Selectivity in Trashing Trump

Exclusive: Around the United States, massive demonstrations have protested the inauguration of Donald Trump, but there is a danger that the anti-Trump forces could block the positive elements of his message, writes Robert Parry

By Robert Parry

To say that Donald Trump is an imperfect messenger for some reasonable messages doesn’t do justice to the word “imperfect.” But he is right to note that Official Washington has gone far off-track in recent decades and that the Establishment needs shaking up.

Police maintain barriers to control anti-Trump protesters near the presidential inauguration, Jan. 20, 2017. (Photo credit: Robert Parry)

For instance, in his Inaugural Address, President Trump made clear that he would break with the orthodoxy of neoconservatism and liberal interventionism that has led to endless wars in the Middle East and a dangerous New Cold War with Russia.

Trump declared: “We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first. We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example. We will shine for everyone to follow.”

That sentiment reflects a traditional U.S. approach to the world, followed by America’s first presidents who warned against “entangling alliances” and articulated best by President John Quincy Adams who said in 1821 that while America will speak on behalf of liberty, “she has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart.

“Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.”

Over the past several decades – even after the end of the Cold War –American presidents have violated this founding precept as they repeatedly went abroad “in search of monsters to destroy.”

These missions – designed and advocated by Washington’s dominant neocons and their liberal-hawk sidekicks – have not only wasted trillions of dollars and cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers but the projects have failed to improve national security, have led to massive bloodshed in the targeted countries and have undermined global stability.

No Accountability

Yet, it has been a sign of Official Washington’s disconnect from reality that the architects of these failed endeavors have escaped accountability and indeed have solidified their control over the foreign policy establishment and the mainstream news media.

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders.

Despite the bloody fiascos in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine and other unfortunate countries where the neocons and liberal hawks have prescribed “regime change,” these esteemed know-it-alls have systematically pushed aside all rivals, including old-school “realists” and peace proponents.

The confirmation gauntlets that have confronted Trump’s nominees for State, Defense and other national security posts have revealed a near-unanimous bipartisanship in favor of a continuation of neocon/liberal-hawk orthodoxy, demanding pugnacious approaches toward Iran, Russia, Syria and China.

So, while there is a great deal to worry about from President Trump and his administration – particularly an apparent hostility toward climate-change science, disdain for minority rights and the embrace of right-wing law-and-order nostrums – there could be a new opening for conflict resolution and a return to traditional diplomacy. Already, there has been a housecleaning at the State Department, where the biographies of some of the most prominent neocons, such as Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, have disappeared.

Trump’s Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson is regarded as a pragmatic businessman who has little patience for the destructive “regime change” strategies of the neocons and liberal hawks. However, because of that and Tillerson’s desire for better relations with Russia, many Democrats and some Republicans appear eager to block his confirmation and force Trump to pick someone more acceptable to the neocon/liberal-hawk foreign policy establishment.

Reasons to Resist

Progressives and Democrats have every right and reason to express revulsion at Trump’s crude remarks about women, Mexicans and others — and to resist Trump if he pursues the failed environmental, economic and domestic policies of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. But there seems to be an attitude of rejecting everything associated with Trump.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry listens to Russian President Vladimir Putin in a meeting room at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, at the outset of a bilateral meeting on July 14, 2016. [State Department Photo]

On Friday when I was moving among protesters on the outskirts of Trump’s inauguration, I noticed a large number of signs denouncing Trump’s interest in détente with Russia. There were repeated references to Russian President Vladimir Putin and to the CIA’s unproven claims that Putin approved the release of Democratic emails showing the party hierarchy’s hostility to Sen. Bernie Sanders and revealing the contents of Hillary Clinton’s paid speeches to Wall Street and some pay-to-play features of the Clinton Foundation.

This CIA-initiated narrative that Putin somehow rigged the election for Trump has become an accepted wisdom not only in Official Washington but among much of the Democratic Party and within the progressive movement. Little interest is shown toward the lack of evidence provided by the U.S. intelligence community and the dubious reasoning involved, since it would have been a huge gamble for Putin to have interfered in the U.S. election and then faced the likely outcome of an angry President Hillary Clinton seeking revenge once she took office.

There’s also a logical inconsistency in portraying Trump as a Manchurian candidate, since the idea of putting such a secret agent in the White House would involve the person talking tough against Russia during the campaign – to garner political support – rather than declaring publicly a desire for better relations with Russia, a position that was widely viewed as harmful to Trump’s chances.

Trump never hid his interest in avoiding a costly New Cold War with Russia and took a rhetorical beating for it, both during the Republican primaries and during the general election. That would not have been the approach of a true Manchurian candidate.

A Current Danger

But the current danger for Democrats and progressives is that – by bashing everything that Trump says and does – they will further alienate the white working-class voters who became his base and will push away anti-war activists.

Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at the Prescott Valley Event Center in Prescott Valley, Arizona. October 4, 2016. (Flickr Gage Skidmore)

There is a risk that the Left will trade places with the Right on the question of war and peace, with Democrats and progressives associating themselves with Hillary Clinton’s support for “endless war” in the Middle East, the political machinations of the CIA, and a New Cold War with Russia, essentially moving into an alliance with the Military (and Intelligence) Industrial Complex.

Many populists already view the national Democrats as elitists disdainful of the working class, promoters of harmful “free trade” deals, and internationalists represented by the billionaires at the glitzy annual confab in Davos, Switzerland.

If — in a rush to demonize and impeach President Trump — Democrats and progressives solidify support for wars of choice in the Middle East, a New Cold War with Russia and a Davos-style elitism, they could further alienate many people who might otherwise be their allies.

In other words, selectivity in opposing and criticizing Trump – where he rightly deserves it – rather than opportunism in rejecting everything that Trump says might make more sense. A movement built entirely on destroying Trump could drop Democrats and progressives into some politically destructive traps.

[For more on this topic, see’s “Neocons: the Anti-Realists” and “Yes, Hillary Clinton Is a Neocon.”]

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

217 comments for “Selectivity in Trashing Trump

  1. historicus
    January 23, 2017 at 10:39

    I think we need a counter-meme to the Revenge of the Orange-Haired Monster. How about “What Would Hillary Have Done?” The real Hillary, not the fairy-tale feminist champion of the people that some Democrats cling to in their wistful if-onlys.

    Yes, Hillary would not have stocked her cabinet with a single billionaire! Would have abandoned Kissinger and the neoliberals! Would have stood up for women’s rights, like she did when First Lady of Arkansas (spearheading the breakup of the teachers’ union, mostly women in its rank and file), on the Board of Directors at Walmart (the nation’s largest employer of women, praising its unfair labor practices), as First Lady (leading the attack on poor women and their children in the welfare “reform” laws), as Secretary of State (green-lighting the coup in Honduras, whose junta uses the rape and murder of women as a fun tool to keep its terrorized people under control)!

    Yes, her record is so very encouraging. And we could have had a lovely nuclear confrontation with the Russian Federation and its sinister New Hitler. You know, that darn pesky bunch of red devils that keeps throwing monkey wrenches in our plans to rule the world. The so-scary country that Hillary’s pal Zbigniew Brzezinski wants to balkanize (with its massive energy and mineral resources) into smaller, easily exploited entities that would pose no threat to our global economic dominance.

    Yes we would have done ever so much better with Madame Romney-in-a-Pantsuit.

    Lincoln observed long ago that the country had reached such a point where no further growth would be possible “until a great crisis shall have been met and passed.” We are again at such a flashpoint. Trump’s excesses may wake the people up to the reality that has been obvious to many since about 1848, that an economic system based on the exploitation of one class by another cannot and should not endure. It will not go quietly but if it survives, humanity cannot.

    • Joe Tedesky
      January 23, 2017 at 14:56

      historicus I always look forward to reading your rendition of history. I’m leaving you a link to an article I am in the process of reading….one of these days I hope to finish reading it, as I move around on this earth. I hope you may appreciate it as well, and maybe later on another comment posting give us your take on the money changers who have been around longer than their usefulness for mankind has to bare. Joe

      Although you probably already know what this article goes on about, hopefully you will enjoy it anyway.

  2. exiled off mainstreet
    January 23, 2017 at 01:34

    No nukes is good news. Let’s hope he’s serious about getting rid of neocons and “liberal” interventionists like Nuland, a war criminal.

    • msavage
      January 23, 2017 at 08:43

      “liberal” interventionists like Nuland, a war criminal.

      I thought he already had ousted Nuland? And yes, no nukes is always good news, isn’t it?

  3. Zachary Smith
    January 22, 2017 at 23:53

    Since Trump hasn’t yet tortured anybody or sent Israel some extra-high-quality cluster bombs for use on Gaza, I still feel free to offer him some friendly advice. Hillary’s people are watching every single move he makes, and are already working on the Impeachment List. Latest instance:

    President Trump – Don’t Forget You Can’t Delete Tweets Now As President

    Even when correcting misspelled words everything must be archived. I distinctly recall that when Hillary was doing vastly worse things as Secretary of State none of it was a problem.

    How things have changed.

  4. January 22, 2017 at 23:09

    Thanks Robert. Keep doing what you do.

  5. dan
    January 22, 2017 at 22:27

    Great article. Thanks for writing. I particularly appreciate your reasoning as to how a true “Manchurian Candidate” might act, in order to slip into the White House undetected. Sounds right to me.

  6. Jean Frances
    January 22, 2017 at 19:57

    Hello all. Totally agree, we may have a peace dividend out of this presidency. To all the commenters who are bummed out about the pink pussy hats and the focus on women’s health and mainstream feminist overtones, I just want to say that the focus of the corporate media should be a clue as to what they are avoiding. I can’t speak for what went down in DC, but in NYC I saw and heard peace-niks (a few), lots of BLM and Occupy and immigrants’ rights advocates. Unfortunately, I also saw a lot of Putin references.

    You know it’s not all about abortion when you are marching with people shouting BLACK LIVES MATTER, and WHOSE STREETS? OUR STREETS. As well, Si Se Puede, El Pueblo Unido…, and Tell Me What Democracy Looks Like!

    Perhaps a lot of the Hillary-loving gals jumped on the Acela out of NYC and left us with a clearer picture of the activists opposed to the government, not just Misters Trump and Pence. Finally, Angela Davis gave, from the DC stage, a broad view of the struggle. I watched it on on a stream from somewhere, and I have not seen a single mention of it in the NYT or Wapo. Did she get on MSDNC with Rachel Effing Maddow?

    • bob
      January 22, 2017 at 21:40

      I didn’t understand why they named the hats that. I’m older and from another generation and I wouldn’t have acknowledged his comments by naming them that but I guess I’m just wrong. I apologize for misstating it. To me, it’s derogatory and demeaning. I don’t like Tramp. I don’t like the Clintons and I think we’re in terrible trouble. Her name is not Rachel Effing Maddow. The corporae media have always lied to you. The Times’ Judy Miller led you by the hand to your Iraqi Oil Plantaion with Jesus. They sent her to court with armed guards. What part of this do you not fetch? Whip on a soothing salve from Fox News, Glenn Beck or another right wing fear monger, the orb of light Ann Coulter. You know I bet Willie Horton on work release bought the hats, or Farrakhan or the Mau-Mau! Maybe the hats came from the Mau-Mau. You should be terrified. It’s what Republicans do best. Fester in a slow boil.

      • Miranda Keefe
        January 22, 2017 at 22:26

        I guess the hats are supposed to be pussy-cat hats, thus the little ears. The pink is supposed to symbolize the uterus. It’s a reclaiming of the term from being a derogatory one about female privates to its first use as meaning a cat.

        I had a problem with them thinking that they’d been sold (making someone rich) or given away (showing the march was financed by big money.) But it turns out they were all supposedly knit by women participating in the march. I don’t know, they seem pretty uniform to me for that, but maybe they all downloaded a pattern given them by the march organizers?

        • Irene
          January 23, 2017 at 01:33

          My sister forwarded me a pussy hat knitting pattern. I haven’t spoken to her since.

      • msavage
        January 23, 2017 at 08:41

        “To me, it’s derogatory and demeaning.”

        See? So we DO agree on something, Bob! We also agree re Trump and the Clintons. And the corporate media.

    • msavage
      January 23, 2017 at 09:02

      I think the majority of the disinformation campaign might have been focused upon the D.C. march? As for the Pussy Hats, here’s my theory: It started out as a grassroots campaign. In my opinion, misguided, because it’s derogatory and embarrassing. But whatever. Started out as grassroots, gained some traction that way. Then some sick shite like Soros decided that it’d be a great way to de-legitimize the rallies, and picked up on it. Probably had the hats passed out in D.C. My opinion–they were too widespread to be attributed solely to a successful grassroots campaign.

  7. bob
    January 22, 2017 at 18:50

    Savagem, people like you refer to pink hats as pussy hats while proclaiming some intellectual high ground. You miss the entire point of why they marched. You berate others for their comments while stating you’re the essence of some intellectual discourse on a news site rather than explaining why your game show host with no governmental experience can lead the free world and a pluralistic dynamic society. There’s a lot of rot on a vine.

    • Miranda Keefe
      January 22, 2017 at 19:56

      Bob, the organizers of the event named them pussy hats.

    • msavage
      January 23, 2017 at 08:40


      You didn’t answer my question. How do you know that Soros didn’t fund the “pussy hats” movement?

  8. Litchfield
    January 22, 2017 at 14:51

    I wqas really turned off to see the Official poster art for the Women’s March on Washington titled ‘We the People are Greater Than Fear’ by Shepard Fairey.

    Heavily made-up woman in head scarf.

    There is a whole lot wrong with this image.
    And why Shepard Fairey?
    Aren’t there any women graphic artists out there who could do better?

  9. tony
    January 22, 2017 at 13:55

    To be fair Mr Parry, I am sure most protesters are weary of the GOP domestic policy, and rightfully so.

  10. tony
    January 22, 2017 at 13:53

    “These missions – designed and advocated by Washington’s dominant neocons and their liberal-hawk sidekicks – have not only wasted trillions of dollars and cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers but the projects have failed to improve national security, have led to massive bloodshed in the targeted countries and have undermined global stability.”

    And they also cause blow-back attacks (Benghazi) because people dont like it when you illegally destroy their country

  11. bob
    January 22, 2017 at 12:58

    Soros did not organize yesterday’s march nor did he fund it. There is plenty to attribute to Soros but organizing and funding the march is not one of them.

    • savagem
      January 22, 2017 at 15:18

      Really Bob? And how can you be so sure of this? Did you see all of the pink “pussy hats” on hundreds of thousands of heads in D.C? I have a hard time believing this was grass roots organizing. But if you’d care to provide evidence for how you’re so certain that Soros has nothing to do with it, I have an open mind.

      • Miranda Keefe
        January 22, 2017 at 17:02

        All the hats made me think that either someone made a lot of money off the marches or someone spent a lot of money on the marches.

        Either way it is disturbing.

        What bothers me is people I would expect to be concerned about things like peace and against things like unfair trade deals, are being mobilized just to be antagonistic against Trump instead of being selective and opposing him when he is wrong and supporting him when he is right (which is what Bernie promised.)

        • backwardsevolution
          January 23, 2017 at 03:31

          Miranda – well said.

  12. Roger Annis
    January 22, 2017 at 12:52

    The premise of the article is flawed. I agree that the Democrat critique of Trump is dangerous and deceptive, but Trump is part of the Establishment, too. The Establishment is fractured because it faces a serious challenge to its credibility and legitimacy. It is said that Trump believes “the Establishment needs shaking up”. No, it is, rather, that some in its ranks believe the Establishment requires the appearance of being shaken up, in order that it may continue with more of the same, or likely even worse.
    Mainstream reporting coming out of Moscow is finally telling some truth (Bloomberg, WaPost), reporting that the leaders of Russia have no expectation of change in U.S. foreign policy until and unless shown otherwise. Medvedev says they have zero expectation that sanctions will be eased. I have no doubt that this was the Russian leaders’ view all along; they have consistently said as much.

    • msavage
      January 22, 2017 at 15:46

      “(Bloomberg, WaPost)”

      I don’t have the desire to respond to your post at the moment, aside from pointing out that the sources you’re citing cannot be trusted. They are noting but propaganda–a real-life Ministry of Truth.

  13. Ragnar Ragnarsson
    January 22, 2017 at 12:18

    All I can say is thank God there’s somewhere people can come and discuss Donald Trumps presidency openly and intelligently. I learn as much from the articulate and thoughtful comments as I do from the articles themselves. There’s nowhere else like this particular site.

  14. Kim Dixon
    January 22, 2017 at 10:48

    Mr Parry knocks it out of the park, as usual.

    Here’s a fascinating article, positing that Soros money is behind yesterday’s “spontaneous” Women’s actions.

    And watching this sudden eruption of activism after eight years of immoral acquiescence to right-wing evil (D)… yeah, I buy it.

  15. Linda Furr
    January 22, 2017 at 09:54

    This is where I’ve been since his party’s first debate with all the ‘system’s’ Republican candidates mouthing their individual financial patrons’ sentiments no matter what question was asked. Trump was obviously out of step with the Washington DC milieu by saying things like “Of course, we should have a graduated income tax system. 10% of my income is nothing compared to 10% of what o a poorer person makes”… and “Why can’t we just get along with other countries, trade with them, talk with them instead of fighting all the time.” You see” I still remember the words almost exactly. Millions around the country remember them, too.

  16. W. R. Knight
    January 22, 2017 at 09:49

    And little do they realize the disastrous effects of endless war on both the environment and the climate.

  17. Peter Loeb
    January 22, 2017 at 08:19

    “President John Quincy Adams who said in 1821 that while America will
    speak on behalf of liberty, “she has abstained from interference in the
    concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which
    she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart.”
    as quoted by Robert Parry above.

    A most excellent article by Robert Parry. I would only counsel that
    John Quincy Adams ishardly a reliable source. He consistently proclaimed
    the inherited right of white colonial invaders to commit genocide against
    Native Americans and wrote at length in favor of the
    US conquest of Florida (by Andrew Jackson) which was never approved by Congress.
    (University of Kentucky Press, 1992,) From Adams Diary in 1811:

    “I gave [a colleague] all the additional information that I possessed
    about [a powerful executive branch]—I showed him the ‘secret laws’
    (italics in original], those singular anomalies of our system which have
    grown out of the error in our Constitution which confers upon the
    legislature the power of declaring war..” (Weeks p.67)

    Otherwise I hope that the dismantling of the neoconservative orthodoxy proceeds.

    —Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

  18. Michael Morrissey
    January 22, 2017 at 07:47

    I agree with Mr. Parry. As for the notion that Trump is a “fascist” because he is a billionaire and has appointed other billionaires to his cabinet, that is a misnomer. He may be a plutocrat, but maybe that is because he believes independently rich people are less easily bribed than us ordinary folk, or even, like Ralph Nader, has an idea that “Only the Rich Can Save Us.” In any case, we have known for a long time (Ramsey Clark was the first notable I heard say it, decades ago) that the US is a plutocracy, not a democracy. So is it better to have a plutocracy disguised as a democracy, or a plutocracy that may not be all bad?

    I am appalled by the number of people ready to hit the streets against Trump before he has done anything at all, when they should be hitting the streets to support his desire to get along with Russia. This is still Issue No. 1, though I’m sure many will continue to deny it, and will make little of it, saying he is taking the opposite path with China and making the usual genuflections to a “strong military.”

    But they should stop and think: What is Issue No. 1 for the “intelligence community” and for the mainstream media? It is Russia and Trump’s suggestion that peaceful relations are better than “getting tough.” It should be very clear to everyone by now, after all that has happened, that in continuing to demonize Trump (on the basis of what he might do!) they are supporting, willy nilly, the military-industrial-intelligence-MSM war conspiracy.

    Those who see Trump as a “fascist” cannot fail to see what has happened right on the front pages all during the campaign and continued through the election up to this day. How could it be plainer? All the candidates, except maybe for Stein, who did not emphasize it, spouted the “get tough with Russia line” (yes, Bernie too), and this line gathered more and more intensity as support for Trump increased. The MSM consists of the most powerful corporations in existence, as far as molding public opinion is concerned, and they have and continue to be solidly aligned with the CIA and the “intelligence community” in a totally fraudulent, transparently fraudulent, effort to demonize Russia, Putin, and Trump. This is the perfect example of a fascist conspiracy.

    But where are the feet on the street protesting this fascist war conspiracy, which has been right in their faces for months, and is still going strong? Why are they not in the streets supporting the one candidate, now president, who has even shown any sign of being willing to stand up to it?

    • msavage
      January 22, 2017 at 10:37

      All very well said, Michael Morrissey. These protesters have been well programmed by their masters through the corporatocracy-controlled media.

      • Stiv
        January 25, 2017 at 22:18

        You’re full of shit and should get out more often. There are legitimate and pressing concerns that are being aired. If a mentally ill President can’t handle it, he should resign. You clowns (yes I said it) who can’t see the fascist agenda that is ALWAYS a part of the GOP agenda…and has been since 1930’s…then you are one of them or not informed. I hope I don’t need to define fascism for you.

        Parry is an issue with me as well. He should get out of his armchair and do what he was once so good at…investigative reporting. His analysis is really lacking and there’s plenty of that around already

    • Litchfield
      January 22, 2017 at 14:02

      So many good comments on this thread.
      Robert Parry attracts many clear thinkers—and good writers!

  19. F. G. Sanford
    January 22, 2017 at 07:02

    I read a terrific article the other day at OpEdNews dot com. It was called, “Women’s March Hypocrisy and My Refusal to Go Along With It”, By Kathleen Murphy. It captured exactly my bewilderment with the “shark jumping” that’s now going on all across the American political spectrum. Briefly watching interviews of the protestors, I noted that most of them couldn’t really express a coherent thought about exactly what they were protesting. Nothing has happened yet, but as I mentioned a long time ago, a Trump victory was no threat to any “liberal”, because every “liberal” and human rights “watchdog organization” would be rejuvenated to their Nixon era fanaticism – and beyond.

    Deena Stryker – a “real woman” in my book, called this way back when amidst all the “stop Trump” hysteria of the primaries. An intrepid journalist who had lived overseas most of her life, and perhaps the only living American who has done a legitimate piece of work on Fidel Castro, dissected the “fascism” arguments concerning Trump with particular attention to the “Mussolini” references. Of course, there are comparisons to be made, though mostly superficial. Anyone who has taken the time to explore the meaning of the word and its geopolitical and economic ramifications could not – NOT – in any sense of the word, deny that Hillary Clinton and the machine she represented were the quintessential “fascists” in this election.

    Now, believe it or not, there is an apparently neocon-inspired campaign to paint Tulsi Gabbard as a “fascist”. The case can be made on grounds I would call at this point rather abstract and contrived, but the “facts” assembled around this argument are nevertheless symbolically true. So-called “liberals” and “progressives” appear to be lost in a crisis of identity, paradoxically jumping from one deadly shark to potentially deadlier ones – in a display of hypocrisy unmatched since Ronald Reagan coined the term “moral equivalence”.

    On his way out the door, Barack Obama authorized data sharing among intelligence and law enforcement agencies designed to once and for all eliminate any Fourth Amendment protections any of these pitifully duped “protestors” might have had against accusations of “subversive activity”. It is based on the rationalization that the government’s “need to know” rather than “due process” is sufficient justification. If the rumors are true that Soros affiliates are organizing much of this, we are now witnessing the OTPOR color revolution CANVAS strategies of American regime change, and these women represent America’s chickens come home to roost. Chickens indeed. They had no courage to speak when women and girls were being bombed, raped and sold into sex slavery all across the middle east. Suddenly, “women’s rights” are a big issue. Where was Hillary Clinton when any of that really mattered?

    I’ve said enough already, but I feel compelled to add one more thing. Bernie Sanders was not committed to an anti-imperial non-interventionist platform to any appreciable degree. If you were sick of all the unnecessary wars, Trump was the only rational choice. It’s as simple as that.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 22, 2017 at 07:11

      Sanford – excellent post. Thank you.

    • Abe
      January 22, 2017 at 14:46

      The sharks aren’t jumping now.
      They’re flying.

      Fasten your seat belts.
      Feed the fishes.
      War Is coming.

      Spoiler alert: This “US Intelligence” video shows what really happened to flight MH-17
      Hint: It wasn’t the Russians

    • Abe
      January 22, 2017 at 15:35

      72 years later
      evil returns
      (piloted by female zombies)
      to claim its final victory


      • Abe
        January 22, 2017 at 19:36

        72 years is a long time.

        On 12 January 1945, the Red Army began the Vistula–Oder Offensive, a successful Soviet operation that saw the liberation of Kraków, Warsaw and Pozna?. Preceding the offensive, the Red Army had built up large amounts of materiel and manpower, and greatly outnumbered the opposing Wehrmacht in infantry, artillery, and armour. General Heinz Guderian presented accurate German intelligence results to Adolf Hitler, who refused to believe them, dismissing the apparent Soviet strength as “the greatest imposture since Genghis Khan” The Soviet offensive was brought forward from 20 January to 12 January because meterological reports warned of a thaw later in the month, and the tanks needed hard ground for the offensive; not to assist American and British forces during the Battle of the Bulge (as Joseph Stalin chose to claim at Yalta).

        On 12 January 2017, 3,500 US troops have arrived in Poland, one of the largest deployments of US forces in Europe since the end of the Cold War in 1991. In late November, the US State Department approved the acquisition of 70 AGM-158B JASSM-ER (extended range) missiles for Polish F-16 fighters. Warsaw plans to increase the size of the army by at least 50 percent in the coming years (from about 95,000 to 150,000). The Polish military is going through long-term modernization program with significant equipment acquisitions planned for 2017 through 2022 to involve new air defense systems, ballistic missiles, a new fighter trainer aircraft, combat and transport helicopters, submarines, self-propelled howitzers, and procurement of around 1200 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), including at least 1000 with combat capabilities. Warsaw has demanded a full-scale permanent NATO base on its territory. These highly provocative steps towards Russia undermine the security of Europe and position Poland at the frontline of a new arms race.

        NATO is relying on Poland to host its new Wunderwaffen (“Wonder Weapons”).

        However, reports of Polish flying sharks “cannot be confirmed”.

        Eliot Higgins has denied reports of that Bellingcat is planning to investigate anything remotely related to NATO Defence Capacity Building (DCB) Initiatives. Higgins insists that such reports are “amateur” and “fake news”.

        Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council have prepared a detailed “independent investigation” on advanced Russian flying sharks “confirmed” by Higgins after viewing several Al-Nusra and Islamic State videos from Syria. The report also features Digital Globe images of a super secret flying shark base in Iran.

        NATO’s Minister of Information has expressed “high confidence” that Endsieg is imminent for the Alliance:

        • Abe
          January 22, 2017 at 21:41

          Lockheed Martin’s AGM-158 JASSM standoff air-launched cruise missile was threatened with cancellation in 2005 following a series of poor test results. The program went through 2007 on an ongoing roller coaster of ups and downs, and by May 2009 it appeared the program was facing cancellation once again. A production hiatus did take place between Lot 7 and FY 2010’s Lot 8 in FY 2010, but test results allowed the USAF to move forward, and the missile began to win export orders.

          Unit cost for the baseline AGM-158 JASSM is around $1 million per missile. The extended range variant of JASSM has almost double the range of the base missile.

          AGM-158B JASSM-ER (Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range)
          Range: 1000 km (620 mi)
          Production unit cost: $1,327,000

          The US State Department cleared the $200 million weapons package to Poland. Warsaw will receive 70 AGM-158B JASSM-ER missiles.

          In May 2015, the Air Force nominated the JASSM-ER as the optimal vehicle to carry the Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project (CHAMP) payload. CHAMP is an electronic warfare technology that uses a high-power microwave pulse to non-kinetically destroy an enemy’s command, control, communication and computing, surveillance and intelligence (C4SI) capabilities.

          Pre-positioning JASSM-ER cruise missiles in Poland enhances Washington and NATO’s conventional and nuclear first strike capacity.

        • F. G. Sanford
          January 23, 2017 at 04:08

          This is terrible news. Now, if Putin decides to put his dastardly plan to reestablish the Russian Empire into action, it will take him 72 hours to completely destroy Poland instead of the usual 48. The delay will create enough time for the entire populations of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to succumb to intractable diarrhea, creating a terrible burden on NATO which, by treaty convention, will be required to deplete its toilet paper stockpiles below acceptable levels. I wonder if these “shark jumpers” realize that three million soldiers and five thousand tanks would get Russia’s attention, but they would not represent a viable “threat” to Russia’s existence.

    • Abe
      January 22, 2017 at 17:03

      “Jumping the shark” is attempting to draw attention to or create publicity for something that is perceived as not warranting the attention, especially something that is believed to be past its peak in quality or relevance.

      The idiom “jumping the shark” is almost always used in a pejorative sense. It is most commonly used in reference to gimmicks for promoting entertainment outlets, such as television series or political campaigns, that are declining in popularity.

      American stand-up comedian Douglas Stanhope observed that America jumped the shark on 9/11:

      LISTENER DISCRETION ADVISED (minutes 0:00-2:20)

      Others have argued that the relevant “catastrophic and catalyzing event” happened on November 22, 1963.

      In any event, since the advent of a “Global War on Terror”, American and European audiences have become inured to the horrific and the absurd.

      Under Bush and Obama, there were several attempts to jump jumping sharks. But these efforts ultimately failed to command sufficient viewer attention. Sure, sanctions were imposed, but audiences were rather unenthusiastic.

      It seems the sea is not enough.

      Trump and Clinton came ready and willing to jump sharks in the sky.

      Let’s just hope and pray that the Donald doesn’t attempt to “nuke the fridge”.

    • Gregory Herr
      January 23, 2017 at 19:06

      This is an important reality that needs to inform the “fascism” arguments:
      “Anyone who has taken the time to explore the meaning of the word and its geopolitical and economic ramifications could not – NOT – in any sense of the word, deny that Hillary Clinton and the machine she represented were the quintessential “fascists” in this election.”

      Obama, representing the same machine, laid a lot of “fascist” foundation, didn’t he? The information sharing gets to go on steroids now. We really can’t address issues from partisan perspectives anymore because both parties are on the wrong side of so many important issues. Activism and protest should be directed at D.C. generallly, and should be issue-specific. If we stop singling out the two parts of our duopoly, we’ll take back a source of their power to divide us.

  20. January 22, 2017 at 05:31

    The idea there has never been a racist, misogynist or philandering president in the White House is risable. Indeed, it is much more probable that presidents displaying one or more of these characteristics have far outnumbered those who did not. What the Podesta emails, other leaks and even biographies ought to have taught us is that most Anerican presidents over the last hundred years or so, have sought to keep their sins concealed from public scrutiny. What is much more disturbing than that is the fact that the intelligence services have also sought to keep them secret. Yet even more disturbing is the fact it indicates those tax-sponging agencies almost certainly have a hidden agenda behind their concern for all this secrecy.

    The hypocrisy now coming from the corporate media, the Clintons, the Democratic party machine and the intelligence agencies is breathtaking in scale. Though I am certainly no fan of Trump, you do get what you see, which makes him far more difficult to blackmail or put under pressure. That would go a very long way to explain the reaction to his presidency we see coming from the CIA, the FBI and the NSA. The people already know he’s flawed. In other words, he’s a lot like most of the rest of us.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 22, 2017 at 07:11

      Bryan – well said!

  21. Ludmila
    January 22, 2017 at 03:35

    Many people in my town as well as around Russia are looking at President Trump with hope because we are tired of all those hot and cold wars.Somehow we belive in him and his inauguration promises

  22. drummerboy
    January 22, 2017 at 02:56

    another thing.

    do you realize how close we are to a complete tea party takeover of the country? (yeah , the tea party – no one mentions them anymore. as if they’ve gone away.)

    Or do you just want to wait until they have 38 states under their control, so we can start the march to constitutional amendments?

  23. Norma J Price
    January 22, 2017 at 02:53

    I agree that a lot that is going on is a case of shooting the messenger.

  24. drummerboy
    January 22, 2017 at 02:32

    Here’s a test. What’s your take on the following bit of news?


    WASHINGTON — President Trump used his first full day in office on Saturday to unleash a remarkably bitter attack on the news media, falsely accusing journalists of both inventing a rift between him and intelligence agencies and deliberately understating the size of his inauguration crowd.

    In a visit to the Central Intelligence Agency designed to showcase his support for the intelligence community, Mr. Trump ignored his own repeated public statements criticizing the intelligence community, a group he compared to Nazis just over a week ago.

    He also called journalists “among the most dishonest human beings on earth,” and he said that up to 1.5 million people had attended his inauguration, a claim that photographs disproved.


    Hint – try to get past your feelings of superiority about what a blatant liar he is, and what is he thinking, he’s an ass, just a blowhard, ha ha ha.

    I mean, he’s all of those things, but so beyond the point….

    • backwardsevolution
      January 22, 2017 at 03:24

      drummerboy – the upper echelon of the intelligence community HAVE been deliberately going after Trump and egging him on. When he questioned their assurances that Russia hacked the DNC/Podesta emails, they vilified him in the press. There is no hope for you if you haven’t noticed any of this. The one hope (if you let him) the country has, and you’re going to blow it because the President points out the dishonest media and says his fish is longer than it was.

      • Kiza
        January 22, 2017 at 06:20

        You are trying to engage a wrong person in a debate. As I wrote above: from the perverted, corrupt, dumb and often paid (by Soros) world of the US “progressives” (aka snowflakes), you can pick where this one belongs. They all serve the most vile Deep State, whatever their personal reason is and they will never pull back. The left is the new right in USA, the rest are the normal people.

        • backwardsevolution
          January 22, 2017 at 07:07

          Kiza – yes, better not to debate these paid trolls.

          • Ragnar Ragnarsson
            January 22, 2017 at 12:08

            “yes, better not to debate these paid trolls.”

            True. Altho I heartily applaud your effort!

          • Litchfield
            January 22, 2017 at 13:55

            I was wondering whether Drummer Boy was a troll.
            I’ll ignore her/ him from now on.

        • bob
          January 22, 2017 at 14:59

          name calling is innately intellectual Kiza, another delusion of adequacy

          • Kiza
            January 22, 2017 at 23:19

            I know, your kind likes swearing better.

  25. drummerboy
    January 22, 2017 at 02:16

    oh my, I’ve upset some delicate flowers here with my rough language. Why, some people apparently think that a well placed FUCK means I have a poor vocabulary. At any rate, pretending to be offended has absolved them from responding to what I said.

    Trump deserves NO support. He is an authoritarian. He is mentally unwell. He can not be trusted. He is easily manipulated. He has appointed the most regressive cabinet in our lifetimes, if not ever. And those people will manipulate him. Pence will manipulate him. But worst of all Bannon will manipulate him.

    For all of those weaknesses, he connects to 10’s of millions of people. Millions of people believe every damn word he says. He is Rush Limbaugh with power. Every twitter, every utterance of his, puts those followers farther and farther away from reality – and when we don’t share a reality, there is no possibility of a conversation. They are lost souls, until another leader takes Trumps place and starts leading them to a place that’s safe for us and for society and where they aren’t a threat. We can only hope that that happens, but there’s no sign it will happen anytime soon.

    Until then, they are a mob, potentially at Trump’s control. We’ve never faced a mob this large, this widespread.

    It’s a threat the country has not faced since the civil war. He can not be allowed to strengthen his position. He must be fought at every turn.

    But this only makes sense to people who see the threat, and there are way too many on the left who clearly don’t see it.

    And you will spell our doom, with your self-righteousness and your feelings of superiority over Trumpism. To say nothing of your rather insane desire to work with him.

    You people don’t get it. At all.

    • drummerboy
      January 22, 2017 at 02:18

      And may I also say that I’m a longtime fan of Robert Parry – but this is the damn stupidest thing he’s ever written. It’s a freaking suicide pact.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 22, 2017 at 03:16

      drummerboy – and YOU don’t see how people like you have been leading the country down the drain for a long time now. Are you looking at a great country? Really? How have the snowflakes made it better? They’ve been so involved in their own self-centeredness, like a mother or father who isn’t paying attention, so taken in with the trees that they don’t see the forest? And it’s on fire! And you almost elected someone who potentially would have set the whole world on fire. And you weren’t paying attention while your government was funding, arming and training ISIS. You weren’t paying attention when your own government murdered a sovereign leader either, Gaddafi, who provided free medical, free dental, free education, and pumped in fresh water for his citizens.

      I say Trump stinks, but he stinks less than Hillary. If he’s a great big braggart, who cares, so long as he brings peace. He’s not going to roll back abortions (not someone who talks about grabbing pussy). He’s not about to harm gay marriages. Who cares. And he’s not about to harm immigrants either. Illegals, maybe, but he’s got bigger fish to fry. But you might get your jobs back, some of them, anyway, and you might get a fairer trade system, one that works for all countries. And you might get peace of mind that you won’t be blown off the face of the earth tomorrow. And ISIS might get undone, and Israel hopefully will get put in her place. Russia might be unsanctioned, and she’ll begin trading again with Europe, who desperately need her trade.

      The Federal Reserve might be reined in, and the banks just might get broken up. Who knows? Pharmaceutical companies might get their hands slapped, and then cut off, along with the insurance companies. It could be good. Give it a chance.

    • Litchfield
      January 22, 2017 at 13:54

      “And you will spell our doom, with your self-righteousness and your feelings of superiority over Trumpism. To say nothing of your rather insane desire to work with him.

      You people don’t get it. At all.’

      I can’t follow this.
      It is Drummer Boy who expresses a feeling of superiority over Trumpism and his fear of Trump’s followers. Not sure about the “self-righteous” part.

  26. Wm. Boyce
    January 22, 2017 at 01:04

    You know, this article has perfectly reasonable reasons for thinking that the new administration has a different point of view. The problem is, the messenger is insane. If you look at the reporting on his speech to the CIA today – you’ve got to be kidding, if you didn’t already realize that this guy it nuts, there it is, pure and simple. Crowd size? CROWD SIZE?

    I’m sorry, I have a hard time believing this guy will even last four years in this position – this is freaking day two!

  27. backwardsevolution
    January 22, 2017 at 00:41

    Re: The Pussy Hats

    Just the fact that everyone is wearing pink hats smacks of being far too organized not to have been run by professional organizers. The useful idiots wearing the hats don’t even realize they’re being used.

    “Billionaire Globalist Soros Exposed as Hidden Hand Behind Trump Protests — Provoking US ‘Color Revolution’ … Billionaire globalist financier George Soros’ has been revealed to be a driving force behind the organizing of nationwide protests against the election of Donald Trump — exposing the protests to largely be an organized, top-down operation — and not an organic movement of concerned Americans taking to the streets as reported by the mainstream media.” – Free Thought Project […]

    Trump may well be dedicated to his cause of “Making America Great Again,” but the forces arrayed against him are formidable and dedicated to turning his victory into a message of defeat. This would be a classic form of the kind of “directed history” that we often analyze. It is always married to a dominant social theme – a meme – developed as elite propaganda and purveyed by the press.

    Conclusion: In this case the meme informs us that Trump is an impossibly racist and brutal individual who will turn the US into a dictatorship that is easily slotted into a larger, international technocracy. In fact, the danger of this sort of social manipulation comes from Soros and the Clintons – and the larger shadow state itself. Trump on the other hand is the target.”

  28. backwardsevolution
    January 22, 2017 at 00:36

    “Trump’s Declaration of War

    So along with the globalists, the CIA, the offshoring corporations, the armaments industries, the NATO establishment in Europe, and foreign politicians accustomed to being well paid for supporting Washington’s interventionist foreign policy, Trump will have arrayed against him the leaders of the victimized peoples, the blacks, the hispanics, the feminists, the illegals, the homosexuals and transgendered. This long list, of course, includes the white liberals as well, as they are convinced that flyover America is the habitat of white racists, misogynists, homophobes, and gun nuts. As far as they are concerned, this 84% of geographical US should be quarantined or interred. […]

    We should ask ourselves why a 70 year old billionaire with flourishing businesses, a beautiful wife, and intelligent children is willing to give his final years to the extraordinary stress of being President with the stressful agenda of putting the government back in the hands of the American people. There is no doubt that Trump has made himself a target of assassination. The CIA is not going to give up and go away. Why would a person take on the grand restoration of America that Trump has declared when he could instead spend his remaining years enjoying himself immensely?

    Whatever the reason, we should be grateful for it, and if he is sincere we must support him. If he is assassinated, we need to take up our weapons, burn Langley to the ground and kill every one of them.”

  29. backwardsevolution
    January 22, 2017 at 00:33

    Donald Trump is far from perfect. So am I. How many here are perfect? What I’m seeing is a bunch of petulant, bad-tempered children who lost an election, but can’t accept that fact. So they’re going to cry, have a tantrum, protest, wear pussy hats and roar. Unbelievable, really. The moral decay of the country has been ongoing for decades, but now they feel a need to protest? Riiiiight!

    IF Trump screws up, nail him then. Until then, get behind him and maybe our children will frigging survive.

  30. January 22, 2017 at 00:20

    “You can’t con people, at least not for long. You can create excitement, you can do wonderful promotion, you can get all kinds of press…but if you don’t deliver the goods, people will eventually catch on.” – from page 60, The Art of the Deal by Donald Trump, with Tony Schwartz

    By the end of his first hundred days in office, we will “eventually catch on” to the modus operandi of marketing whiz, Donald Trump. Without the FULL cooperation of the Congress, he will not be able to deliver. And if he starts pressuring them, they’ll use the many conflicts of interest he will still have remaining to get rid of him, and put their own man, Pence, in charge.

    • Bill Bodden
      January 22, 2017 at 13:47

      “You can’t con people, at least not for long. You can create excitement, you can do wonderful promotion, you can get all kinds of press…but if you don’t deliver the goods, people will eventually catch on.”

      But if you get caught being underhanded or worse, give the people time and they will forget and you can score against more marks – maybe even become president some day.

      Except for not becoming president this formula also worked very well for Hillary Clinton. More than 60 million of her supporters either forgot her disastrous past, didn’t know about it, or, perhaps worse, didn’t care.

  31. drummerboy
    January 21, 2017 at 23:52

    I read this article and these comments while shaking my head.

    Trump deserves exactly NO support. I don’t give a shit if he offered us medicare for all tomorrow.

    He needs to be stopped. He is building an army of followers that may be impossible to stop one day.


    we are so fucked.

    • Kiza
      January 22, 2017 at 00:19

      I like your advanced English skills.

      • January 22, 2017 at 00:26

        It’s only “locker room” talk – no worse than Trump’s… Justifications good for the now Prez are good for a mere member of the plebs…

        • Kiza
          January 22, 2017 at 00:31

          I thought was a zine for intellectual debate about important issues, not a locker room. Thank you for this clarification.

          • bob
            January 22, 2017 at 14:57

            You’re on this vine Kiza.

          • January 23, 2017 at 13:22

            I guess you never heard of sarcasm…

    • Sam F
      January 22, 2017 at 09:00

      You are perhaps young and angry, as all have been at some point. Remember that political battles are won by joining with those moving in the right direction, and then forming new coalitions when they move the wrong way. Trump has power for the moment because his supporters are angry about endless wars, corruption, and economic insecurity. Those are good causes, even if their reasons are not always idealistic. If Trump is the way to solve part of that, and then betrays them on domestic policy, they will dump him and run the other way.

      Then you want to be in position to tell them that the Dems will only betray them again too, and have a true progressive populist party, whatever you wish to call it, to welcome them to a better coalition.

      • Bill Bodden
        January 22, 2017 at 13:39

        Well said, Sam. A note of thoughtfulness and understanding during a cacophony of rabid and profane rants across the nation.

    • Miranda Keefe
      January 22, 2017 at 16:49

      You are being used by the MIC and Wall Street. Wake up.

  32. Bill Bodden
    January 21, 2017 at 22:15

    Already, there has been a housecleaning at the State Department, where the biographies of some of the most prominent neocons, such as Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, have disappeared.

    Well, that’s one reptile cleaned out of the swamp.

    • January 22, 2017 at 18:52

      Agreed. That was one piece of good news.

  33. John P
    January 21, 2017 at 22:00

    I think every American should look at the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s, ‘The Fifth Estate’ I watched tonight. You will hear about the Russian mafia and gambling at Trump Tower, Donald Trump some time later at beauty contest at Trump Tower with a previously convicted Russian mafia member from the gambling crimes at trump Tower. You will see connections between the NY wing of the FBI, and Rudy” Giuliani to crush Hillary + more.
    I’m not a fan of Hillary, I liked Bernie Sanders, but you think Trump got it bad.

    Click the box in the middle of the picture and some images come up briefly as the system is setting up. In about 20 seconds or so the program will start.

    The Conspiracy Files: Putin, The FBI and Donald Trump
    An ugly and controversial U.S. election campaign got even uglier – and more bizarre – after the election was over. In recent days, Donald Trump has faced a storm of questions about his Russian connections. Meanwhile, the FBI is also taking incoming fire over how it publicly handled the Clinton email affair – while remaining silent about its probe of Trump’s Russian ties. In the wild final days of the campaign, it seemed as if the name of Vladimir Putin was heard almost as much as Trump or Clinton. On Inauguration Day January 20, The Fifth Estate’s Bob McKeown looks at what was behind the triumph of Trump – and the disturbing questions left unanswered.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 21, 2017 at 22:42

      John P – CBC, Canada’s equivalent to CNN. Another arm of the establishment.

      • John P
        January 21, 2017 at 23:14

        backwardsevolution did you watch? I don’t think so looking at the time line. Good night.

        • backwardsevolution
          January 21, 2017 at 23:23

          John P – you are right, I didn’t watch that one. l got it mixed up with another one I had watched on Putin. I will watch this and tell you what I think. Thanks, John P.

          • backwardsevolution
            January 22, 2017 at 00:21

            John P – okay, John, I’m back. I watched the whole episode. To say the show was ridiculously biased would be an understatement. What was omitted was telling, along with what was included. The way they spun the story was really quite remarkable and should be studied by psychologists. I hope everybody here watches it just to witness The Fifth Estate’s fall from grace.

            I mean, just to state that the Clinton Foundation was all above board is absurd.

            “The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

            The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

            On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation. […]

            Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation because its “atypical business model .?.?. doesn’t meet our criteria.”


            John P, I’m all for getting to the bottom of this Russian hack or leak business. Let’s have the evidence. But let’s also investigate the 30,000 emails that were destroyed by Hillary. NSA would have all of these; they have everything. Let’s do a thorough investigation of what happened in Ukraine, MH-17, Libya, Benghazi, Syria, Iraq, Honduras, Haiti, Bernie Sanders, Seth Rich. Bring it on.

            That program made out that poor Hillary, with absolutely no wrongdoing or chicanery on her part, lost the election because of lies. Sure, Fox News and RT might have been calling her out (although I never watched them), but absolutely every other network and newspaper were against Trump.

            Let’s place all of the evidence on the table. I’d go along with that.

      • January 22, 2017 at 18:51

        The CBC long ago ceased to be good for the people as any number of Canadian leftists, including Rick Salutin, will tell you. It’s not CNN, but it may as well be. As for myself, I haven’t had tv in many years and it hasn’t hurt me at all. I am actively learning more than those who passively learn, sitting in front of their tv sets having establishment crap pushed at them.

        • exiled off mainstreet
          January 23, 2017 at 02:18

          I agree. The CBC and other Canadian TV was fully in the bag for the harpy. Its reporting on Russian issues and Syria is rank propaganda which does not withstand serious scrutiny. By the way, Trudeau sacked the experienced diplomat and former Liberal party leader Stephane Dion as external affairs minister and replaced him with Christa Freeland, a Ukrainian-Canadian activist descended from one of the Nazi regime’s key quisling Ukrainian newspaper editors, Mihailo Chomiak, who was active during almost the entire period of Nazi occupation editing the paper for Ukrainians the Nazis issued from Krakow, in what was then the Generale Gouvernement, Nazi occupied Poland. This has recently been exposed by the John Dances with Bears website. After the war, Chomiak apparently made himself useful to the yankee occupation forces in their changeover to an anti-Soviet perspective, and was far more privileged than conventional “displaced persons” until he was able to emigrate to Canada.

          • January 23, 2017 at 09:40

            Very interesting! I thought I had Helmer’s website bookmarked. If I don’t see the bookmark, the site might evade me for some time. I know he’s good.

  34. KB Gloria
    January 21, 2017 at 21:47

    Do none of you, including the author, recall this article???

    Is he fulfilling this slim chance in any way with fox-henhouse cabinet picks??

    Some of these recent essays have been absurd and so amazingly disappointing—Mr. Perry–have you noticed the readers you are attracting?

    • Zachary Smith
      January 21, 2017 at 22:35

      I used your link to revisit that piece, and would like to also repost something I wrote there about climate change.

      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.

      As things stand now, human civilization as we presently know it is doomed. I was honestly expecting Hillary to become President on January 20, and if that not happening is due to a minor miracle, I’m not above hoping for another one. Namely, that Trump get his head out of his heinie and tackle Climate Change as nobody else on the planet with any authority has done. All the other crap people fears he might do can (if it happens) be reversed. But if the Earth goes, none of that other stuff matters at all.

      • Kiza
        January 21, 2017 at 23:41

        Zachary, I could never understand these US “progressives”. They bray about Climate Change, but seldom and weakly complain about the single biggest green-house-gas producer on the planet – the US military. Does Gloria have an even remote idea how much pollution a single military jet engine produces? What about reportedly $20 billion dollars the US military spent just on airconditioning of its forces in Afghanistan and Iraq? How many tons of carbon did that release? This is if she cares more about some gas than about the lives of all the Afghanis, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians etc etc that the US military extinguishes.

        I once tried driving a high-power Californian car up the Colorado mountains and almost gave up, but the US military is driving multi-ton armour-plated Humvees and tanks in unnecessary wars around the World without a question being raised by the “progressives”. I swear that I have never read a single complaint about what I have just typed. It appears that being antiwar is so old fashioned.

        This reminds me somewhat of the LGBT community’s reaction to the imprisonment of Chelsea Manning – silence where principles matter, loud noise everywhere else.

        In the perverted, corrupt, dumb and often paid (Soros) world of the US “progressives”, it is the economic activity which has to reduce first, not the military activity. This is why I am proud not to be a “progressive”.

        • Kiza
          January 22, 2017 at 00:26

          Just for anyone interested, the US Abrams tank and the Israeli knock-off Merkava tank, both at around 70 tons, are the heaviest tanks in the World ( But one would expect those two countries to care the most about the environment of the World they want to lord over.

          For comparison, the latest and the heaviest Russian tank Armata T14 is about 50 tons.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 21, 2017 at 23:15

      KB Gloria – methinks you’re forgetting who Obama appointed. Talk about who he surrounded himself with! Where were the huge protests for the environment when Obama was in charge? How about the moral protests over his eight years of war, slaughtering thousands upon thousands of people, displacing millions more? His embrace of Wall Street and the Federal Reserve.

      Fine, you forgot about that. But here comes Trump, and all of a sudden everybody is all “Oh, my God, Satan is at the wheel”! And all before he’s even gotten his coat off. Come on, give him a chance. But you’re not willing to do that, are you? You’re going to tar and feather him before he even begins.

      Ever wonder if he felt sick to his stomach about his cabinet nominees, but realized he had to ride the line between keeping the neocons/neoliberals happy (so that they accept his nominees) and trying to bring about change? If he had free rein (which he does not have, not with the media, his own party, and the Democrats still fighting against losing the election), I’m sure he would have chosen other people.

      Fry him when he screws up, but not until. You wouldn’t do that to your children, would you?

    • msavage
      January 22, 2017 at 10:24

      “Mr. Perry–have you noticed the readers you are attracting?”

      Could you at least spell the name correctly? And from my experience, this site is one of the few left that is actually attracting intelligent, thoughtful readers.

    • Litchfield
      January 22, 2017 at 13:45

      It’s Parry.

  35. Bill Bodden
    January 21, 2017 at 21:18

    This article and comments indicate considerable confusion related to Donald Trump’s assumption of the presidency. Some of the responsibility for that confusion can rightly be assigned to Donald Trump himself because of many of the ominous comments he has made – make torture more brutal, etc. – and because his words must be regarded with skepticism. I’m inclined to give him the benefit of some doubt about his peace-based overtures regarding Russia. Hopefully, that is more than wishful thinking. However, when it comes to Israel his original pronouncements about being neutral didn’t last long, and he may very well prove to be the ultimate disaster in that 70-year tragedy.

    On the obverse side of the political coin, the disparate elements making up the left do not inspire much confidence. In principle the protests, less the disruptions on the fringes, are valid to send a message of opposition to threats from Trump and likely accomplices in the Republican party against the environment, civil and human rights, and social and economic justice. However, when Bernie Sanders pledged fealty to the Democratic (?) party and so many people voted for Hillary Clinton there can’t be much substance in what purports to be the left. There is a need for real opposition, but it won’t come from protest marchers or Democratic party politicians. The Democratic party needs to be relegated to the trash can of history. The decent minority in this party should abandon it and join with independents likely to give the American people the representation they need to make America one nation with liberty and justice for all..

    • KB Gloria
      January 21, 2017 at 21:37

      Yep–right along with the Republican party, Bill.

    • Sam F
      January 21, 2017 at 22:46

      Both very true. But the Repubs are the designated trash can for incurable racists and militarists, and are likely to remain so. They will lose much support when Trump betrays them utterly within two years. The Dems are now just their backstop, fielding fake liberals in case the Repubs miscalculate. So it is the Dems who must go; we need third parties that people believe in, to govern by coalition.

    • msavage
      January 22, 2017 at 10:21

      “There is a need for real opposition, but it won’t come from protest marchers or Democratic party politicians.”

      I agree with you on this. Won’t come from marchers wearing “pussy hats” and holding signs depicting militant uteri. They clearly have no idea where the important battle lies.
      “The Democratic party needs to be relegated to the trash can of history.”

      Agree with this as well.

  36. Carl Rising-Moore
    January 21, 2017 at 21:16

    These are truly wise words. You have expressed many of the same thoughts that have been bouncing around my grey matter for many months.
    When I spent 12+ hours per day trying to stop then end Obama’s lead from behind invasion of Libya, I was shocked to discover that the anti-war movement was almost non-existant. The millions that took to the streets to protest the invasion of Iraq by GWB’S Coalition of the Willing” had pulled the blankets over their heads and went to sleep. 8 years of the Obama “Change We Can Believe In” as he continued the Neoconservative and Neoliberal, masterplan for the “Exceptional. America” and the Pentagon Full Spectrum Dominance of planet Earth has brought us to the brink of WW111.
    It is important that the so called progressive Americans that took an 8 year nap to not throw out the baby with the bath water. Protest those domestic policies that do harm to the poor and ethnic groups, but support President Trump in his efforts to end the Responsibilty to Protect or preemptive wars. If this administration can end the many decade effort for Uncle Sam to be the World’s policeman, then that must be supported in a visable manner by the progressive anti-war movement. I miss Chalmers Johnson.

  37. Dave
    January 21, 2017 at 21:14

    Although U.S. policy has favored (unjust) military intervention for the better part of the last 60 years, it seems premature to assume that Trump will have a positive influence. His cozy relationship with Russian lenders will certainly deter the US from further conflict with Putin, but his arrogant belligerence toward most every Arabic-speaking nation on earth does not bode well for a lessening of tensions in, for example, Iran.

    I also agree that it would be wrong to resist every single statement that comes out of Trump’s mouth. In fact, many times he describes the problem perfectly. It is only when he starts to describe his proposed solutions that he violates norms of civility, common sense, and constitutionality. Trump is correct, for example, that the use of drones has failed to make America (or any other country) safer. Trump’s proposed solution, on the other hand, is to re-introduce torture.

    Also, Parry seems to be making light of the absurd gap between Trump’s statements and his actions. For example, Trump rightly criticized Washington elite for favoring financial institutions over the middle class, and he rightfully criticized those who had “reaped the rewards of government.” Yet he picked Steven Mnuchin for treasury secretary and Wilbur Ross for commerce secretary.

    Are we supposed to drop our resistance to these two awful people simply because Trump claims they were hired to drain the swamp (that they created and profited from)? If not, then can you name any example of anyone that Trump appointed who might conceivably improve the problems that Trump campaigned on?

    Because as far as I can tell, loyalty to the Constitution and to traditional American values would suggest at least 99% opposition to Trump’s appointments.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 21, 2017 at 23:02

      Dave – I don’t think Trump hates Arabs. He hates ISIS and terrorism. Of course, all the U.S. has to do is tell Saudi Arabia and Israel that the fun and parties are over. ISIS is a western-made piece of machinery. Once their funding is stopped, along with training, arms and food, they’ll start getting hungry, and then they’ll pack up and go home.

      Dave, what if Trump felt he HAD no choice but to choose these nominees? Maybe his choices would have been rejected flat out if he didn’t? He’s walking a tightrope here, trying to keep the neocons/neoliberals from revolting, but still trying to change things. Do you think for one minute that if he nominated some sweet peacenik for Secretary of State that they’d be accepted? I don’t think so.

      Put yourself in his shoes, and then have some patience and give him a chance.

      • Dave
        January 22, 2017 at 07:50

        People keep telling me that I need to give him a chance. I will give him just as much of a chance as he and the GOP gave Obama. They attacked him with vicious lies every day for eight years. They blocked every one of his actions, (including even jobs bills and immigration reform that had originally been introduced by Republicans.)

        For eight years, no lie was too petty that Trump wouldn’t tweet it, no appointment was so middle-of-the-road that the Republicans wouldn’t block it.

        Now we are supposed to ignore the truth about Trump, and not block his criminal nominees? Because everyone expected his nominees to be despicable? Imagine if Obama had chosen not one, not two, but three separate nominees who had been caught cheating on their taxes? Would Republicans have just laughed it off?

        • Sam F
          January 22, 2017 at 08:46

          Let’s fight when it is time to fight, not on presumptions, or only because the right wing are generally corrupt. We can support Trump exactly as far as he can stop warmongering, and oppose him when he does wrong.

          • Litchfield
            January 22, 2017 at 13:43

            I can’t really buy the “Obama was blocked” argument.
            Obama caved in before anyone really had to block him.
            Obama had/has no vision (except the marvelousness of Obama) and is/was not a fighter. If he did want to get anything done, he blew the Dem majorities he would have needed to have a chance to do anything meaningful.

        • Miranda Keefe
          January 22, 2017 at 16:46

          Please give him a chance on the things he has said that are good.

          Give him your support if he follows through on better relations with Russia.

          Give him your support if he follows through on ending these unfair trade deals.

          Give him your support if he follows through on not seeking regime change in Syria and other places.

          Please do not be a reactionary who opposes things whether they are good or bad just because Trump is doing them.

          I did not march yesterday. I have this sense that all these women and allied men are being used by the MIC and Wall Street, who don’t give a damn about women’s issues, to ramp up opposition to Trump no matter what and the only things they really want opposition on are Russia, regime change, and the unfair trade deals.

          • msavage
            January 23, 2017 at 08:32

            “I did not march yesterday. I have this sense that all these women and allied men are being used by the MIC and Wall Street, who don’t give a damn about women’s issues, to ramp up opposition to Trump no matter what and the only things they really want opposition on are Russia, regime change, and the unfair trade deals.”

            I agree. I have to believe there were many women (and men) who marched with good intentions. But TPTB–and their media whores–turned the whole thing into a freak show, from my perspective. Class War is the central issue here. Money is the only thing that matters to these people–money and power. Women’s issues are a useful distraction

      • January 22, 2017 at 18:46

        A tightrope? It’s simpler than that. Trump, like other presidents, has simply sold his soul for personal gain. He will be free to make trouble, as long as it’s not for important people and interests, as long as he can be useful.

  38. jan karol
    January 21, 2017 at 20:50

    No. Women have taken too much to date. Strategic protests are a good idea. But the real moral majority had something to say. Quit putting women in their place. Obviosly it struck a nerve worldwide so respect that. I’m watching news cutting into protest coverage with pictures of the Donald going to church. If you don’t think this was specific enuf you weren’t reading the signs.

  39. bob
    January 21, 2017 at 19:41

    I wish I could believe his anti-war rhetoric. If he has a redeeming quality he does not drink alchohol. I heard he had a brother who died and drank heavily.

    • Zachary Smith
      January 21, 2017 at 22:26

      I’ll agree that avoiding alcohol is not a bad idea, but that habit hardly turns anybody into a saint. Recall that Hitler didn’t drink, use tobacco, or eat meat.

    • Sam F
      January 21, 2017 at 22:39

      The greatest value of international trade is in keeping most businessmen opposed to war despite its profits to other businessmen. It is pure self-interest but it forces them to pretend to be civilized.

    • January 22, 2017 at 18:42

      If Trump was ‘meaningfully’ anti war, then he wouldn’t be keen on bumping up the oil-gulping military, which is eager to help out with regime change so that more oil will be available to uncle Sam and around and around we go. Trump is neither meaningfully anti war nor is he principled.

  40. bob
    January 21, 2017 at 19:38

    I’m a print journalist and it’s all I ever wanted to be. Common Dreams said on its site today one of the first things President Donald J. Trump said is the press are the worst people and can’t be trusted. Dear God! The leader of the free world is a thin-skinned, paranoid megalomaniac and this derives from being an evil human and creating armies of enemies. I think I’ll pray for alien intervention. Good luck America.

    • KB Gloria
      January 21, 2017 at 21:36

      Hear! Hear! But for comment I was beginning to worry I stumbled in on Breitbart–Consortium News is taking some strange turns in what is truly a necessary dressing down of the neocons, but I marched today for environmental preservation, consumer protections, corporate regulations, National Parks and protected lands, health care (no, ACA is not the gold standard) and human dignity and tolerance, respect and civil rights and the end of this fake war on terror. When you look at the cabinet nominees, it is pretty obvious our new executive is clearly not interested in these issues but very much a part of the horrific agenda threatened by the center to extreme right conservatives since Obama took office. I am beginning to lose faith in CN, and that is truly and deeply disappointing.

      • Reddox
        January 23, 2017 at 15:37

        I absolutely agree with you, KBGloria. I’ve read this site for years, and now I’m absolutely mystified by some of what I see.

        Of course, the dominance of foreign policy by neoconservatives and liberal interventionists over the last several years is a problem. But why would anyone have any faith that the incoming executive is sincerely interested in change?

        He wants more spending for his big, beautiful military. He wants to stick a finger in the Chinese government’s eye. He wants to talk tough and make threats to the North Koreans and the Iranians. He’s somehow going to get rid of ISIS, either with his own secret plan or with some plan that he’s demanding the generals come up with in the next 30 days (even though he “knows more than they do”). He’s going to make changes in NATO by insulting allied countries. He’s going to engage in gratuitous provocations in the Middle East, like moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

        But we should be willing to give him a chance because he wants to be nice to Russia? If he didn’t come across as such a pathetic sycophant, who would fall all over himself to change U.S. policy because Putin gave him a personal compliment, maybe he could sort of be taken seriously. Unfortunately, he and his nominee for Secretary of State both come across as basing their policy toward Russia on personal needs.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 21, 2017 at 22:18

      bob – the press Trump would have been talking about are the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, etc. They have absolutely vilified Trump and, yes, they have LIED, and not just little lies, but great big fat lies! These are the people he is talking about.

      90% of all media are owned by six corporations, most of them lying. If people were lying about me and I fought back, I would hope I wouldn’t be called “paranoid” or “thin-skinned”. What is he supposed to do? They’ve practically put him in bed with Putin.

      • Realist
        January 22, 2017 at 07:05

        Maybe if Obama had fought back against the lies and slanders in the media with some passion rather than fretting about being considered “uppity,” he could have actually accomplished something for the liberal agenda for which he half-heartedly postured. But, then again, maybe he was truly gutless and/or less than candid about his beliefs, values and priorities. Maybe he was quite willing to take all the hits if they advanced the cause of his wealthy patrons on the inside. Maybe it’s a simple matter of Trump can’t be bought because he doesn’t need the cash.

      • bob
        January 22, 2017 at 13:48

        Corporate media is not changing. We get Martha Raddatz, Wolf Blitzer, John King. I understand it but the idiot who said the MLK bust was removed is an idiot and you can’t respond to every illiterate corporate knucklehead standing at the CIA making your first speech and his underling refusing to answer one journalist’s question is no answer. I understand corporate journalism and it is exactly why my profession was purchased to lie to you. We’ve known this since the 70’s when major dailies began being purchased but Trump is a fraud. Trump University is a fraud. Trump refuses to release his tax returns because he is a fraud but Republicans like him because he’s rich and an authoritarian jackwagon. I voted for Obama twice but he betrayed my allegiance. One of his first acts was to keep the “Jesus Tax” in a nation sketched in separation of church and state. Trump’s first populist, executive order was to raise mortgage rates for working America. He is, however, white and Republicans love their reflection. I used to be whiter but more of a beige now.

        • savagem
          January 22, 2017 at 15:05

          Hmmm….not quite sure how to respond to this, Bob. You’re a journalist, you say?

          • Kiza
            January 22, 2017 at 23:06

            Yeah, one of the nonpartisan and highly literate kind (sarcasm intended), those who create news instead of reporting them, the kind that Trump and Kellyanne Conway are referring to:

            It used to be a shame in the past, but these days they proudly and loudly self-identify.

          • Reddox
            January 23, 2017 at 16:02

            Kiza, anyone who uses Zero Hedge as a reference deserves to be taken as a crank.

          • Kiza
            January 24, 2017 at 07:18

            Thanks very much for the compliment. I appreciate being called Deplorable or Crank by your kind, it means I am probably doing it not too badly. Zerohedge has been my #1 source of information for the last 18 months, because I do not consume the MSM sewerage (TV, newspapers etc) any more, unlike those of your outlook.

            Go check the list of the 200 fake news sites, Zerohedge is on it. Since this list has been published, I started exploring the other sites on it to broaden my sources of reliable news.

          • Reddox
            January 24, 2017 at 11:02

            Don’t flatter yourself that you were being complimented. That wasn’t the intent at all.

            Just because you don’t like what you read in “the MSM”, you’re reflexively relying on a Bulgarian inside trader who’s been banned from the financial industry, who’s been called out by one of his own blogging partners for his disingenuous BS, and whose father was just another apparatchik in Sofia. Not smart.

            But then, when you’re here rhapsodizing about Russian tanks, it’s clear what you are, comrade.

          • Kiza
            January 24, 2017 at 11:31

            Bulgaria would be like an Eldorado for you. Have you ever visited there, or is your deep knowledge and understanding all from MSM?

          • Reddox
            January 25, 2017 at 13:59

            Yes, Kiza. I lived in the Balkan region for over two years. Try again.

    • Zachary Smith
      January 21, 2017 at 22:23

      The leader of the free world is a thin-skinned, paranoid megalomaniac and this derives from being an evil human and creating armies of enemies.

      Would you alter that statement in any way if we were into the second day of President Hillary?

      • bob
        January 22, 2017 at 13:52

        No I understand the bombing Clintons and I did not vote for her but it does not alter one iota what Trump is and the carnage he is about to legislate. We had three choices during the election and the populist got hanged from the Live Oak.

    • Kiza
      January 21, 2017 at 22:42

      As a professional journalist, you should be informed a little better than an average person since the raw material of your job is information. Then, you should know who Common Dreams works for.

      In general, DJT often shoots himself in the foot when he opens his mouth to twit, but bending of DJT words by the Western (not only US) media has become the most fashionable “art form” in the whole empire. So many of your fellow artists compete to spin the meaning of his words totally out of their intended scope. If you would fall for it, you would be as dumb as their average news consumers are.

      In other words, I do not think Trump ever said that all journalists “are the worst people and can’t be trusted”, but some very clearly are.

      • bob
        January 22, 2017 at 14:16

        Perhaps Kiza Donald should attribute his comments to the specific journalist who irritated him the second day of his presidency. Excuse me Kiza, Trump made spastic convulsions in front of the world to demean a journalist and Republicans embrace it like a genetically mutated white privilege. Indeed, the Royals have dated their cousins for 800 years until they reduced their gene pool to fit in a teacup.

    • James lake
      January 22, 2017 at 02:44

      I agree with Trump on the media.
      I live in the uk and media ownership is a real issue with the Murdochs newspaper and TV news, and satellite tv.
      The government owned BBC is also a problem with its neo liberal/ neo conservative bias.
      They are all anti Trump and behave as if the USA is their country it’s very odd.

      There was a March today in London don’t ask me what it was about I am not sure those attending had a clear idea either. But the usual neo liberal were there to herd the women like sheep.
      Very odd the whole thing

    • Irene
      January 22, 2017 at 09:19

      The way Common Dreams boots commenters with respectful dissenting views and repeats any fake news put out by the DNC, they are hardly ones to criticize.

      • January 22, 2017 at 18:39

        Common Dreams is a big failure. I grew increasingly alarmed with the way they would carry, without qualification (and qualifying can be done, as Roger Annis at “The New Cold War: Ukraine And Beyond” demonstrates) articles the the likes of arch neoliberal (despite his protestations to the contrary) Jeffrey Sachs and CIA asset Graham Fuller and everyone mainstream (wishy washy) Left to very fake Left and would, accordingly, point it out. To he point where one day I found myself banned by the org that claims to not censor for political reasons. At first I thought it was me. I opened another email account (but didn’t attempt to hide myself by using a different handle) and then used another I already had, all to no avail. CD will sacrifice progressives in order to keep donations coming in. And some of these very fake Leftists (Jeffrey Sachs for sure) are VERY popular, ergo….

  41. SteveK9
    January 21, 2017 at 19:20

    A lot of this can be laid at the feet of our ‘main stream media’ to use an overused term. They’ve whipped up such hysteria over Trump, that many people simply can’t listen to these words.

    “We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first. We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example. We will shine for everyone to follow.”

    As a lifelong Democrat, these are welcome, and I wish a few more of my fellows would pay attention. I wrote in ‘Sanders’ name as a protest, but since the election I’ve developed a lot of sympathy for Trump, mainly because of the despicable actions of his enemies in the ‘war machine’. It started during the election … when the disgraceful ‘Trump is a traitor’ campaign started up, to cover up the Wikileak revelations. Too bad Kennedy did not succeed in ‘smashing the CIA into a thousand pieces’.

    • Litchfield
      January 21, 2017 at 19:56

      I agree completely with this comment. The tactics of Clinton’s supporters really started to catch my attention during the campaign. After the election they got worse, much worse. So that in the end I more or less reversed my own position on Trump to the point that I am damned glad he won. I definitely feel increasingly out of step with the left in this country, after being a lifelong Democrat–that is, I think, at least 10 presidential elections.

      I think Trump has a better chance than any alternative I can think of to “drain the DC swamp” and defang the CIA and the tell the MIC pigs at the trough to go and get a real job.

      • John
        January 21, 2017 at 21:46

        What “left”? The Democrats are a far-right party, and have been so for decades. Referring to them as “left” is giving them credit they do not deserve, while maligning the actual Left (most of whom do not see anyone worth voting for, though a few did hear about Jill Stein).

        • Litchfield
          January 22, 2017 at 11:54

          I debated with myself as to whether to put “left” in scare quos and decided to leave this argument for a different time. You might have missed my point: After decades of “lesser evil” voting, this time around I gave that up.
          Not interested in an argument on this on this thread. Been doing that for decades already!

        • January 22, 2017 at 18:30

          Even Jill Stein, who I momentarily was routing for, has turned out to be crooked. Visit:

  42. jakester48
    January 21, 2017 at 19:03

    Trump’s foreign policy is the only area in which I have some hope of a positive outcome of his presidency. But with Trump, it’s not what he says, it’s what he does that will matter. And since he is a self-proclaimed dealmaker, who expects a quid for his quo, I wonder what he expects Israel to deliver to US interests in return for the huge amount of dollars she has been promised.

  43. Miranda Keefe
    January 21, 2017 at 18:54

    Thank you. This is what needs to be spread throughout the Progressive community.

  44. bobzz
    January 21, 2017 at 18:44

    So, while there is a great deal to worry about from President Trump and his administration – particularly an apparent hostility toward climate-change science, disdain for minority rights and the embrace of right-wing law-and-order nostrums…

    Agree with RP on these and I would add moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. That will embroil the entire Muslim world. No worry though. Douglas Feith—one of the architects of Iraq II—assured us it would cause no problem. That in itself almost guarantees it will be. Where did the Trump go, who said, early in his campaign, that he would be neutral regarding Israel?

    • msavage
      January 22, 2017 at 10:11

      “Where did the Trump go, who said, early in his campaign, that he would be neutral regarding Israel?”

      Yes, I have been wondering this, as well. As I see it, Israel is a key to the unraveling of this entire web of deceit, lies, corruption, murder, etc. I have been wracking my brain to try to come up with a way in which Trump’s reversal on this issue could turn out well for those of us who want to see change for the better. Haven’t come up with anything yet. Anyone?

      • Sam F
        January 22, 2017 at 10:29

        I’ll guess that he is playing for time while he and Russia figure out how to cooperate and rally the factions toward cooperation against Isis. Then perhaps a joint approach to Israel and its history of racism and troublemaking. I would guess that the resulting policy will be a carrot-vs-stick approach, and will fail. Can’t see beyond that yet. Frankly I wish that they would simply redirect Isis to take on Israel, which it now richly deserves, and where Isis would fit and be contained very nicely.

        • Reddox
          January 23, 2017 at 14:47

          Sam F, where did you get the idea that Russia has any interest in fighting ISIS? Russia is more interested in supporting its ally, the Assad government. It has mainly targeted Syrian rebels, not ISIS.

      • Litchfield
        January 22, 2017 at 11:50

        Here is a try:
        1. Trump cannot take on everyone and everything at once.
        With the CIA, the media (including print media both left and right), the MIC, the banksters, the Dem Party Deep State operatives, etc. ranged up against him, he needs to have one powerful consituency in his corner.

        2. Another idea that some have raised: Moving the capital to Jerusalem and supporting Israel in its Greater Israel ambitions as they relate to the occupied territories and the rest of Palestine mind end up being a kind of jiu-jitsu move (not that this is necessary Trump’s plan, but trying to look ahead). That is, if Israel is given “permission” by Trump to move ahead with its plans, it must then choose whether to take the opportunity or not. If it chooses the latter, the two-state cover story is in shreds, the veil is torn from Israel’s “peaceful negotiations” toward two states protestations, and is put on the spot. Basically, it comes down to shit or get off the pot. If Israel takes the Trump bait, the focus of the “debate” immediately shifts to Israel’s being an apartheid state. If they don’t, the capital stays in Tel Aviv and the status quo remains in place . . .

        • savagem
          January 22, 2017 at 15:03

          Thank you also for your insight re this issue.

  45. msavage
    January 21, 2017 at 18:42

    First let me just clarify–I’m a woman. And I’ve just briefly glanced over some of the coverage of the “women’s protests” here in the U.S. And just from that briefest of looks–I’m more frightened by the sight of hundreds of thousands of women wearing “pussy hats” and holding signs depicting militant vaginas, than I am of what Trump represents. I haven’t even sorted it out yet to figure out why. But I’m disgusted, and the reactions of these “women” leave me feeling MUCH more hopeless than I did over Trump’s winning of the election. First of all, with all we have to worry about, with the hundreds of thousands being killed around the world due to our sociopathic “leaders” who care for nothing more than power and money, THIS is what these women are most worried about? Their ABORTION rights?! Jesus! Secondly, as Parry points out, though Trump and his cabinet picks are, indeed, horrific–there are some bright spots among his positions. It’ll take me a while to digest all of this, I suppose. But at the moment, I am feeling disgusted by the photos I’ve seen of thousands of women wearing pink “pussy” hats while our world is in such chaos. These women do NOT represent me. Quite frankly–I’m ashamed of, and for, all of them. I think the fear I’m feeling stems from the fact that so many women think that their abortion rights are the most important issue at the moment?

    • Litchfield
      January 21, 2017 at 19:44

      OMG, all of those pink hats are “pussy hats”?
      OK, I see this:

      It looks a bit ridiculous. But, one positive point about the election of Trump rather than Clinton—which is really good for women, too—is that Clinton would have neutralized any political action, organizing, and protest from women, just as Obama basically castrated protest and criticism from black Americans and just about all progressives and people like Meryl Streep and other celebrities, who never made a peep of criticism of Obama’s many bad actions but step up to the mike to excoriate Trump before he has even taken office.

      A Clinton win would actually have been the coup de grace for the Democratic Party. Now, there is a chance that something can be salvaged—if the sheeplike pussy hat wearers and others can be brought gently out of their fetal position of hysteria and head banging to see the sense in supporting Trump’s positive policies. He will need the backing of an active populace to fight the Deep State, the CIA, the bankers, and the MIC if he is to execute any of the positives he has announced. Progressives should protest and organize in a target fashion against retrogressive policies, but not the man himself.

      Thank you, Robert Parry, for once again bringing needed clarity. I do hope your hysterical comrades in the editorial offices of putatively progressive rags such as The Nation and Harpers, to just name two, are paying attention. Harper’s has disgraced itself with its two post-election covers. The Nation more or less the same. They are still in the pre-election not-looking-in-the-mirror mode of thinking that ad hominam ridicule of DJT, sufficed as an argument to vote for Clinton, and that applauding the actions of people who tried to shut down his rallies left black marks on their own faces.

      So many on the left are on the virge of walking into the trap Parry describes. Tom Englehardt is another one. All I can say to these folks is: Sober up! But they don’t listen to me!! I hope they will listen to Robert Parry and pull back from the brink.

      • January 22, 2017 at 18:15

        They call the Democratic Party the graveyard of social movements.

    • Bob Van Noy
      January 21, 2017 at 21:34

      Thanks for your response msavage. I suspect it was difficult for you to submit this insight. Much propaganda is still going on and it is hard to sort through it all but moving away from confrontation is key right now, I think. Several of us here were and remain big proponents of Tulsi Gabbard because she rejected malfeasance at DNC and is a peaceful warrior something Neocons wouldn’t understand…

    • John
      January 21, 2017 at 21:41

      To use a phrase from Medea Benjamin. “Exceptional American Vaginas”.

      Unfortunately, for the last couple decades, Feminism has been bastardized by identity politics. It no longer means valuing those traits considered “feminine” (compassion, nurturing, empathy), nor does it mean giving a voice to the voiceless. Look at “Feminism”‘s chosen candidate, a well known War Criminal. The ideals of actual Feminism have been denigrated so today’s “Feminism” is merely about women showing that they can promote patriarchal values just as good as any man.

      In no way am I implying that the right to control over one’s own body should be seen as less important, but that the right of Libyan women to not be blown up by a flying robot is at least as important.

      Admittedly, I have a penis, so, for many women, I have no right to speak of feminism. Real feminism, however, is about values, not anatomy.

      • Kiza
        January 22, 2017 at 00:41

        Nicely said John. Here is a cartoon of the alternative perspective on the women’s march:

      • msavage
        January 22, 2017 at 09:54

        “Look at “Feminism”‘s chosen candidate, a well known War Criminal. The ideals of actual Feminism have been denigrated so today’s “Feminism” is merely about women showing that they can promote patriarchal values just as good as any man.”

        John, I don’t believe the fact that you have a penis negates your right to speak of feminism. :) And I want to thank you for saying the above. You have helped me to put a finger on yet another reason for my intense, visceral distaste for Hillary Clinton.

      • January 22, 2017 at 18:16

        Ah yes, Code Pink. Another prog org partly funded by George Soros.

    • What a mess
      January 21, 2017 at 22:10

      Ditto! I couldn’t agree more. I’m Also a Woman that listened today. Really Angela Davis
      calling for Militant Acts….in the name of Love and Truth?

    • Sam F
      January 22, 2017 at 08:36

      Yes, I have felt the same and concluded that I should not be surprised that there are just as many naive persons of both sexes, able to be fooled that their political party represents them when it collects and devotes all its resources to fool them.

      The anger is good, for it will be needed in the battle to come against the Repub counter-revolution and its disastrous intentions in domestic policy. But it must not be directed against the Trump populists who merely want an end to the wars, corruption, and economic insecurity, who are natural allies of liberals and progressives.

      • msavage
        January 22, 2017 at 10:06

        “But it must not be directed against the Trump populists who merely want an end to the wars, corruption, and economic insecurity, who are natural allies of liberals and progressives.”

        I couldn’t agree more with you regarding this. There’s no denying that there are those that voted for Trump because they agree with some of the more outlandish statements that he’s made. Just as there’s no denying that there are many who supported Clinton just because they didn’t want their abortion rights taken away (as has been proven by many of the signs and sentiments seen during the “women’s marches”). But I do believe the vast majority of the people who voted for Trump voted for him for the reasons you cite. And are, therefore, natural allies of those on the “left” who also want to see an end to wars, corruption and economic insecurity.

        All my life I’ve maintained a neutral opinion where abortion rights are concerned. I can relate to both sides of the argument. But seeing a photo of a woman with a cartoon uterus giving the middle finger to the new president of the U.S. I don’t know…I cannot relate to another woman who chooses to express herself in this manner. To expend the trouble, expense and the time to travel to D.C. to protest. With people dying all over the world due to the murderous MIC; with people dying all over the U.S. due to contaminants in our water and food; with people dying all over the U.S. due to lack of adequate health care and/or an inability to afford health insurance; with our environment degrading on a daily basis; etc., etc., etc. To see a photo of Madonna at the D.C. protest, wearing a pink “pussy” hat, and to hear some of the words she chose to share, during her moments on the podium. It literally made me nauseous. What is WRONG with some of these women?

        • Litchfield
          January 22, 2017 at 11:40

          I agree with what you say.

          I don’t want to make the “decorum” argument or play the “concern troll” role.

          But for me as a thinking woman my view is that this type of “protest” is not the right thing at the present moment and juncture in Trump’s presidency.
          My view is that citizens of both sexes should welcome the new president and his family, and declare the intent to participate in constructive political engagement with the policies that Trump pushes (and those who espouse them) when they emerge.

          All of this protesting now seems kind of like shooting off a big cannon when there is no real enemy in sight. Also celebrating a sexual organ seems bit silly. What if men protested war wearing penis caps. Would women really want to join them in protest or demonstration? Or, even many peaceable men. Just gives unfriendly cartoonists and caricaturists an easy “handle,” so to speak.

        • Peppermint
          January 22, 2017 at 20:13

          “What is WRONG with some of these women?”

          You know, I get up every morning and ask that same question of the male testosterone addled empire I have to live in, only I ask, “What is WRONG with the puppet masters that they never have enough?! What would be sufficient for them?” And NO I don’t ascribe to, nor condone, whatever effluent flowed out of Madonna’s mouth. Just as Trump’s band of merry supporters aren’t all alike, nor are the women who marched on Saturday.

          This planet is in a shit-ton of trouble. I see clearly the strings being pulled, and I read and stay away from bs MSM enough to know who’s pulling them. I am also getting tired of being mansplained to, Left and Right; and, sometimes, women “mansplain” to me too. Some of them have-gasp- bought into the lies every one of us has been fed our entire lives.

          By virtue of the FACT that DT has shown us, through his words and cabinet appointments, that he’s going to maintain the rape, pillage, and carnage of this planet, he is disqualified to represent me. He is disqualified to represent my children’s future. By virtue of the FACT that his speech is abusive, he is disqualified to represent me. How anyone can justify this presidency is beyond my comprehension. I get it, yeah, here we are so I’m going to have to deal with it. But do NOT tell me to go quietly. And, no, I did not support Hillary warhawk Clinton.

          I know why I marched in a local sister march yesterday and only one post here encapsulated those reasons. Sorry but I cannot find that post as I scrolled through, in order to link off of it. Let me say this- it was not for superficial reasons lacking thought, nor due to a narrative bought and paid for by the DNC, that I marched.

          While there are many oh-so-nuanced “explanations” on this site for what The Donald is doing and why, I find it strange that people here are having difficulty finding nuance with the women’s march. Hint: for many people it had nothing to do with wearing a pussy hat. Although it is ironic that some people here are shocked, shocked I tell you, (and offended) by women using a symbol of mockery for DT that he himself used to describe his “exploits” with women, while excusing his crass, adolescent-like braggadocio. He cannot even conduct himself with a modicum of respect for others (as evidenced by name-calling), or maintain consistency of thought in what comes out of his mouth. He is a fraud. His narrative is a fraud. Repeated filing of bankruptcy does not constitute a smart businessperson. It only makes him a huckster and manipulator/player of the game.

          The disease of our culture can be summed up in the following by WH Auden:
          “We would rather be ruined than changed
          We would rather die in our dread
          Than climb the cross of the moment
          And let our illusions die.”

          Well, this nation is in the throes of a death spiral because we refuse to give up our illusions about self- importance and greed, illusions about power and control, and limits inherent to being human. Donald Trump is both a symptom of, and mirror to, those illusions.

          • Joe Tedesky
            January 23, 2017 at 02:11

            Peppermint, your argument here convinces me of how I must take the time to listen better to other people’s concerns. I’m glad you noted how there is more to the protesting than what Madonna has to say. This whole long election season has pitted various varieties of us Americans severely against one another, and that’s a most unfortunate development.

            While I can’t speak for everyone here, I think that there are many of us who are so relieved by Hillary’s loss, that our applauding her defeat might be misread as our having unconditional support for Donald Trump. This support of Trump’s willingness to have good relations with Russia, is similar to people connecting all women to say a Madonna type celebrity. Like I said this election has divided us all more than it has joined the many factions of the America populace together, and with that observation I feel a lot of disappointment.

            When you notice a progressive such as myself agreeing with Donald Trump regarding his wanting détente with Russia, this is as odd as me seeing progressive women being found in the same camp as CIA Director John Brennan….how did we progressive liberal thinkers end up so severely divided like this? This would be a good conversation to have on this comment board. So let’s all stay cool and calm, and have that conversation…I mean at our core we are on the same team, right? My wish for this New Years would be that somehow, and by some happenstance we will all finally come together.

            Thanks for explaining your position on the women’s March…and let’s keep our fingers crossed, and keep our fingers dialing our representatives to get our country where it needs to be. Joe

          • msavage
            January 23, 2017 at 08:27

            Hi Peppermint,

            Joe Tedesky has already responded very eloquently to you, and I agree with everything he’s said. I am sure there are many who marched for the reasons you cited. And thank you for doing that. I fully support and understand protesting Donald Trump for a myriad of reasons. Unfortunately, the hundreds of thousands of “pussy hats” are what stood out for me about the D.C. protest, and the cartoons of militant uteri, and the performances of “women” such as Madonna. But that’s probably how it was intended, right? Media instructed to focus on the most inane, ridiculous portions of the protests? In fact, judging by the number of “pussy hats” that were on display in the crowd in D.C., I wouldn’t be surprised if there was Oligarch money involved in pushing that “message”–Soros?–specifically to de-legitimize all of the protesters.

          • Joe Tedesky
            January 23, 2017 at 10:54

            To the women who this may matter to. I myself am a free spirit, and I am perfectly fine with almost any expression of art, or protest. Although, when it comes to who represents my point of view it may matter to how my sponsor makes us all look. I don’t want a racist representing my view of agreement with President Trump’s Russia policy. If the racist lumps in their view on race while pointing out the fine points of why we should make peace with Russia, well then I’m out of here. Same things goes for the women when a celebrity woman goes off the rails, and steals the show.

            When I met my wife thirty some years ago she was a divorced mom of three with no child support coming in from her exhusband, and she had a regular job. My wife was from a big family who could only pay to put the boys through college. My wife draws rings around Madonna, not on the stage, but in life where it matters the most to make things work. Some woman like my wife are the ones who should be behind the microphone representing us. Enough about my wife, but women need real life experienced women standing tall for their cause, and the media must focus on their issues when they speak…it’s that simple.

            The pussy hats are cute, and I guess they stand for something, but somehow I picture somewhere down the road we will all fine out that they were a deal sold as a manufacturers seconds, and the protest was a way of getting rid of them….just me. I may have left out my pussy hat remark, but hey I just had to say something, and I will no doubt get one from a grandchild next Christmas, and I will love it…since I’m losing my hair, and my head gets cold.

            Protest all you want, and don’t be surprised if some of us here at CN end up standing with you. Joe

          • Kiza
            January 24, 2017 at 11:29

            Joe, thank you for this personal comment.

            Somehow, these women opposite to your wife, always seem to find themselves closer to the microphone. And not only women. I have a tongue-in-cheek theory that this world consists of 20% of truly good people, 10% of truly bad people and the rest are neither here nor there. But the 10% are so active, so loud, so energetic with their troublesome ideas and intentions that they make this world close to hell for the 90%. They are the reason why the evil always has initiative over the good.

    • Irene
      January 22, 2017 at 09:59

      Nothing says “Trump’s words are offensive and demeaning to women” like wearing a constant reminder of them on your head.

    • Reddox
      January 23, 2017 at 14:23

      Where did you get the idea that abortion was the most important issue at the rally Saturday? You admit that you barely paid any attention to what was said — “I’ve just briefly glanced over some of the coverage”. You admit that you haven’t really tried to understand what was going on — “I haven’t even sorted it out yet”. Maybe you should actually become informed before you indulge your own hysteria. It wasn’t just women at the rally, it wasn’t just about abortion, and it wasn’t just in the United States.

  46. incontinent reader
    January 21, 2017 at 18:39

    Exactly right.

  47. Ragnar Ragnarsson
    January 21, 2017 at 18:09

    Slightly off topic, but does anyone else see the irony of people dressed all in black and wearing ski masks (so they can anonymously commit crimes) shouting “No KKK!!”.

    I have to admit, after hearing Trumps speech yesterday, at first I was just a little speechless. Then, as what he said began to sink in, and after watching it a second time, I realized what had just happened and I was thinking “Yes!!”. Say what you want about the man, but he most definitely has a large pair of brass ones.

    I voted for him because Clinton was just too scary to even consider. After yesterday, I’m finally proud of it instead of mildly apologetic. He has many flaws, but he’s also trying to undo the neocon death-grip on America.

    Thanks Mr Parry, for your continued pursuit of sanity and truth. I know there are a couple of people who object to any positive talk about Trump on this site, but to them I can only say, don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Or, like Obama used to say, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

    • CitizenOne
      January 21, 2017 at 23:40

      Wise words Ragnar Ragnarsson Mr. Parry is indeed a speaker of truth and has been for many decades. He is like a compass pointing north. Never will you lose you way. He is critical of every flavor of establishment lies be it by democrats, republicans or the media. It is especially important now for you to support this website. It is and has always been an unusual place where insider experts have been able to have their opinions hosted by a master truth hunter and tireless investigative sleuth and gate keeper who only allows in those who bring a rational argument and facts to the table and who will question and even omit any post not bringing facts. Mr. Parry might just be the most respected journalist who has dared to bring forth the facts that just about every other “progressive” journalist has not addressed.

      I personally am in no doubt that the reason I have been attracted to this website is the same reason I am attracted to science which is nothing but the pursuit of truth. Fakers and propaganda and lies have no place in science and dutiful scholars will ferret out any bad apples and eventually the ultimate goal of science to uncover unknown truths and properties of our Universe will lead us toward a new and better future.

      So there are two themes here which are accurately portrayed by Mr. Perry. One is that Mr. Trump is facing extreme challenges by the status quo on foreign policy and that we can agree that his foreign policy positions are the best things we have heard from Mr. Trump.

      The other accurate representation of the Trump model by Mr. Parry is that Trump’s domestic picks for nominations and his first executive acts seem to be more in line with traditional republican planks.

      I would argue that Trump’s positions on foreign policy are the key defining differences between former republican presidents and Donald Trump and are also the drivers behind the claims by the government and supported by the media that some foreign agency must be behind all of this.

      I would also suggest his policy might be exactly not to throw out perfect for good by yielding on some issues to give him a chance to fix a larger problem.

      Let’s just look at it by the numbers. One might cite GDP or other sources of economic strength as a comparison between nations but certainly with a defense budget comparison, there can be no equating the defense spending of the USA vs. the rest of the World.

      It is bigger than welfare, bigger than all else and if Donald Trump wants to curb it by not going along with foolish interventions around the World then why would we attack him for that?

      There is so much suffering right now around the World by people who have become the unintentional collateral damage of the Obama and Bush administration’s wars that perhaps we should question how a democrat like Obama could sanction even more military interventions like he has. Perhaps we should also be glad a republican like Trump has questioned what former democrats have supported to disastrous ends.

  48. CitizenOne
    January 21, 2017 at 17:42

    Now, there are new stories about how Donald Trump will start a war and also why Trump is like a Nazi sympathizer because Trump opposes US foreign military intervention. They compare Trump to Charles Lindbergh when Lindbergh, who held anti-Semitic views, opposed US involvement in WWII.

    So on the one hand he is going to start a war which apparently a bad thing. Where were those concerns when the NY Times was deliberately handing us a pack of government lies in or to do just that in the run up to the Iraq war?

    On the other hand, Trump opposing carpet bombing the middle east makes Trump a Nazi

    What the heck?

    Sounds like he just can’t get a break from the main stream press.

  49. Novus
    January 21, 2017 at 17:40

    Soros lost $1Billion on November 8th, 2016 and continues paying protesters $50/hour to vilify Trump.
    That’s the man behind the Democrats and is using his NGOs in Europe to destabilize Russia.
    Don’t be surprised by anti Russia signs among protesters.

    • January 21, 2017 at 19:04

      He’s behind so much. And I’m surprised – to put it mildly – that Robert Parry carries CIA asset Graham Fuller’s articles. It’s gotten so nuts – I guess we are supposed to throw up our hands and say “What’s the use?” – that I can look at who’s funding an organization (Center for Media and Democracy) founded by John Stauber and discover that it is partly funded by Soros’s Open Society Foundation (, even while John (who no longer works at CMD) is warning us about fake progressive organizations that have been bought by rich Democrats like Drummon Pike, John Podesta and George Soros! (

      • Kiza
        January 21, 2017 at 22:23

        I second your opinion on what Fuller is and I have been often cen sored here for my comments.

        What we need to keep in mind is that Soros is a likely CIA asset: in the latest documents released by the CIA please compare the timing of the financial market manipulations by the CIA and when Soros got rich by betting against the British Pound. Therefore, Soros is likely to be a CIA freelancer operating at arms-length.

        • January 22, 2017 at 18:11

          When your comments are disappeared, may I recommend that you keep track. If you blog, just create a category called ‘Disappeared’ and be sure to use an extended clipboard, always copying your post just before you hit send. That’s what I’ve been doing for some time. People, especially people who care enough to look for answers, should see what’s going on. As I said, I’ve been tracking my disappeared comments for some time, which just happened naturally. I was already blogging and it didn’t take much to organize to be able to do it. Some time after getting in the habit of tracking, and blogging about my disappeared comments, I came across Off Guardian. I mentioned my blog and my practice of tracking my disappeared posts without even realizing that the Off Guardian creators actually created OG specifically in response to The Guardian’s out of control censorship, for political reasons, of visitors to it’s Comment Is Free forums. I felt right at home. And it’s a great website. But they all need to be monitored all the time. Especially considering how every source of information is viewed as problematic by the 1% and it’s tools who view the people as the enemy and have succeeded in lulling most people into not noticing the class war in which they are being slaughtered, as Chomsky notes in his fabulous doc called “Requiem For The American Dream.”

          • Kiza
            January 22, 2017 at 22:21

            Thank you for this recommendation, it is a good one.

            To me, it was important to try work out the pattern of censorship. Naturally, there is also a technological imperfection – comments sometimes disappear into an electronic black hole. The pattern is that the comments to Robert Parry’s and a few other author’s articles are seldom censored, but comments to some authors’ articles are frequently censored – Fuller being one of them, for example.

            The strangest case of censorship I encountered here was when some guy wrote a low-brow, gung-ho, military-style comment about Tulsi Gabbard’s military record. I retorted eloquently and effectively. Then this troll realised he made a mistake. So his original comment and my retort disappeared and his new, much more skillful criticism of Tulsi Gabbard appeared. It truly looked like a professional troll and the zine moderator (article writer) working together.

            From then on I avoid commenting on the articles of a few authors who do not suffer criticism gladly. Mr Parry appears the most open and tolerant author here.

          • Bob Van Noy
            January 23, 2017 at 11:37

            Arby I wanted to acknowledge your positive comments about off-guardian. I found that site recently and I agree that it is a quality site with valuable commentary including yours. Thanks for your knowledgeable contributions, we’ll need them going forward as we try to figure out what kind of “fix” we’re in now…

    • Realist
      January 22, 2017 at 06:40

      Soros has become persona non grata in his own birth country of Hungary. They recognise him for the trouble-maker that he is and have actually banned him from entering the country. Well, Orban is on good terms with Putin, George simply cannot abide that.

  50. Alice LaChapelle
    January 21, 2017 at 17:38

    Thank you, Mr. Parry for the few shreds of hope that you are able to give.
    It will be a bumpy ride.
    One has to wonder if ‘we’ have learned anything — in time to halt climate and nuclear catastrophes
    and the collapse of our democracy….

  51. bob
    January 21, 2017 at 17:37

    we are the Romans and we crumble brick by bloody brick

    • Peppermint
      January 22, 2017 at 16:17

      Best comment here.

  52. Zachary Smith
    January 21, 2017 at 17:21

    There is going to be a lot of “selective” reporting about Trump. Witness the slew of articles talking about how the crazed warmonger wanted TANKS and MISSILES in his Inaugural parade. From my viewpoint this wasn’t the greatest of ideas, but then again, it wasn’t my inaugural parade. A few moments googling turned up the Kennedy event which had a lot of missiles and military stuff. Reagan doesn’t seem to have put them on the street, but a full military display was sitting beside the road. On January 20 of 1953 the Eisenhower parade featured a huge 280mm cannon – Atomic Annie – being towed down the street.

    Was there even a hint of any of that in most of the stories dumping on Trump? No.

    And how many times has the Corporate Media featured the latest move at the Pipeline Protest site of installing a freaking anti-aircraft missile launcher? ‘They’ say it isn’t loaded, and is there strictly to monitor any attempts by the Evil Indians and their Helpers to send in Drones or something. It also gives the Authorities an excuse to have a larger-than-usual Military Force to guard this valuable piece of equipment.

    I don’t have the slightest doubt Trump & Co. are going to do some dumb things, and it’s beginning to look as if those events will be treated like huge pimples on the otherwise perfect face of US history. Easy to do if you resolutely ignore all other instances of dumb things done in the past.

    • January 21, 2017 at 18:50

      Good points Zachary.

  53. Knomore
    January 21, 2017 at 17:10

    Thanks, Robert Parry, for this summation of the cracked mirror state of American politics… and the myriad pieces it could shatter into.

    We have been so misinformed, lied to and twisted around by the reigning powers that it becomes next to impossible to read correctly anything we are told, anything we hear. Consider all of the false flags, increasing in number over time since 9/11. What do they mean? How are we to read all of the mixed messages of which Trump is just one more?

    I heard Trump’s speech yesterday as a vigorous, point by point, disavowal of the NWO and the Deep State cabal that’s forcing this evil idea on America and the peoples of the world. I’m in his court until he proves by his actions that trusting him is folly.

    Thank you for your iteration of warnings from our forefathers about foreign entanglements and for the heads up about keeping an open mind. It’s time for a complete renewal of the American political system and with it, banishment of both parties. Time… and patience.

  54. January 21, 2017 at 17:05

    Thank you Bob,
    For helping us separate the wheat from the chafe in a Trump presidency. It is truly remarkable that after offending practically every significant voting block in the country he winds up a clear winner, and one of the unheard of group of voters who still want to set things right with Russia failed to generate any media attention, despite Mr. Trump’s actual recognition of Russia’s national interest and his refusal to vilify President Putin. Indeed the pro-Russia stance advertised for the Trump administration could be the silver lining around a cloud of deplorables, if it actually happens.

    Could it be that the “peace dividend” that was discussed briefly at the end of the Cold War 27 years ago might actually materialize? Bob, you have identified the reason it never did. For some reason the neocons and liberal hawks lined up, and with the help of the MI complex, cheered on by their corporate controllers inside the beltway, and they all coalesced after 9/11 to capture the country in a fear of terrorism. Following the Doctrines of Wolfowitz and Bush to project American values of free speech and democracy as cover, we sought to clone other countries into agreeing with us in both style and substance. In the process we have created disasters in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine, including millions of refugees for our friends and allies to manage, while their economies and societies were destabilized or disintegrated. What, may I ask, is this kind of foreign policy from a “benevolent” America? Not the country I once believed in. Maybe we are clutching at straws, but if Trump can get it right with Russia, we might be able to squeeze out enough of a peace dividend to really cope with our huge problems in education, health, infrastructure, law enforcement, etc, at home and break the neocon/liberal hawk stranglehold on our government and media. Wouldn’t that be worth a few political fopas?

    • Bob Van Noy
      January 21, 2017 at 21:11

      Howard Mettee, I thought your response was well thought out and accurate. Thank you for this contribution. And, the answer is yes.

    • Kiza
      January 21, 2017 at 22:07

      “… we might be able to squeeze out enough of a peace dividend to really cope with our huge problems in education, health, infrastructure, law enforcement, etc, at home …”

      Yes, the keyword is “might” because there is no guarantee. Some people in finance (who I trust) say that it is probably already too late for US to pull out. On top of attempting it in the last minute, the reform in the US is being done by a loud-mouth salesman such as Trump. But miracles do happen sometimes…

    • January 23, 2017 at 18:49

      Excellent response Mr. Mettee. However, regarding your comment “they all coalesced after 9/11″….allow me to bring up the proverbial elephant in the room. As far as I am concerned, being a pilot, the actuality is that the coalescense was predestined by the false flag operation of 9/11. I realize this is an argument for another classroom because we have many bright people on this site, of which I am grateful, commenting brilliantly on very important issues regarding today, so I must digress. However, I believe that every President in modern history, post-inauguration after Kennedy is brought into a special room for a special meeting with special people who tell him what he actually can and cannot do. In this arena both Obama and Trump were brought up to snuff about 9/11. Unlike Obama, Trump most likely had it figured out years ago and didn’t need to be told about it. What he does about that knowledge….one can only hope it is a good decision.

  55. Charles Homsy
    January 21, 2017 at 16:52

    Sound analysis. The Dem party has lost it. There has been no significant effort by the DNC to address the real reasons they lost the election.

  56. evelync
    January 21, 2017 at 16:34

    re:’Over the past several decades – even after the end of the Cold War –American presidents have violated this founding precept as they repeatedly went abroad “in search of monsters to destroy.” ‘

    Yes, and they/we have become the monsters in the process of seeking “monsters to destroy”.

    Foreign policy has been handled secretly because it violates our principles and is hard to ‘splain to people without lying.
    We average people, I think, are starting to see through the fog and rebel.
    e.g. I met a retired Republican couple at an airport recently who were vehemently opposed to Clinton but would’ve voted for Bernie and who nodded strongly when I mentioned the endless regime change wars. They felt a moral repulsion against those wars.

    I think we’re beginning to see through the fog because it’s become so obvious that our government is not working for anyone but the profiteers.

    Did you have a chance to have any discussions with the “protesters” about this, Mr. Parry?
    Thank you!

    • Michael
      January 21, 2017 at 21:34

      “”Yes, and they/we have become the monsters in the process of seeking “monsters to destroy”.””

      +++A liberalism that needs monsters to destroy can never politically engage with its enemies. It can never understand those enemies as political actors, making calculations, taking advantage of opportunities, and responding to constraints.+++
      +++Such a liberalism becomes dependent on the very thing it opposes…+++

      From Feb 2017 Harper’s, Trump: A Resister’s Guide

      While not terminally ill, the US would be unable to heal without a diagnosis such as was provided by DT in such stark terms during his speech. Let’s move forward in an engaged and thoughtful manner. Last chance?

  57. Tom Coombs
    January 21, 2017 at 16:30

    I have always been for detente with Russia. This new cold war manufactured by Nuland and her ilk especially distresses me. What bothers me is giving credit to Trump. Trump is only interested in the economic benefits of closer ties to Russia. I’m Canadian. Our system is far from perfect but we do have five political parties that can voice their views in our parliament. We are going to be severely affected by Trump’s trade policies. Our former prime minister was a sissy hawk and damaged our relations with Russia. We have to become the “white doves” of old and hold to our former stance on human rights. I’m all for staying out of turmoil abroad,
    we can’t even take care of our native brothers and sisters here in Canada, that should be our priority now. As for you guys, you have to seriously look at your two party system, your executive branch and your voters rights. Take care of things at home and be polite to Canadians.

    • SteveK9
      January 21, 2017 at 19:16

      I disagree. I don’t think Trump is ‘only interested in the economic benefits of closer ties to Russia’. I think he honestly believes all of the killing over the last 16 years is terrible. You really can lump W and O together at this point. I didn’t think Obama could really match the carnage of Bush, but he came through by the end.

      • backwardsevolution
        January 21, 2017 at 19:57

        SteveK9 – I agree with your synopsis. In the words of John Lennon, I really think Trump wants to “Give Peace a Chance”.

    • John
      January 21, 2017 at 21:08

      Many of us have taken a closer look into the things you have mentioned, however, being able to change such things would either require a series of Constitutional ammendments or a revolution followed by a new Constitution.

      Considering the entrechment of monied interests, and the uber-militarization of the police, and the narocticaztion of the populace, neither of these seem possible currently, umfortunately.

      I wish I had better news for you there.

    • Sam F
      January 21, 2017 at 22:18

      Yes, your suggestions for the US are good, although we shall see about Trump. Generally the Repubs do not mind genocide but do not want to pay for it, and find it somewhat bad for business, while the Dems are bribed to fabricate foreign monsters for the MIC/Israel/WallSt/Saudis. We need more political parties to stop the Dem/Repub duopoly of oligarchy running fake liberals to destroy democracy. Democracy only works when coalitions of parties that people actually agree with install the officials.

  58. Loren Bliss
    January 21, 2017 at 16:17

    Very well said. Indeed the most intelligent advice to yet emerge from the post-inauguration hurly-burly.

  59. Abe
    January 21, 2017 at 16:17

    Nothing new, really, but this year’s frolics demonstrate how the alliance between the military-industrial complex and the Israel lobby stage manages American elections:

    • Abe
      January 21, 2017 at 19:47

      “Geopolitical observers of the Middle East turbulence tend to blame the raging chaos in the area on the presumed failure of the ‘incoherent,’ ‘illogical’ or ‘contradictory’ policies of the United States. Irrefutable evidence […] suggests, however, that in fact the chaos represents the success, not failure, of those policies—policies that are designed by the beneficiaries of war and military adventures in the region, and beyond. While U.S. policies in the region are certainly irrational and conflicting from the standpoint of international peace, or even from the standpoint of the U.S. national interests as a whole, they are quite logical from the viewpoint of economic and geopolitical beneficiaries of war and international hostilities, that is, from the viewpoint of (a) the military-industrial complex, and (b) the militant Zionist proponents of ‘greater Israel’ […]

      “Just as the beneficiaries of war dividends, the military-security-industrial complex, view international peace and stability inimical to their interests, so too the militant Zionist proponents of ‘greater Israel’ perceive peace between Israel and its Palestinian/Arab neighbors perilous to their goal of gaining control over the ‘promised land.’ The reason for this fear of peace is that, according to a number of the United Nations’ resolutions, peace would mean Israel’s return to its pre-1967 borders, that is, withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. But because proponents of ‘greater Israel’ are unwilling to withdraw from these occupied territories, they are therefore afraid of peace—hence, their continued attempts at sabotaging peace efforts/negotiations.

      “By the same token, these proponents view war and convulsion (or, as David Ben-Gurion, one of the key founders of the State of Israel, put it, ‘revolutionary atmosphere’) as opportunities that are conducive to the expulsion of Palestinians, to the geographic recasting of the region, and to the expansion of Israel’s territory […]

      “The alliance between the military-industrial complex and the Israel lobby is unofficial and de facto; it is subtlely forged through an elaborate network of powerful militaristic think tanks such as The American Enterprise Institute, Project for the New American Century, America Israel Public Affairs Committee, Middle East Media Research Institute, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Middle East Forum, National Institute for Public Policy, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, and Center for Security Policy […]

      “In brief, the evidence is overwhelming (and irrefutable) that the raging chaos in the Middle East, North Africa and Eastern Europe/Ukraine is not because of the ‘misguided’ policies of the United States and its allies, as many critics and commentators tend to maintain. It is, rather, because of premeditated and carefully-crafted policies that have been pursued by an unholy alliance of the military-security-industrial complex and the Israel lobby in the post-Cold War world.”

      Planned Chaos in the Middle East—and Beyond
      By Ismael Hossein-zadeh

  60. Joe Lauria
    January 21, 2017 at 16:13

    Excellent piece Bob. But there is a glaring contradiction in Trump’s rhetoric. If he wants to scale back US interventionism why does he want to “rebuild” a military that needs downsizing, not rebuilding? Is it simply for economic reasons?

    • SteveK9
      January 21, 2017 at 19:12

      Canceling a grotesque waste of money, like the F35 could be a form of ‘rebuilding’.

    • backwardsevolution
      January 21, 2017 at 19:28

      Joe Lauria – Trump wants to scale back interventionism, but he also has to keep the MIC happy. If he has to make a choice, the latter is the better way to go. The only thing I worry about is if Trump doesn’t run next election or gets voted out, and then Clinton or someone like her gets elected after a big military rebuilding. Look out!

      Trump has said that NATO countries are not paying their fair share, and they’re not spending their 2% of GDP on the military, or whatever NATO requires they should be spending. But I was just reading somewhere that countries are or are going to be beefing up their military spending, which equals big bucks for American manufacturers.

      So he’s maintaining the MIC profits, but not intervening in other countries. This should placate them for awhile.

      • Sam F
        January 21, 2017 at 22:02

        This has been my thought also. Placation of the MIC during the initial phase, to avoid outright subversion, followed by retargeting their budget to infrastructure or other purposes. But he may continue their budget excesses; too early to tell.

    • Kiza
      January 21, 2017 at 21:45

      There is nothing the experienced military brass like more than living in peace and getting all the shiny new toys and great salaries for doing nothing. It is only the younger officers who need war to advance in their careers. Ask anyone who has been in the military.

      One of the few supporters of Trump within the power triad are the military. If he gives them their fancy and shiny new toys (feeling of power) and a good pay, they will not wish for wars to justify the huge expenditure. I do not think the World will have a problem with the US having the most powerful military on the planet if it does start and then get involved in local conflicts (Ukraine, Syria, Libya and so on). A non-interventionist administration with a content military – that is the only peace formula possible. (Remember what the leading Democrat warmonger Madeleine Albright quipped: “What is the purpose of having the finest military in the World if we are not allowed to use it?”)

      Some “progressives” will attack such opportunism by Trump of keeping MIC well fed and content. But such criticism would be coming from the most hypocritical people whose candidate would have done the same plus she would have blown up the planet, so it does not carry any validity.

      • Sam F
        January 21, 2017 at 22:10

        Exactly, although continuation of the war toys budget for long would lead to war, as Albright foolishly showed. UK PM Gladstone noted presciently in 1860 that “We have no adequate idea of the predisposing effect which an immense series of measures in preparation for war has in actually begetting war.” Now we have a more than adequate idea.

        • Kiza
          January 21, 2017 at 23:07

          Sam, what you write I agree with – in the long run, too many fancy war toys will lead to wars, when some neo-something-nutt-case (such was Albright) comes into position to control them.

          You could easily draw an interesting parallel with the general powers of the President: after Bush and Obama grabbed so much power on behalf of the Deep State that Obama has effectively become an emperor, now the Deep State will have a problem getting rid of Trump politically because his position of the Emp…, sorry the President, is so all powerful. Their only option will be the assassination.

          Also, US desperately needs to find savings to boost the productive part of the economy. Cutting military right now is a very attractive option, but not a viable one in my view. But I am betting on Trump slowly closing down some of almost 1,000 overseas US military bases and so on – he will take the slow path of least resistance with US military.

      • Realist
        January 22, 2017 at 05:14

        Trying to please the ensconced establishment is exactly how Obama was led down the garden path. They obviously told him “trust us, we’ve been at this for years and you are just an untested outsider,” so the bankers got everything they wanted and so did the MIC. No doubt that Trump will have his own versions of Petraeus, Gates, Larry Summers and the rest telling him “how things must be.” Brennan is already doing so publicly, after Clapper basically characterized him as Putin’s clueless stooge.

        Apparently, the government has grown so large over the course of 228 years that the one man recognised by the constitution as the fount of all executive power simply cannot effectively exercise it so that the buck always lands on his desk alone. There are a myriad of power centers in DC grabbing for dollars that Trump (and undoubtedly Obama before him) doesn’t even know exist, and unless he surrounds himself with cabinet member of ability and integrity, no one is necessarily going to tell him about.

        • Sam F
          January 22, 2017 at 08:17

          Yes, there could be interesting Trump-Obama naivete parallels. The National Security Council NSC now exceeds 2000 staff surrounding the President and far outnumbering all of his appointees and known advisers, representing no one but the MIC and secret agencies, and comprises almost the entirety of their social group. It should be eliminated or severely downsized and silent until called upon.

    • Joe Tedesky
      January 22, 2017 at 02:44

      “If he wants to scale back US interventionism why does he want to “rebuild” a military that needs downsizing, not rebuilding? Is it simply for economic reasons?”


      I question Trump’s reasoning on this very subject myself, and a couple things come to mine;
      (1) by having a strong military, and when proudly parading it in front of the world’s grand stand that this would show America’s superior military might. This show of might could serve as a strong bargaining tool, in order to scare America’s enemies, and while at the same time it would give bragging rights for the U.S. to intimate while giving reassurance of it’s strength to America’s weaker allies to stay close, and be a reminder to it’s puppet allies to dare not stray to far from the U.S. Empires strong dominant claim to it’s mastering of the NWO hegemony.
      (2) to drive up the national debt, so when the day of reckoning is brought upon the U.S. by the money changers, that the American taxpayer will be so deeply stuck in debt that the payables for this bill will continue into the now and until infinity.

      This is what I guess could be his, or someone’s reasoning for why he declares such things. What I also am concerned with is his impeachment, and that if a ordeal of impeachment is imposed upon this nation, would this be the trigger for a financial crash of such spectacular proportions to be enough that a President Pence would then enforce the biggest bailout for the banks that this world has ever seen.

      • Joe Tedesky
        January 22, 2017 at 11:50

        I just came across this Pepe Escobar article where Pepe quotes a high ranked insider he refers to as Mr X. I would recommend you all read this, and put it up aganst all of the other analogies that are getting thrown around out here, and get yourself even more confused…or not confused. Play nice people, because we are all at the beginning of a tremendously huge moment of change, for the better or worst of it.

  61. January 21, 2017 at 16:09

    all good and true observations. Pass it on.

  62. Abe
    January 21, 2017 at 16:07

    “In reality, regardless of who sits in the White House, US foreign policy is primarily dictated by unelected corporate-financier special interests. This explains why the US has exhibited treachery and subversive tendencies toward Russia for decades – transcending US presidencies, and even entire eras of US politics. Banks, energy firms, and defense contractors have seen Russia as a competitor since World War II – a competitor to undermine, overrun, buy-off, or otherwise isolate and eliminate.

    “Skewing elections in favor of president-elect Donald Trump over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would have made little to no difference at all in this decades-long struggle between East and West.

    “Understanding this, however, does much in explaining why the US is exploiting the DNC’s compromised e-mails to blame Russia. It provides yet another opportunity to further justify attempts to encircle, contain, and ultimately overthrow the political, financial, military, and industrial order in Russia – eliminating a significant obstacle to Wall Street and Washington’s ambitions toward global hegemony.

    “Without being able to cite ‘election hacking’ and other alleged threats Moscow poses to the West, the immense expenditure on military expansion – particularly by the US in Eastern Europe – would be inexcusable.”

    What’s Really Behind US Claims of “Russian Hacking?”
    By Tony Cartalucci

  63. Drew Hunkins
    January 21, 2017 at 15:59

    As I’ve been writing for about the last year: the left, progressives and anti-war folks must make a clear distinction: 1.) by all means protest and rally tooth and nail against Trump’s attacks on gov’t-public services, public education, Ayn Rand-M. Friedman tax plans, and his evisceration of labor, environmental and consumer protections; but 2.) acknowledge where Trump gets things morally and ethically correct — his overtures to tamp down the new Cold War and make peace with the Kremlin is something he should be lauded for. If Killary would’ve won we’d be on the brink of nuclear war with Moscow by this Monday morning. Moreover, Trump’s vociferous attacks on all the NAFTA/TPP baloney are as welcome as a cold drink after a hard day’s work.

    Fitzgerald’s beautiful quote is more timely now than ever: the mark of true intelligence is being able to function intellectually while keeping two contradictory thoughts in one’s head simultaneously.

    • Kiza
      January 21, 2017 at 21:19

      Drew, the problem with your recommendation is that the needs of the elitist Democrats are totally opposite: they care much more about the wars enriching their MIC donors and the Obamacare enriching their pharma donors and so on than about public education, tax plans, evisceration of labor, environment, consumer protection and so on. They have objectively proven this orientation during eight years of Obama’s presidency.

      To my uninformed (and disinterested) friends when they ask I explain that the Democrats lost because of:
      1) unelectability of Hillary Clinton and
      2) Obama’s track record.
      All email revelations were successfully blocked by the MSM and played a negligible part in the election loss
      , regardless if the Russians hacked and delivered them to Wikileaks or not. Also, HRC had an election budget which beat Trump’s around 10:1 and even this did not make enough difference.

      US Democratic Party is on the path of extinction. Only a ground-up reform or a non-democratic revolution could save them.

      • backwardsevolution
        January 21, 2017 at 22:05

        Kiza – you are so right when you say that “All email revelations were successfully blocked by the MSM.” For awhile there I did watch CNN at night, and there was very, very little about the leaked emails. They shredded absolutely everything that Trump said, hung on his every word, yet there was virtually nothing said about Hillary. Once in awhile a negative comment slipped out, but that was quickly covered up by the host of the show. Very biased, one-sided coverage. It had one positive effect, though: I don’t watch it anymore.

      • Realist
        January 22, 2017 at 04:45

        On the one hand I’m inclined to believe that the Dems plan to emulate the successful Republican strategy against the Obama administration and the large Democratic majorities in both houses of congress after the 2008 elections and prosecute a scorched earth policy of condemning, obstructing and subverting everything the president and his congressional majority attempt to do, regardless of whether they oppose the policies or perhaps even originated some of them themselves (such as Obamacare). It worked once, especially when the GOPers had an angry army of Teabaggers behind them, and now the Dems not only have every minority with an axe to grind behind them but the entire media and large segments of the non-elective federal government (i.e., the intelligence community and other factions of the Deep State).

        So, it may be a reasoned (through ill advised for the best interests of the country) approach. But, having been a registered Democrat my entire adult life, and having voted exclusively Democratic until confronted with the menace of Hillary Clinton, I think that I know better. I can smell “group think” or the “herd mentality” in the Winter air (even if it is 80 degrees here in South Florida). Not only are the Democrats right now not inclined to support Trump even in policies that they have stood for over decades, I think they are ready to oppose them just to pick and perhaps win a few fights. It’s called cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face, and it’s what Obama himself did a lot of in his last days just to lash out at Putin and Russia who made him look foolish, ineffective and frankly downright cruel in Syria.

        The 2018 midterm elections will be predictive of a much longer time frame to follow. Either the Dems will so embarrass Trump (or facilitate his self-destruction) that they make a big comeback in the Congress, winning back the Senate and coming close in the gerrymandered House, and this will presage a wave election in 2020; or, they will be seen as bitter obstructionists and be contracted to the size of irrelevance, wherein the GOPers have supermajorities in both houses and can block any filibusters. This would give huge momentum to Trump, should he choose to run for a second term at age 74, or to most any Republican successor, even a lackluster one.

        I would note that, at this point, the Dems already weak bench is just about depleted, and I don’t see any rising stars on the horizon. Could a one-trick obstructionist be seen as any kind of star? Trump was an iconoclast within his own party. The Dems will probably have to discover their own version of that, besides hoping Trump messes up big time. Anyway, time for them to grow up, quit the crap of just trying to sandbag Trump, and either develop a new philosophy of governance or resurrect the beliefs they always stood for before selling out to Wall Street and corporate America.

        • Kiza
          January 22, 2017 at 05:04

          Yes, it is sad or funny that Trump is on the left of the Democrats on some issues, just because they are so keen to obstruct that they will adopt any monstrosity.

          Tulsi Gabbard, although too young now, could recover the voter base to the Democrats. Therefore, there is at least one rising star, but which will never shine under the current party leadership. The Democrats are a disaster zone at the moment.

    • Sam F
      January 22, 2017 at 07:58

      Yes, although the intelligent can see beyond the contradictions, that the Dems and Reps included good and bad ideas. Trump was positive on foreign policy if only because most businessmen do not profit from superpower confrontation. The Dems included many with good principles but whose leaders had betrayed them consistently for MIC/WallSt/zionist/Saudi campaign bribes.

      Dems must realize that identity politics is almost always a scam: the first visible candidates from the under-represented group always represent their oppressors, who pay for that visibility. They must reject the MIC/zionist calls for endless war, which are based on obviously false claims of foreign threats and special rights for Jews who never suffered in WWII. They must realize that the Dems have led them astray from good intentions, and that most of those who supported Trump were angry about endless war, corruption, and economic insecurity, all perfectly reasonable causes. The true idealists and populists must make common cause to defeat their common oppressor.

      Any time or energy spent on these diversions to cover-up the DNC corruption is wasted. Anger against Trump should be anger against the right-wing counter-revolution that has destroyed democracy and corrupted most of the federal government, and which controls the mass media. We must focus on their wrongs, build new political parties that truly represent us and accept only modest individual donations, which can form coalitions to end the right-wing treasons and treachery. If Trump stops the warmongers we can support him exactly that far, even if he does it for the wrong reasons, and oppose him when he betrays his supporters, which is chapter two.

    • msavage
      January 22, 2017 at 09:39

      “Fitzgerald’s beautiful quote is more timely now than ever: the mark of true intelligence is being able to function intellectually while keeping two contradictory thoughts in one’s head simultaneously.”


    • W. R. Knight
      January 22, 2017 at 09:54

      Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Comments are closed.