The Risk of Baiting Trump on Russia

In the drive to damage President Trump, American liberals have seized on his desire for more cooperation with Russia, baiting him as “a Putin puppet,” a dangerous strategy, says Norman Solomon.

By Norman Solomon

Four weeks into Donald Trump’s presidency, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote that “nothing he has done since the inauguration allays fears that he is in effect a Putin puppet.” The liberal pundit concluded with a matter-of-fact reference to “the Trump-Putin axis.”

Economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. (Photo credit: David Shankbone)

Such lines of attack have become routine, citing and stoking fears that the president of the United States is a Kremlin stooge. The meme is on the march — and where it will end, nobody knows. Actually, it could end with a global nuclear holocaust.

The incessant goading and denunciations of Trump as a Kremlin flunky are escalating massive pressure on him to prove otherwise. Exculpatory behavior would involve setting aside possibilities for detente and, instead, confronting Russia — rhetorically and militarily.

Hostile behavior toward Russia is what much of the U.S. media and political establishment have been fervently seeking. It’s also the kind of behavior that could drag us all over the brink into thermonuclear destruction. But c’mon, why worry about that?

For countless media commentators and partisan Democrats including many avowed progressives — as well as for some Republican hawks aligned with the likes of Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham — the benefits of tarring Trump as a Russian tool are just too alluring to resist.

To be clear: For a vast number of reasons, the Trump administration is repugnant. And the new president’s flagrant violations of the U.S. Constitution’s foreign and domestic emoluments clauses are solid grounds for impeaching him. I’m glad to be involved with a nationwide petition campaign — which already has 890,000 signers — urging Congress to begin impeachment proceedings. We should go after Trump for well-grounded reasons based on solid facts.

At the same time, we should refuse to be stampeded by the nonstop drumbeats from partisan talking points and mainline media outlets — as well as “the intelligence community.”

It wasn’t mere happenstance when the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, openly lied at a Senate committee hearing in early 2013, replying “No sir” to a pivotal question from Sen. Ron Wyden: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” The lie was exposed three months later when Edward Snowden made possible the release of key NSA documents.

Yet now we’re supposed to assume straight-arrow authoritative honesty can be found in a flimsy 25-page report “assessing Russian activities and intentions,” issued in early January under the logo of Clapper’s Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That report has been critiqued and demolished by one astute analyst after another.

As investigative journalist Gareth Porter noted, “In fact, the intelligence community had not even obtained evidence that Russia was behind the publication by WikiLeaks of the e-mails [of the] Democratic National Committee, much less that it had done so with the intention of electing Trump. Clapper had testified before Congress in mid-November and again in December that the intelligence community did not know who had provided the e-mails to WikiLeaks and when they were provided.”

More broadly and profoundly, many cogent analyses have emerged to assess the proliferating anti-Russia meme and its poisonous effects. For instance: “Why We Must Oppose the Kremlin-Baiting Against Trump” by Stephen F. Cohen at The Nation; “The Increasingly Unhinged Russia Rhetoric Comes From a Long-Standing U.S. Playbook” by Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept; and “The Did-You-Talk-to-Russians Witch Hunt” by Robert Parry at ConsortiumNews.

The frenzy to vilify Russia and put the kibosh on the potential for detente is now undermining open democratic discourse about U.S. foreign policy — while defaming advocates of better U.S.-Russia relations in ways that would have made Joe McCarthy proud. So, President Trump’s expressions of interest in improving relations with Russia — among his few lucid and constructive statements about anything — are routinely spun and smeared as corroborations of the meme that he’s in cahoots with the Russian government.

Many organizations that call themselves progressive are culpable. One of the largest, MoveOn, blasted out an email alert on February 10 with a one-sentence petition calling for a congressional investigation of Trump — flatly declaring that he has “ties to the Russian government.”

Trump’s Views on Russia

Consider these words from President Trump at his February 16 news conference:

Donald Trump speaking at CPAC 2011 in Washington, D.C (Flickr Gage Skidmore)

— “Look, it would be much easier for me to be tough on Russia, but then we’re not going to make a deal. Now, I don’t know that we’re going to make a deal. I don’t know. We might. We might not. But it would be much easier for me to be so tough — the tougher I am on Russia, the better. But you know what? I want to do the right thing for the American people. And to be honest, secondarily, I want to do the right thing for the world.”

— “They’re a very powerful nuclear country and so are we. If we have a good relationship with Russia, believe me, that’s a good thing, not a bad thing.”

— “By the way, it would be great if we could get along with Russia, just so you understand that. Now tomorrow, you’ll say ‘Donald Trump wants to get along with Russia, this is terrible.’ It’s not terrible. It’s good.”

Rather than being applauded and supported, such talk from Trump is routinely depicted as further indication that — in Krugman’s words — Trump “is in effect a Putin puppet.”

And how could President Trump effectively allay fears and accusations that he’s a Kremlin flunky? How could he win cheers from mainstream newsrooms and big-megaphone pundits and CIA headquarters? He could get in a groove of decisively denouncing Russian President Vladimir Putin. He could move U.S. military forces into more confrontational stances and menacing maneuvers toward Russia.

Such brinkmanship would occur while each country has upward of 4,000 nuclear warheads deployed or stockpiled for potential use. Some are attached to missiles on “hair-trigger alert” — which, the Union of Concerned Scientists explains, “is a U.S. military policy that enables the rapid launch of nuclear weapons. Missiles on hair-trigger alert are maintained in a ready-for-launch status, staffed by around-the-clock launch crews, and can be airborne in as few as 10 minutes.”

Those who keep goading and baiting President Trump as a puppet of Russia’s government are making nuclear war more likely. If tensions with the Kremlin keep escalating, what is the foreseeable endgame? Do we really want to push the U.S. government into potentially catastrophic brinkmanship with the world’s other nuclear superpower?

Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.

100 comments for “The Risk of Baiting Trump on Russia

  1. Herman
    March 1, 2017 at 09:34

    The following statement by the authors along with similar one seems to be a rite of passage to somewhere:

    “To be clear: For a vast number of reasons, the Trump administration is repugnant. And the new president’s flagrant violations of the U.S. Constitution’s foreign and domestic emoluments clauses are solid grounds for impeaching him. I’m glad to be involved with a nationwide petition campaign — which already has 890,000 signers — urging Congress to begin impeachment proceedings. We should go after Trump for well-grounded reasons based on solid facts.”

    If you have anything good to say about President’s possible approach to Russia, you must preface it with a thorough bashing.

    People like the President who at least offer a glimmer of hope of ending the Cold War are as scarce as hens teeth. Getting them out of the political arena is the wish of an overwhelming number of Washington insiders and repeating the mantra of impeachment is aimed at limiting the threat he poses. Quirky, egotistical and impulsive are not grounds for impeachment.

    There are a lot of things the President said last night which highlighted some important issues and if the opposition so chooses could be the basis for engaging him and reaching some sort of compromise. On the other hand, those who see him threatening their positions don’t want to have to confront those issues at all.
    Dealing with Russia in any constructive way is one of them. We don’t talk to terrorists or Russians. Addressing how we should educate our children at taxpayers expense is another. We know what is best.

    What Mr. Solomon has to say otherwise is correct, if course.

  2. Loup-Bouc
    March 1, 2017 at 00:03

    Per Norman Solomon’s article: “And the new president’s flagrant violations of the U.S. Constitution’s foreign and domestic emoluments clauses are solid grounds for impeaching him.”

    The assertion would be just risible for being legally quite frivolous, were it not very threatening to now-needed stability of government (stability needed because the People’s interest lies in solving real economic, social, international relations, and environmental problems, rather than engaging in the wasteful theatrics that would be the gist of the product of an impeachment doomed for utter lack of legal foundation and zero political chance).

    The emoluments clause (and it is singular, just one clause, not, as Solomon misstates, a set of clauses) — the emoluments clause is: “No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

    Reduce the clause’s content to the terms that, perceiving very superficially and rather ignorantly, a law-dunce might consider plausibly pertinent: “no person holding any office…of trust [“under” the United States] shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument…, of any kind whatever, from any…foreign state.”

    The “Trump Organization has licensing deals with two Trump Towers in Istanbul, and has received up to $10 million from developers since 2014. President Trump admitted recently that “I have a little conflict of interest, because I have a major, major building in Istanbul.” That is the essence of the much of the allegation that supports the “Impeach Trump Now” Petition of which Solomon is a signatory.

    The Trump Organization received the licence LONG BEFORE Trump even ran for the Presidency. Despite the online idiotic blather that insists a President can be impeached and removed from office for something he did before he was elected and inaugurated, the LEGAL REALITY is that such is NOT possible. Legal ignorance — and nothing else — explains the citations put to support the contrary.

    One oft-cited/oft-quoted “argument” references a case of a federal district court judge impeached after he was appointed to a federal court of appeals — for conduct he manifested while he was still a federal district court judge. The reference is abysmally stupid. The man was a federal judge when he committed the “offense” and REMAINED a federal judge when he was impeached. The other citations are even more idiotic.

    Having a foreign territory building is NOT having an “present, emolument…, of any kind whatever, from any…foreign state.” It is merely holding property abroad.

    Having a “conflict of interest” is NOT, itself, a basis of impeachment and removal from office, because it is NOT a “High Crime and Misdemeanor.” See

    The petition continues: “Many of the Trump Organization’s extensive business dealings with foreign governments, businesses owned by foreign governments, and other foreign leaders violate this ban.”

    The TRUMP ORGANIZATION’S conduct is NOT Trump’s PERSONAL conduct. And the language “extensive business dealings with foreign governments, businesses owned by foreign governments, and other foreign leaders” is so vague and bullshitty that it could not survive a summary judgment motion in any litigation occurring in a U.S. court.

    The petition lists various putatively nefarious foreign dealings of Trump’s business partners and foreign governments and foreign diplomats, but not Trump. Third party actions cannot support impeachment and removal from office of any U.S. official. The matter is what THE OFFICIAL did WHILE IN OFFICE.

    The “Impeach Trump Now” Petition references also “Domestic Emoluments Clause,” which provides: “The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.”

    If Trump receives capital gains from operation of the Trump Organization’s two Trump Towers located in Istanbul, Trump has NOT received “Compensation” or “any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.”

    You may WANT to perceive the matter so that it impeaches Trump. But, if so, you are not a LAWYER, even you hold a law degree or are admitted to any bar of any of the U.S. states or the federal courts. Rather, you are intentionally deluding yourself to render good-feeling your political bias or hatred of Trump.

    The “Impeach Trump Now” Petition is purely a disingenuous, largely dissembling, and much fraudulent attempt of igniting irrational public outrage against the MAN who foiled the “Queening” of the darling of neocon, neoliberal, imperialist, FASCIST ELEMENTS of the Democratic Party and persons, organizations, and business and financial entities and interests that supported and would have gained from Hillary’s coronation.

    Mr. Solomon’s assertion is despicable propaganda, not journalism. I was shocked by seeing it published by Consortium News.

    • Loup-Bouc
      March 1, 2017 at 00:14

      My comment’s second-from-last paragraph bore a typing error. That paragraph was:

      “You may WANT to perceive the matter so that it impeaches Trump. But, if so, you are not a LAWYER, even you hold a law degree or are admitted to any bar of any of the U.S. states or the federal courts. Rather, you are intentionally deluding yourself to render good-feeling your political bias or hatred of Trump.”

      The error was the absence of “if” in the language “even you hold,” which ought to have been “even if you hold.”

      The paragraph ought to have been:

      “You may WANT to perceive the matter so that it impeaches Trump. But, if so, you are not a LAWYER, even if you hold a law degree or are admitted to any bar of any of the U.S. states or the federal courts. Rather, you are intentionally deluding yourself to render good-feeling your political bias or hatred of Trump.”

  3. Hans Meyer
    February 28, 2017 at 15:26

    I think that the potential damages to the so-called Democratic party lie in the nature of these talk. We know that
    neocons’ policies are pushing Russia to the defensive, their main base in the Baltic is basically surrounded by NATO, Belarus is basically the only state that is not occupied. If the talks between Russia and Trump’s team involved some ways to defuse this tension and avoid a nuclear war, while the “Democrats” seem not to mind and “may” even have considered the use of tactical nukes to scare Russia away from Ukraine. Even if these were just talk from their part, an official inquiry may reverse the game they play with Trump in their de favor. As several journalist said in Consortiumnews and counterpunch, the man gives away so many opportunities for impeachment that increasing tension with Russia is quite unnecessary. But again, the game of the neocons with China, Russia and Iran seems everything but we’ll thought and intelligent,

  4. Hank
    February 28, 2017 at 11:26

    Good Points- Ray McGovern also gives a complete backround to the US hegemony in Ukraine.

  5. Realist
    February 28, 2017 at 07:51

    “Those who keep goading and baiting President Trump as a puppet of Russia’s government are making nuclear war more likely.”

    It used to be that reasonable people thought that George W. Bush was out of line for the leader of a reputedly “free country” when he flatly demanded that “you are either with us or against us,” i.e., if you are not a kneejerk lackey you are a traitor. Now the political opposition turned insurrectionists who claim to represent the will and the soul of America are casting baseless aspersions of betrayal on their own elected leader just to gain advantage and facilitate his overthrow. If Trump were truly what the Dems and the rest of the conspirators say, he’d mount a purge against them PDQ. Instead, he placates them with policies that seem to be greasing the skids towards war. I’d like a show of hands, how many Americans will be pleased when the nuclear-tipped missiles get launched from their silos? Will that be deemed “a job well done” for “democracy?”

    Paul Krugman, you used to be a hero. Now you make me sick.

    • Richard Coleman
      March 2, 2017 at 17:36

      “If Trump were truly what the Dems and the rest of the conspirators say, he’d mount a purge against them PDQ.”

      Wait. The day’s not over yet.

  6. February 28, 2017 at 03:53

    Indeed, there is far more to this madness than meets the eye! The money-dominated political system disallows any rational thinking of serving the people’s needs, it is a cabal that’s been around a long time. And, yes, the Israel lobby is a major player in Washington and K street, just read Mearsheimer and Walt’s excellent book “The Israel Lobby”, for which they were castigated though being distinguished professors of history.

    The warmongers take advantage of Russia’s past history of communism and Stalinism to prate their narrative of Russia as the “evil empire” even though Russia has state capitalism now. Not even China is really communist, it is also dominated by state capitalism with communist underpinnings. But the ruling cabal knows they can rely on propaganda to conflate the past with present. The so-called “liberals” seem unaware they’re “only a pawn in their game” (to quote Bob Dylan). (I’m sick of all the terms, liberal, conservative, progressive, you name it.) What we need is rational, intelligent discourse, and we don’t get it. Whoever said it, we’re driving off the cliff, is right.

    I’ve read that there’s a joke in Russia, “More sanctions, please”. Putin and obviously his very intelligent advisors have made astute economic decisions to benefit the country in the face of a very hostile western neocolonial assault. They have set up the BRICS economic group, so the US went after Brazil, the most vulnerable country to try to pull a plug on functioning of the BRICS. Russia also set up counter sanctions on countries that play the western games. The imperial cabal will not give up their great militaristic game, and I don’t believe Putin wants to detonate a nuclear bomb, though he might be tempted given the nastiness of the US rhetoric. John McCain would love to! There’s also a joke about NATO in Russia, NATO says “How dare you put your country so close to our military bases?”

    Unfortunate that we have no leadership of the stature of Kennedy and Khrushchev in the Cuban missile crisis. Both leaders talked and worked out a deal to end a very dangerous situation. But then, I consider Kennedy a statesman (we know what happened to him), but all we get are political hacks these days, it seems.

  7. Jay
    February 27, 2017 at 21:37

    Drew H:

    “If mentioning the Zionist dimension to Washington imperialist warmaking is anti-Semitic than there are plenty of anti-Semites out there,”

    The problem is throwing it in everywhere, now Ukraine included. And basically there’s no evidence for your claim re Ukraine.

    Want to make the point that in invading Iraq the US was doing a favor to the state of Israel, and the Saudis, go right ahead, but you did something else.

    Also, implying as you did that Paul Craig Roberts is of the left is delusional.

  8. Jay
    February 27, 2017 at 21:34

    “If mentioning the Zionist dimension to Washington imperialist warmaking is anti-Semitic than there are plenty of anti-Semites out there,”

    The problem is throwing it in everywhere, now Ukraine included. And basically there’s no evidence for your claim re Ukraine.

    Want to make the point that in invading Iraq the US was doing a favor to the state of Israel, and the Saudis, go right ahead, but you did something else.

    Also, implying as you did that Paul Craig Roberts is of the left is delusional.

  9. Loren Bliss
    February 27, 2017 at 19:23

    What we truly need to be asking is what definitively insane scheme underlies the ever-escalating rush toward World War III.

    Surely it is not material gain as thermonuclear warfare obliterates all such potential.

    Therefore my own suspicion is that our obscenely wealthy capitalist overlords have built themselves a system of well-stocked bunkers they believe will enable them to survive the decades of nuclear winter — their Final Solution to global warming — that will inevitably follow thermonuclear warfare.

    Such a war would also (1)-instantly fulfill all Ruling Class schemes for “cleansing” the planet of its over-population, especially its surplus workers; and (2)-allow Ruling Class emergence — though only if their survival plans succeed — into a world they could tyrannize at will, a pure-capitalist, Ayn Rand replay of the biblical Garden of Eden, in which they reign as gods and subjugate all else to their obscene greed.

    As far-fetched as these possibilities may sound, they are confirmed both by the Ruling Class refusal to maintain the national infrastructure (why bother it if it will soon be destroyed?), and by our overlords’ corollary refusal to take any real steps to ameliorate terminal climate change (which again suggests belief World War III and its nuclear winter will provide the requisite Final Solution).

    Indeed no other hypothesis — Ruling Class belief World War III will result in the ultimate cleansing and renewal of the planet — explains the headlong rush to war, the abandonment of national infrastructure and now (under Trump), the absolute refusal to act against climate change.

    Surely therefore our overlords have inadvertently left uncovered some evidence of their scheming, which — let us hope — Wikileaks or a comparable organization will unearth before it is too late.

    • Richard Coleman
      March 2, 2017 at 17:26

      Unfortunately, you are attributing too much rationality to the thinking of the 1%, or a faction of it. Remember Dr.Strangelove. There were thinkers there that calculated they would “win” a nuclear war. Of course “they” wouldn’t be the ones incinerated!

      The “We’re Number One! USA! USA!” madness has actually penetrated many of their skulls. They have talked themselves into believing that somehow Russian weapons won’t seriously hurt……us. Also, don’t minimize the effect that christian rapture ideology has on the thinking of many of our military strategists. A nuclear holocaust might be just the thing to herald the second coming of Jeezus. This has been documented especially among top Air Force generals.

      I think it was Curtis LeMay, General of the Air Force who was once asked what the Russians would do in the event of a serious American incursion somewhere, and his response was roughly, “Nothing. Once they see we are determined and united they’ll back down. Your commie has no guts.”

  10. Stiv
    February 27, 2017 at 16:41

    I look on in disgust as I see Right wing trolls hanging out at Consortium. Maybe we shouldn’t have been so surprised given the Trump apologist tilt that’s been happening here. Did anyone notice over the weekend that Nunes started crowing about “The New McCathyism” of the “left”? Looks like you’ve got a new fanbase Robert! This article by Solomon doesn’t say anything new either.

    However, it would be a good thing if we could live in peace as much as possible..and that would include Russia. Still doesn’t mean we stick our head in the sand like some of these “reporters” want to. Russia is not our friend and we are not Russia’s friend. Unfortunately, that will be said about many nations soon. I don’t see any crying about that amongst the head in the sand crowd.

    A sicked feeling that everybody is becoming a “dittohead” ( remember that? ) and not being plastic enough to see truths whatever they might be.

    Here’s a truth for you….Trump must go. War is inevitable with this “guy”..because he needs to prop up his “manhood” for lack of it. Now, putting the nation on war footing with a massive DOD buildup. If he doesn’t destroy us one way he will another….which is another point. Better believe he will bring his “business expertise” to government. Bankruptcy…fiscal and moral bankruptcy. You can be an apologist for that if you want but it won’t make you any better.

    Thanks for the last and greatest betrayal
    of the last and greatest
    of human dreams.

    ~William S. Burroughs~

    • John
      February 27, 2017 at 17:25

      I have yet to see any major influx of “Trump Apologists” here, just those that recognize that he, at least, isn’t itching to start WWIII. (Ironically, it is, in his case, because he has business interests around the world that he is less likely to do so.)

      Neither do I see any “Right wing trolls”, other than a few who seem to think that Russia is a big bad boogeyman.

      Why is Russia not “our friend”? You state this as fact, but, though I can see why, if you were a war profiteer in need of enemies to increase your profit, this may be the case, it certainly does not carry over to the vast Majority of people.

      Did Russia not try to tell us the consequences of Regime Change in Libya and Syria? Did they not try to warn us about supporting Nazis on Kiev? Don’t friends try to warn their friends away from making tragic mistakes?

      Did they not use their media outlets to tell us about Occupy, third party candidates, Electoral manipulation, problems with fracking, etc? Friends, in my experience, will try to inform their friends of better courses if action.

      The problem seems, from my perspective, that the US does not want friends, it wants slaves, or masters. It loves those who use us to assist them in their crimes (i.e. Israel and the kingdom of Saudi Arabia), who openly state how they control us, and likes having underlings that can be completely controlled by us. That, however, is not friendship. Friends work with each other as equals. Friends help make their friends better people (or nations).

      Rather than being full of “right wing trolls”, most commenters on this site seem to have supported Sanders in the primaries (he was canter- right- as he was a New Deal Liberal, but claimed to be Centrist by claiming to be a Democratic Socialist.) This alone indicates it is to the Left of any Democratic Party hive of groupthink. Many of the commenters have openly supported Jill Stein, the only candidate nationwide who could credibly be called “Left” (as the Green Party is the only party with a national infrastructure that explicitly denounces Capitalism.) There are some Libertarians here, but that party is currently split between Right and Left factions. The right wing trolls are those for the two faces of the Corporate Party (Democretins and Rethugnicans). I see very few here that support the establishment of either of those parties.

      (President Tribblehead is an outlier – in many ways he has positioned himself solidly on the Left of either major party – his support for Single Payer, his opposition to NAFTA, TPP, ETC, his aversion to regime change wars, his support for Medicare and Social Security, etc – admittedly, none of these may be any more than typical campaign lies, but he at least he is rhetorically to the Left of Lady MacBeth).

      “Trump must go” you say, but what is your plan for after that? President Pence? Or, like the NeoConmen in Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc, have you given no thought beyond your short-term gratification?

      • February 27, 2017 at 19:52

        TPP in which the USA relinquished its sovereignty has been quashed by T. He is not stoking the Syrian bloodbath as H promised too do. Excellent post, Both P and T must be encouraged in what they do correctly.

        Yes one may want to thank the 27 million Soviets who died opposing Nazism.

      • Realist
        February 28, 2017 at 08:05

        Bah, the Hillary braintrust thought they would nail down the election by appealing to Republicans and warmongers. That way they wouldn’t need the progressive Bernie supporters. Surprise! The damned fools didn’t attract the conservatives they courted, they only succeeded in driving away many (if not most) of the hardcore liberal base of the party. They made their own bed, let them die in it! And, since they recently muscled another Clintonista into the chairmanship of the DNC over the hopes of young progressives, they can well expect another “shellacking” at the ballot box in 2018, which will be richly deserved. They never learn. They always choose financial leverage over principles. The dolts don’t realise that Wall Street wins no matter which party gets elected to office.

    • Bill Bodden
      February 27, 2017 at 18:43

      Stiv: Most of your so-called “Trump apologists” on this site are people who agree with Trump when he gets it right and strongly disagree when he gets it wrong. Trump was a breath of fresh air when he talked about special interests buying politicians, but he has been mostly downhill ever since. He was right hoping for friendly relations with Russia instead of risking war, but he is wrong if he lets the Establishment browbeat him into confrontation. He is certainly wrong – and that is putting it mildly – with his plans to add hundreds of billions of dollars to the war department’s budget.

      • Loren Bliss
        February 27, 2017 at 19:44

        Another point that needs to be made is how what is being done to Trump is precisely what would be done to Sanders had he won the presidency.

        The ugly truth we are learning is that the capitalist ruling cabal — essentially Wall Street and its deep-state vassals — is genuinely omnipotent, as in fact it has been since 22 November 1963, and as it will undoubtedly remain, assuming no wars of human extinction, for the next hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

        (Remember the Eastern Roman Empire survived until 1453 — 977 years after the fall of the Western Empire in 476. Allowing 62 years per generation, that’s 16 generations who knew naught but tyranny. And with today’s technology and technological advancement now dedicated entirely to sustaining and intensifying despotism, assuming a thousand-year duration of the present order is scarcely different from assuming the sun will rise tomorrow morning.)

        • Bill Bodden
          February 27, 2017 at 21:22

          Another point that needs to be made is how what is being done to Trump is precisely what would be done to Sanders had he won the presidency.

          The same as the oligarchs of the Democratic-Republican duopoly that ganged up on Jimmy Carter and others before him who weren’t part of the ruling political mafia.

          • Loren Bliss
            February 28, 2017 at 00:08


      • Realist
        February 28, 2017 at 08:21

        All that is true, but Hillary herself was Donald’s biggest selling point. He shouldn’t think that the vampire is dead yet. Someone said she claimed to be actively running for 2020 right now. I hope to hear him make some sense and coherently defend his integrity and policies against the insurrectionists in his upcoming address to the congress, but am not holding my breath. Maybe he should stick to reading a script by someone with a lucid rational vision towards a longed-for peace and the much awaited economic recovery. (Love him or hate him, Pat Buchanan still writes a good speech.)

        This performance will be the counterpart to Obama’s first address in which he was shouted down as a liar by some rube congressman and all civility between the factions was lost for the next 8 years. Don’t ya love American political theatre?

    • Stan Expat
      March 1, 2017 at 15:41

      In what way are you suggesting “Russia is not our friend”? Yes, at the moment of the current insanity anything Russia is evil to Americans but what in reality is not friendly about Russia? The only issue that has the left up in arms is support for sovereignty and self determination by Syria, Iran and other targets of the US. In reality the only conflict is that Russia does not roll over and ignore our wars of aggression. Otherwise, the only differences are those made up by the massive western propaganda machine. I get the feeling that the neocons and now progressives and liberals who all want war with Russia are rattling sabers without regard to the foolhardy nature BECAUSE Putin is the leader. If they know anything about modern Russia they know Putin is none of the things they accuse him of, and more importantly, know he is a calm rational person who does not allow emotions to escalate petty politics and accepts the role of evil external enemy” the political left and right seemed to focus on. If he was not such a steady hand at the tiller, they would not have been so confident that he would not kick their whiny asses. He is the most predictable leader I know of. Just listen to his speeches and you know exactly what he thinks. I know that is a bizarre notion but he actually is very honest and with 16 years of reading and listening, I have never found a case where what he said turned out to be false. The only honest broker in Syria, Ukraine and many other conflicts has been Putin. He likes peace and has shown that as being the foremost peace maker on the world stage the last 8 years or so. The only success in foreign policy Obama had was the Iran deal but that was shepherded in by Putin. Same with Minsk 1 and 2 but they failed solely because the US and the neoNazis of Kiev had no intention of abiding by the agreement. The Syrian peace talks were his doing.
      One thing that Putin has going for him that can make the long term difference is he has repositioned the country to be a major player in the shift of economic and production power from the west to the East, with the New Silk Road and OBOR which will be the key trade, finance and production center of the universe in20 years. The US sort to lock others out of it because the US is kept out of it(a condition of membership is not being an aggressor nation) was the push for TPP by Obama who knew unless he countered the eastern trade pact, the US would continue its downward sllde. Now, with no TPP to tie their hands, the 13 Pacific countries are free to join the eastern trade block which will be the largest in the world. That is another reason for the mounting frustration of EU crippling , particularly, the southern countries which stand the most gain for aligning with the New Silk Road but can’t as members of NATO.

  11. Albert Willems
    February 27, 2017 at 16:25

    Your effort to impeach Trump may have the same end result as what you seem to argue against. I do recognize Trump`s oddities, but his being elected was the will of the people, unless I use the wrong definition of democracy. I did not like the way Bernie Sanders was sidelined or rather thrown under the bus, because the owners wanted their Hillary in the White House and we know from the Libya affair, what the consequences of that mistake probably would have been. And why all the hatred against Assad, the only secular Arab country left in the ME after Saddam Hussein`s country was destroyed, based on a stack of lies. Let us first get to the bottom of that one before we allow the same country to destroy another country. Could it be, that the fact, that Syria and Iran are good friends have anything to do with it? After all, Iran is the ultimate goal with its oil and about the last country on the planet having escaperd total control of its central bank by the international central bankers cartel, isn`t it? Hot nuclear eggs anybody?

  12. Bill Bodden
    February 27, 2017 at 15:31

    This is another instance linked to the mind-boggling behavior of so many Americans. Among the many people churning up the propaganda mill attacking Putin, Russia and anyone not hostile to them are warmongers, panjandrums and other charlatans who have been lying for decades to the American people who, in turn, have been mostly gullible in accepting their mendacious claims. The worst case is, of course, the lying that promoted the war on Iraq. Nevertheless, its proponents are in the vanguard of attacking Putin and Russia and anyone willing to establish a friendly relation.

    Disclaimer: I was curious about the Russian language about 50 years ago and studied it for a while so that I could read a few words. I hope the CIA and other intelligence agencies don’t learn of this treason; otherwise, I’m in trouble. I fear that the fact I have forgotten most of what I learned won’t be accepted as exculpatory so I’ll be up the creek without a paddle. In this McCarthyite-like climate I guess once a commie, always a commie.

    • Albert Willems
      February 27, 2017 at 16:37

      Thanks for your honest and straight forward comment. I share your views on this issue. No, I am not a communist, but a democratic socialist in its purest definition. It seems to me, that communism is to the far left of socialism like unbridled capitalism is to the right of democratic capitalism. Neither is democratic.

      • Bill Bodden
        February 27, 2017 at 18:31

        Albert: Re my “commie” remark. I was being facetious with that one.

  13. Kevin Kresse
    February 27, 2017 at 15:03

    Do not throw the baby out with the bath water.
    Trump has extensive Russian investments. And in 2013 before his Presidential run he said in Russia to an American Reporter on TV he knew Putin, Putin was a brilliant leader and Putin was eating the lunch of Obama, but also had eaten the lunch of Bush Jr. He specifically mentioned Syria, but more generally praises Putin as a global leader. He also affirmed his personal relationship w Putin.

    Now it is one thing to peddle peace with Russia, but it is another to have close relationships with Russian investors and praise Putin repeatedly

    Then there was Trump during the election, where he openly encouraged more Hillary email disclosures from Russia.

    The world is not black and white. Trump is not your average Real Estate Mogul who happened to win the Presidency peddling white supremacy and now seems as determined to profit from his Presidency as he does to hide his financial ties to foreign banks, Investors and possibly laundered monies from various shell companies at home and abroad.

    Sure, some Democrats have used the Russia Card to “Red-Bait” Jill Stein and others in the process of fighting against the WikiLeaks disclosures.

    But Trump is clearly hiding something. Any decent political class of Patriots would begin with his tax returns, close examination of his bailout from bankruptcy at the hands of Russian-linked money, and move on to his close association with Russian assets, agents and intelligence operatives before, during and after his 2015-3016 campaign.

    Where there is smoke there is the potential for fire.

    • D5-5
      February 27, 2017 at 16:19

      Another expression is “beating a dead horse,” which I admit I tend to do myself. The problem with this comment is it sounds like CNN with the “close association with Russian assets, agents and intelligence operatives . . .” I’ve been reading his associations there were mostly business-oriented, nothing much sinister. What do you have as references on this assertion?

    • Albert Willems
      February 27, 2017 at 16:46

      You make me think, that McCarthyism is some sort of genetic aberration for a certain group of people, or is it some irreversible hypnotic state of mind?

    • John
      February 27, 2017 at 16:54

      Why wouldn’t someone admire a leader who transformed his country from a hemorrhaging basket case to a powerhouse, while maintaining a popularity rating over 70%?
      Especially when that leader is a strict adherent of International Law? (That he is higher ranked in international Martial Arts federations than Chuck Norris is just a side bonus.)

      Compare this to every other politician’s salivating deference to Netanyahu, who is a bloodthirsty genocidal War Criminal, who has never met an International Law he did not eagerly break, or the ubiquitous prostration in front of the House of Saud, and I am forced to question why you feel that Putin should be demonized.

      Where there is smoke, there is often a smoke machine, especially when all the smoke is originating from manufacturers of illusions.

    • Tannenhouser
      February 27, 2017 at 20:23

      Yes much better to pretend HRC’s whoreing for the worlds two greatest shithole countries is somehow preferable to a country with people that ACTUALLY have some shared belief’s with ours. Ya that’s the ticket. Not to mention actual HARD proof actually exists to build a case for said whoreing. There’s smoke alright, it’s coming from whatever you been smoking.

  14. February 27, 2017 at 14:45

    Interesting Video at link below:
    Intel community trying to undermine Trump’s presidency?

  15. david w. connor
    February 27, 2017 at 14:29

    As the Nuclear ‘Doomsday’ clock edges closer to midnight, Solomon’s warning not to push Trump to prove his macho by confronting or threatening Russia is timely and a safer strategy in this perilous age where stockpiled nuclear weapons are still being expanded, perfected and possibly exchanged.

  16. D5-5
    February 27, 2017 at 12:31

    I used to respect Paul Krugman, but then again I could say that about much of the fraying Left. The simplistic demonizing on on on is the pathetic disintegration of US discourse to the infantile. Terms like “liberal” and “progressive” have been mined into knee-jerk salivating. Particularly disturbing to me is the origins of all this Russia-Putin thing emanating from the leaks (yes leaks not hacks) last June, and, obviously, a classic diversion tactic from the actions of Clinton related to the DNC and The Clinton Foundation. What is being said about what the leaks revealed? Where is the investigation versus all this smoke blowing at Russia?

    • Brad Owen
      February 27, 2017 at 13:07

      The greater emergency for The Western Empire is that the money power is about to be yanked out of their hands, by what China and Russia have wrought, through their BRICS-type activities: virtually a Marshall Plan for the whole post-European Empire World of former colonies (those dirty bastards[snark]). That is precisely what the “Trans-Atlantic Community” (Western Empire) have been holding back all of these post-WWII decades (just as soon as FDR’s body went cold and stiff), with their bass-ackwards-thinking monetarism, IMF, World Bank and such. And Israel was the cork that was stuck in the “bottle” of the African Continent; a giant piggy bank for the former (now covert) European Empires (with much American assistance; we, a former colony too, having been re-colonized by this same money power, started when FDR’s body went cold and stiff; “mission accomplished” by the time W the dumb was “installed” in the White House)

      • Brad Owen
        February 27, 2017 at 13:13

        Do you recall a Daniel Moynihan speaking of “benign neglect” as policy for Africa? I do. That shot down JFK’s Peace Corps plans for development. JFK was shot down himself for flirting with Lincoln’s Greenback solution (U.S. Treasury notes) to treasonous blackmail from the banking community. You just don’t eff with the Western Empire’s money power, and walk away laughing about it.

        • Jay
          February 28, 2017 at 20:47

          Bill O:

          “JFK was shot down himself for flirting with Lincoln’s Greenback solution (U.S. Treasury notes) to treasonous blackmail from the banking community.”

          Got evidence for this, as in the organizers saying so?

          • Brad Owen
            March 1, 2017 at 05:24

            Research it on the EIR website. The same team employed to kill DeGaulle was was used to kill JFK. Look it up yourself. Do the work.

          • Brad Owen
            March 1, 2017 at 05:42

            EIR is executive intelligence review. Type in their search box JFK assassination. Tons of articles will appear. It is one of their major topics of research, as so much flows from that infamous assassination. It is a LaRouche site, so never mind the Establishment “character assassination” bs about him. That is just meant to keep you from looking into EIR.

          • Jay
            March 1, 2017 at 12:10

            Bill O:

            Thank you that’s what I thought.

            Larouche is mostly a distraction, or a summary of what others have found. See his claims about mining heavy hydrogen from the moon for fusion reactors.

            It is very unlikely that JFK was killed for those reasons. They’re about as believable as the claims that the Israelis did it because JFK objected to Israel’s atomic weapons program.

        • Richard Coleman
          March 2, 2017 at 16:37

          I thought “benign neglect” was from Kissinger or Nixon. Maybe I’m wrong. As for JFK, he was so far off the reservation it’s a wonder he lived as long as he did. Consider: his Africa policy opposing Dutch colonialism in Congo and French colonialism in Algeria, support for Sukarno in Indonesia, refusing to commit combat troops to Vietnam, refusing to invade Cuba, trying to dial down the cold war by cooperating with the USSR on space, going after big oil subsidies, breaking with the Fed on printing currency, support on civil rights, his war with Wall Street over the Steel price increase, disgust with Saudi Arabia, opposing nukes for Israel, and on and on.

      • D5-5
        February 27, 2017 at 16:15

        I appreciate this widening of the context for what’s at stake as to ultimate considerations in sustaining the globalizing/hegemonic ambitions of the financial establishment. The competition is obviously severe, and at stake is running the people of this country down even further, apparently a minor consideration if we look at the past sixteen years. My point is simpler. If we have any chance whatever we need a new leadership for the people vs. the financial institutions. We are witnessing the power of the oligarchy to control politics as they beset Trump, whatever you think of him, like a pack of wolves. Now we have Hillary Clinton announcing a run for the presidency again, in 2020. This strikes me as similar to Richard Nixon emerging from seclusion in San Clemente to announce he would like another shot. Clinton certainly was knowledgeable (at least) of the DNC’s manipulations to bring down Sanders, who MIGHT have been the leader we need. There is also the question of pay-for-play with The Clinton Foundation, worth looking into, let alone her inconsistencies and postures and reversals. HRC again? I suggest this prospect is a measure of how far away we are from getting anywhere to move American politics toward decency, serving the people, including the global community.

        • Brad Owen
          February 27, 2017 at 17:23

          I never think of anyone from the R column, so I never gave Trump a thought, until lately. Being a blue-collar white guy who never bought into Reagan, I was holding out, (after a long detour through libertarian la-la-land, which I deeply regret), for a revival of a New Deal Democratic Party (Sanders was our last chance). I finally realized that the Clinton-Obama machine has buried that Democratic Party and set the tombstone upon It’s grave.
          I read an article on the insidethevatican website: “Steve Bannon, in his own words”. He was explaining his worldview. He sees theTrump admin as being in a fight with “the Davos Party”, which is obviously both R, and D; The Establishment, the oligarchy itself. My charitable take on where Trump stands, based on what Bannon had to say, is that he stands with the “nuts and bolts” business community, grounded in the REAL WORLD of manufacturing, guided by the old Christian ethic of “good works” where their business operations are actually those very good works that raise the living standards of ALL those participating in these good works, from the assembly line men, to the CEOs and CFOs guiding the work process,to the mutual benefit of ALL concerned. He is an unapologetic capitalist who believes this is the way things get done in the real world. He sees the financier community as having become perverted and wicked; a phony kind of gangster capitalism that is mutually harmful to all concerned, except for the con men themselves (the TRUE useless eaters of the World). He’s a rude crude dude with attitude, but may be just the sonofabitch we need to knock the gangster sons-of-bitches off the Emperor’s Throne, chopping off the Emperor’s head in good Puritan RoundHead fashion. In a way, he just may be our Putin. That’s about the most charitable view I can come up with. The single major “tell” will be if he reinstates Glass-Steagle or not. If he does, he’s what I just described. If he doesn’t, then he’s another phony, or been “turned”.

          • D5-5
            February 28, 2017 at 11:15

            Brad, thanks for this discussion. I replied and included a link to a Pilger-Assange discussion from Nov 7 (right before the election) on Hillary Clinton and The Clinton Foundation and other topics. I did this at least twelve hours ago and it got “in moderation” and now has been deleted. I would like to know what the problem is with including a discussion between Pilger and Assange on this site.

          • Richard Coleman
            March 2, 2017 at 17:03

            “he stands with the “nuts and bolts” business community, grounded in the REAL WORLD of manufacturing, guided by the old Christian ethic of “good works” where their business operations are actually those very good works that raise the living standards of ALL those participating in these good works, from the assembly line men, to the CEOs and CFOs guiding the work process,to the mutual benefit of ALL concerned. ”

            What?? “Trump Gives Pen to Dow Chemical CEO After Signing Executive Order to Eliminate Regulations”

            The president was flanked by leaders of major U.S. corporations, including Lockheed Martin, Johnson & Johnson, Dow Chemical Co. and Campbell Soup.

            Dow Chemical Co. chairman and CEO Andrew Liveris, who leads Trump’s advisory council on manufacturing and received the presidential signing pen. Just yesterday, Liveris praised the Trump administration for being “the most pro-business administration since the Founding Fathers.”

            Yup, this is going to benefit all concerned, yes indeedy. Except us riff-raff who eat, breathe, drink water, and die from nuclear wars.

  17. Marie Lee
    February 27, 2017 at 12:22

    I totally agree with Norman Solomon. It makes no sense to be using Russia as the main line of attack against Trump.
    Talk about false news. This is beyond Orwellian and makes the democrats especially repugnant and dangerous. Our whole political system has gone off a cliff. I used to think it was mostly the Republicans who were crazy, but the Democrats have joined the club. Where are the adults???

    • Joe Tedesky
      February 27, 2017 at 14:34

      I agree Marie we should leave Russia out of our American family fight.

      I also am beginning to see Trump’s biggest problem won’t end up being the Democrate’s as much as his own Republican Party, and certain people inside his Cabinet. Flynn was the first to be let go, so now who will be next. My guess is Bannon is on the list. Everyone is giving Bannon to much credit. Bannon will go down, when the time comes, even easier than Flynn went down. Just look at him, or better yet learn more about him, and it’s easy to see how big of a target he is. Kellyanne has already been marginalized with among her other comments but especially with her Bowling Green terrorist attack comment, she is yesterday’s news. Trump after firing Flynn then went on the news saying how he didn’t think Flynn did anything wrong…Donald Trump firing somebody over something the Donald didn’t think that the person he fired did anything wrong? Think about that for a moment, then consider the point I’m trying to make…we’re talking about Donald I always know what I’m doing Trump here.

      I picture Trump and maybe Bannon as well going down over another botched executive order going sour, as had happened with their to quick to implement ‘Muslim Ban’. Stuff such as this will add up to a president and advisor who don’t know the first thing about our American Constitution, or have a clue on how to run a government. Don’t forget his Trump Hotel Casino Empire, and conflict of interest. Donald’s son’s better be careful where and when they open up new markets, it could be impeachment time with every brick they lay as they build new hotels.

      The Russian connection may work if Trump is found guilty on conclusion or some other espionage type of affair. I’m not saying Russia will be completely off the board, but I wish it were. We Americans could use a leader such as Vladimir Putin. The Russian people love him, and even with all of the Western sanctions which have been placed upon Russia, somehow Putim still makes his government work. Leave Putin be Putin, and worry about our own government is what I say, but then again who listens to me.

      • John
        February 27, 2017 at 16:37

        Strangely, the sanctions seem to actually be working out for Russia in the long term. It is forcing them to regain their domestic industrial base, as well as their domestic value-added agriculture (wines, cheeses, etc) rather than just basing their economy on exports of raw materials. It has also solidified their support for China’s OBOR policy.

        • February 27, 2017 at 19:07

          Putin and the legislature are labeling GMO’s and moving towards organic. Putin has suggested transferring uncultivated lands from large landowners to farmers.

        • Joe Tedesky
          February 28, 2017 at 00:02

          John I believe the sanctions are hurting the Western powers, including American corporations such as Catapillar, as much or more as the squeeze on Russia is harming the Russians.

          Printing money at the Fed for war, and selling lethal weapons to terrorist, plus attempting to own every crude oil pipeline there ever was, oh and did I mention protecting Zionist is the over all goal…but that’s okay since what else were we going to do with all of that money (what money) anyway?

  18. Jay
    February 27, 2017 at 11:59


    Krugman is hardly a progressive. While Solomon would be. I don’t see Solomon advocating any such war.

    You seem to have confused Hillary Clinton with progressive causes.

    • Brad Owen
      February 27, 2017 at 12:50

      I think the confusion comes from Sanders’ cheer-leading for H.C. during the general election. THAT is where I said “oh HELL no” and went Green, never to look back. I wouldn’t be surprised if we would already be living (or, rather, dying) , in a permanent nuclear winter if H.C.’s party of war criminals was at the helm today.

      • Jay
        February 27, 2017 at 17:51

        Bill O:

        And Sanders was quite clear that he’d work for Hillary Clinton’s election should she win the nomination. Of course, her primary “win” is highly debatable.

        I too voted for Stein, but that’s exactly what I was going to do long before Sanders declared. If Sanders had been the nominee for the democrats, I’d have happily voted for him.

        • Brad Owen
          February 28, 2017 at 05:49

          I know he said he’d campaign for HRC if he lost, but I didn’t think he would follow through with it, after the Clinton/Obama machine bitch-slapped and knee-capped him throughout the primaries. I didn’t think he would be all hunky-dory with that kind of betrayal of the democratic process. He didn’t have the balls Jill had in standing up against the neo-fascist Establishment.

          • Rob
            February 28, 2017 at 13:03

            Right, Jill had the balls, and now we all have fascist Trump/Bannon. And just wait, the full-on police state hasn’t even started yet. Doesn’t it feel great to take a principled stand, even when the results are disastrous? So, thanks to everyone on the dumb-dumb left who either stayed home or voted for a third party candidate. Yes, I voted for Hillary, despite that fact that I dislike both her and her husband. The lesser of two evils strategy makes a lot of sense when one of the choices is truly evil as well as mentally disturbed. And please don’t come back with Hillary being just as bad as Trump. That’s plain stupid.

          • Jay
            February 28, 2017 at 14:22

            Bill O:

            “I know he said he’d campaign for HRC if he lost, but I didn’t think he would follow through with it, after the Clinton/Obama machine bitch-slapped and knee-capped him throughout the primaries.”

            Okay, but say hypothetically, after Sanders “lost” the primary that he then reneged on his promise, can you imagine the garbage that would be thrown at him? He’d be accused of electing Trump. (“They” already tried that with Stein, and were laughed at. Salon briefly pushed this crap after Hillary lost.)

            So of course, Sanders campaigned in the fall for Hillary.

            Look the day he declared, the declaration in DC, not Burlington, I knew I’d vote for Sanders in my primary assuming he hadn’t dropped out completely by the time my state’s primary came along.

            However, I never really thought he’d get far or get massive crowds all over the country. (Yes, I think he likely won the primary–but we’ll never know for certain; you can bet those voting computer logs were destroyed.)

            Then before Sanders declared, as I say, I knew that I’d vote for Stein should no real liberal (e.g. Sanders, Barbara Lee) win the democratic party’s’ nomination. Assuming Hillary were the nominee, I’d not have voted for her in a close state like say PA. I’d have still voted for Stein or left that line blank.

          • Jay
            February 28, 2017 at 14:34


            Hillary was a horrid candidate, I realize you know this.

            Thankfully, I wasn’t voting in a close state–eg WI, MI, NC, FL, MN, NH, etc.

            I still would have found it very very hard to vote for Hillary were I say voting in PA, or any of the aforementioned states.

            I included Minnesota in that list, because that’s a state Hillary barely won. Unlike say New Hampshire, it is unheard of for a democrat to lose the electoral votes of Minnesota. (I believe 1972 was the last time.)

            Hillary chose to take the entitled money from GS, when she knew she was very likely to run for president, she didn’t learn from her loss to an unknown in 2008, she chose to run the State Department from a private email server. (You or I do that kind of thing say running the local elementary school, and we’ll be in serious trouble.)

            As I said, I’m sure you’re aware of these failings and more, and you still chose to vote for her, fine I understand why.

            However: Her choices drove voters away from her. And you know this. (And she didn’t run a good primary campaign–it should have been a huge clue about her negatives that she couldn’t draw crowds.)

          • Brad Owen
            February 28, 2017 at 16:56

            To Rob. There is no daylight between Hillary and Wall Street. Wall Street is the enemy of the people. There is a chance Trump meant what he said about reinstating Glass-Steagall during the campaign. He may be a fascist, or he may simply be “the Strongman” out to slay the real fascists infesting Wall Street. It’s a chance I wouldn’t take so I voted Jill. I know Hillary meant it when she said NO to Gl-St, and stands with Wall Street (in her “private positions”). You voted for the enemy. You voted for WWIII. Thank you for your treason. You are the problem with with our voting citizens. Fortunately, for the whole World, your party lost.

          • Richard Coleman
            March 2, 2017 at 16:18

            ‘scuse me, but a) Hillary won by 3,000,000 votes, and 2) the election was totally stolen (after the assist from the DNC) by the Repubs.


            Oh, and I don’t believe the official ridiculous vote total for Stein and the Greens either. Why should I?

  19. Jay
    February 27, 2017 at 11:57


    You have a point, several, then you undermine yourself with the “Washington-Zio” thing about Ukraine.

    • D5-5
      February 27, 2017 at 12:25

      Would like to hear more of the point you are trying to make here, and why #8 above “undermines” the post.

    • Drew Hunkins
      February 27, 2017 at 12:37

      No undermining at all my friend, none at all. The cheerleaders for the Kiev Nazi junta were several Washington-Zio warmongers in Nuland, Kagen, and some of Killary’s lieutenants.

      • Joe Tedesky
        February 27, 2017 at 14:07

        Drew when our liberal friends start with their ‘Putin aggression’, I always bring up Nuland, Kagan, and the Kiev Nazi junta, and that leaves them blank faced. I don’t know how much it changes their minds, but I do know it informs them of how uninformed they really are, and then they shut up. Apparently that’s what you have encountered over at Commondreams….I surmise. Good to read your comments Drew. Joe

        • Drew Hunkins
          February 27, 2017 at 15:46

          Thanks for the support Mr. Tedesky. You consistently seem to make astute points on this message board.

        • Peter Loeb
          February 28, 2017 at 09:54

          Who is ” Joe Tedesky”???—Peter

        • February 28, 2017 at 19:20

          Yes, when I hear how Russia ‘invaded’ Ukraine I wonder about the waves of Russian infantry, tank columns, helicopter gunships which were conspicuous by their absence.I also wonder about what battles were fought, which cities fell to the Russian forces. And why didn’t the invading Russian forces take Kiev, oust Poroshenko and replace him with a puppet administration.

          With all their surveillance equipment I am sure that the Americans could have given graphic and detailed pictures of the ‘invasion’. Of course, they couldn’t because it never happened. But of course, that will not stop the fabrication of a Russian ‘invasion’ being continuingly peddled. That is the nature of propaganda.

          • Richard Coleman
            March 2, 2017 at 15:59

            Not to mention the ongoing unrest, protests, and people fleeing the hated Russian occupation! Where are the internet posts of the beleaguered Crimeans begging to be liberated from their Russian captors!!??

            What? There are none? OIC.

      • Jay
        February 27, 2017 at 17:48


        And what about the pro Nazi Ukrainian coup enactors?

        What you’ve said is a bit of a stretch. And 8 still undermines your case. Besides being loaded with its own anti-Semitism.

        • Drew Hunkins
          February 27, 2017 at 18:58


          If mentioning the Zionist dimension to Washington imperialist warmaking is anti-Semitic than there are plenty of anti-Semites out there, starting with many astute left writers and intellectuals. Folks such as Diana Johnstone, Steven Lendman, Paul Craig Roberts, James Petras, Gilad Atzmon, Mearsheimer and Walt, the Saker, and even Robert Parry here on CN has on occasion pointed out the power of the Israel lobby.

          It’s a bit much to throw around the anti-Semitism card when anti-Semitism is hardly even a phenomenon anymore in American life, despite what the SPLC brays about. What we need are brave souls who aren’t afraid to mention that much (not all) of Washington imperial planning has virtually taken place in Tel Aviv over the last couple of decades.

          There’s undoubtedly a Zionist Power Configuration in America (ZPC), it’s very powerful but it’s not omnipotent. Pointing out the ZPC does nothing but build a strong case for true and rational thought as it relates to the geo-political reality across certain areas of the globe. Failing to point out the ZPC often works to undermine otherwise decent essays, articles and scholarship.

          • Rob
            February 28, 2017 at 12:38

            So, some of those who helped to incite the coup in Ukraine are zionists. They might also be fans of particular sports teams or musical performers. The point is that there is no logical or evidentiary connection between zionism and anti-Russian or anti-Putin sentiment. This is what is troubling about implying that such a connection exists. Zionism is not the same as neoconservatism. Conflating the two is either mistaken or dishonest.

          • Jay
            February 28, 2017 at 14:40


            Thank you.

          • Jay
            February 28, 2017 at 14:45

            Drew H:

            “t’s a bit much to throw around the anti-Semitism card when anti-Semitism is hardly even a phenomenon anymore in American life,”

            So clearly, you’ve never read Breitbart under Bannon.

            And you have no idea what Glenn Beck and Bircherite types draw from.


            What you mean is something else about say Jews being allowed to attend Harvard. Or purchase a house in nice suburb.

          • Miranda Keefe
            February 28, 2017 at 17:59

            “The point is that there is no logical or evidentiary connection between zionism and anti-Russian or anti-Putin sentiment. ”

            The Zionists are anti-Syria because they see the secular Baathist Syria as the only neighbor left that is a real foe. They want regime change, even further they want the dissolution of the Syrian state into a number of smaller, warring, factions.

            The Zionists are anti-Iran because Iran supports Hezbollah, the southern Lebannese resistance to Israeli invasions and occupation that just won’t go away. Iran supports Hazbollah because they are Shia.

            The Zionists wanted the U.S. to bomb Assad in 2013. They wanted the U.S. to not make peace with Iran but to increase sanctions and allow Israel to bomb them.

            Neither of these happened as Obama backed off bombing Syria and made a deal with Iran. But Obama didn’t do this alone. The real mind behind both of these was Putin. It was Putin who got Assad to agree to allow all his chemical weapons to be removed or destroyed, thus allowing Obama to back off his ‘red line.’ It was Putin who supported Iran and agreed to proved them the nuclear materials needed for the power plants that the deal would ban them from making.

            The Zionists thus hated Putin. He was standing in their way. The anti-Putin campaign became the obsession of the Zionists and their Neo-Con allies right after Putin gave Obama a way out not to bomb Syria. They began the normal propaganda by attacking him as the primary force in the world for oppression of LGBT folk. (I’m LGBT, but I could see this for what it was as worst nations, like the Saudis, were given a free pass.) When the Winter Olympics began the coverage was half about the athletics and half about how bad Putin was.

            The Neo-Cons who orchestrated the fascist coup in Kiev were following through on a ‘pivot’ to Putin by the Zionists with a focus on Ukraine that was seen as his ‘soft underbelly.’

            It is ironic that the tools they are using, the fascist in Kiev, to get rid of their current threat to Zionism, Putin, that those tools are the heirs of the Ukrainian Nazis who helped the Germans in the Holocaust. I’m sure they know this, but they ignore it and expect the rest of us to ignore it too.

          • Jay
            February 28, 2017 at 20:41


            Syria is not part of Ukraine.

            The subject was the claims of Zionists provoking the coup of early 2014 in Ukraine.

          • Miranda Keefe
            February 28, 2017 at 23:49

            Jay wrote, “Syria is not part of Ukraine.

            “The subject was the claims of Zionists provoking the coup of early 2014 in Ukraine.”

            Jay, did you read all I wrote? I laid out how the Zionists saw Putin as standing in the way of their two goals of breaking up Ukraine and bringing down Iran and that they saw the Ukraine as his weak ‘soft belly’ where he was vulnerable. Thus it was Neo-Cons who support Zionism who orchestrated the coup in Ukraine. Their goal was to destabilize Russia and get Putin out of power.

          • Peter Loeb
            March 1, 2017 at 08:46


            When the ADL is involved (“Anti Defamation League”) it is next
            to impossible to distinguish a hate crime from anything else.
            When the PM of Israel (David Ben Gurion) bombed a Synagogue
            in Iraq in the early 50’s as well as Jewish community centers and
            other common places Jews congregated, the Jewish Iraqis were told it was
            anti-Semitism. Jews then were 1/3 of the population of Baghdad.
            Jews fled Iraq—as per guidance by Israel—to Israel. For “protection”
            from Anti-Semites…sorry from Zionists masquerading as anti-Semites.(?)

            Zionists need anti-Semitism to guarantee Jewish loyalty to Zionist Israel
            as the one and only state for Jews etc.

            As in Baghdad, one offers condolence to all those who are hurt
            in any way from these most cynical maneuverings.

            From a distance, it seems once more that Zionists feel obligated
            to create more antisemitism to generate loyalty to their fascist
            apartheid state. (Zionists were also dealing with
            Hitler’s Third Reich—a guy named Adolph Eichmann–thus
            breaking a boycott of Germany. The proviso was that a small
            number of Jews would l) deposit their remaining cash in a Zionist
            (Jews only) bank 2).they must travel ONLY to Palestine.(“Israel” in 1948)

            The most that the ADL could do would be to join Palestinians
            in yet another celebration of Nakba Day and recognition of
            Israeli oppression and apartheid.

            Don’t hold your breath. ADL has always sided with the oppressor.

            To fight “anti Semitism”?? Who knows.

            —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

          • Jay
            March 1, 2017 at 12:01


            “Thus it was Neo-Cons who support Zionism who orchestrated the coup in Ukraine. Their goal was to destabilize Russia and get Putin out of power.”

            This is a reach and it’s an all too perfect conspiracy.

            Stick with NATO surrounding Russia and you’ll come off better.

            Also the fact is that the coup backers used neo Nazis in Ukraine, so there’s that problem for your analysis.

          • Jay
            March 1, 2017 at 12:05

            @Peter L:

            And what does your post have to do with the coup in Ukraine?

            The idea of ginning up anti-Semitism (or other bias) so as to be able to scream it for one’s own unhelpful ends isn’t a new one. Nor does it vitiate the existence of anti-Semitism.

          • Miranda Keefe
            March 1, 2017 at 17:00


            I wrote, “Jay, did you read all I wrote? I laid out how the Zionists saw Putin as standing in the way of their two goals of breaking up Ukraine and bringing down Iran and that they saw the Ukraine as his weak ‘soft belly’ where he was vulnerable.”

            I meant to write, “Jay, did you read all I wrote? I laid out how the Zionists saw Putin as standing in the way of their two goals of breaking up SYRIA and bringing down Iran and that they saw the Ukraine as his weak ‘soft belly’ where he was vulnerable.”

            I wish there was an edit function.

        • John
          February 28, 2017 at 15:21

          “Semitic” has two basic meanings. One is the idea of “Semitic people” – these are people who can trace their ancestry (through DNA, as geneologies can be easily faked, and such fakery has neen done throughout history) to people indigenous to the Eastern Mediterranean region (the term comes from the descendents of the mythical son of Noah, Shem.)

          AshkeNazi Jews have been, through DNA analysis, shown to originate in the Caucasus region, with none or almost no ancestry in the Levant region of the Eastern Mediterranian. AshkeNazi Jews are the ruling faction of Israel, and are also the origin point of Zionist thought (starting with Theodor Herzl).

          Palestinians, however, are pretty much genetically identical to the ancient population of the Levant, as shown by DNA comparisons between them and ancient grave sites.

          Therefore, by this definition of “Semitic”, Zionism itself, by its nature as a colonial project by which a Caucasian people invade, displace, and oppress an indigenous Semitic population, is Anti-Semitic.

          The other meaning of “Semitic” is by language grouping. Semitic languages include Aramaic, Arabic, Ancient Hebrew, and other closely related languages. Modern Hebrew, however, is a Syncretic language. Many of its words are derived from Germanic, Romantic, or Russian origins. It is closer to Esparanto than most other languages, as, like Esparanto, it is an invented language, rather than one that evolved through continuous usage over time (notably, its invention was a product of the creation of the State of Israel.) Yiddish, the language spoken by the founders of Israel, and the European Jewish communities that pre-existed the Zionist colonial project, is a Germanic language.

          So, by this definition of “Semetic”, we again see that Zionism is a colonial project of a Germanic language speaking people displacing, occupying, and oppressing an indigenous population of Semitic language speakers (and creating a Syncretic language in the process). Thus, by this definition of “Semetic”, Zionism once again is revealed to be profoundly Anti-Semetic.

          When you try to equate Anti-Zionism with Anti-Semitism, you are therefore inverting the issue, betraying a serious Anti-Semantic bias of your own.

          • Miranda Keefe
            February 28, 2017 at 18:11

            The information I’ve seen is that genetic testing actually proves that European Jews have a Palestinian origin. This is congruent with most originating from the Spanish Jews who moved to the rest of Europe, primarily Poland/Lithuania, after they were expelled by Ferdinand and Isabella.

          • Jay
            February 28, 2017 at 18:57



            Saying “it’s all a zionist plot” is a form of antisemitism. It’s a way of saying “the Jews are responsible for the coup in Ukraine”–deal with it.

            As I allowed elsewhere, have problem with the state of Israel’s policy, the document it and complain. But don’t go around pretending that “every thing is a conspiracy controlled by the Jews”.

            Oh and as Miranda K point out your genes research isn’t complete.

    • Lonkal
      February 27, 2017 at 20:30

      It’s a shame about some of the websites that are valuable resources against Washington consensus media are increasingly far-right tilted. I speak with here, where references to zionist conspiracies and Left-hate are common, the place is pretty much an alt-right site now, perhaps it always was. So the situation currently is either you agree with stuff Paul Krugman and the cool-kids have to say, or you’re a pro-Russia alt-righter. Thems ya choices. I’m glad for a third option like Any other sources for news and analysis much appreciated.

  20. Exiled off mainstreet
    February 27, 2017 at 11:36

    People like Krugman and other former “progressives”, by in effect backhandedly favouring policies the end result of which would be nuclear war are traitors to civilization and enemies of the people.

    • cruxmatter
      March 4, 2017 at 14:16

      Krugman was sooo looking forward to being Secretary of the Treasury. He’ll never get over it.

  21. Drew Hunkins
    February 27, 2017 at 11:33

    A few weeks ago I was mocked and ridiculed over on for not being a Putin hater, and in fact, now and then having a few kind words to say about Putin. Some of my fellow commenters on Commondreams simply would not countenance that Putin’s not the personification of the Devil himself and therefore would heap scorn my way for not genuflecting to that orthodoxy. Feeling it’s time I defend myself, here are a few reasons why I not infrequently have some positive things to say about Putin and certainly don’t fall for all the incessant and absurd vilification of Putin that’s melding certain factions of the right and left:

    Over the last 15 years, in general, Putin’s presided over a nation-state that has —

    1.) Acted somewhat as a bulwark of sorts to Washington-militarist-imperialist aggression (of course, not successful at all times, that’s for sure).
    2.) Decreased the unemployment rate from what existed under the Yeltsin kleptocracy of the 1990s.
    3.) Decreased the general mortality rate from what existed under the Yeltsin kleptocracy of the 1990s.
    4.) Decreased the infant mortality rate from what existed under the Yeltsin kleptocracy of the 1990s.
    5.) Decreased the poverty rate from what existed unde the Yeltsin kleptocracy of the 1990s.
    6.) National single-payer health insurance for every single Russian citizen; something millions of Americans can only hope for as they wait in line in bankruptcy court.
    7.) Deliberately and somewhat effectively targeted al-Qeada-ISIS and the Saudi Terror Network.
    8.) Denounced the fascist coup and subsequent fascist gov’t of Kiev that Washington-Zio imperialists fomented and installed.
    9.) Witnessed rising wages and salaries fo the vast majority of the working class masses.
    10.) Prosecuted and jailed several internationally connected mobster-oligarchs who had previously pillaged and plundered Russian state-owned enterprises and who had exploited and victimized vast swaths of the Russian population during the 1990s gangster kleptocracy.

    So forgive me if I don’t immediately bow down to whatever WaPo, NPR, PBS News Hour, CNN and Krugman have to say about the evil madman Putin.

    • John
      February 27, 2017 at 16:32

      CommonNightmares : News and Views for the Neo-Con Community.

      It was not long ago that site used to have some very good regular commenters, however, shortly after last year’s DNC showed that there should be a DNR order for that party, there was a massive purge of basically anyone who did not bow down and worship at the altar or Lady Macbeth (soaked in the blood of Yemeni Children, personally sacrificed by Abby Zimmet to her beloved incarnation of Lilith, the Queen of Chaos).

      The purge they had there suddenly made commenters who, in some cases, had been regulars for over a decade, who contributed more to that site than any of their staff writers had, suddenly dissappear. Not just no longer commenting, but all their previous posts simply vanished. In my own case, I got no explanation of why, only a note that my account was suspended until sometime in 2156.

      Interestingly, a couple months later, ProPornOT released their honor roll of credible news sites, and, unsuprisingly, CommonNightmares was not one of those sites that they listed as showing enough integrity to upset Stratfor, Bellingcat, and the OUN(B).

      Thus, it comes as no surprise to me that you find youself alone and mocked by the dregs of humanity that are left there.

      Welcome to Consortium News, where the comments section, for the most part, is actually intelligent and thought provoking.

      • Drew Hunkins
        February 27, 2017 at 18:45

        Very interesting info John, thanks for imparting. I too was essentially banned a couple mos ago from Commondreams; all of a sudden I went to sign in to post and my username and password wouldn’t work. Again, thanks for the valuable info regarding Commondreams.

        • Drew Hunkins
          February 27, 2017 at 19:04

          By the way, just so there’s no confusion, I was mocked and ridiculed over at CD a couple mos ago, and I was banned shortly after that. Hence my original post above should read “a couple mos ago.”

          • Miranda Keefe
            February 27, 2017 at 21:05

            I didn’t get banned at Common Dreams, but I did have several comments censored. But for me the problem is that the Clintonistas have taken over the comments. I remember when the battle of words was between those who supported Sanders in order to stop Clinton and those who that as sheep dogging. Now even the pro-Sanders position is no longer PC.

            I hardly post there anymore, it’s so depressing. The articles quite a while ago became so pro-Democrat it is frustrating. No more Parry, no more Hedges, no more Greenwald, no more Gosztola.

            By the way, I posted there as LibWingofLibWing.

            I’d be curious to know your posting handles there, Drew and John.

          • John
            February 28, 2017 at 14:57

            I respond to this, rather than to Miranda, as Miranda’s question to me has no reply button.

            At CommonNightmares (and elsewhere) I use the name herdpoisoning. Though I started using it before becoming aware that Aldous Huxley defined it in Brave New World Revisited, my intent with it is more eliquently defined by him there.

          • Miranda Keefe
            February 28, 2017 at 17:39

            Thanks, John.

            I guess at some point further down the nesting of posts the system doesn’t allow more replies.

            This in some ways is good. On the phone even this level of nesting makes the final nesting so narrow it’s one word per line sometimes.

    • irina
      February 27, 2017 at 16:34

      Not to mention that Putin has also managed to keep a huge, geographically and ethnically diverse country together rather remarkably well. What I have to wonder, is who do we think is going to take his place if we do bring him down, and why would
      that person be preferable ? Considering the parade of leaders prior to Putin, we could do way worse than having him in charge.

      • Montse
        February 28, 2017 at 16:45

        Actually, another Yeltsin would do! The US and Europe would be mighty happy if that were to happen. Delusional thought on their part, but the actions of the West against Russia are devoid of simple reasoning.

    • February 27, 2017 at 22:32

      Great. Keep putting the word out and maybe some will listen and get the point.

    • Trell
      February 28, 2017 at 13:03

      You left out a couple of things
      11.) He assassinates and/or imprisons journalists and his political rivals.
      12.) He is the richest person in Russia, despite earnings of $100,000 a year. How can that happen

      • Stan Expat
        March 1, 2017 at 14:21

        This is repeated often by those who have a vested interest in deceiving you but why is that the people who know him best, his own constituents, don’t believe any of that. Who did he assassinate? What evidence do you have, were you there? The writers of these stories do not speak or read Russia, likely never been within thousands of miles of Russia and are in no position to have some secret, only known the them, facts.
        What is missed in all these posts is that under Putin’s management, Russia has gained far more freedom, more opportunity, more stability, and higher statue around the world. Ask the expats who live in Russia, all will tell you it is a pretty nice place to live now, safe, ,low stress, secure and a lot of fun.
        Being the “richest man in the world” was a rumor created by someone saying he could have had up to $20billion for all he knew but was never in a position to have any knowledge for fact. That went viral through neocon dominated news papers but each newspaper added $10 billion as the rumor spread until it reached $200billion only to be topped by another western paper which not long ago said $400,000,000,000. If that is how you get your opinions you have lost all credibility on any topic.
        I don’t have to deal with this sort or rumor mongering, since I moved out of the US 16 years ago, and have been living in Russia, plus other travels for all that time. When I return home, I am ready to leave back to Russia in only a few days because the US is going nuts….the fear, stress and ignorance is worse than in any country I have visited, 90 in all so far. It was not that way 30-40 years ago but the US is in serious crisis of identity and corruption that makes daily life hard, really hard for the vast majority suffering from accelerating decline in quality of life, exploding poverty, and general insanity from being subjected to the most intense propaganda machine the world has ever seen.You are a victim of it. If there is only one thing you should learn about Russia it is that everything you ever read or heard in the west is dead wrong. Everything.

  22. cornhuskergold
    February 27, 2017 at 11:04

    Nuclear War: “acceptable price to pay, to regain power for the progressive cause. like … collateral damage”, says the left-tilted brain to its obviously ginormous and brilliant self

Comments are closed.