Trump’s Slim Chance for Greatness

Special Report: Donald Trump’s unlikely victory created the opportunity to finally break with the orthodoxy of Washington’s neocon/liberal-hawk foreign policy, but can Trump find enough fresh thinkers to do the job, asks Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Donald Trump must decide – and decide quickly – whether he wants to be a great U.S. President or a robo-signature machine affixing his name to whatever legislation comes from congressional Republicans and a nodding figurehead acquiescing to more neoconservative foreign policy adventures.

Or, to put it in a vernacular that Trump might use, does he want to be “Paul Ryan’s bitch” on domestic policies? And does he want to surrender his foreign policy to the “wise guys” of Washington’s neocon establishment?

Donald Trump speaking with supporters in Phoenix, Arizona. June 18, 2016. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

Donald Trump speaking with supporters in Phoenix, Arizona. June 18, 2016. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

Trump’s problem is that he has few fully developed ideas about how to proceed in a presidency that even many of his close followers did not expect would happen. Plus, over the past few decades, the neocons and their liberal-hawk sidekicks have marginalized almost every dissenting expert, including old-line “realists” who once were important figures.

So, the bench of “confirmable” experts who have dissented on neocon/liberal-hawk policies is very thin. To find national security leaders who would break with the prevailing “group thinks,” Trump would have to go outside normal channels and take a risk on some fresh thinkers.

But most mainstream media accounts doubt that he will. That is why speculation has centered on Trump settling on several neocon retreads for Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, such as former Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former CIA Director James Woolsey and ex-National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, all staunch supporters of George W. Bush’s disastrous Iraq War which Trump has denounced.

‘Team of Rivals’

If Trump is guided in that direction, he will make the same mistake that President Barack Obama made during the 2008 transition when Obama was seduced by the idea of a Lincoln-esque “Team of Rivals” and staffed key top national security jobs with hawks — keeping Bush’s Defense Secretary Robert Gates, hiring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and leaving in place top generals, such as David Petraeus.gates-duty

That decision trapped the inexperienced Obama into a policy of continuity with Bush’s wars and related policies, such as domestic spying, rather than enabling Obama to achieve his promised “change.”

Faced with powerful “rivals” within his own administration, Obama was maneuvered into an ill-considered “counterinsurgency” escalation in Afghanistan in 2009 that did little more than get another 1,000 U.S. soldiers killed along with many more Afghans.

Secretary Clinton also sold out the elected progressive president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, when he was ousted in a coup in 2009, signaling to Latin America that “El Norte” hadn’t changed much.

Then, Clinton sabotaged Obama’s first attempt in 2010 to enlist the help of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to work out a deal with Iran on constraining its nuclear program. Clinton favored an escalating confrontation with Iran along the lines dictated by Israeli hardliners.

Clinton and the other hawks succeeded in thwarting Obama’s will because, as Gates wrote in his memoir Duty, Gates and Clinton were “un-fireable” in that they could challenge Obama whenever they wished while realizing that Obama would have to pay an unacceptably high price to remove them.

As clever “inside players,” Gates, Clinton and Petraeus also understood that if Obama balked at their policy prescriptions, they could undercut him by going to friends in the mainstream news media and leaking information about how Obama was “weak” in not supporting a more warlike approach to problems.

Obama’s Real Weakness

Yet, by failing to stand up to this neocon/liberal-hawk pressure, Obama did make himself weak. Essentially, he never got control of his foreign policy and even after the Gates-Clinton-Petraeus trio was gone by the start of Obama’s second term, the President still feared angering Washington’s foreign policy establishment which often followed the heed of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

President Barack Obama stands with Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the President's official arrival ceremony in Tel Aviv, Israel, in 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

President Barack Obama stands with Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the President’s official arrival ceremony in Tel Aviv, Israel, in 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Obama was so worried about Israel that, at the apex of his power after winning reelection in 2012, Obama went on a several-day trip to visit Netanyahu in a craven attempt to show his love and obeisance to Israel. Obama took similar trips to Saudi Arabia.

Still, that was not enough to spare him the wrath of Netanyahu and the Saudi royals when Obama finally pushed successfully for an Iran nuclear deal in 2014. Netanyahu humiliated Obama by accepting a Republican invitation in 2015 to speak to a joint session of Congress where he urged U.S. lawmakers to repudiate their own President.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia demanded and got new concessions from Obama on arms sales and his grudging support for their proxy war in Syria as well as their direct aerial bombardment of Yemen – both part of a Sunni Wahhabist sectarian strategy for destroying Shiite-related regimes. (The Sunni/Shiite clash dates back to the Seventh Century.)

Indeed, the little-recognized Israeli-Saudi alliance targeting the so-called “Shiite crescent” – Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and Iran – is at the heart of what has been driving U.S. policy in the Middle East since the 1990s.

And, if President-elect Trump wants to truly reverse the downward spiral of the United States as it has squandered trillions of dollars in futile Mideast wars, he will have to go up against the Israeli-Saudi tandem and make it clear that he will not be manipulated as Obama was.

Saudi King Salman bids farewell to President Barack Obama at Erga Palace after a state visit to Saudi Arabia on Jan. 27, 2015. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Saudi King Salman bids farewell to President Barack Obama at Erga Palace after a state visit to Saudi Arabia on Jan. 27, 2015. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Facing down such a powerful coalition of Israel (with its extraordinary U.S. lobbying apparatus) and Saudi Arabia (with its far-reaching financial clout) would require both imagination and courage. It would not be possible if Trump surrounds himself with senior advisers under the thumb of Prime Minister Netanyahu and King Salman.

So, we will learn a great deal about whether Trump is a real player or just a pretender when he selects his foreign policy team. Will he find imaginative new thinkers who can break the disastrous cycles of Mideast wars and reduce tensions with Russia or will he just tap into the usual suspects of Republican orthodoxy?

Sunlight on the Swamp

Trump could also show his independence from Republican orthodoxy by recognizing that government secrecy has gone way too far, a drift into opacity that dates back to Ronald Reagan and his reversal of the more open-government policies of Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.

Trump says he wants to “drain the swamp” of Washington, but to do that first requires letting in much more sunlight and sharing much more information with the American people.

For starters – assuming that the timid Obama won’t take the risk – President Trump could pardon national security whistleblowers who have faced or could face prosecution, such as Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, John Kiriakou, Jeffrey Sterling and Edward Snowden.

That could be followed by an executive order forbidding excessive secrecy inside the federal government, recognizing that “We the People” are the nation’s true sovereigns and thus deserve as much information as possible while protecting necessary secrets.

Trump could show he means business about respecting average American citizens by sharing with them U.S. intelligence assessments on key controversies, such as the Aug. 21, 2013 sarin gas attack in Syria and the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 shoot-down over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014. [See here and here.]

The Obama administration has engaged in selective release of information about these mysteries to manipulate U.S. public opinion, not to inform and thus empower the American people. Trump could go a long way toward restoring public trust by renouncing such tricks.

He also could save many billions of dollars by shutting down U.S. propaganda agencies whose role also is to use various P.R. tricks to shape both foreign and domestic opinion, often in the cause of “regime changes” or “color revolutions.”

Trump could shut down the State Department’s Office of Public Diplomacy, return the U.S. Agency for International Development to its legitimate purpose of helping poor countries build schools and drill wells, and shutter the trouble-making National Endowment for Democracy.

By steering the world away from the New Cold War with nuclear-armed Russia, Trump could not only help save the future of mankind, he could save trillions of dollars that otherwise would end up in the pockets of the Military-Industrial Complex.

FDR or Coolidge?

Regarding domestic policy, some Republicans expect that Trump will simply sign off on whatever Ayn-Rand-inspired legislation that House Speaker Ryan pushes through Congress, whether turning Medicare into a voucher program or privatizing Social Security.

President Franklin Roosevelt

President Franklin Roosevelt

In this area, too, Trump will have to decide whether he wants to be a great president in the mold of Franklin Roosevelt or someone more of the caliber of Calvin Coolidge.

Trump also must face the reality that he has lost the popular vote by a rather significant margin – almost a million votes in the latest tallies – and thus only has the presidency because of the archaic Electoral College. In other words, he lacks a real mandate from the people.

When confronted with a similar situation in 2000, George W. Bush chose to pretend that he had a decisive mandate for his right-wing policies, shoved them down the Democrats’ throats (such as his massive tax cut mostly for the rich that wiped out the budget surplus), and eventually saw his failed presidency sink into bitter partisanship.

Republicans will surely urge Trump to do the same, to ignore the popular vote, but he might do well to surprise people by looking for overlapping areas where Democrats and Republicans can cooperate.

For instance, many Democrats fear that Trump will undo the difficult progress made on climate change over the past eight years. After all, Trump has voiced doubts about the scientific consensus on the existential threat posed by global warming.

But Trump also wants to invest heavily in America’s infrastructure (plus he has vowed to help the inner cities). So, there’s potential common ground if Trump were to launch a major program to create a world-class mass transit system for urban and suburban areas.

Trump might even turn to one of his critics, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, for Transportation Secretary with instructions to study mass transit in Japan and Europe and implement a similar system in the United States, quickly. Besides creating jobs and improving life for urban dwellers (who largely supported Hillary Clinton), quality and fast mass transit could get millions of Americans out of their cars and thus help in the fight against global warming, too.

To demonstrate a willingness to reach across the aisle on such important issues, Trump might even consider offering Energy Secretary to Al Gore.

But such bold steps would require Trump to have the courage and creativity to go against the Republican “playbook” which calls for a zero-sum game against the Democrats.

Whether Trump has such courage and foresight is the pressing question of the moment. Will he go for true greatness (both for himself and America) or will he be content to have his name and face on one of those place mats showing the 45 U.S. Presidents?

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and

92 comments for “Trump’s Slim Chance for Greatness

  1. Ken Macd
    November 18, 2016 at 00:03

    If any believed the polls showing Clinton would win (eg. NYT saying 90% chance Clinto would win) then I guess you can believe that Trump lost the popular vote. I didn’t and I don’t. I think he got about 70% of those who voted.

  2. AuntieMavis
    November 17, 2016 at 23:34

    The US’s economy has for decades been predicated on being in a state of perpetual war. Any change would simply change where the profits go. The MIC or the people.

  3. November 17, 2016 at 21:34

    Trump needs to be especially careful of being influenced by Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
    Trump must understand that the U.S. has fought the wars in the Middle East because of Netanyahu’s and the AIPAC’s lobbying for America to fight the wars, and for American fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, to die for Israel on the pretext that Israel’s security was in danger if the U.S. did not stop the aggression against Israel.
    Trump’s family includes his Jewish daughter and son-in-law. Trump’s transition team consists of several top level Israel supporters.
    If Trump does not take steps to curtail the influence of Israel supports in his close knit group Netanyahu will have a direct line to Trump and Trump will find himself increasing under the influence of Netanyahu.
    Let’s hope Putin can steer Trump to the correct path.
    Just my opinion.
    Guy Fawkes

  4. Herman
    November 17, 2016 at 13:54

    Ifi he does one thing, if he follows through working with Putin on issues of common concern, he will have done something historic, because the opposition will be fierce.

    The point about finding good people to help do the job is critical, and so many of our “thinkers” have made their living being on the opposite side that they will be hard to find, people who are smart and tough.

  5. Russ Gerrish
    November 17, 2016 at 04:03

    Firstly, I agree absolutely with Zachary above. Kirby, and Trudeau, are idiots who are doing an awful job of representing their government. Mind you, it must be a difficult job to knowingly present hypocrisy in a live setting and then have to defend it.

    About Donald, I believe firmly that he will do an excellent job. It is about time government was governed with a realistic, business approach. He understands efficiency, eliminating waste, having to justify expenditures, etc., as a normal part of doing business. He also knows that it is extremely stupid to provoke other countries into senseless wars. The best and most sustainable approach to business has always been the “Win-Win” philosophy. If he adapts the foregoing into his presidency, he will do well.

  6. Zachary Smith
    November 17, 2016 at 02:02

    Since there are quite a few suggestions here for President Trump, I have a very definite – even if trivial – one for the man. That is to fire the pissant State Department spokesman John Kirby.

    What a stupid hack this fellow is!

  7. Zachary Smith
    November 17, 2016 at 01:18

    I liked the comparison of Trump to Obama, for as F.G. Sanford says, “a community organizer and one term Senator” simply did not have the skill set necessary to become a successful president. One of the Big Banks staffed his cabinet, and Bush’s neocons took care of foreign policy. Trump doesn’t have to make the same mistakes as Obama! News sources say Trump is very big on “loyalty”, but if he goes whole-hog down that path, he’s going to make the same fatal mistake as did Jimmy Carter when he brought his “loyal” but incompetent band of Georgians to Washington. I wish I could offer up some advice about how to locate some middling honest men and women who aren’t either neo-liberals or neoconservatives, but I simply don’t have access to that sort of information. I wouldn’t even know who to ask! But finding out things like that are essential issues for Mr. Trump.

    He needs to think outside the box. Franklin Roosevelt saw WW2 coming, and formed a “unity” government with Republicans in his Cabinet. Perhaps Mr. Trump could emulate that with somebody like Jill Stein as Surgeon General, or Shirley Sherrod as head of Agriculture.

    By steering the world away from the New Cold War with nuclear-armed Russia, Trump could not only help save the future of mankind, he could save trillions of dollars that otherwise would end up in the pockets of the Military-Industrial Complex.

    No! No! No! to this except for the saving of trillions. Simply avoiding nuclear war isn’t going to save mankind. I don’t know where Mr. Trump got his half-assed notions about climate change. Probably in the early years of the internet from some of the Denier Blogs which were funded by Big Corporate Energy. If he joins in the parade of hacks starting back at Reagan, he’ll be just another link in the chain to civilization-ending disaster.

    For instance, many Democrats fear that Trump will undo the difficult progress made on climate change over the past eight years. After all, Trump has voiced doubts about the scientific consensus on the existential threat posed by global warming.

    Screw the Democrats and the horse they rode in on. Bad as Trump threatens to be, those Democrats were doing nothing except running their mouths. If, in the worst case, Trump does nothing, I’m no worse off than I was with Obama or Hillary. In the best case – an unlikely one it’s true – if he could somehow turn around the stampede of human lemmings to disaster, he’d be hailed by the future civilization – which at present isn’t going to exist – as the greatest of all.

    Not the way to bet, but “lightbulb” moments have been known to happen.

  8. Edward
    November 16, 2016 at 22:57

    Sen. Webb might be a sensible candidate for a Trump administration. I can’t tell what the exact disagreements are over staff selection so I can’t really size up what is happening. They seem to derive from Trump’s son in law and children as much as with Trump himself; it might be useful to know the politics of his children.

  9. ltr
    November 16, 2016 at 20:49

    Slim, slim, slim chance but I will hope as will you.

  10. John M. Morgan
    November 16, 2016 at 20:24

    Lots of good suggestions, but I am surprised Parry would suggest a position for Al Gore. It is my impression that Gore is almost as toxic to Trump’s base as Hillary. Surely there are candidates for energy secretary with more integrity and much less political baggage than Gore!

  11. Patrick
    November 16, 2016 at 17:12

    Let us just wish Russia and Assad finish off the rebels before January. I also have no idea what Trump really stands for but I am hoping he will at least get the regime change disasters correct. That has to extend to Iran too. That is all I have on my wish list.
    The other items mentioned in this article are too unlikely. Let us hope he gets one thing right.

  12. Rob
    November 16, 2016 at 14:47

    Wow, Robert Parry, you are giving Trump way too much credit for being thoughtful and principled. He has no real interest in governing and was as surprised as the rest of us in his victory. Somehow, this wealthy son of a wealthy father, a cheater and a liar, managed to channel social and economic anxieties into a populist movement tainted by racism, xenophobia and misogyny. It is doubtful that he is even slightly informed on the subjects of Middle East policy, neoconservatism, U.S. propagandism and the like. For him to develop an understanding about them is asking for a miracle. An even bigger miracle would be for Trump to develop a moral conscience.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 16, 2016 at 20:52

      Rob – even at his age and with his wealth, he was out every single day, flying all over the U.S., shaking hands, talking to people, giving speeches. He worked very hard to win, and I don’t think it was a big surprise to him at all. He knew it was close. Anyone listening to the MSM were being told that Hillary was way ahead; they were listening to the lies again.

      If he is ill-informed on the Middle East, it wouldn’t really take him long to get up to speed. I mean, what has been happening? Orchestrated coups to take out leaders that the U.S. and its puppets don’t like. Lots of weapons and arms sales dollars going to a selected few elite. Made-up wars in order to keep the military-industrial establishment in jobs and money.

      How about we just pull out? How much do you need to know to do that sensible thing? Not much. Get out! There, done.

      Trump is aware of what the elite have done to the country, he’s aware of the propaganda. Listen to what he says here:

      • Wm. Boyce
        November 17, 2016 at 01:14

        Wow, you are really out of it. I hope your disillusionment isn’t so great you want to… well…

        • backwardsevolution
          November 17, 2016 at 06:57

          Wm. Boyce – thanks for the compliment. It is a great speech Trump gave. So far he’s done three things: TPP has been stopped, he wants to negotiate, not make war, and – drum roll, please – he has pointed out what’s behind the curtain. The elite don’t like this (look at the whistle blowers they’re jailing), but the truth shall prevail. Thanks, Trump.

  13. E Wright
    November 16, 2016 at 14:28

    I hope Ivanka shows him your piece.

  14. rafa rafa
    November 16, 2016 at 13:27

    One way of understanding Trump is to look at his apartment – unbelievably kitsch old-fashioned pomposity. All his political ideas are in line with that – old retreads. This isn’t a guy who does fresh thinking – or, apart from Twitter, wh. suits his pithy style down to the ground, is in any way in tune with a new millennium. It’s amazing how so many political commentators think that presidents and other leaders are capable of magically pulling a whole new personality out of the hat. My bet: he’s good at bankruptcy. He bankrupted himself, now he’s going to bankrupt the US – and take a good few billion dollars for himself. in the process. Not great again, bankrupt again.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 16, 2016 at 20:45

      rafa rafa – bankrupting the U.S.? The previous presidents (Clinton, Bush, Obama) have done a good job at doing that.

      “I like Wikipedia’s definition of a Pyrrhic victory, couldn’t hardly have put it better myself: “A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Someone who wins a Pyrrhic victory has been victorious in some way. However, the heavy toll negates any sense of achievement or profit.”

      That sounds about right. I just have the idea that Hillary would enjoy it a bit more, and more blindly, than the Donald would. But it wouldn’t make much difference regardless. Obama’s had the luck that he’s been able to hide the economic downfall on his watch behind a $10+ trillion increase in the Fed balance sheet and a multiple trillion, 50% increase in household debt.

      The next president won’t have any such gift thrown into their laps. The new president will have to empty the poisoned chalice.

      Imagine being -almost- 70 years old, well-off, and still wanting that job. What’s that make a body? In urgent need of a lifetime of therapy? Mariana Trench-deep unhappy?”

      Under Obama, $10+ trillion on the Fed balance sheet and 50% increase in household debt. Hold on, it’s coming. And don’t blame Donald for it. They’ve set him up to take the fall.

    • Wm. Boyce
      November 17, 2016 at 01:12

      Leopards do not change their spots, especially at 70.

  15. Mahatma
    November 16, 2016 at 11:29

    Finally, at long last people on the left are beginning to realize what an opportunity we have before us. Yes, it will be difficult, yes looking the other way on certain matters will be painful, yes he might just go off the rails. But that does not mean that opportunities should not be taken to join in the Trump insurgency and have a voice in it. Try to shape immigration policy and so on.

    Let every progressive rejoice in what his election has done already. The final knockout blows to TPP and TIPP, I am ecstatic about that. Rapprochement with Russia and possibly, even likely, with China too – reducing tensions finding ways to cooperate – accepting a multi-polar world an attitude of win win – these are real gains for the very people who’s interests I have always supported.

    I am a much nicer guy than Trump and I should have led the insurgency because I’m better than he is – except tens of millions of the very people whose interests I align myself with voted for this ugly guy instead of my beautiful face.

    If Trump does only whit I mentioned – he does plan jobs programs for places like Ohio too, progressives could have some good ideas to offer on that policy – he will have reversed US policy sense WWII “Global full spectrum domination.” The evil man.

  16. Mark Bristow
    November 16, 2016 at 11:27

    Hope is childishly delusional now.

  17. Ernest Spoon
    November 16, 2016 at 11:26

    From what we are witnessing currently, I foresee our time-share condo salesman-elect as a hands-off president, letting his underlings run the show on a day-to-day basis with his august self only coming off the golf course to sign legislation into law and for the odd state dinner or photo op or two.

    The national security deep state in the State Dept, CIA and NSA will take over his foreign policy. So while there may be rapprochement with Vladimir Putin–something I applaud as Russia is still holds the second largest nuclear weapons stockpile in the world–the rest of US foreign policy will go on autopilot. Weapons and unnecessary monetary aid will flow to Israel and Saudi Arabia as if no transition of political parties in the US executive ever took place.

  18. Alvin
    November 16, 2016 at 10:05

    Great, now Robert Parry is participating in the whitewashing of Trump.

  19. J'hon Doe II
    November 16, 2016 at 09:59

    Robert Parry — “FDR or Coolidge?

    Regarding domestic policy, some Republicans expect that Trump will simply sign off on whatever Ayn-Rand-inspired legislation that House Speaker Ryan pushes through Congress,”


    Excerpt from Ellen Brown piece;

    Another Privatization Firesale?

    The infrastructure plan of the Trump team was detailed in a report released by his economic advisors Wilbur Ross and Peter Navarro in October 2016. It calls for $1 trillion of spending over 10 years, funded largely by private sources. The authors say the report is straightforward, but this writer found it hard to follow, so here the focus will be on secondary sources. According to Jordan Weismann on Slate:

    Under Trump’s plan … the federal government would offer tax credits to private investors interested in funding large infrastructure projects, who would put down some of their own money up front, then borrow the rest on the private bond markets. They would eventually earn their profits on the back end from usage fees, such as highway and bridge tolls (if they built a highway or bridge) or higher water rates (if they fixed up some water mains). So instead of paying for their new roads at tax time, Americans would pay for them during their daily commute. And of course, all these private developers would earn a nice return at the end of the day.

    The federal government already offers credit programs designed to help states and cities team up with private-sector investors to finance new infrastructure. Trump’s plan is unusual because, as written, it seems to be targeted at fully private projects, which are less common.

    David Dayen, writing in The New Republican , interprets the plan to mean the government’s public assets will be “passed off in a privatization firesale.” He writes:

    It’s the common justification for privatization, and it’s been a disaster virtually everywhere it’s been tried. First of all, this specifically ties infrastructure—designed for the common good—to a grab for profits. Private operators will only undertake projects if they promise a revenue stream. . . .

    So the only way to entice private-sector actors into rebuilding Flint, Michigan’s water system, for example, is to give them a cut of the profits in perpetuity. That’s what Chicago did when it sold off 36,000 parking meters to a Wall Street-led investor group. Users now pay exorbitant fees to park in Chicago, and city government is helpless to alter the rates.

    You also end up with contractors skimping on costs to maximize profits.

  20. November 16, 2016 at 08:03

    Mr. Parry and Consortium News, or anyone else seeing this, could you put Trump’s people in touch with me, I can help him a lot.

  21. Peter
    November 16, 2016 at 07:54


    Robert Parry writes of a glorious world where neocon approaches
    are erased and Trump will be great. Put simply: that won’t

    We have been here before. This is not as “historic” as some
    would have you believe. A reasoned response is not
    demonstration in the streets. It is the continued
    provision of basic information as most writers for have done all along.

    At this writing, the Democratic Party has failed
    to come to terms with the destructive relationship
    with AIPAC/ISRAEL. Why with seeming endless
    financial resources were these saviors
    of the world unable to deliver at the polls??

    Neither has the Democratic Party been able
    to acknowledge its essential cowardice. Token
    responses preserved the fabricated legend
    of a black President (Obama) confronting
    the realities of persons of color.

    I remember hearing on the radio a black father
    saying “When my son wants to go to the
    mall, I may give him some extra money.
    But I don’t know if I’ll ever see him again…”
    No burn baby burn!

    Both major candidates ran hate campaigns.
    Such campaigns have traditions in the US
    of hundreds of years. The anti-Russian
    polemic has long been a staple. I heard
    one so-called “expert” refer to the Russian
    “landgrab”. There was no mention
    of the US coup (see many Consortium articles).
    Such a statement was acknowledged as FACT
    and beyond dispute.

    It does not seem possible that whatever policies
    Donald Trump pursues, that meaningful high-paying
    jobs will bloom in the rust belt states. Or anywhere
    else for that matter

    Yes, we must be prepared to face continued life
    in the US as it has long been.

    PS: Many remarks by Parry about Obama’s basic
    cowardice are inciteful.

    —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

    • backwardsevolution
      November 16, 2016 at 17:05

      Daniel Bruno – LOL. What, only white men are racist? You must be kidding.

      What you say is interesting re the State Department being 50 to 75% Jewish at all the top levels. When and how did this happen? Whoever hires or promotes must have been selecting for people of the Jewish faith then, because otherwise those numbers would not have gotten so high. I mean, Jews are less than 2% of the U.S. population. What gives? When did the State Department start to stack the deck? When did this all start, and under whose presidency? I’d be interested to know.

      Back in the spring Obama put forward a candidate to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court, another Jew. IF he had been nominated, the Supreme Court would have consisted of five Catholics and four Jews. With less than 2% of the U.S. population, how did they potentially get into a position to have four Supreme Court justices? It doesn’t add up, UNLESS they are being carefully selected for these positions. You’d think that only Jews and Catholics went to law school.

      Everywhere you look, the Jews are there in top positions. They own the banks, the media, the big tech companies, and on and on. When did the United States of America become United Israel and Its 50 Bitches?

      If the Jews were ever going to meet their match, Trump would be it. He’s not afraid to broadcast to the world what he sees. The very thing that people do not like about him, that he’s outspoken, brash, out there, could be a very good thing.

      Who knows. The term “anti-semitic” has been very useful to the elite. It just shuts down any conversation, doesn’t it? I’ve also read very good learned articles stating that the Jews were the driving force behind multiculturalism. That way they can control, yet hide. They use divide and conquer tactics to maintain control: pit blacks against whites, brown against yellow, etc. They use the impressionable young, who haven’t lived enough to know what’s going on, to do their work. Just get them all stirred up with terms like “racism” and “misogyny”, “xenophobia”.

      If true, this paints a very scary picture. Who really is controlling the U.S.?

  22. Abe
    November 16, 2016 at 01:27

    “The hypocrisy is that while Bolton and his clique of ‘alt-right’ infiltrators attempt to pin the rise of terrorism as an exclusive feature of the Obama administration, he himself and those amongst him have worked ceaselessly side-by-side the Obama administration, and literally shoulder-to-shoulder with the Saudi regime to sponsor terrorism and promote endless war across the North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia.

    “Those who think ‘Trump’ is going to ‘change’ anything find themselves precisely where liberals were in the wake of Obama’s victory in 2008. Despite evidence suggesting otherwise, the temptation to believe in ‘hope and change’ led to an increasing indulgence in denial and excuses until liberals found themselves passionately defending policies they had once marched in the streets in opposition to during the Bush administration.

    “The alternative media was meant to eliminate the smokescreen of left-right partisan politics. Those infiltrating the alternative media, particularly outfits like Breitbart, are simply attempting to reassert establishment agendas under cover of now an ‘alt-right’ perspective.

    “Will those lured into this ‘alt-right’ bear trap pull their leg out in time? Or will they allow it to sink its inescapable steel jaws into their legs, trapping them for 4-8 years in a cycle of denial and excuse-making for why the wars, abuses, and decline of America both Bush and Obama cultivated, continue under Trump?

    “Real solutions, beyond partisan politics exist, but in order to see them, the smokescreen of left-right distractions must be cleared. The smokescreen exists precisely to prevent us from seeing them.”

    Trump’s Administration: The Swamp Deepens
    By Tony Cartalucci

    • backwardsevolution
      November 16, 2016 at 03:04

      Abe – the guy has barely gotten his coat off. He was only elected a week ago. Let’s get the facts first.

  23. Jim allegretto
    November 15, 2016 at 22:28

    How is a racist going to have good programs for all of the people when has bad mouthed most of them??
    Trump is Trump, too late to change who he is!!
    He has proven that he is a big time hawk- the answer is NO!!!

    • backwardsevolution
      November 15, 2016 at 23:01

      Jim – the last three presidents did not have good programs for ALL of the people. During their tenures, we saw the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Trump has a big mouth, and I don’t believe he meant what he said at all. I don’t think he dislikes Mexican people. I just think he feels illegal immigration is hurting America’s poor through taking their jobs. He has a brash way of saying things. He’s trying to bring back jobs for the very people who are protesting against him, and he’s trying to bring peace in the world. Those are noble things to strive for. Give him a chance.

      • Joe Tedesky
        November 16, 2016 at 00:05

        I live in a Rust Belt state, and we here in this location have very few Hispanic people amongst us. Although I have many Hispanic friends in Florida. My one friend who is from Guatemala, and is waiting for his citizenship couldn’t vote yet. My friend from Guatemala did tell me how he hopes that Trump will deport some of the bad hombres that are in his Florida neighborhood, and send them back to the jails in the countries they came from. I’m not telling this story to support any racist attitudes, but after hearing what my friend from Guatemala had to say, it made be think of how nothing is ever as simple as the media makes it out to be. That people and life are much more complex within our own humanly structured mechanisms, and opinions are based on personal experiences we all have. In short we are all suckers, and our media dwells on that flaw.

        Also why doesn’t any U.S. politician ever go after the wage saving businesses that attract these undocumented people? These immigrants are just looking for away to get by. Why can’t we process these people in a legal, and fair way? My questions probably make me sound naive, but seriously why can’t we deal with this properly…I mean this undocumented laborer problem has been with us for decades, so what’s it going to take to wrap this whole thing up, and make it better for everyone?

        • backwardsevolution
          November 16, 2016 at 02:59

          Joe – laws are on the books to go after the businesses who employ these undocumented workers, but it is not enforced. Seems silly to have a law when it’s not enforced, doesn’t it?

          Read a really good article about some black families in Georgia (I believe it was) who were angry that the undocumented workers are taking work away from them. One fellow said that he used to look forward to the work every year, walking to work from his home, but now the employers are housing the undocumented workers on their land and don’t bother hiring the local black families. They were angry, and I don’t blame them. They want to work, but that work is now gone. These employers were stiffing the Mexicans on their pay (if I remember correctly) and paying them much less than the locals.

          And I feel sorry for the Mexican workers too as a lot of U.S. corporations went down to Mexico, bought up the land they used to work on, automated it, and now they’re not needed there anymore either.

          I guess in the end you’ve got to protect your own citizens, though. There’s way too many foreign workers coming in and replacing tech workers as well (like at Disney where they brought in foreign workers, then made the U.S. workers train them before they were given their pink slips!) Manufacturing is sent overseas, where it can be, and if it can’t be, they just bring foreign workers in. No wonder wages have not gone up; the work force is being diluted with too many people.

          How to destroy a country.

        • F. G. Sanford
          November 16, 2016 at 15:37

          Joe & all-
          How do you guys get to see each others comments in order to run a dialogue? I couldn’t see any comments at all under this article until about five minutes ago. I’m starting to think maybe I’m on the “bad boy list”… or something.

          • Joe Tedesky
            November 16, 2016 at 23:18

            F.G. I’m no computer expert but once I ran three computers at one time, and this site was different on each one. Sometimes the articles weren’t the same, and comments were different….screwy, but I would recommend consortiumnews get a good IT to look into it.

          • Sam F
            November 17, 2016 at 09:08

            Often the comments don’t appear until you make a comment. Try making a blank comment like “test” and then edit/deleting it. It looks a means to select like-minded commenters.

          • Zachary Smith
            November 17, 2016 at 12:47

            Sam F, that’s what I usually do when I can remember it. Otherwise I may learn that whatever it was I was going to say had already been written and maybe better than my own intentions. That makes a person feel foolish.

  24. MG
    November 15, 2016 at 20:57

    To become Great President one has to have some base to insure great policies will go through.
    What base does Trump have?
    Whatever personality he has, he run as Republican, the Senate and the House are Republican and persistent in Republican majority since 2010. Choices he made so far in the same trend. Do you really think he’s going to run against it?! Not bloody likely! :)

  25. PokeTheTruth
    November 15, 2016 at 20:41

    Many knowledgeable people who have the credentials, experience and communication skills to become a presidential advisor are talking the talk but not volunteering to walk the talk. This is why Mr. Trump sees revolving door Washington insiders and former bureaucratic policy makers as his only choices.

    Prose on paper is cheap, deeds are the mark of great men. Mr. Parry and others should consider applying for a position in Trump’s administration. Washington, DC needs a new perspective on how to get the national economy going again and build better relations with foreign nations.

    If these men don’t step up then America will continue to be led by the agents of the global oligarchy that have ruined our nation for 24 years as we have seen in the progressive liberal governments of Clinton and Obama and the Middle East wars started by Bush ’43 that continue on today.

  26. Sam F
    November 15, 2016 at 20:28

    An excellent and very thoughtful article, very well suited to the day.

  27. John
    November 15, 2016 at 20:15

    This article’s title is BS…..President elect Donald Trump will be engaged in turning back the tide of progressive socialism. The entire European Union is the poster child for the resurrection of socialism on a massive scale. Illegal immigration in the USA is a Trojan horse designed to overwhelm the economic system. There are only two roads to take this late in the planet’s game…..nationalism or socialism. The elite think tanks are pushing for socialism….why? because all the big corps will be paid by the sweat of your brow……All of the MSM represents the push for socialism…..Your job is to expose the owners of the MSM. I can tell you who you’ll find…..but I don’t want to spoil the surprise…..Here is a clue…..the same ethnicity who started and funded the Bolshevik revolution…..say it isn’t so…..

    • Herman
      November 17, 2016 at 15:48

      John, this is not the whole story but the German Government funded the Bolsheviks, sending Lenin and pots of money back into Russia on the assurance that the Bolsheviks would withdraw from the war, which they did when they came to power and ceded Germany a huge swathe of Russia, including Ukraine. Smart guys that they were, they got it all back when Germany was defeated. The Germans loaded a train car of important revolutionaries and the Jewish Bund and saw to their transport into Russia. Seemed like a clever idea at the time. The law of unintended consequences….again.

  28. Abe
    November 15, 2016 at 20:12

    The biggest story of the 2016 Presidential election was completely ignored by mainstream media… and Consortium News. Why?

    “Crosscheck in action:

    “Trump victory margin in Michigan: 13,107
    Michigan Crosscheck purge list: 449,922

    “Trump victory margin in Arizona: 85,257
    Arizona Crosscheck purge list: 270,824

    “Trump victory margin in North Carolina: 177,008
    North Carolina Crosscheck purge list: 589,393

    “On Tuesday [8 November 2016, the United States presidential election], we saw Crosscheck elect a Republican Senate and as President, Donald Trump. The electoral putsch was aided by nine other methods of attacking the right to vote of Black, Latino and Asian-American voters, methods detailed in my book and film, including ‘Caging,’ ‘purging,’ blocking legitimate registrations, and wrongly shunting millions to ‘provisional’ ballots that will never be counted.

    “Trump signaled the use of ‘Crosscheck’ when he claimed the election is ‘rigged’ because ‘people are voting many, many times.’ His operative Kobach, who also advised Trump on building a wall on the southern border, devised a list of 7.2 million ‘potential’ double voters—1.1 million of which were removed from the voter rolls by Tuesday. The list is loaded overwhelmingly with voters of color and the poor […]

    “2016: Hillary wins among those queried as they exit the polling station—yet Trump is declared winner in GOP-controlled swings states. And, once again, the expert pollsters are forced to apologize—when they should be screaming, ‘Fraud! Here’s the evidence the vote was fixed!’

    Now there’s a new trope to explain away the exit polls that gave Clinton the win. Supposedly, Trump voters were ashamed to say they voted for Trump. Really? ON WHAT PLANET? For Democracy Now! and Rolling Stone I was out in several swing states. In Ohio, yes, a Black voter may have been reluctant to state support for Trump. But a white voter in the exurbs of Dayton, where the Trump signs grew on lawns like weeds, and the pews of the evangelical mega churches were slathered with Trump and GOP brochures, risked getting spat on if they even whispered, “Hillary.”

    “This country is violently divided, but in the end, there simply aren’t enough white guys to elect Trump nor a Republican Senate. The only way they could win was to eliminate the votes of non-white guys—and they did so by tossing Black provisional ballots into the dumpster, ID laws that turn away students—the list goes on. It’s a web of complex obstacles to voting by citizens of color topped by that lying spider, Crosscheck.”

    The Election was Stolen – Here’s How…
    By Greg Palast

    • John
      November 15, 2016 at 20:17


    • Wm. Boyce
      November 17, 2016 at 01:09

      Thank you, Abe, that is indeed the story.
      Theorizing about the evils of Clinton is popular. And look what we got. We don’t even know yet what that means.

  29. backwardsevolution
    November 15, 2016 at 19:45

    “Because I was critical of the George W. Bush regime, the liberal-progressive-leftwing and homosexual/transgendered rights groups have me on their mailing lists.

    And it is unbelievable. The entirety of “the other America” refuses to accept the people’s decision. They think that their concerns are more important than the concerns of the American people, who they regard as nothing but a collection of racist homophobic rednecks.

    Unless they provoke him beyond reason, Trump is not going to bother any of these people.

    Trump wants to bring middle class jobs back to Americans, including for all those paid to protest him.

    In order to avoid nuclear war, Trump wants to restore normal relations between the major nuclear powers.

    When there are no jobs for Americans that pay enough to support an independent existence, Trump doesn’t see the point of massive legal and illegal immigration.

    This is only common sense.

    Yet “the threatened people” see it as fascism.

    Who are “the threatened people?” As always, the most powerful.

    Tell me, what lobby is more powerful than the Israel Lobby? You can’t. But the Jewish Lobby, J Street, has sent me a hysterical email at 5:11pm on 14 November. Unless “we all come together and oppose Trump’s appointment of Breitbart editor Stephan Bannon as chief strategist and senior counselor” a “wave of hate will sweep across the land,” consuming “Jews, Muslims, African-Americans, LGBT people (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered), immigrants, Hispanics, women and other groups.”

    Really now! So is Trump’s chief strategist, whatever position that is, going to attack the Jews and those with unusual sexual impulses with drones and cluster bombs, like the zionist neoconservatives who controlled the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes did to millions of slaughtered and displaced peoples in 7 countries, and like Israel does to Palestinians? Or is the former Breitbart editor going to round them all up and torture them in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo like Bush and Obama did? And like Netanyahu does in Israel?

    Or will Trump simply shoot them down in the streets like Netanyahu does to the Palestinian women and children?

    How come J Street and the Oligarchy-funded fronts are only concerned with nonexistent threats and ignore all of the real threats?

    According to J Street, the main concern is that Trump has appointed an “Alt-Right” person to advise him. Dangerous tensions between nuclear powers? A collapsing American middle class?
    These concerns, if present, are in the peripheral vision of the “threatened people.”

    According to the front group known as the Southern Poverty Law Center, Trump’s election by fly-over America has resulted in “over 250 reports of hate crimes around the country.” Is the Southern Poverty Law Center including the brutal beating of a white man by a gang of blacks? How many innocents has Trump slaughtered and put into concentration camps? How many countries has he invaded? The corrupt American media and oligarchic front groups have created “the new Hitler” before he is even inaugurated.

    The Klingon Clintons and neoconed Bush/Cheney and Obama killing regimes have murdered more people and invaded more countries than Hitler, and the holier-than-thou group doesn’t care. Yet, the all-powerful Israeli Lobby thinks a Breibart editor is going to target the Jews, immigrants, the transgendered and homosexuals, women, Muslims, Hispanics, “and other groups.” What a change this will be. Only non-immigrant, white, heterosexual males will be in the protected group known as the “preferred minority.”

    Trump wants to bring back jobs and stop nuclear war, people. Give him a chance. Do not listen to the likes of George Soros, who believe in open borders and no nations, no culture, no nothing – just globalization!

  30. November 15, 2016 at 19:30

    The purpose of the Electoral College is to earn electoral votes, not the popular vote. You can’t be guaranteed to have both. If you want the popular vote, you would have to campaign for it, and that would not mean you would get the electoral vote as well. probably not. So, not having the popular vote does not mean that you don’t have a “mandate”. You don’t have a popular mandate.You have an electoral mandate, which, according to our system, is the one you want.

  31. angryspittle
    November 15, 2016 at 19:20

    Yeah, forward it to the WH, not that that moron would read it. It is too long.

  32. backwardsevolution
    November 15, 2016 at 19:20

    Trump needs to break up the medical monopolies. This guy at has been saying this for years now.

    “The Federal Government must demand that all monopolist practices in the health industry end immediately under penalty of prosecution using existing federal law found in 15 United States Code Chapter 1. […]

    If we were to take half of the current Medicare and Medicaid spending out of budget we would save $700 billion dollars a year. This would eliminate half of last year’s depreciation of your spending power. The same savings applied to the private sector would free up over a trillion dollars a year for other purposes, some of which would go into capital investment and if that resulted in 20% of it flowing back to the government in tax revenue that would bring in another $200 billion in taxes. That is a $900 billion a year swing before you add on the improvements in productivity and business cost, and thus the businesses that would be attracted to the United States from other nations.

    That’s a low estimate, by the way. The more-likely figure is in the neighborhood of $2 trillion annually between private, public and federal savings. […]

    Donald Trump can cause this to happen with the stroke of a pen by appointing an AG who he directs to bring these actions using existing law. This requires no new law from Congress and in fact Congress can’t block it — since it is existing law, they would have to amend or repeal said law and Trump can veto any such attempt.”

  33. backwardsevolution
    November 15, 2016 at 18:49

    Trump was given a “slim chance” of winning the election, but he did. He went up against the establishment, including the media, and he won. Who else do you know could have pulled this off? Anyone? Maybe Bernie, but, as we saw, Bernie choked and decided he wasn’t going to go up against the establishment. Bernie went halfway; Trump went all the way. He did not back down, even under tremendous pressure to do so. People were asking him to step down, but he refused. He took on his own party, the media, people from his own party jumped over to Clinton, but he didn’t let that stop him. Do you think maybe he has something that’s worth admiring?

    Given all of the above, does this sound like someone who just turns around and gives in, gives up? I don’t think so.

  34. tony
    November 15, 2016 at 18:47

    There is one other possible reason Trump is creating a neocon administration. Window dressing….

    • PokeTheTruth
      November 15, 2016 at 20:46


      How do you seeing it play out? Give us a plausible scenario, please.

  35. backwardsevolution
    November 15, 2016 at 18:24

    Good article. You’re right, it will be an uphill battle for Trump, but Trump is not Obama. Trump has a much thicker skin. Besides, Obama seemed content being the first black president. He let others handle the hard work; he was off to the golf course or thinking about his legacy. As you say, by being weak, thinking more about himself, he became weaker and the country suffered.

    Trump is not afraid to “fire” people or dismiss them. As Paul Craig Roberts said, he will have to clean house. This is a war between Trump and the Oligarchy, who will fight him with everything they have to maintain the status quo.

    “Trump won the presidency, but the Oligarchy is still in power, which makes any real reforms difficult to achieve. Symbolic reforms can be the product of the contest between President Trump and the oligarchs.

    Karl Marx learned from historical experience, and Lenin, Stalin, and Pol Pot learned from Karl Marx, that change cannot occur if the displaced ruling class is left intact after a revolution against them. We have proof of this throughout South America. Every revolution by the indigenous people has left unmolested the Spanish ruling class, and every revolution has been overthrown by collusion between the ruling class and Washington.

    Washington has conspired with traditional elites to remove the elected presidents of Honduras on a number of occasions. Recently, Washington helped elites evict the female presidents of Argentina and Brazil. The presidents of Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia are in the crosshairs and are unlikely to survive. Washington is determined to get its hands on Julian Assange. To achieve this Washington intends to overthrow the Ecuadoran government that, in defiance of Washington, gave Julian Assange political asylum.

    Hugo Chavez had the power to exile or to exterminate the Spanish ruling class in Venezuela when the ruling class participated in a CIA coup against Chavez. But before the CIA could kill Chavez, the people and the military forced his release. Instead of punishing the criminals who would have murdered him, Chavez let them go.

    According to Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, this is the classic mistake of the revolutionary. To rely on good will from the overthrown ruling class is the certain road to the defeat of the revolution.

    Latin American has proved itself unable to learn this lesson: Revolutions cannot be conciliatory.”

    He must purge the establishment people. Maybe we could come up with a few suggestions for Trump appointments. I think that Trey Gowdy would make an excellent Attorney-General of the United States. I saw him question Lynch, Clinton and Comey. Man, he knows his law and he is not afraid to ask difficult questions. He also stated repeatedly that “the Rule of Law” needs to apply to everyone, including the elite.

    Anyone have any other suggestions?

    • Sam F
      November 15, 2016 at 21:15

      Trump has the Obama example at hand. But with the lesson of the Russian and Latin American revolutionaries he could put the neocons in Club Fed Guantanamo where they belong, or have Putin give them their very own ranchos in Siberia (a real program there). Very few would protest that without oligarchy funding.

      An AG raised in modest circumstances and retaining sympathy for the unfortunate should be pleased to prosecute neocons, and perhaps give their castles to the great whistleblowers who revealed their crimes against humanity..

      • backwardsevolution
        November 15, 2016 at 22:55

        Sam F – that would be sweet.

    • Brad Owen
      November 16, 2016 at 15:17

      I think a criminal elite just might always be with us. I don’t know if anyone was more thorough-going in elimination of elites than the Soviet Union. And Putin still has oligarchs to deal with (hold-overs from their neo-liberal nineties). He has cornered them, told them to enjoy their wealth but stay out of politics. Sun Tzu says leave your enemy an out, a pathway for retreat. The best we can probably hope for is another “Roosevelt” directly from the ruling class elite, coming to offer a New Deal that helps the working class and SAVES the elite’s money game within parameters. Trump could work with China and Russia on the Silk Road’ World-wide infrastructure projects and the special cooperation needed between us and Russia to build the World LandBridge between Alaska and Siberia, connecting the whole world with mag-lev lines, power lines, pipelines, com-lines. Trump aught to pitch the enormous real estate opportunities in Alaska as they create a good half-dozen NYCs to service the World LandBridge. Trillions of dollars to be made, and something to show for it besides burned-out cities and traumatized, angry populations. FDR, an elite, was beloved by the people. They elected him four times to the White House. Trump knows who the real rulers are, being a big New York businessman. He must know the relavent “mafiosa” he has to pitch to.

      • Sam F
        November 17, 2016 at 09:03

        Yes, liberators of the lower class have usually come from the middle class. Perhaps there are nouveau riche liberators of the middle classes. But in the US even lower middle class Repubs insist irrationally on the doctrines of their masters in hope of status and emoluments: money=virtue, theft=productivity, democracy=mob rule, republic=tyranny, etc.

        I would suggest tolerating gangsters just long enough to get the evidence to convict them, otherwise they plot revenge and usually win. Sufficient loyalty to prevent oligarchy counterplots requires widespread gratitude for great relieving poverty or injustice.

        Not sure that Siberia and Alaska need a land bridge, but there are certainly great works to be done, and much more to be gained in security by building the roads, schools, and hospitals of the poorest nations, than by bombing them.

  36. F. G. Sanford
    November 15, 2016 at 18:16

    What are the odds that anyone can dismantle the “deep state” monied interests – the faceless and nameless “board of directors” – who really run things? My best guess would be that Trump has two chances: slim and none. But, a chance is a chance. Neocon operatives appear to be circling his fledgling administration like flies on a fresh barnyard Pie-o-My cake. It certainly seems that the usual pejoratives – “conspiracy theorists” and “anti-Semites” – are being liberally spurted at some of his presumptive nominees. Spurious or not, those are the default monikers deployed when all else fails. They must be worried. I have no way of knowing to what extent those accusations are true, but I seem to recall that John Bolton was one of the original PNAC signatories. Rudy Giuliani probably would have signed, but they didn’t rust him with anything as sharp as a ballpoint pen. Revisiting the Gates-Clinton-Petraeus triangle and bewildered uncle Wrongway Peachfuzz look-a-like Leon Panetta, I am reminded of the seeming Saturday Night Massacre scenarios which surrounded the persons of McKiernan, Ward, Gaouette and Ham. McChrystal would later succumb, but that was a fate of his own making. The bottom line is, the Obama Administration didn’t have any problem swinging the axe when so inclined. The back stories on those episodes, and perhaps a “heart to heart” with Gaouette and Ham would be worthwhile investments. I find it hard to believe that a community organizer and one term Senator had sufficient experience with the military gears and levers to engineer those purges. Knowing who did might be very revealing. Does Trump have a chance? I kinda doubt it, but at least somebody finally put a chink in the neocon suit of armor. My biggest concern is that the alt-left machine behind the obviously synthetic street protests will drive a crackdown which will then become the “I told you so” argument that an intrinsically authoritarian regime has come to power. The “Hegelian Dialectic” strategy of “color revolution” appears to be afoot. Will Americans fall for it? Hard to say. They’ve fallen for almost everything since November 22, 1963.

    • backwardsevolution
      November 15, 2016 at 18:38

      F.G. Sanford – yeah, push Trump until he reacts with a crackdown. Hybrid wars. Here’s a guy who was paid $3,500.00 to protest at a Trump rally:

      “The Western presstitutes used the protests in Kiev to delegitimize a democratically elected government and to set it up for a coup. The protest pay was good enough that non-Ukrainians came from nearby countries to participate in the protest in order to collect the money. At the time I posted the amounts paid daily to protesters. Reports came in to me from Eastern and Western Europe from people who were not Ukrainian but were paid to protest as if they were Ukrainians.

      The same thing is going on with the Trump protests. CNN reports that “for many Americans across the country, Donald Trump’s victory is an outcome they simply refuse to accept. Tens of thousands filled the streets in at least 25 US cities overnight.” This is the exact reporting that the Oligarchy desired from its presstitutes and got.

      I hope no one thinks that simultaneous protests in 25 cities were a spontaneous event. How did 25 independent protests manage to come up with the same slogans and the same signs on the same night following the election?”

      George Soros has been instrumental in busing people into different cities to protest. Here he sits with his money, trying to overthrow an elected leader. How is he better than Assange or Snowden? Shouldn’t he be charged with treason?

      • KCP
        November 17, 2016 at 18:22

        backwardsevolution — That first link you posted is fake news from a fake news website by fake news writer named Paul Horner. Horner owns and dozens of other click-bait sites.
        The story about a guy paid $3500 to protest Trump is one of many Horner hoaxes that get passed around as fact. He cranks out a lot of stuff. Most all of it aimed at enraging gullible right wingers. He’s interviewed today in the Washington Post. Says he makes $10,000 a month doing it.

        • backwardsevolution
          November 17, 2016 at 23:06

          KCP – thank you. After I posted it, I saw something on the Internet relating to ABC News, saying the very thing you said. I wondered whether what I posted was from this site, but then I saw that my post went through, so I just figured it was legit. Wrong! Wow, you’ve got to be on your toes, don’t you? Thank you for the info.

    • MA
      November 15, 2016 at 19:12

      America is heading towards martial law.

    • Joe Tedesky
      November 15, 2016 at 20:29

      Doesn’t a coup always start with the well intended? If violence should persist will skinheads start roaming the streets, with nails in their bats? I hope not, because this would be a bad start of the pilot ‘the President Donald Trump Show’ to be a flop….but, reality tv starting out on a bad note is a fantastic event to behold for this will made sure that curious viewers will return. I’m being sarcastic, but even if President Trump downplays his demeanor on a level of 12 down to 0, the media won’t let it go…he’s doomed, by his own creation…his brand. (Devil laugh here)

      F.G. I recall back a few months ago, you making a statement whereas you said Hillary would lose, and Trump would win, but that Trump would end up a failure. You may have even said that these next four years could be a working period for the Left (whatever that is) to gain momentum towards regaining the government away from these scoundrels….or did I make that up?

      I’m just living day to day, because I’m tired of being left down. Cheers!

      • Sam F
        November 15, 2016 at 21:00

        I’ve made the observation perhaps too often, that we are really very lucky. With the warmonger Dems discredited and Trump likely to discredit the Repubs on domestic policy, we have the opportunity for a progressive regrouping.

        It seems unlikely that the Dems will abandon their role as a plush subsidiary of the Repubs fielding fake liberals as a backstop in case the Repubs lose. Without a real domestic disaster, they may hang on to the young and careless with excuses and simple issues like the environment and identity candidates whose turn has come. I suspect that there is no way forward without protection of elections and mass media from money.

        There is just a chance that Trump will be the one to restore democracy, as he has the courage and opposition to established oligarchy, if he or his advisors understand the problem and the solution. The article expresses this very well.

        • backwardsevolution
          November 15, 2016 at 21:44

          Sam F – if possible, Trump has got to break up the medical monopolies, the banking monopolies, media stranglehold and, as you say, big money and foreign governments flooding money into election campaigns. Get money right out of elections. Hillary spent $1 billion on her election. Can you believe that? Trump has got to bring back a separation between investment banking and commercial banking. It would be nice if he audited the Fed too.

          Just a small wish list.

          • Sam F
            November 16, 2016 at 10:18

            Yes, breaking monopolies and extortionate practices in medicine and other areas is high on my list as well. I have a platform of over thirty major federal reforms which cost very little and hurt no one on this side of the law, Constitution, and justice. Financial reforms appear to be critical also, but I leave those to specialist debate.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 15, 2016 at 22:58

          Sam F yesterday I commented how select Democrate’s along with Jill Stein and the Green Party could make a viable progressive party. All I know, is a lot of voters are out there screaming to be heard, and neither of the two major political parties seem to be hearing those screams. In plain words, the current status quo isn’t satisfying the citizens needs, and as the old scout said, the natives are getting restless indeed.

          In my personal life, I can’t get over the reactions of all the people I have come in contact with, since the election results came known. There are those who have a positive outlook, and there are those who are literally crying from worry over Trump’s ascension to the Oval Office. I’m kind of just reading as much as I can bear to read (which is never ending) and giving Trump the chance to proof himself. For my love of country I hope his presidency goes well. My other concern is that the division within our cultural side of our country doesn’t evolve into a nightmare of violence.

          I also know, how a lot of Trump voters a long with Hillary voters, and add to them the no voters, would rally behind a true candidate who would put the citizens first. I think to many Trump voters they see, or how they hope it’s there, that Trump will be this kind of people power president. I hope they are right.

          • Sam F
            November 16, 2016 at 10:28

            Agreed. If the Trump optimists are wrong, and the Clinton mourners and Sanders optimists see their error, I hope that they will join one party, take no MIC/WallSt/zionist bribes, have the guts to instill in the oligarchy a real fear of violence by the middle and lower class, and support candidates with the strength to fix the problems by any civilized means, and to move from restored democracy to international humanitarianism.

        • Joe Tedesky
          November 15, 2016 at 23:28

          Sam F here is an op-Ed from Bernie Sanders, it may interest you.

          • Sam F
            November 16, 2016 at 10:08

            The Sanders article is well written, but completely ignores the issues of MIC/zionist influence upon foreign policy, which in view of his general silence or vagueness on these matters, and their causing of most US foreign policy disasters, disqualifies Sanders from high office. I wonder whether anyone would be surprised, if he had won, that he announced quietly an Assad-must-go policy and gave every Israeli a few thousand more per year for disrupting the entire Mideast and completely discrediting the US. The Dems would have echoed that anything less was anti-semitic.

    • Gregory Kruse
      November 16, 2016 at 00:38

      I didn’t know you could put a chink in someone’s armor. I thought you just try to find a chink and stick a spear through it.

    • jacko redglove
      November 18, 2016 at 04:22

      John Bolton is the ultimate Neocon and Trump has proposed using him in his Cabinet, what does that say?As far as 911 being investigated properly he wouldn’t be allowed to tell the real truth, he knows the life expectancy of US Presidents who think they actually have power and try to use it other than as directed by secret rats nest out of London. My prediction- the billionaires on Wall Street will be grotesquely enriched in the next 8 years and Trump will be giving BJ’s at the Wailing wall in gratitude they didn’t off him..

  37. Christopher Schaefer
    November 15, 2016 at 17:59

    I almost always find Robert Parry’s articles clear and inciteful, creating new possibilities for my thinking. Many thanks, Christopher Schaefer

  38. Sam
    November 15, 2016 at 17:58

    So, let me get this straight. The guy who ran pledging to bomb the shit out of ISIS and other radical Islamic terrorists in the Middle East, said he’d rip up the Iran Nuclear Agreement, said he would be fine with Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and others getting the nuclear bomb, asked several times why we hadn’t used a nuclear weapon already, said over and over that climate change was a hoax, pledged over and over to end the war on coal, hired oil and gas lobbyists to run his EPA and Energy transition teams, is already reportedly looking to accelerate efforts to pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement, said he would reinstitute our torture regime and would go way further than waterboarding, is rumored to pick Giuliani at State and Sessions at Defense, has doubled down on his commitment to round up Mexican immigrants and wipe out Roe v Wade, ran against raising the minimum wage, is so psychologically unstable that he attacks a Muslim Gold Star family, a former Miss Universe, a disabled reporter, and boasts about grabbing women by the pussy, threatened political protesters with violence, dropped all pretense of separating himself from the Klan and neo-Nazis here in the U.S., said we need more “stop and frisk” and “law and order” in response to police murdering unarmed African Americans — that guy is somehow our savior.

    Give me a fucking break.

    • Sam F
      November 15, 2016 at 20:30

      Sam, let’s distinguish our names better, as I have been using “Sam” here. I will use “Sam F” if you will be so kind as to add an initial. Thanks!

      • backwardsevolution
        November 15, 2016 at 21:46

        I wondered when I saw “Sam”. It didn’t sound like you, but then I’m new here. Good to have a distinction.

    • Sam F
      November 15, 2016 at 20:35

      I should also note that, while Trump has said such things, Mr. Parry is correct that this is a time of decision and critical appointments, Trump’s policies are not set, his principles may be better aligned with the electorate than the Washington swamp, and he may have more courage than Obama to keep the neocons in line.

      Sometimes character is revealed by position, and these responsibilities are new to Trump. Encouragement and cautionary advice such as this article do no harm. And of course, if Trump fails and creates a domestic policy disaster, we will have a fine context for a progressive political revolution.

    • Gregory Kruse
      November 16, 2016 at 00:31

      Well yeah.

    • Wm. Boyce
      November 16, 2016 at 11:46

      +1 to Sam the wave’s comment

      There is nothing in Mr. Trump’s record, other than tweets and ill-formed spoken thoughts, to indicate he will change from past behaviors. I think he’s going to fold up like an accordian under the pressures Mr. Parry so ably describes. And don’t forget the huge business/government entanglements already being described in the press. He may run afoul of the “Emoluments” section of the Constitution rather quickly, as he has many business deals overseas. We’ll see how “strict constructionist” judges handle that little problem.

    • Zachary Smith
      November 17, 2016 at 01:37

      Trump used his superior evaluation of the electorate as well as his rapidly growing political skills to adopt a technique called “chumming” in the fishing industry. This involves tossing out some chopped up “bait fish” to increase the tonnage of the catch. In politics this is often called “throwing them raw meat”; something to energize your existing base and enlarge it. Trump’s declared positions against needless war with Russia and discarding the wretched TPP treaty certainly resonated with me. Another of his chumming buckets was a claim he’d crank up torture. I was drawn to Trump by the former, and repulsed by the latter, so I spent my vote on Jill Stein.

      We don’t yet know what the real-world Trump is going to do, and as likely as not he doesn’t yet either. There is a time to set on your hands and wait, and this is such a time.

  39. Joe Tedesky
    November 15, 2016 at 17:21

    I would warn Trump voters to keep down their excitement for Trump’s win, and for these supporters to wait and see what happens with their new president. I say this only because if Trump doesn’t come through for them, and he does not do well with his supporters wish list, well then I say to these Trump supporters welcome to the disappointment club. New presidents folding their cards early seems to be in vogue. So, if Trump doesn’t come through for them he will be at least keeping with this trend. I must say I think cabinet picks should be announced during the campaign, and not after.

    MoonofAlabama had an article the other day describing how Obama has already ordered our military to only fight ISIS and not Assad. The article claimed Obama did this due to Trump’s coming on board in January. I would think this a good thing, but should the U.S. also have Syria’s permission to fight along side Russia and Syria, because without this permission the U.S. is still rogue by our being in this war torn country. Remember Syria is still a sovereign nation.

    Progressives should mobilize now, and prepare for 2018 mid terms. If Trump turns out to be a failure then many of these same voters who voted for Trump will be angry once more, and this could mean votes for any candidate who would appeal to their interest. People want jobs, healthcare, and a safe world to live it, so the candidates message will have to address those concerns. Say what you will about Trump’s campaigning, but he outsold his rival by harping on jobs, and making a better America. Come to think of it, what was Hillary message anyway? With Trump every time he spoke he sounded deliberate with his remarks, and that’s the way to speak when running for office. Crazy talk works, when people believe you.

    Also in 2021 congressional districts will be up for redistricting. This will be an important time to get the right people elected, who may change this Republican lock that they have secured on our congressional representatives seats to be filled. So voting in governors becomes rather important, and this must not be forgot.

    • Joe Tedesky
      November 15, 2016 at 23:47

      “Interweaving our destiny” with others, Washington and Hamilton argued, would “entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice.” America should therefore pursue economic integration with the world, but maintain strict neutrality in its feuds.

      I found this great article on the LA Times. Elizabeth Cobbs nails it when she talks about how America’s foreign policy is all wrong. Her historical reference are very telling, and her comparisons to how modern day presidents have changed our original stands on foreign policy is even more revealing. Read it for yourself, and take what you will from it, but Ms Cobbs in my mind describes our country’s problem very well.

  40. Idea
    November 15, 2016 at 17:03

    Bob Graham for CIA Director

  41. bfearn
    November 15, 2016 at 16:42

    Very strange that so much for so many is riding on the attitudes of one man, a billionaire no less.

    It doesn’t look good but as always time will tell.

  42. Bob Van Noy
    November 15, 2016 at 16:07

    “For starters – assuming that the timid Obama won’t take the risk – President Trump could pardon national security whistleblowers who have faced or could face prosecution, such as Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, John Kiriakou, Jeffrey Sterling and Edward Snowden.”

    Thank you Robert Parry, for your “Sunlight on The Swamp” ideas. They are exactly what should happen. Lets now see what comes about. If it doesn’t happen; they would be a good batch of talking points going forward toward establishing a political consensus… what ever that might look like.

    (President Trump) basically took away the Democrats’ blue collar base, and if he finds a way to cultivate that; he could fundamentally transform American politics. I’m no fan but it is interesting…

    • Frank
      November 18, 2016 at 11:43

      He is appointing a man as CIA Director who advocates the assassination of Snowden. And worse.

  43. November 15, 2016 at 15:32

    Excellent, excellent piece! Please forward to the White House immediately! Meanwhile, since I don’t have The President’s email address, I will print this out and snail mail it to him with a note that he should definitely read it personally. I voted for him, as the lesser of two evils, largely based on his more conciliatory approach to Russia vs. Hillary’s nuclear sabre-rattling; points that were clearly made on this site several times but almost never and then obscurely in the MSM.

  44. Peter Smith
    November 15, 2016 at 15:20

    Excellent, I wish Trump would read this

  45. Adlai Stevenson
    November 15, 2016 at 15:18

    We will find out quickly whether Trump will be great or mediocre by watching his relations with Russia and the Clinton/Obama overthrow of Assad. I am rooting for greatness, but nothing could have been worse than President Hillary Clinton and the New World Order.

    Divine Providence indeed.

    • Mohammed Cohen
      November 18, 2016 at 01:18

      Don’t wish for something that may get your hopes shot real fast! By Trumps post-election list of who’s who of the Neocons it is becoming more and more clear that he will surround himself with the die-hard Israeli firsters instead of America first! His worse first step to have his ultra-orthodox Zionist son-in-law Jared Kushner with him at the White House on nation’s most sensitive daily secret briefings only to have them passed to his family friend the mass killer and a war ciminal Nut-and-yahoo! So those who still believe that Trump would be able to fulfill 10th. of his promises he made to the Americans, are nothing but the regular sheeple believing everything they wanted hear! Sorry champs it’s already too late! We are headed for worse than Bush-Obama’s nightmares!

    • Eileen Kuch
      November 18, 2016 at 02:34

      You’re absolutely right; nothing could’ve been worse than President Hillary Clinton and her New World Order. As for President-Elect Donald Trump, I believe he will have great relations with Russia, having read in the English version of the Russian Press that Russians staged massive celebrations upon hearing of Trump’s victory.
      In addition, both Trump and President Vladimir Putin spoke over the phone, and their conversation was quite friendly .. In fact, Putin congratulated him on his victory over Hillary. Also, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was also relieved and happy that Trump had won.
      Naturally, Trump will have difficulties with Congress, since not all Republican members of the House and Senate will support his foreign and domestic policies. He’ll face many challenges, but he’s a strong leader – having been a corporate CEO for decades. The good news is that he’s not a politician.

      • Frank
        November 18, 2016 at 11:42

        He is appointing as CIA director a man who advocated the assassination of Assad as well as Snowden. His reported AG pick Sessions is another neocon warhawk who also suffers from Reefer Madness. Trump is beginning to shed his alternative media support.

Comments are closed.