Am Mittwoch startete Robert F. Kennedy Jr. seine Präsidentschaftskandidatur, um Präsident Biden in den Vorwahlen der Demokraten 2024 herauszufordern, und versprach, mit der „Abwicklung“ des US-amerikanischen Imperiums zu beginnen. In einer Rede, in der er seinen Wahlkampf ankündigte, stellte Kennedy die Motive von Präsident Biden in der Ukraine in Frage und sagte, es scheine, […]Robert F. Kennedy Jr. startet US-Präsidentschaftskandidatur und schwört, das US-Imperium aufzulösen (antiwar.com) — CO-OP NEWS
Schlagwort / #US elections
Joe Biden: Return of the CFR
Published: November 2020 Swiss Policy Research
A Joe Biden presidency means a “return to normality” simply because it means a return of the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
Quelle: Joe Biden: Return of the CFR
Glenn Greenwald On His Resignation From The Intercept
Matt Taibbi 30.10.2020
The Pulitzer winner founded the Intercept to challenge official narratives and protect editorial freedom. When editors abandoned those principles, spiking a controversial story, he was forced to quit
Quelle: Glenn Greenwald On His Resignation From The Intercept
Why Are These Anti-Russian And Anti-Chinese Narratives So Similar? — Moon of Alabama
After more than four years of Russiagate we finally learn (paywalled original) where the Steele dossier allegations about nefarious relations between Trump and Russia came from: A Wall Street Journal investigation provides an answer: a 40-year-old Russian public-relations executive named…Why Are These Anti-Russian And Anti-Chinese Narratives So Similar? — Moon of Alabama
Pepe ESCOBAR: Here’s How the Trump Presidency Will Play Out |Engdahl analysis on „Trump Deception“
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. Januar 2017 um 09:59 Uhr
Von: micham <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Betreff: Re: ESCOBAR: Here’s How the Trump Presidency Will Play Out | Engdahl analysis on „Trump Deception“
Hi folks in the GC-Tower!
Brilliant analysis of Pepe! Thank you!
Trump mobilisiert und reanimiert ja nicht nur bei den Frauen ungeahnte
Was mich wachgerüttelt hat war der Auftritt von Rabbi Marvin, der
als Erster nach Trumps Vereidigung auf die Bühne durfte, um seinen
„Segen“ zu geben und es schaffte, da die Geschichte von Zion und
Jerusalem reinzupacken. Einen Tag später die Medienmeldung zu den Plänen
der Verlegung der US-Botschaft von Tel Aviv nach Jerusalem.
Erhellendes dazu fand ich im Interview „The incredible Trump deception“
von William Engdahl in der Sendung Guns and Butter von KPFA Berkely vom
The Incredible Trump Deception with F. William Engdahl
We examine some of the early political appointments of the new Trump
administration and the geopolitical shift in American foreign policy
that it represents. The powers behind the Trump presidency – the
Netanyahu Likud connected think-tank, The Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies, including General Mike Flynn, Walid Phares; James Woolsey,
and Michael Ledeen, among others; an attack on the nuclear deal with
Iran; the failed strategy of using radical political Islam to
destabilize and destroy countries; a strengthened alliance between
Russia, China and Iran; the failed CIA coup in Turkey of July 2016; a
strong dollar policy and a weakened European Union; rising interest
rates and concomitant flight capital to a Wall Street safe-haven; making
America great again by re-building Americas defense industry
Trump, Kissinger and Ma playing on a crowded chessboard | Asia Times
January 14, 2017
Confrontational rhetoric from the Pentagon and State Department is just noise, writes Pepe Escobar; the real Great Game plotting is on a deeper level
Quelle: Trump, Kissinger and Ma playing on a crowded chessboard | Asia Times
F. William ENGDAHL: Is Trump the Back Door Man for Henry A. Kissinger & Co?, New Eastern Outlook, 09.01.2017
Martin Zeis, 09.01.2016
on Jan 06, 2017 the Electoral College voted (304 : 227) Donald Trump as next President of the United States of America.
As memento a statement by Nick Bernabe (AntiMedia.org, 11.11.2016): „47 percent of Americans voted for nobody, far outweighing the votes cast for Trump (25.5 percent) and Hillary (25.6 percent) by eligible voters.“
After a multi-week romping of the Clinton/Obama/Neocon camp and the world-wide trying to figure out the main features of a Trump Presidency these are crystallizing, i.a. the geopolitical aims.
Today F. William ENGDAHL points out that „more and more as Cabinet choices are named, it looks like the entire Trump Presidency project is emerging as Henry A. Kissinger’s “Back Door Man”.
Below some extracts, full text attached (pdf, 5 p).
Henry Kissinger „began his relationship with Nelson Rockefeller and the brothers Rockefeller–Laurance, David, Winthrop in the 1950’s and has been the core strategist of the Rockefeller family’s globalization or World Government above nation states as David called it in 1991. That included Kissinger’s role with the Bilderberg Meetings, with David’s Trilateral Commission and right down to the present. It was Secretary of State Kissinger who asked his good friend David Rockefeller to facilitate Nixon’s “China opening” to the West in 1971. Then the geopolitical aim of Kissinger’s rebalance was to seduce China, then the weaker of Washington’s two great adversaries, into the Western alliance against the Soviet Union, then the stronger adversary, at least in military and geopolitical terms.
Today, as the year 2017 begins, the roles have turned and clearly China has emerged after more than three decades of unbridled industrial and economic expansion, as the stronger challenger of David Rockefeller’s so-called World Government. Russia, following the economic savagery and deindustrialization of the post-1991 Yeltsin years, is in Kissinger’s view, clearly the weaker of his two adversaries. Both China and Russia under Xi Jinping and Putin, are, together with Iran, the most formidable defenders of national sovereignty – the main obstacles standing in the way of David Rockefeller’s (I use him as the template) World (fascist) Government. (…)
With Kissinger now in a unique relationship with President-elect Trump as shadow foreign policy adviser, with Kissinger allies Tillerson as Secretary of State and Mattis as Secretary of Defense, it is beginning to appear that the heavy hand of Kissinger and his version of British Balance of Power political manipulations is about to target China, as well as Iran, and to try to use Putin and Russia to destroy the genuine possibility of a counterweight to Western One World delusions, by fostering mistrust and bad blood between China and Russia and Iran.“
The real significance of the ODNI report on “Russia’s election election interfering” | The Vineyard of the Saker
A bird’s eye view of the vineyard
Quelle: The real significance of the ODNI report on “Russia’s election election interfering” | The Vineyard of the Saker
Immanuel WALLERSTEIN: The U.S. Election: It’s over at last, or is it?; 15.11.2016
in his distinctive manner Wallerstein dissects the US presidential election results – internal and external and entirely reverse to the frantic media-speculations hastily interpreting every Trump-tweet/guff.
Recent days some serious articles on the same subject were published – e.g. F. William Engdahl’s The Dangerous Deception Called The Trump Presidency (see: www.williamengdahl.com/englishNEO25Nov2016.php ) or Gregory R. Copley’s Geopolitical Overhaul: What Will A Post-Obama World Look Like? (see: www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-27/geopolitical-overhaul-what-will-post-obama-world-look ) — both articles are attached (pdf-file) —
The U.S. Election: It’s over at last, or is it?
Commentary No. 437,
Nov. 15, 2016
Almost everyone is astonished at Trump’s victory. It is said that even Trump was astonished. And of course now everyone is explaining how it happened, although the explanations are different. And everyone is talking about the deep cleavages that the election created (or it reflected?) in the U.S. body politic.
I am not going to add one more such analysis to the long list I’m already tired of reading them. I just want to concentrate on two issues: What are the consequences of this victory of Trump (1) for the United States, and (2) for U.S. power in the rest of the world.
Internally, the results, no matter how you measure them, move the United States significantly to the right. It doesn’t matter that Trump actually lost the national popular vote. And it doesn’t matter that if a mere 70,000 votes in three states (something under 0.09% of the total vote cast) had been lacking to Trump, Hillary Clinton would have won.
What does matter is that the Republicans have gained what is called the trifecta – control of the Presidency, both Houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court. And while the Democrats might win back the Senate and even the Presidency in four or eight years, the Republicans will hold on to a Supreme Court majority for a very much longer time.
To be sure, the Republicans are divided on some important issues. This is apparent just one week after the elections. Trump has already begun to display his pragmatic side and therefore his priorities: more jobs, tax reduction (but certain kinds), and saving parts of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that are widely popular. The Republican Establishment (a quite far right Establishment) has other priorities: destroying Medicaid and even Medicare, different kinds of tax reform, and rolling back social liberalism (such as abortion rights and gay marriage).
It remains to be seen if Trump can win against Paul Ryan (who is the key figure in the Congress-based rightwing), or Paul Ryan can push back Trump. The key figure in this struggle seems to be Vice-President Mike Pence, who has positioned himself remarkably as the real number two in the Presidential office (as had Dick Cheney).
Pence knows Congress well, is ideologically close to Paul Ryan, but politically loyal to Trump. It was he that chose Reince Priebus as Chief of Staff for Trump, preferring him to Steve Bannon. Priebus stands for uniting the Republicans, while Bannon stands for attacking Republicans who are less than 100% loyalists to an ultra-rightwing message. While Bannon got a consolation prize as an inside counselor, it is doubtful that he will have any real power.
However this intra-Republican struggle turns out, it is still the case that U.S. politics are now significantly further to the right. Perhaps the Democratic Party will reorganize as a more leftwing, more populist movement, and be able to contest the Republicans in future elections. That too remains to be seen. But Trump’s electoral victory is a reality and an achievement.
Let us now turn from the internal arena in which Trump has won and has real power to the external arena (the rest of the world) in which he has virtually none. He used the campaign slogan “make America great again.” What he said time and time again was that, if he were president, he would ensure that other countries respected (that is, obeyed) the United States. In effect, he alluded to a past in which the United States was “great” and said that he would recover that past.
The problem is very simple. Neither he nor any other president – be it Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama or for that matter Ronald Reagan – can do very much about the advanced decline of the erstwhile hegemonic power. Yes, the United States once ruled the roost, more or less between 1945 and circa 1970. But ever since then, it has been steadily declining in its ability to get other countries to follow its lead and to do what the United States wanted.
The decline is structural and not something within the power of an American president to stem. Of course, the United States remains an incredibly powerful military force. If it misuses this military power, it can do much damage to the world. Obama was very sensitive to this potential harm, which accounts for all his hesitancies. And Trump was accused throughout the electoral campaign of not understanding this and therefore being a dangerous wielder of U.S. military power.
But while doing harm is quite possible, doing what the U.S. government might define as good seems virtually beyond the power of the United States. No one, and I mean no one, will follow today the lead of the United States if it thinks its own interests are being ignored. This is true not only of China, Russia, Iran, and of course North Korea. It is true as well of Japan and South Korea, India and Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, France and Germany, Poland and the Baltic states, and our erstwhile special allies like Israel, Great Britain, and Canada.
I am fairly sure that Trump does not yet realize this. He will boast about the easy victories, like ending trade pacts. He will use this to prove the wisdom of his aggressive stance. But let him try to do something about Syria – anything – and he will soon be disabused of his power. He is most unlikely to retreat on the new relationship with Cuba. And he may come to realize that he should not undo the Iran agreement. As for China, the Chinese seem to think that they can make better arrangements with Trump than they would have been able to do with Clinton.
So, a more rightwing United States in a more chaotic world-system, with protectionism the major theme of most countries and an economic squeeze on the majority of the world’s population. And is it over? By no means, neither in the United States, nor in the world-system. It’s a continuing struggle about the direction in which the future world-system (or systems) should and will be heading.
— emphasis, Martin Zeis —
Nick BERNABE: Actually, „Nobody“ Won The 2016 Presidential Election; AntiMedia, 11.11.2016
Martin Zeis, 14.11.2016
Nick BERNABE points to the broadly covered fact, that „around 193 million people did not vote for Trump or Clinton. That’s nearly two-thirds of the population of the United States. … The majority of Americans don’t vote anymore because the political system no longer represents them. We’ve been disenfranchised by decades of corrupt, unrepresentative politicians. The United States, according to a highly-cited academic study, is effectively an oligarchy “elected” by a minority of voters ruled by a smaller minority of disliked politicians who represent an even smaller minority of billionaires and special interests.“
It will be seen which faction of the US-Oligarchy – for quite some time entangled in a controversy about a geopolitical realignment after the 1990ff-full-spectrum-dominance „vision“ crashed – prevails in the wake of the presidential election outcome.
11.11.2016 – http://theantimedia.org/nobody-won-2016-election-landslide via zerohedge
Actually, „Nobody“ Won The 2016 Presidential Election… And It Was A Landslide
Submitted by Nick Bernabe via TheAntiMedia.org
“Nobody for President, that’s my campaign slogan,” Nick Cannon asserted in “Too Broke to Vote,” his viral criticism of the American electoral process from March of this year. (1)
Now, it turns out nobody for president won the 2016 election in a landslide.
According to new voter turnout statistics from the 2016 election, 47 percent of Americans voted for nobody, far outweighing the votes cast for Trump (25.5 percent) and Hillary (25.6 percent) by eligible voters.
The Anti Media – 2016 Presidential Election – Turnout Rate
49,9% Don’t Vote
25,6% Voted for Clinton
25,5% Voted for Trump
1,7% Voted for Johnson
And the “I voted for nobody” group is actually much larger than the 47 percent reported because that number only includes eligible voters. How many millions of Americans under the legal voting age — not to mention the countless millions who have lost their voting rights — voted for nobody, as well? (2) Factoring in those individuals, around 193 million people did not vote for Trump or Clinton. That’s nearly two-thirds of the population of the United States.
Nobody also seemingly won the presidential primaries, with only 9 percent of Americans casting their votes for either Trump or Clinton.
So when does nobody take office? Nobody won the majority of votes in the primaries or the general election, and the two main candidates who were running didn’t “win” the popular vote — they simply slightly outcompeted each other considering neither garnered over 50 percent of the eligible voters’ ballots.
That’s where the real debate begins.
As I wrote back in August when the primary voter turnout rates came in, one could argue that Trump (and Obama) do not have a legitimate mandate to rule over the people of the United States. Trump did not win the majority of Americans’ votes — not even close.
When all Americans are included, Trump only garnered the votes of about 19 percent of us. This means the United States will be ruled over by a small minority of voters who elected someone to continually impose their political positions on the other 81 percent of us.
Of course, as is the case with Democrats looking to assign blame for Hillary’s loss, pundits and political pontificators argue the people who didn’t vote have no right to complain about the outcome. After all, a non-vote or a vote for a third-party candidate was, in actuality, a vote for Trump. But that logic is flawed. The majority of Americans don’t vote anymore because the political system no longer represents them. We’ve been disenfranchised by decades of corrupt, unrepresentative politicians.
The United States, according to a highly-cited academic study, is effectively an oligarchy “elected” (3) by a minority of voters ruled by a smaller minority of disliked politicians who represent an even smaller minority of billionaires and special interests. You know it, I know it, hell, even former U.S. President Jimmy Carter knows it. (4) The majority of Americans voted for nobody not because they don’t care or because they are apathetic — they voted no confidence in a political system that forgot about them a long time ago.
Du muss angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar zu veröffentlichen.