (زيادة ترامب في الانتخابات الأخيرة من نسبة تأييد الذكور السود، لم تظهر في التغطية الليبراليّة له، لأنّها تريد جعله ظاهرة محصورة بالمتطرّفين لأنّها لا تريد أن تعترف بعمق الأزمة السياسيّة الأميركيّة). قد لا يختفي ترامب عن الساحة السياسيّة بعد سقوطه، لكن سيأتي مثله – الكثير مثله – في السنوات المقبلة. كانت معادلة ترامب ناجحة: هذه شعبيّة الرئيس بين أعضاء حزبه لم يسبق لها مثيل، حتى أنه فاق شعبيّة ريغان في عزّه. وهذا العامل يمنع حتى خصوم ترامب في داخل حزبه من المجاهرة بانتقاده.

هناك سيناريوات حقيقيّة لتقويض النظام السياسي الأميركي من الداخل. تتخيّل ترامب، مثلاً، أو غيره في المستقبل، وهو يحضّ أنصاره على اقتحام مراكز الاقتراع لتعطيل عميلة عدّ الأصوات (القانون المحلّي في أريزونا يسمح للمتظاهرين بمحاصرة مراكز عدّ الأصوات، وهم مدجّجون بالسلاح الظاهر). وقد غرّد ترامب، قبل يومين، مطالِباً بـ«وقف العد». هذه الجملة لو صدرت عن زعيم دولة في العالم النامي، لكانت أدّت إلى تقريع فوري من وزير الخارجيّة الأميركي، إلّا إذا كان هذا الزعيم من أدوات أميركا الكُثُر في العالم الثالث. هناك بوادر على حالة تمرُّد في النظام الحاكم. تسرّب أنّ وزير الدفاع الأميركي السابق، جيمس ماتس، اتّفق مع البعض في هيئة الأركان على معارضة ترامب، في حال أصدر أوامر اعتبروها مناقضة للمصلحة الأميركيّة العليا، وقادة في مكتب التحقيقات الفدرالي تباحثوا في انتخابات عام 2016 في إمكان تعطيل انتخاب ترامب. كان النظام الأميركي مستقرّاً عندما كانت الشرعيّة محلّ إجماع بين الناس، وعندما كان الحزبان متقاربَيْن في الموقع نحو الوسط الأميركي المحافظ. لكنّ الحزب الجمهوري سافرَ كثيراً نحو اليمين ممّا كان عليه من قبل، والتحالف الجديد للحزب الديموقراطي يدفعه نحو الليبراليّة، فيما قيادة الحزب لا تزال في حالة رفض الواقع والإصرار على البقاء في موقع الوسط المحافظ. هي معركة أجيال في داخل الحزب الديموقراطي، وينعكس ذلك على سياسات الحزب نحو الاحتلال “الإسرائيلي”.

سخِرت أميركا كثيراً من أنظمة في العالم النامي، وهي باتت تحمل سمات بعض تلك الأنظمة. هل يرفض ترامب مغادرة البيت الأبيض؟ هل سيحرّض أنصاره على التمرُّد المسلّح؟ هذه الأسئلة لم تعد سيناريوات أفلام هوليوود. وإمكانيّة طرد ترامب من البيت الأبيض بالقوّة ليست مستعبدة. يمكن لنا اليوم الاستعانة بأمثلة من أنظمة في العالم الذي لا يعتبره الغرب متحضِّراً لتوقُّع مجرياتٍ سياسيّة أميركيّة. لعلّ مشاغلهم الداخليّة تصرفهم عن دول العالم النامي، وتقلِّل من حوافز شنّ حروبهم التي تبدأ ولا تنتهي.

* كاتب عربي
(حسابه على «تويتر» asadabukhalil@)

الأخبار

If Donald Trump Refuses to Leave the White House, Secret Service Will Escort Him Out

If Donald Trump Refuses to Leave the White House, Secret Service Will Escort Him Out

By Tom O’Connor and Naveed Jamali, Newsweek

In a year of tragic firsts for the country, the unthinkable is always a possibility.

As an early lead began to slip on election night, President Donald Trump prematurely declared victory, even as former Vice President Joe Biden appeared set to win thanks to an influx of mail-in ballots, received early but counted last in key states.

Trump has since claimed the race was rigged and shows no sign of conceding, leading the Biden campaign to consider outcomes previously thought to be only the most radical.

“As we said on July 19th, the American people will decide this election,” Biden’s team said in a statement Friday. “And the United States government is perfectly capable of escorting trespassers out of the White House.”

And the Secret Service would be the ones to do it, one former US official and two experts told Newsweek.

The scenarios Newsweek discussed with its sources are hypothetical. No network has called the race and the votes are still being counted. Trump has a narrow path to victory in the Electoral College. He has never said or implied that he would continue to occupy the White House after exhausting any legal challenges to the vote.

Still, this is what happens when a sitting president doesn’t stand up to pass the baton to his or her successor. It’s never been seen before in the United States and there is no imminent threat that it will happen in January, but there is a plan in place to prevent a transition in power crisis.

The 20th Amendment has it that Trump, or any other lame-duck leader, loses his presidential mandate January 20 at noon, and, if he tries to stick around after that, the very guard once tasked with protecting the nation’s top officeholder now has to evict him.

“The Secret Service would escort him off, they would treat him like any old man who’d wandered on the property,” one former official involved in the transition process between former President Barack Obama and Trump told Newsweek.

And whether or not Trump actually attends the Inauguration Day ceremony is irrelevant to the actual transfer of authority – in which Trump would also lose privileged modes of transportation such as the presidential Air Force One and his iconic, fortified limousine, the Beast.

“As of noon of January 2021 the Beast doesn’t belong to him, AF1 doesn’t belong to him, and the White House doesn’t belong to him,” former US Navy intelligence and counter-terrorism specialist Malcolm Nance told Newsweek.

The system is intentionally built to work independently of the whims of whoever happens to be in the White House at the time.

“The transition process is automated. There is no ‘do-it yourself’ move,” Nance said. “So if he doesn’t have a designated place, they’ll decide for him. Basically, the systematic things will happen whether he’s a willing participant or not.”

Trump also loses his commander-in-chief status, meaning the Pentagon cannot and will not come to his aid should Biden be sworn in.

It’s not the military’s place to intervene, however. Like the former official Newsweek spoke to, Nance also indicated it would be the Secret Service to remove the president, physically if need be.

“If he says he will not physically leave the White House, they will physically remove him,” he added. “They may have to put hands on him to remove him. They may tell him if he doesn’t make his flight, he may have to contract his own flight.”

Such a scenario would be unprecedented. Of the 43 men who preceded Trump in the presidency, 35 have willingly ceded power either because their two-term limit expired, they lost an election or chose not to run again. Eight died and one quit.

Trump managed to unwillingly make history last year by being only the third president to be impeached, but – like Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton before him—the Senate saved Trump from being ousted.

Overstaying his Oval Office welcome after an election, however, would truly be unparalleled.

“No sitting president has ever refused to leave office or vacate the White House in the course of American history,” the White House Historical Association told Newsweek.

Even if Trump managed to somehow vacate the vote itself, the outcome would likely be unfavorable for him. No avenue exists for him to prolong his administration nor appoint his deputy, Vice President Mike Pence.

Rather, the first ever undetermined US election would result in the third-in-line assuming the presidency. In this case, that’s Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, an influential Democrat often targeted by Trump’s rhetoric.

“There is no constitutional provision to extend the term of office,” the White House Historical Association said. “If no president has been chosen by January 20, 2021, then the statutory line of succession begins, which means the Speaker of the House ascends to the presidency. The Vice President’s term similarly ends at noon on January 20.”

Many outlets project Biden is most likely to pull through based on the current count, however, and Berggruen Institute Vice President of Programs Nils Gilman said he cannot see Trump participating in the formalities of his predecessors.

“It’s hard to imagine Trump graciously welcoming Biden to the White House on the morning of January 20th, then doing the traditional ride with him down Pennsylvania Avenue, then sitting behind him on the podium and politely clapping as Biden gets sworn in,” Gilman told Newsweek. “Presiding over the ceremonial celebration of his own political failure doesn’t seem at all in character.”

Trump’s absence, Gilman argued, would not only fuel more partisan bickering but also introduce dangerous new precedents for future leaders who potentially would not conceive of such a break in tradition.

“This would indeed be yet another example of how Trump is systematically breaking the norms that make felicitous governance and cooperative policymaking possible – in this case by traducing the symbolic performance of the idea that the US government is a government of all Americans, not just the government of a single party,” Gilman said.

2020, a year defined by the COVID-19 pandemic, civil unrest and economic turmoil, has painfully demonstrated the limits of saying “never,” and opened up an array of discourse on a number of doomsday scenarios.

In fact, an incumbent Trump unwilling to walk away has already been imagined by Gilman and other experts concerned about the potential for a break in the United States’ so far uninterrupted democracy.

Earlier this year, Gilman and Georgetown Law professor Rosa Brooks established the Transition Integrity Project, an exercise involving a bipartisan group of experienced individuals from various government, media and academic backgrounds to establish four scenarios for the 2020 election.

These involved Biden winning the electoral and popular votes by a healthy margin, Biden winning the two metrics by a narrow margin, Trump winning the former but losing the latter and a too close to call case where the victor is not established the following day.

Needless to say, the final scenario has become reality, as did predictions of widespread efforts by the Trump campaign and friendly media to amplify “stolen election” and “voter fraud” narratives.

This hypothetical series of events quickly turns ugly, with Trump refusing to concede and mass nationwide demonstrations potentially turning violent as a new uncertainty grips an already tumultuous country. Trump presents himself as the “law and order” option.

Despite these attempts to overturn his rival’s victory through propaganda and social media smears, officials and even some Republicans quietly begin to discuss backing Biden and, by the time the president-elect is certified by lawmakers on January 6 and Inauguration Day arrives two weeks later, it’s clear that Trump no longer has the backing of the US government.

“Biden’s electoral victory was certified but Trump refused to leave the White House. He began to burn documents and potentially incriminating evidence, and continued to launch attacks against the legitimacy of the election. President Trump released a series of pardons for members of his administration as well as himself before the Secret Service escorted him out of the White House,” the scenario goes.

“But the Secret Service demonstrated its ‘culture of professionalism’ [as one member of the Federal Government Team indicated] by indicating that it would be ‘loyal to the office, not to the person’ and therefore it would escort Trump out of the White House on January 20,” it continued.

Speaking to Newsweek in light of recent events, Brooks stood by this assessment.

“If Biden is projected to win and is then formally certified as the winner in the Joint Session of Congress on Jan 6, he is officially going to be the next President, whether Trump concedes or not,” she said. “Once Biden is sworn in on inauguration day, power transfers to him, and the Secret Service will indeed escort former President Trump out of the White House.”

Her colleague, Gilman, agreed.

“As to Trump refusing to leave the White House physically, I must say that I find this to be an exceedingly unlikely turn of events,” he told Newsweek. “At some point the Secret Service will simply escort him out.”

The White House and Secret Service did not respond to Newsweek’s request for comment.

‘Gloves will come off’ once Trump’s out & media stop protecting Biden, Democrat’s accuser Tara Reade tells RT

8 Nov, 2020 05:44 

‘Gloves will come off’ once Trump’s out & media stop protecting Biden, Democrat’s accuser Tara Reade tells RT
FILE PHOTO © REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko

Tara Reade, the former US Senate aide who accused Joe Biden of sexual assault, said more allegations may surface as the media allows more truthful reporting on the former VP’s alleged corruption once his victory is sealed.

“I think there will be more interest as far as other people may be coming forward,” Reade said on Saturday in an interview with RT’s Polly Boiko.

Reade noted that journalists such as Glenn Greenwald were stifled during the election in their efforts to report on alleged influence-peddling by Biden’s family in Ukraine and China, but once Biden has replaced Trump in the Oval Office, the rules may change.

Reade argued that the US media was forced to exercise self-censorship in their reporting on Biden during the election cycle, saying that “the journalists … have been frustrated that they have been basically given a message to not go after Biden.

“I think the gloves come off after he becomes president,” Reade said. “I think the truth needs to come out, and I don’t mean attacks, I don’t mean attacks like I experienced, by any means. What I’m talking about is actual journalism being able to get done. If there was corruption, reveal it. If he used his position as vice president to enrich his family, in the way he’s accusing Trump, then it should be revealed.”

Reade earlier this year accused then-senator Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993. Last year, she was among seven women who alleged that he had touched them inappropriately. She called Biden a “predator” in her interview with Boiko and said some of her friends considered his support for the 1994 Violence Against Women Act a “cover for his misogyny.”

“It’s like the wolf in sheep’s clothing,” Reade said. “Oh look at me, I’m safe. Not really.”

Reade, who claimed she was pressured to quit her job on Biden’s staff after filing a sexual-harassment complaint, said that since leaving Washington in 1993, she has watched the Democratic Party evolve and become more dominated by corporate interests. Even in the 1990s, she said she witnessed Biden’s devotion to credit-card companies and other corporate donors, arguing that such dominance has only increased. 

“We’ve kind of become the United States of oligarchy.”

The party’s controllers also have become more pro-war, Reade said. “What gets me about the Democratic Party is our hypocrisy,” she said. “I was part of that cult, if you will, the Democrats, and I’m out of it now. I really see the hypocrisy, the sanctimoniousness. We need to stop.”

Reade said the party also needs to “stop blaming everything on Russia, which is just ridiculous,” and start having real conversations about improving the US political system.

“Hopefully we can start looking at other countries as allies and collaborators on ways to work with them rather than as enemies and find the next war,” she said. “My fear with Biden’s cabinet, the packed cabinet he will pick, is that we might end up by spring in another regime war. That’s my prediction.”

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

ALSO ON RT.COM

4 years of anti-Trumpism shaping MSM vote coverage, but expect long fight

Source

Saturday, 07 November 2020 9:22 PM  [ Last Update: Saturday, 07 November 2020 9:22 PM ]

US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (L) talks with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) during a rally with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the US Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington, DC. (AFP photo)
“Trumpism”, a cartoon by The Economist

By Ramin Mazaheri and crossposted with PressTV

4 years of anti-Trumpism shaping MSM vote coverage, but expect long fight
* Ramin Mazaheri is currently covering the US elections. He is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.

With Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 US presidential votes, you will probably not hear pro-Trump views in the mainstream media for four years, but 70 million Trump votes show they do exist.

Last night I dreamt that I asked Trump what it was like to be the world’s most insulted man over the last four years?

This piqued his interest and he granted me a walk-and-talk interview. While I waited for him to be free I ate pizza – the food of variety and routine entertainment. When he became available we walked to a car, marveling that the secret service was going to let us travel without them. Trump would drive, which in dream logic means I think he is in charge.

I had more good journalistic questions for Trump, but I couldn’t remember any others when I woke up.

If the United States corporate media could insult Trump for four years then we should assume there is the same bias and animosity in their coverage of the current election crisis.

As a journalist I must account for this and realize they routinely give only one side of the story. In short: it’s clear they still want Trump out by any means necessary, which is why their mainstream journalists have done all they could to give the impression that it’s all over but the counting.

It’s not.

Trump’s demeanor in my dream was one of annoyance changing into focused determination – one cannot permanently put down someone with an ego as massive as Trump’s. Similarly, you cannot insult Trumpers because they truly believe their Americanness makes them totally impermeable to serious denigration. This arrogance is the psychological foundation of imperialism – that Western culture can never embarrass itself enough to jeopardize the idea of their natural superiority over others. Anti-Trumpers have this arrogance in the same magnitude, but express it slightly differently.

One cannot understand American political culture if one does not at least occasionally tune into right-wing AM talk radio. This is the only place to find the Christian conservatives who compose one-third of the country (polls show 50% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents call themselves “moderately” or “highly religious”). Due to fanatical Western secularism these people are essentially shut out of mainstream political discourse, but their massive numbers have allowed them to carve out this niche on an antiquated medium.

Every decent journalist should already know this. The US has very few of those (whereas the Iranian press is vibrant and demanding).

This explains why we hear so much talk in the American press about the pernicious influence of “online disinformation” such as the highly-publicized “Stop the Steal” page on Facebook. The out-of-touch US journalist class is totally tech-focused and thus mistakenly believes the primary threat to their narrative dominance is online.

If they would simply turn on the good old radio it would be shocking clear: “Stop the Steal” is the tip of the iceberg and not the work of Iranian or Russian trolls: there is a huge sector of US society which does not believe this election is fair and transparent enough, and they are focused, politically-involved and have the same analytical skills God gave all humans.

You can take down Facebook pages, but the massive audience which right-wing AM radio has enjoyed for decades will still be there. The US MSM has always ignored this medium, mistakenly hoping it would just go away, and thus Iranian and Russian trolls are the culprit.

You couldn’t hear pro-Trump views in the MSM for four years, but 70 million Trump votes shows they actually do exist.

This massive audience is incredibly upset, and on November 4, 2020 they became self-assured that they are not an historical anomaly. Trumpers are currently more emboldened and politically justified than ever and… you expect them to take a knee on their undoubtedly unusual presidential vote? Because the mainstream media says so?

The victory of the “Trumpian Republican” over a media-overhyped “Blue Wave” is totally confirmed, though their figurehead may not survive. That makes them skeptical and upset in massive numbers, but this voice is blocked. This is why if you only tune into mainstream media everything is exactly as it has been for four years: Trump must leave office, and they marshal a ton of experts who prove it.

But turn to the one media source where Trumpers actually feel comfortable talking with other Trumpers and you will find they are also marshalling a ton of experts who are howling with indignation not at the mistreatment of their figurehead but at the way mail-in ballots and questionable 2020 political decisions have called the integrity of US vote structures into question.

Trump is a figurehead, but the elections verify that Trumpism is a real movement. It is based on the idea that America is not the world’s greatest country but the greatest country in the history of mankind. However, the Washington Swamp has corrupted it. Their essential stance is that the November 3rd vote is fine – it’s the people who ran that vote who cannot be trusted and whose work must now be verified.

Trumpers do not want major structural changes – Democrats are more inclined to installing semi-progressive changes – they want different people in office, and (like every other country) people who are more openly reflective of their worldview. Corruption is the primary wellspring of Trumpism, not White supremacism.

Trump gained with every ethnic cohort and gender except White males, after all. Any journalist who keeps talking about White supremacism – as the primary ethos of Trumpism, not as a longstanding and genuine structural problem which includes Democrats as well – is totally wasting your time. Incredibly, there are many of these, and they are the best-paid ones.

Here’s the problem: unless the vote is not just totally counted but also calmly litigated and vetted – precisely because there has been a drastic changing to the 2020 vote forced by the pandemic, the executive orders of state governors and overreaching local officials – half the voting population is going to have major resentment and continued grounds for belief in the corruption of American officials (again, because they believe the structures sent by the archangels Jefferson, Washington and (ugh) Hamilton cannot possibly be at fault).

So Trump and Trumpers – who were not even browbeaten by four years of anti-Trump bias – will not be browbeaten into calling off the vote clarification efforts.

This notion is being trumpeted all over their media, but you have to know where to find them in a very stratified and biased US media. As a journalist I must objectively report (disclaimer: I did not support either candidate) that they sound serious as hell.

Not serious as hell as in right-wing militias shooting up Main Street – that was an absurd distraction with the backing of zero historical precedent – but serious in that they can marshal their own lawyers, analysts, professors, local officials, state officials, poll watchers and regular Joes who all can intellectually defend the idea that they are not going to accept the presidential vote without assurances that it was totally fair. In my journalistic view: they meet the American standard of “reasonable doubt” to merit judicial checking.

And what’s wrong with that? What’s Christian Conservative about demanding modern vote justice via checks and balances? What’s wrong is that it threatens the 1%’s desires.

Remember 2000? Jay Leno’s nightly mocking and the quick trashing of lower class votes?

In 2000 the mood in America was one of total impatience – this is because the imperialist US abhors a vacuum. Somebody must be in charge, if only so they know whom to slavishly follow.

By mid-December Al Gore foolishly quit – denying modern political justice to thousands of Black Floridians –  for what he thought was the good of the nation; to end the perceived nightmare of a very short-term power vacuum. That’s not going to happen this time around.

The US mainstream media is doing all they can to make it happen, but Trumpers have their own media which is mainstream enough to them, and they sure don’t sound like this will be over soon. At least – not to this journalist. Expect the impatience to kick in soon, which is hysterical (the word of 2020), because the inauguration isn’t until late January.

Trump cares mainly about himself, not the nation, which is another reason it’s different this time around.

The 2000 election had two key effects: alienating many Americans from politics while highly polarizing the ones who remained involved. Yet another reason it’s different this time around – less patriotism and more zero-sum game polarization.

In my dream Trump was driving because he truly is in charge – it’s widely acknowledged here that the Trump family will hold the most sway in the Republican Party win or lose. Donald Trump Jr. looks like the heir apparent: he definitely has the media savvy, is all over Fox News (which I assume few “objective” US journalists ever tune into either) and, crucially, his father’s combativeness towards the US establishment. Trumpian Republicans are a force to be reckoned with and will change the country’s politics – however, I contended here that the duopoly’s quicksand will swallow them up and dilute them.

For Iran there is no need to overreact – America has been anti-Iranian Revolution since forever. Trumpians are not original in their pro-Zionism. Who knows what Trumpism will really morph into – maybe their reluctance towards more endless wars will enlighten US foreign policy?

The Donald is still in the driver’s seat, but in my dream it’s notable that we didn’t drive anywhere. Bad omen for him from this news gypsy.


Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

www.presstv.tv

%d bloggers like this: