Trump has it in his power to obliterate the whole Russiagate controversy. From David Stockman at antiwar.com:
Read part 1
The explanation for the kind of soft-power aggression embedded in Washington globe-spanning “sanctions” regime, as we detailed in Part 1, is not national security: It’s simply what Imperial Washington does for a living.
In the same vein, the billions of taxpayer money being pumped through the foreign policy agencies, NGOs, think tanks, advocacy organizations and sleazy lobbying operations like those of the Podesta brothers and Paul Manafort finance there own raison d’être.
Stated differently, the recipients of this fabulous supply of fiscal largesse create their own reason for being in the form of manufactured dangers and fake threats to the security and liberty of the American homeland.
Indeed, when it comes to the Empire’s great beltway beehive of national security operations, you could well paraphrase Stalin’s brutal secret police chief, Lavrenti Beria, who once boasted, “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”.
The Imperial City operates on the same principle: Show the agencies, contractors, NGOs, foreign aid lobbyists and the rest of the vast gang the money and they will show you the threat.
Needless to say, it does not occur to the busybodies of the Imperial City beehive that their meddling and interventions are not welcome or that the big sacks of walking around money they dispense end up being plundered arbitrarily by whichever faction of local bandits gets Washington’s ear first.
Ann Coulter thinks George H.W. Bush’s Willie Horton ad was a masterpiece. From Coulter at anncoulter.com:
The press in America is even worse than we imagine. We sense that they’re biased and stunningly incompetent. They are those things, but so much more. Our media’s version of the news is mathematically and precisely the opposite of the truth.
The death and burial of George H.W. Bush is only the latest example.
In the puffery and revisionism that accompany funerals, the man who gave us David Souter, an unnecessary war, tax hikes he promised not to impose and the Americans With Disabilities Act (aka The Destruction of Small Libraries Throughout New England Act) has been elevated to saintlike status.
But the one incident the media decided to excoriate Bush for was, in fact, his finest moment: the Willie Horton ad.
If we let the media get away with this, they will have once again redefined what constitutes acceptable discourse in America and cemented the notion that our political process should never be soiled by such a campaign ad — the one thing Bush got right in his entire public career.
Far from representing the “low road,” the Willie Horton ad was the greatest campaign commercial in political history. The ad was the reason we have political campaigns: It clearly and forcefully highlighted the two presidential candidates’ diametrically opposed views on an issue of vital national importance.
Bush’s opponent, Gov. Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts, had championed a self-evidently insane criminal justice program that provided prison furloughs to first-degree murderers.
Jeremiah Johnson outlines dire threats to liberty and the American way of life. From Johnson at shtfplan.com:
In previous articles, I outlined the three methods the globalists are most likely to use (in order of preference) to finish off the U.S. and usher in their Globalist-Corporatist-Oligarchic world government. They are as such:
- A lethal bio-engineered virus
- An Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) “Event” – defined as either an attack by a foreign entity (such as North Korea, China, or Russia), or a “domestic self-infliction” subsequently blamed on one or more of the listed former.
- A nuclear war
For skeptics and rabid naysayers who attacked previous articles regarding the threat posed by North Korea outlined over the past several years, information from the U.S. Air Force was posted the other day that may make you want to “reanalyze” your stance. As I mentioned before, I’m just the messenger: the information has been gathered over the years by men such as Pry and Graham who headed the former Committee to brief Congress on the EMP Threat against the United States.
A secret intelligence agency with a license to kill is not what the founding fathers had in mind. From Jacob G. Hornberger at fff.org:
Given that we have all been born and raised under a regime that has the CIA, hardly anyone questions the power of the CIA to assassinate people. The CIA’s power of assassination has become a deeply established part of American life.
Yet, the Constitution, which called the federal government into existence and established its powers, does not authorize the federal government to assassinate people.
If the proponents of the Constitution had told the American people that the Constitution was bringing into existence a government that wielded the power to assassinate people, there is no way that Americans would have approved the deal, in which case they would have continued operating under the Articles of Confederation.
Under the Articles, the powers of the federal government were so weak, it didn’t even have the power to tax, much less the power to assassinate people. That’s because our American ancestors wanted it that way. The last thing they wanted was a federal government with vast powers.
Trump’s window of opportunity to investigate and prosecute the FBI and intelligence officials that put together the plot against him has probably passed. From Ray McGovern at consortiumnews.com:
With just a few days left before Congress adjourns, House Republicans, like their President, have pretty much let the clock run out. There’s little chance now in “taking on the intelligence community,” says Ray McGovern.
Because President Donald Trump has again pulled the rug out from under them, House Republicans face Mission Impossible on Friday when they try to hold ex-FBI Director James Comey accountable for his highly dubious authorization of surveillance on erstwhile Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
Comey let go his unprecedented legal maneuver to have a court quash a subpoena for him to appear behind closed doors before the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee before the Democrats take over the committee in January. The current committee chair, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), decried Comey’s use of “baseless litigation” in an “attempt to run out the clock on this Congress.”
The Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA); so the still secret FISA application “justifying” surveillance of Page is almost sure to come up.
Comey had wanted a public hearing so he could pull the ruse of refusing to respond because his answers would be classified. He has now agreed to a closed-door meeting on Friday, with a transcript, likely to be redacted, to appear soon after.
In trading and gambling, there’s a phrase: cut your losses. The phrase has its uses in foreign and military policy as well. From Maj. Danny Sjursen at antiwar.com:
These days it seems everything the U.S. military touches in Afghanistan turns to rubbish. It’s possible this war is already over, only Washington won’t concede it.
I’ll admit it. I’m sick of writing about America’s longest war – the quagmire in Afghanistan. Still, in a time of near media blackout on this issue, someone has to keep banging the drum. Of late, it seems every single week that those of us who follow the war are inundated with more bad news. It all adds up to what this author has long been predicting in Afghanistan: the impending military defeat of the U.S.-trained Afghan Army and its American advisors. This is a fact that should rattle the public, shake up policymakers, and usher in a holistic review of the entirety of America’s interventions in the Greater Middle East. Only don’t count on it – Washington prefers, like a petulant child, to cover its proverbial eyes and ignore the fated failure of this hopeless war and several others like it.
This past month, four US service members were killed in Afghanistan, bringing the 2018 total to 13 American deaths. That may sound like a relatively modest casualty count, but given the contracted US troop totals in country and the transition to using those troopers only in an advisory capacity, this represents a serious spike in American deaths. Add to this the exponential rise in Afghan Security Force casualties over the last few years, and the recent rise in green-on-blue attacks – in which partnered Afghan “allies” turn their guns on their American advisors – and matters look even worse. Despite the ubiquitous assertions of senior US commander after commander that the mission has “turned a corner,” and that “victory” is near, there’s no meaningful evidence to that effect.
Books could be written about what Americans don’t know about Iran, and now one has been written. From Conn Hallinan at antiwar.com:
Americans – including those in the White House – know little about Iran and its history with the United States. A new book wants to change that.
Want another thing to keep you up at night?
Consider a conversation between longtime Middle East reporter Reese Erlich and former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Charles Freeman, Jr. on the people currently directing the Trump administration’s policy toward Iran.
Commenting on National Security Advisor John Bolton’s defense of the invasion of Iraq, Freeman says “The neoconservative group think their good ideas were poorly implemented in Iraq,” and that the lesson of the 2003 invasion that killed upwards of 500,000 people and destabilized an entire region is, “If at first you don’t succeed, do the same thing again somewhere else.”
That “somewhere else” is Iran, and Bolton is one of the leading voices calling for confronting the Teheran regime and squeezing Iran through draconian sanctions “until the pips squeak.” Since sanctions are unlikely to have much effect – they didn’t work on North Korea, have had little effect on Russia, and failed to produce regime change in Cuba – the next logical step, Erlich suggests, is a military attack on Iran.
Such an attack would be a leap into darkness, since most Americans – and their government in particular – are virtually clueless about the country we seem bound to go to war with.
Throwing a little light on that darkness is a major reason Erlich wrote the book. For over 18 years he has reported on Iran, talking with important government figures and everyday people and writing articles on the country that increasingly looks to be our next little war.