Donald Trump derided Hillary Clinton’s hawkish foreign policy record over the weekend, a glimpse into a potential general election strategy of casting Clinton as the more likely of the two to take the nation to war.
Just moments after maligning Syrian refugees at a rally in Lynden, Washington, Trump pivoted into a tirade against Clinton as a warmonger.
“On foreign policy, Hillary is trigger happy,” Trump told the crowd. “She is, she’s trigger happy. She’s got a bad temperament,” he said. “Her decisions in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya have cost trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and have totally unleashed ISIS.”
And he expressed a rarely heard appreciation for the “other side to this story,” noting: “Thousands of lives, yes, for us, but probably millions of lives in all fairness, folks” for the people of the Middle East.
Trump implied that casualties inflicted by the U.S. military were far higher than reported. “They bomb a city” and “it’s obliterated, obliterated,” he said. “They’ll say nobody was killed. I’ll bet you thousands and thousands of people were killed every time you see that television set.”
“If we would’ve done nothing,” Trump argued, “we would’ve been in much better shape.”
Clinton has made herself vulnerable to this kind of criticism. She did in fact enthusiastically vote for the Iraq War. She also spearheaded the Obama administration’s overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, now supports a “no-fly zone” in Syria, and has aligned herself with Gulf State monarchies and Israel’s extremist right-wing leadership.
And yet, unlike most everything else he says, Trump’s attack on Clinton’s war record garnered remarkably little media coverage, despite representing a significant break from the traditional foreign policy dichotomy between the two parties, one that’s been building since Trump entered the race.
Of course, Trump is hardly the candidate of peace. Nor is he a credible messenger.
He’s advocated for killing the families of terrorists, endorses torture, and in his tirade against Clinton, he applauded Saddam Hussein for executing people without trial, saying, “He used to kill [terrorists] instantaneously. … They didn’t go through 15 years of a court case.”
And at the Washington state rally, Trump contrasted Clinton’s vote for the war in Iraq with what he claimed was his own opposition. “I voted against it except I was a civilian so nobody cared,” he said. “From the beginning I said it’s gonna destabilize the Middle East and Iran will take over Iraq.”
But as BuzzFeed reported recently, Trump did not oppose the invasion at the time; his support was “totally unambiguous.”
Trump’s isolationist posturing, however dubious it might be, has triggered a neoconservative flight from the presumptive Republican ticket while repositioning the Democrats, if led by Clinton, as the war party.
After spending the last several months casting herself as a progressive to compete with Bernie Sanders, Clinton now appears to be recalibrating to appeal to disaffected Republicans.
Clinton’s supporters, for example, are tapping Bush family megadonors for campaign cash.
And the Clinton campaign is proudly boasting a growing list, constantly updated, of establishment Republicans who have either refused to vote for Trump or have openly defected to Clinton.
Neoconservatives feature prominently on this list, including the Daily Caller’s Jamie Weinstein, Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin, Iraq war architect Elliott Abrams, and Republican foreign policy adviser Max Boot. (Boot officially endorsed Clinton on Sunday.)
As Weinstein wrote in his endorsement of Clinton: “Despite his bombastic rhetoric about ‘bomb[ing] the hell’ out of ISIS, Trump has mainly articulated a ‘come home America’ non-interventionist foreign policy.” He added: “For all Hillary Clinton’s many, many domestic and foreign policy faults and failures, she has not proposed dismantling the national security infrastructure America has built up since World War II or initiating destructive trade wars.”
Secretary of State John Kerry, delivering a commencement address at Northeastern University, alluded to Trump’s flirtation with isolationism, telling the new graduates, “When you consider the range of challenges that the world is struggling with, most countries don’t lie awake at night worrying about America’s presence; they worry about what would happen in our absence.”
Available data suggests Kerry actually has it backward. According to a 2014 WIN/Gallup poll of more than 66,000 people in 65 nations, the U.S. is viewed as the greatest threat to world peace.
Nevertheless, the myth of America as an indispensable superpower burdened with the task of leading the world to prosperity, through force if necessary, has long dominated the thinking of political elites across the ideological spectrum. Republicans have represented the more militaristic extreme. Today it’s not so clear.
“Donald Trump will be running to the left as we understand it against Hillary Clinton on national security issues,” Republican strategist Steve Schmidt said on MSNBC last week. “And the candidate in the race most like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney from a foreign policy perspective is in fact Hillary Clinton, not the Republican nominee.”
Since the days of French Revolution, the left has almost always been eager for war with and mass murder of those they declare to be “reactionaries.” The grand exception was when the Soviets were allied with NS Germany from 23 Aug 1939 to 22 Jun 1941. Only a few Christians raised objections to the saturation bombing of civilian populations in Germany and Japan during WWII. The record of atrocities during the Spanish Civil War was no better for the left than it was for the Francoist forces. If Jimmy Carter had decided to go to war with South Africa the left would certainly have been on board.
As Lenin said, “Who? Whom?” is the rule.
Jamie Weinstein, Jennifer Rubin, Elliott Abrams
Am I nuts, or are all these guys Jewish? If so, we may have to re-define the war party not by political affiliation, but by religious persuasion.
Say what you want about Trump, and he has yet to prove anything, but when I saw Hillary boasting about killing a man (Gaddafi), I was disgusted. There was ZERO reasons to oust/kill him, and no one talks about the lives lost in that effort, not to mention the aftermath. In fact, Libya was a different place than the picture that the MSM showed you, but why let reality get in the way? It’s much easier to hate whom the gov’t tells you to hate.
The Wicked Witch has 500,000+ notches on her broomstick to prove it..
This is really tricky, and in my view a little preview of how bizarre our politics are about to become. The reactionary right that has brought Trump this far is not unwilling to hear certain messages that are actually somewhat left, as long as they’re given a chauvinistic and conspiratorial enough frame. So you’re going to get Trump pivoting to Hilary’s left on some issues as he’ll have her as the big corporate and Wall Street candidate, leaving the door open for you to fill in the anti-semitic lines, and as some kind of overly- masculinized warmongering woman. Being on the far left I want to say that the Democrats have brought this on themselves, but that obviously it’s crucial that they win this election anyway. Given the choice of the two, I could only maintain that position, but I think this is going to play out with a lot of confusion and frustration. For those of us anywhere to the left of Hilary, we need to think hard about the implications of not casting that vote, and then go out the Wednesday after election and keep working to maintain an actual challenge from the left.
Warmonger’s, like Hillary, always know how to use war to make all of our problems much worse, but they have no clue as to how to help the American people turn things around, for the good, for the world and themselves. It is always all about what they can hoard or steal without getting caught. I do not know if Trump will be a warmonger or not. I know Hillary will! I think Trump could learn to be a warmonger rather quickly though. If it ends up with Hillary and Trump facing off I will abstain! I want Bernie to be president. Any other choice besides Sanders, at this critical point, is political suicide! Won’t do it!
Telling Howard Stern, “Yeah, I guess so,” is “totally unambiguous.”
Give it a fuckin’ rest.
Trump did oppose the Iraq war, as Sean Hannity will attest.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/14/report-gop-mega-donor-adelson-to-give-trump-up-to-100-million.html
Now Trump is going to have to “put up or shut up”…the money talks, walks, and dominates. All corruption stops HERE.
The deficit could have been half gone by now if all the money poured into this scam of lobbying and backing this disgrace of democracy which has become a total pillar of corruption. All the while the US Wall St. has brought Latin America to it’s breaking point. Famine is around the corner.
you see what i see –
it’s kind of a relief that i’m not losing it,
and it’s scary as hell.
i would normally give the process 15 years based on economics alone but given the rapid change in climate and expanding diseases, 6 years and all hell breaks loose.
It’s incorrect to say, as this article does, that HRC voted for the Iraq war, much less enthusiastically. It’s said often by many media outlets, casually. But that does not make it correct. She voted to authorize Bush to use military force at a time when he was explicitly saying he needed that authorization to provide a credible threat to get Hussein to allow inspectors to finish their work, which Bush claimed was his goal. The vote HRC cast was a tragic mistake, but the mistake was not supporting the invasion, the mistake was trusting Bush. (Reid, Kerry, Biden, and many others made the same mistake, incidentally.) But for the purposes of our conversation now, it is inaccurate and fundamentally misleading in its implications for her character to say she simply voted for the war. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html
Thanks for the information. Now what’s your excuse for Libya and Syria, John?
Totally correct. Women with a severely sublimated penis envy become warmongers
https://jackblueblog.wordpress.com/2016/05/14/free-speech/
Clinton IS a war monger … is there an argument about that?
I will believe this if Trump mentions hauling off our neocon past and current prezs and thier war criminal ilk off to the Hague and the American people send lots of rope.
Wouldn’t call this a tirade. I’d call it the truth. Obama recently said in an interview that the Libia atrocity was the worst decision of his administration. Hillary’s crass and infamous quote was “We came, we saw, he died.” I don’t consider Ms. Clinton to be a civilized human being.
US Special Forces have been operating secretly in Libya for months
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/05/14/liby-m14.html
When will these idiots learn that getting more right wing does not work for Democrats, and they usually lose elections when they do that (not to mention the far more important issue of the immorality of war mongering).
Trump has just caught Clinton, so good luck with that strategy. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN0Y2119
(wiping his face and brushing off his uniform as fast as the thick liquidish brown splat is hitting him)
HOLY CRAP BATMAN.. I think the S$IT is hitting the fans!
Batman: What fans Batboy? Fans won’t be needed until the air is poluted and that won’t be until years from now.
Batboy: Gee batman. How do you explain all this brown smelly slime all over me?
Batman: Maybe it was that old chicken where we ate last night. Montezuma’s revenge, you know.
Batboy: You had the same thing and yer not all brown slimed. Forget that. This is from that rally we drove past while waving at the people demonstrating at the Trump rally. They seemes really angry and they were throwing stuff.
Batman: No worries Batboy. Take a shower and remember to vote for Hillary.
Batboy: Look Batman. You had your life. Your future is in the bag. You can retire and live good. But I am condemded to fighting the bad guys trying to get out of the poverty that wallstreet creates with their price-to-loan-to-own scam. How do you expect me to support you when you need me?
Batman: good question Batboy.
most countries who are not coerced, bribed, or threatened by us worry that their oligarch masters won’t be there to defend their corrupt fiefdoms; just ask the Saudis.
Anyone who has read physicist Max Tegmark’s piece on nuclear winter knows that the US triggered revival of the nuclear arms race is by far the biggest issue in security/foreig policy domain and on this one Trump is once again by far the more rational cautious candidate. Clinton completely supports Obama’s nuclear arms build up and might well accelerate it if she’s elected. Wose still, she is even more hawkish and confrontational when it comes to dealing with Russia and will no doubt continue militarizing Russia’s frontiers and supporting Russia’s military antagonists in Ukraine, Georgia, and elsewhere. Whatever the rights and wrongs of these disputes, they hugely magnify the risks of hot war with Russia which could all too easily go nuclear. Read Tegmark to remind yourself what that means. Nuclear winter dwarfs even global warming in destructive power and all in months and years, not decades and centuries. For this reason alone, I could never vote for Clinton and I don’t see how anyone who thinks about what it means that Clinton and most of the US security and foreig policy elites have squandered the unique opportunity for peaceful coexistence wirh Russia that existed after the first cold war ended could possibly in good conscience cast a vote for a hawk like Clinton.
Great Job Rania,
While Trump is another lose canon and would be horrible for the country formerly known as the USA*, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while.
Hillary was picked to be the next POTUS by TPTB; that is why the Republicans fielded a clown car full of candidates much like McCain’s handlers picked Mama Moose Burger as VP to insure Obama’s victory for the establishment.
*Now known as Sector “R” of the Empire. This makes it even more Ironic when one considers the Israeli tail wagging the Giant Imperial Attack Dog. In what the Zionist press called an anti-Semitic rant, a true modern wise man, Mahathir of Malaysia in his farewell speech spoke the truth when he actually complemented the Israelis for being such a small country and having massive influence in world politics all the while shaming his own people for not getting their shit together.
Democrats are the party of peace? Who got us into WW1, WW11, Korean War and who started the hot war in Vietnam?
WW1. president Woodrow Wilson, democrat
WW2. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, democrat
Korean War. Harry S Truman, democrat
Vietnam. President Lyndon B Johnson
but then dems got a clue. No War until
Dumya Dubya Bushya
i tell you the truth – WALLSTREET WANTS A WAR
so that they can put money into the circulation economy without having to invest in mainstreet!
get a clue, people. Wallstreet is a criminal enterprise of the privately owned federal reserve that prints paper to LOAN-TO-OWN pawnbrowker currency fraud and i can prove it.
barabbas, I’m quite confident I served in Kosovo thanks to William Jefferson Clinton, democrat
(Clinton also bombed Iraq in 98′)
And democrats fired on Fort Sumter.
Donald Trump is right. Hillary Clinton is a warmonger and a crook. She is owned by Wall Street and by those that have profited hugely from the militarisation of America and the self perpetuated, never ending War On Terror.
Trump is ‘right to ‘advocate a come home America, non interventionist foreign policy ‘and given the cost of the wars in financial terms, and in loss of life this is the correct policy to adopt. If the most advanced military in the World has been unable to win this war in nearly fifteen years, and there is still no end in sight, with the killing fields expanding, then it’s time to draw a line under it and to consider alternatives to a militarised foreign policy.
Trump’s populist strategy has always included winning the independent vote. He broke from his party by advocating for single payer healthcare, isolationist foreign policy, an end to international trade agreements that are costing Americans jobs, and by broadly appealing to the distrust that independents harbor for government in general. In a Jan 2015 Gallup Poll, 43 % of those polled identified as independents which reflects a steady rise of 8 % since the financial crash in 2008.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/180440/new-record-political-independents.aspx
It is not hard to paint the democrats as the “war party” and vilify Hillary Clinton’s in the process. Antiwar (dot) com clearly identified the democratic party as the war party back in April of 2007 – a view that was madly echoed by the progressive left at the time (“Democrats Earn Their Stripes in the War Party”).
And when Chomsky was asked in by Der Spiegel Online in 2008 to define the difference between the democrats and republicans position on war, he summed up the United States as “a one party system.”
SPIEGEL: You exaggerate. In almost all vital questions — from the taxation of the rich to nuclear energy — there are different positions. At least on the issues of war and peace, the parties differ considerably. The Republicans want to fight in Iraq until victory, even if that takes a 100 years, according to McCain. The Democrats demand a withdrawal plan.
Chomsky: Let us look at the “differences” more closely, and we recognize how limited and cynical they are. The hawks say, if we continue we can win. The doves say, it is costing us too much. But try to find an American politician who says frankly that this aggression is a crime: the issue is not whether we win or not, whether it is expensive or not. Remember the Russian invasion of Afghanistan? Did we have a debate whether the Russians can win the war or whether it is too expensive? This may have been the debate at the Kremlin, or in Pravda. But this is the kind of debate you would expect in a totalitarian society. If General Petraeus could achieve in Iraq what Putin achieved in Chechnya, he would be crowned king. The key question here is whether we apply the same standards to ourselves that we apply to others.
I see the neoCONs as a two horse rider at the circus. Riding both at once and jumping back and forth between the two. Yes, Bill Kristol pushing for a 3rd party says he wants to ride 3 horses so he can defeat Trump and ride Hillary in more wars of aggression.
Hilary is not a trigger happy, she is just a warmonger. Hilary has no idea what she will go through with an opponent as Donald Duck. This guy mean business and he is going to let the world know all the skeletons she has in her closet and I am sure she has lot. Good luck, Hilary, you are going to need it.
The best choice of VP for Trump is a Woman who has put her neck on the line to rail against the Democratic establishment and support insurgent candidate Bernie Sanders.
Who is that Woman?
There is only one.
Tulsi Gabbard.
http://www.trump-gabbard.com
You couldn’t make this stuff up. Where is Jon Stewart when you’ve got material like this?
After boasting that she has the endorsement of Henry Kissinger, Clinton goes on to brag that all of the Neo-Con warhawks that have kept America at war all these years are also endorsing her? How hard is that to resist?
I hope Trump will remember to send her a few dozen roses.
And the increasingly irritating Chomsky says he’ll vote for the Queen of Hell before voting for Trump.
Go figure.(6times 7minus 3times 46divided by 18minus 1=Zion.)
!
Looks like Hillary has shouldered the White Man’s burden.
Four more years of paralysis if I vote for Trump, versus 8 years of a warmongering Hawk….. As a life long Independent who votes mostly Democrat, I’ll opt for Trump as Bernie isn’t going to tow the corporate line.
Trump speaks without filters. Sometimes what comes out is hateful; sometimes it’s sheer lunacy; and sometimes it’s simple truth that no other power broker is willing to admit.
BAM!
Quite right, Trump is a mixed bag he can be real WRONG and he can be real Right. Trump is like a force of Nature that can water your crops or flood your fields. Is the draught of leadership and flood of elite insider deals bad enough. for the choosing each of us must reflect and vote. May God grant wisdom or at least a little luck in our choosing.
I don’t think armageddon is all that popular. If Trump brings out this problem with the fascist Harpy, the fact there never is an intervention she doesn’t support, she’ll tank. The Libya thing, if used effectively, can eliminate her Afro-American “firewall.” It is unlikely that, once Trump highlights the true facts that the el qaeda types Hillary helped to power in Libya committed a mass murder of Sub-Saharan Africans Khaddafi had settled there as “mercenaries” that the black vote will hold up for Hillary.
The Donald has become a boring bully and name-caller. Yawn.
Unlike Hillary, the thoroughly interesting sadist, war criminal, mass murderer, and subverter of the US constitution, fully owned by the organized crime syndicate centered at Wall Street.
What a lot of people are objecting to isn’t Trump so much as it is New York. Trump is quintessentially a New Yorker. So for example, when he says I love blah blah, he isn’t talking about a committed loving relationship. It’s more like “I love pizza..” or “I love the Mets” or whatever.
These people communicate in a bandwidth of hyperbole. It isn’t about nuance and detail. It is about knowing where they are “coming from.” They send “strong signals.” You can probably watch a few Howard Stern interviews (some even with Donald Trump) on Youtube to get a feel for it. It’s how comedians, shock jocks and New Yorkers in particular communicate.
My favorite book on a Donald Trump like character is Good Behavior by Donald E. Westlake. The 1997 audiobook narrated by Michael Kramer is especially good. The newer release has a different narrator for some reason (try to find the older one at the library or on bittorrent). It is good to listen to whenever you want a “taste of New York.”
As far as Hillary goes, I don’t want either another Bush or another Clinton. America is a country of over 300 million people. Surly we can find someone different.
Please?
s/surly/surely
Say, Surly Shirley sounds like a better choice than both Hillary or Trump.
Good article.
Donald Trump should bring in a good running mate who will bring in all the supporters of Bernie Sanders and the disaffected Republicans. Crooked is the worst thing that can happen not only to us but also to the rest of the civilized world.
The Libertarians and the Green Party will do the world a favor if they withdraw by endorsing Trump.
I had a weird flash on a running mate, Chuck Hagel.
Maybe Jeff Sessions.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/05/12/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-jeff-sessions-editorials-debates/84298310/
Yes maybe Sessions.I believe he uttered truths recently regarding our overseas misadventures in IsUS sitting.
I saw they pushed Jan Brewer? of Arizona as a possible choice.
Depends on opponent.
There is only one.
http://www.trump-gabbard.com
Tulsi Gabbard.
She is similarly anti-NeoCon and wouldn’t you know it – a big Bernie supporter.
If Trump brings Democrat Tulsi on board as VP – it is game, set and match over for Killary.
Excellent essay Rania
The Hell Bitch is Gun Crazy!
Trump says the truth,again.
As far as Iraq,a lot of supposedly intelligent people thought it was a good idea,and Trump wasn’t privy to insider info that the HB was.
He probably believed the MSM,the ultimately responsible cheerleaders,as they swayed the public.
Hillary deserves the characterization of being Trigger Happy, no doubt about it. She is a hawk.
But this author’s hesitant and painfully qualified consideration of Trump’s “rarely heard appreciation for the ‘other side to this story'” is touching in its naiveté. She is shocked that his speech hasn’t garnered more media attention while simultaneously noting that he cannot be trusted: “Of course, Trump is hardly the candidate of peace. Nor is he a credible messenger.”
Trump indeed represents a “a significant break from the traditional foreign policy dichotomy between the two parties” but not in a good way. He sees conflicts as a transaction-based decision where a profit is at stake. Everything is a business deal that must be “negotiated.”
Trump: “We have spent hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives in Iraq, and now Libya, and gotten nothing in return but disrespect and ingratitude. That must end. Now. I say we take the oil. No more free military support. Either you pay us to defend you or we take the oil. It’s fair and smart, which is probably why the politicians in Washington haven’t implemented it.”
Trump: “And if any country in the Middle East won’t sell us their oil at a fair market price…we have every right to take it.”
One second the author says Trump’s isolationist stance is posturing and dubious, the next she selectively quotes some neo-con suggesting that his new found non-interventionist approach is genuine. Give me a break. Look no further than Trump’s foreign policy core principles:
Trump: “I believe that any credible American foreign policy doctrine should be defined by at least seven core principles: (1) American interests come first. Always. No apologies. (2) Maximum firepower and military preparedness. (3) Only go to war to win…(6) See the unseen. Prepare for threats before they materialize…” Time to Get Tough, p. 87
That doesn’t sound like an isolationist and No. 6 is reminiscent of the Bush Doctrine’s preemptive strike mentality.
I think you are being had. Here is another Trumpism from “Time to Get Tough.” You know, his views before it was politically beneficial to change them to win an election:
Trump: “We don’t owe the Middle East any apologies. America is not what’s wrong with the world. We’re an example of freedom to the world. No one can match America. We have big hearts – and the courage to do what’s right. But we’re not the world’s policemen. And if we have to take on that role, we need to send a clear message that protection comes at a price.” — Time to Get Tough, p. 14
We’re not the world’s policeman….unless you pay up.
Well said…thank you for reminding everyone of the masks. It’s got to come off.
Not only is Trump going to win; he is going to win big against Hillary. He just mended bridges in Washington today. He WILL and has already started morphing into a winning candidate. Of course, he is not the red neck, conbot candidate he portrayed into the nomination. He is a sophisticated intelligent successful man and certainly not a misogynist–read his book. He is not a Conservative; he is a pragmatist who is not totally owned by money unlike Clinton and most of congress. I too am a left winger, social democrat but I could easily support Trump against “crooked Hillary”.
“I too am a left winger, social democrat . . .”
No, you are not.
@ Bob
You are neither a “left winger” or a “social democrat” if you could actually consider “easily supporting Trump” over “crooked Hillary”.
Presuming you don’t care about voting for the ultimate winner of the POTUS charade, there are many alternatives to voting for either Trump or Clinton. For myself as a “left winger” and believer in “social democracy”, I will be voting for neither.
Despite the fact that I won’t be voting for either HRC or Trump (Stein if Bernie isn’t nominated), I disagree with you. If I end up protest voting, I’ll be crossing my fingers and hoping Trump wins, for several reasons:
1) Trump will be fighting both the RNC and the DNC tooth and nail for anything. Opposition to him will be so great we’ll be looking at 4 years of stasis, then we can do a reboot without HRC or DT.
2) If HRC wins, the neocon wall street coddling mass surveilling etc. etc. status quo will be fully and finally cemented as the new normal, and it will be a minimum of 8 years before we can try again because there just won’t be a primary challenger for 2020 — we’ll have to sit through at least one term of HRC and one term of whatever the GOP picks.
3) Let’s assume Trump is very bad — Nixon bad. Look at the great things that came about as a reaction to Nixon. The Church Committee put the surveillance state on the defensive for a couple decades and the War Powers Act kept us out of Vietnam scale wars for a good 25 years. You _know_ Reagan wasn’t really satisfied with Grenada, but he never got to start his own Vietnam or Iraq. The reaction to Nixon gave us more freedom and saved who knows how many lives.
So, while I wouldn’t ever vote for either HRC or DT, the only candidate who scares me is HRC.
I’m not sure who is up for reelection this year,but Rep party bigwigs dissing Trump might be in for a coattail surprise,or people will just vote out these crummy incumbents.Why not,they all mostly suck anyway.
Right on.
Bob,so am I in many ways,and in some ways I’m not.
But those who deny you your truth are holier than thou blowhards.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/14/report-gop-mega-donor-adelson-to-give-trump-up-to-100-million.html
I feel like Clinton can run a competent neoliberal policy and Trump can run an incompetent neoliberal policy. The question now is — which is worse?
spot on.
If Bernie is not elected.. with Hillary we lose money, with the Donald we get paid. Hillary’s wars, we lose. Donald’s war, we get paid.
again, which is worse. Being the good-guy police of the entire planet, or engaging in questionably useful mercenary endeavors?
The logical, humane thing to do would be to vote for neither. And contrary to spoiler theorist belief, that is still an option. Jill Stein or Gary Johnson make good alternatives.
Not a fan of Trump but I’m happy he’s raising this point (even if he speaks with a forked tongue). Hillary Clinton hasn’t seen a conflict that she doesn’t want us involved in and I have to wonder if she’s bought and paid for by the military industrial complex. Her record on foreign policy has been abysmal too.
FORKED TONGUE?
Let’s have a look at Hillary’s tongue.
The left fork of her tongue talks about american rights which are continuously being eroded thanks to the appeasements of the democratic party.
The right fork of her tongue recently got a tongue-lift by her right wing billionaires.
I wonder if the spit fighting of her left and right forks keep her up at night.
Boot officially endorsed Clinton on Sunday
That should be the title of this article! Thank you very much Rania Khalek.
And for putting into the light the plain truth and facts and for revealing the spin of wallstreet media to contort and hide what Donald Trump really stands for.
Boot officially endorsed Clinton on Sunday I had to say that again. WALLSTREET WANTS A WAR. And i repeat, i do not believe donald is a racist or mysogonist.
Forgive my pleading if it offends you….
IF BERNIE SANDERS is a presidential candidate, i support Bernie, even now.
IF Bernie Sanders is NOT a presidential candidate, i will support Donald Trump.
i do not trust hillary, i certainly don’t trust her marriage with moneybaggers or the moneybaggers – they dont speak do they. They could come out and say, “we support her policy to…. whatever. and we oppose…. whatever.” but no.
Bernie speaks his mind heart and soul.
Donald speaks his mind heart and soul.
Hillary speaks her mind, heart and their soul.
that’s the difference that matters.
WALLSTREET WANTS A WAR.
Spot on and more will see it soon.
Max Boot is a moron and has been kicked around Cspan repeatedly like a soccer ball from the respondents.
Score one for the Donald!
The American people have been incessantly lied too by Washington, that there are only 11 million illegal aliens that have violated our immigration laws for decades, saying that the numbers have fluctuated between 11 to 13 million. In 2015 Mexico’s former ambassador to the U.S. said that 30 million “undocumented immigrants” are living in the United States in the beginning of an interview, and then reversed, stating a different number at the conclusion. The former diplomat, Arturo Sarukhan, took to MSNBC to attack presidential hopeful Donald Trump’s recently released plan to secure the border by building a wall and deporting illegal immigrants. The MSNBC clip began with presidential hopeful and Florida Senator Marco Rubio claiming that only 12 or 13 million illegal immigrants are in the country.
The former ambassador stated,” If you were to deport the 30 million undocumented immigrants in the United States that’s going to cost you about 130 billion dollars.” Contrary to the former ambassador’s initial numbers and to Rubio, MSNBC showed an image while Sarukhan spoke claiming 11 million illegal aliens were in the country. Sarukhan then stated later in the interview that there are 11.3 million illegal immigrants in the country, though he did not address his former assertion that 30 million are here. Many conservative and border watchdog groups have long contended that the actual number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. is closer to 30 million while the U.S. government contends the number is closer to 11 million. This is an obvious assumption when the voters want the preferential Presidential nominee has pledged a giant wall and the intent to mandate E-Verify, which will be an accomplishment in seeking out foreign nationals stealing jobs from citizens and legitimate immigrants.
For every illegal migrant household that leaves the United States under Trump’s plan, Americans would recoup nearly three-quarters of a million dollars ($719,350), according to 2010 data collected by Heritage scholar Robert Rector.
The lifetime savings accrued from one deported illegal household would provide funds for 125 low-income inner city students to receive the maximum Pell Grant award in 2015-2016 ($5,775); it could cover the cost of pre-kindergarten for 90 at-risk children (around $8,000 per child); or it could cover the one year cost of Medicaid for 124 enrollees ($5,790 based on FY2011 data).
The 2010 report calculated the total contributions (mainly taxes) generated by the illegal migrants, and then subtracted the cost of taxpayer aid to those migrants. The aid includes education, subsidized housing, food stamps, tax credits, medical expenses. Overall, the report found illegal migrants cost taxpayers a total of $113 billion a year. The report then “accounts for taxes paid by illegal aliens [which is] about $13 billion a year, resulting in a net cost to taxpayers of about $100 billion.”
Or the government could allocate 60 percent more resources and benefits for returning American soldiers and veterans (increasing the President’s 2016 budget request for the VA from its current $168.8 billion to $268.8 billion). Think of all the So-called FREE TRADE AGREEMENT deficits we have with Mexico ($60Billion) China $600 Billion, we could afford to assist the homeless, those in poverty, single mother and our Seniors and not the wealthy profiteers in Washington and their cronies.
Ann Coulter told Breitbart News in response to the bogus study, which was hyped by the Washington Post:
Any half-wit knows that the government hasn’t the first idea how many illegal aliens are in the country,” Coulter told Breitbart News in response to the bogus study, which was hyped by the Washington Post. “Not the foggiest notion. Government officials can’t even tell us how many illegal aliens are in the government’s own custody in prison — and they show surprisingly little interest in finding out. Suspicions ought to be piqued by the fact that all official sources assure us that there have been exactly 11 million illegal aliens in the country for more than a decade now.
In promoting the study, the Post’s Jerry Markon wrote that there is somehow a “nearly decade-long decline” in illegal immigration “that has the potential to reshape the debate over reforming the nation’s immigration system.” Markon went on:
The total undocumented immigrant population of 10.9 million is the lowest since 2003, says the report from the Center for Migration Studies, a New York think tank. The number of undocumented immigrants has fallen each year since 2008, the report says, driven primarily by a steady decline in illegal migrants from Mexico. Sharper declines from South America and Europe have contributed to the overall numbers, the report says, even as illegal immigration from Central America — where families with children have flocked across the southwest border in recent months — is on the rise.
But Ann Coulter has debunked this type of narrative promoted by the left wing and media before. Then millions of Americans don’t trust the government, the Democrats or the Republicans as there eager to fudge the illegal alien population numbers and the real costs.
As Coulter says in Adios America, her latest bestselling book on immigration which came out right before Donald Trump’s rise to prominence in the 2016 GOP presidential primaries last summer, the government estimates the number of illegal aliens based on census surveys.
But, as she says: “People who have left their families, paid huge sums of money to smugglers, trekked thousands of miles, and broken American law to enter this country don’t have much incentive to fill out questionnaires from the U.S. government.”
Demonstrating the government’s usual brilliance, Coulter’s Adios America notes that the census “tried to account for the reluctance of illegal aliens to answer government surveys by adding 10 percent to their population estimate. Guess where they got 10 percent? Then taken from another survey regarding illegal aliens in 2001, the University of California asked Mexican-born residents of Los Angeles if they had taken the recent census. Ten percent said ‘no.’ But almost 40 percent refused to take that survey.”
Meanwhile, as far back as 1990, Coulter writes, anthropologist Maxine Margolis found “that the Brazilian consulate counted 100,000 Brazilians living in New York City, while the Brazilian foreign office put the number at 230,000. That same year, the 1990 census reported that only 9,200 Brazilians lived in New York City.”
The efforts by the leftist Center for Migration Studies—and the complicit Washington Post—couldn’t be clearer. Markon himself wrote in the Post that the effort here seems to be to undermine Donald Trump ahead of the primaries. Markon wrote:
With its release as voting nears in the 2016 presidential primaries, the 15-page document could impact the fiery debate over immigration unfolding on the campaign trail. Republican candidates, led by Donald Trump, have portrayed the border as overwhelmed by illegal immigrants who must be kept out by a massive wall the New York developer proposes to build. President Obama and Democratic candidates say the border has never been more secure and call for comprehensive immigration reform to naturalize immigrants already here.
This all comes on the heels of a new bombshell report from the Department of Homeland Security that shows there are nearly half a million illegal aliens inside America who overstayed visas for temporary work matters or for tourism.
Thank you, Rania Khalek! for this informative article
O/T, but worth a look. A former 9/11 commissioner says Saudi gov’t employees were involved. Normally I wouldn’t credit this kind of theory but the Guardian did think it worth posting. There’s also the question of the 28 pages.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/12/911-commission-saudi-arabia-hijackers
I think it is probably wise to pay serious attention to John Lehman when he makes assertions like this. It doesn’t seem to be the sort of thing that Reagan Republicans would be promulgating without basis.
And, really, given what we already know, is it more difficult to believe that Saudis at some level of officialdom were involved, in some way, in 9/11 or that none were?
Donald Trump runs from “him” self.
Clinton’s top four question that someone needs to ask, anyone, and we need answers.
1. her e-mail problem a criminal investigation taking its good natured time
2. her deals with countries while SoS for weapons and the money to the foundation. I give you and you give me
3. Her speeches where one person at one of the speeches stated we were called “the little people.” The rest we guess.
4. Her health, four mini strokes one where she fell and broke her elbow. Also her gain in weight, could be the medicine..
We need these asked and answered.
Is she the first candidate that has been under FBI investigation while running? I know, I know she did nothing wrong cause they were not marked.
mini strokes? four?
weight gain issues could be, too much food, lack of exercise, THYROID.
broken elbow? fall? both of these combined could indicate stroke.
i would like to see an MRI on her brain.
Americans need health reports on all candidates.
four?
Shall we investigate why Trump’s ass is also fat? Will you have equivalent concerns when Trump asks the obese Chris Chistie to be his VP? I mean, they could be on meds too! :-s
Please also provide us with a link to proof that Clinton has had four strokes. I can’t stand the woman but as far as I can tell, her brain is working just fine if despicably.
Uh oh,a woman scorned!
Actually and truly ,I believe she is a bubbleheaded idiot,sorry.
A media creation of absolute shite.
Document her intelligence please,other than marrying bent dick?
sniff.. sniff…
i am detecting a scent of insider info.
i do recall that BigDog had his passport file peeked.
bent dick? 4 mini strokes? cant make that stuff up.
Bent Dick;Part of the Lewinski testimony.sheesh.
her mini-strokes could be a plus for the nation if they could be convinced to converge into a maxi-stroke.
This seals the deal for me. I am officially on the Drumpf bandwagon.
KIDDING!!!!! Listened to (Mad) Max Boot on Washington Journal yesterday. His arguments against Trump sounds like any other complaining Dem party official.
When it comes down to protecting perpetual war, though, there was an excellent article in CP a few months ago: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/31/second-thoughts-on-bernies-viability/
This election is truly one of the lessor of the two evils. Donald Trump has declared bankruptcy four times which means he didn’t pay his debts.. Ten cents on the dollar or fifty cents on the dollar – – people got hurt by being short changed….point to this one doing this and that one doing that – He said – – She said?? The option of NONE OF THE ABOVE…..both parties block all candidates from the Presidential Debates. You will not find any third party candidates….
How do you pick who is best for the country and the people without having all the facts??? Which one is worse?? Both parties suppress the votes
Donald Trump has declared bankruptcy four times which means he didn’t pay his debts..
NOT EXACTLY.
What this means is that the deal he was allowed to make did not fit with the future that the business came into. THAT’S BUSINESS.
BANKRUPTCY IS A GOOD THING. It allows employees to keep working and it gives the business a PRICE RESET. The evil of wallstreet is that the wallstreet predatory valuation economy insists that the circulation economy be subordinate to it.
The truth is, the valuation economy is subordinate to the circulation economy thus allowing prices to fluctuate greatly either direction. But wallstreet thieves want rigged pricing and a slave market to perpetuate their rothschild currency system which demands poverty and cancerous growths.
IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS, read until you do.
IF you do understand this and object to the truth of this, please vacate my planet.
@William Bednarz
correction.. “YOU” not meant you in particular
you meaning “any reader”.
A&P/Pathmark gave its executives bonuses – and declared bankruptcy. The employees already gave back pay and benefits…..
Hostage Cakes gave all executive raises and bonuses – and declared banktuptcy
BOTH WERE APPROVED BY THE COURTS…..you do you think got hurt??
Donald Trump declared bankruptcy YOUR EXCUSE DOES NOT HOLD WATER… a good thing – for screwing workers..
Atlantic City casinos went bankrupt – and where are the workers…
Puerto Rico is in a financial crisis and the SENATE isn’t helping as the HEDGE FUNDS do not want a hair cut of what is owed—–WHO GETS SCREWED
your land of make-believe isn’t real – WAKE UP and smell the cess pool
The terrible economy doomed Atlantic city,No extra dough for gambling.
Trump probably hired more minorities than any politician in history,btw.
Yes,the courts(judges) are pro business and antiworker,they are ivy league scum for the most part.
They never worked a day in their life.
Actual labor,not pencil pushing.
Neither has the HB.
Atlantic City was a bad bet – Gambling doesn’t pay. If the politicians announced a new tax – it would be a hard sell to say the least…A casino pays the tax for you because you are gambling against your own tax dollars / and the politicians pull a fast one. BUT while it is legal it is not being honest. The politicians are elected to represent YOUR BEST INTERESTS – and NONE can say it is gambling….. An honest day pay – for an honest days ” work”. HONEST being the key word… GIMMICKS do nothing for the bottom line – nothing for the people’s security
@William Bednarz
and gave their execs bonuses!?
should be a crime.
But should not be a reason for bankruptcy (we cant afford to pay our execs so we BK) nor should paying execs prohibit bankruptcy.
As it happens, in the days the casinos were built, the outlook was good and the interest rates on bonds were high. It’s not like one can refi at a lower rate which makes bonded deals more risky. Look at puerto rico, costs of operations are what they are. The wages at the casinos were actually kept low, didn’t really pace inflation. It is the bond holders that get screwed but who matters most?
Let’s say i want to build a big business with lots of employees and i need to borrow the money using bonds. I have 2 choices; i can reject the bonds rate and not build by guessing the business will fail or, i take the rate, build the business and make a go of it – after all, the bondholders are willing to make a go of it at the rate they want. IF THE ECONOMY HITS THE DIRT, that is not my fault. Revenues slide – i have 3 choices; close the business, default and fight lawsuits, or declare bankruptcy.
The best options is ALWAYS to keep the business going and renegotiate the bonds of file bankruptcy and renegotiate. Unless the bondholders want to lose everything. That’s business.
FYI i object to paying execs bonuses in any sort of failure.
of course, bankruptcy is virtually denied to the puling unshod masses, because they should, by law, be forced to retch up every last gobbet they own, to keep the rentier’s shoes polished…
IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND… as you said.. the debt is NOT PAID – it is legally dis-charged
when does your rocket leave??
Trigger happy – Donald finally admitted it.
Hillary Clinton is an empty vessel, available for lease to whoever can afford the storage space. Right now, she serves as an avatar for Wall Street and the prison/military industrial complex.
Right on the money. A bigger racist, war-mongering Wall Street whore you simply will not find.
wellllll you’d really have to look… or perhaps not
A leaky vessel,a female Jake Spoon.(Lonesome Dove-best Western ever.Larry McMurtry.)
She’s not empty. She’s filled with bile, sadism, a jones for lucre, power, and empire, and an even larger jones for murder. In fact, they kinda take up the whole house.
Trump’s rhetoric can be detestable but between the two of them only one has blood on their hands and that is Clinton. She is a loathsome and violent individual who is responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents. The sickness of culture in the US allows that a president or senator may use illegal lethal force to murder a child, a woman or a man whose only guilt is being born in the wrong postal code and to justify that murder through dangerous logic such that there is no guilt to be carried whatsoever. We talk about candidates such as Obama, Clinton, Bush etc. as if they are foreign policy experts when in fact they are nothing more than murderers. Five year olds exercise more common sense. The taking of a single innocent person’s life is a crime against humanity and yet in the US it is somehow a litmus test for leadership. Simply disgraceful.
Spot on. I especially like the word “loathsome” here.
This is but the latest attempt by Trump to define Hillary. But it was he who said, “I would bomb the SHIT out of ’em.” And, it is Hillary who wrote, “Hard Choices,” which details the complicated scenarios under which she made her recommendations. And, it is Hillary that is for strong gun control, so I don’t think she can be characterized as “trigger happy.” We are dealing with a carnival barker who was born with a sliver spoon in his mouth and who has a large supply of snake oil to sell (do we really think his “wall” is about immigration or about making billions of dollars for The Trump Organization?) versus a stateswoman who is the most qualified candidate in the history of our nation to be President and Commander In Chief.
“And, it is Hillary that is for strong gun control, so I don’t think she can be characterized as ‘trigger happy’.”
Now, there’s an example of truly pathetic logic — or, rather, lack thereof. Unless, of course, you imagine, Jeanne, that only small guns have “triggers.”
Kosovo/Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria . . .
Go a mere seven seconds in to see HRC laughing about her Iraq vote. “That’s why I named the book ‘Hard Choices’!” Guffaw. Wow, something to really laugh about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr-TJTisSbc
Trump may be all the things you say he is but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. And he’s right about her.
If you can’t defend Hillary courting and embracing neocons and her long record of support for disastrous wars, you are not commenting on the article.
Repeating completely unsupported falsehoods about Hillary ( “most qualified”) and ignoring the content under discussion is not participation, it’s propaganda.
So, let’s hear it.
Why do you support a candidate who is courting neocons and who voted for their policies as a senator and continued their policies as SOS?
Real Democrats want to know.
excuse me.. WHERE are the speeches Hilary gave on Wall Street?. Where are her e-mails?. THIS IS THE ELECTION OF EMPTY WORDS AND PROMISES
This is truly the election of the lessor of the two evils….
Who says what about truth?? Donald Trump does not talk of his bankruptcies.
Ten Cents on the Dollar or fifty Cents on the Dollar….he did not pay the debt in full. YES it is legal – BUT FOUR TIMES???? Do you think no-one got hurt being short changed??
Wall Street speeches – but Hilary is silent?? All about Donald Trump’s tax returns?? E-mails??? SILENT
Go point by point… tit for tat….truly the lessor of the two evils..TAKE YOUR PICK…..FLIP A COIN
Oh, Jeanne, Jeanne, Jeanne. So naive! You’re confidence in the benevolence of Hillary Clinton is absolutely quaint.
Oh, Charles, Charles, Charles. So naive! Your belief that Donald Trump is telling you the truth, and not just what you want to hear at the time is absolutely quaint.
I think the relevant comparison would be;Would HRC say these facts?
Nein.nada,nyet.
Hillary also famously said “We came, we saw, he died (ha ha ha).”
Not that I believe a single word that comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth, but Hillary’s “Hard Choices” did get us into the Iraq War, which needlessly destabilized the Middle East and gave rise to ISIS.
Not to mention, she’s been a hawk for decades—from Afghanistan to Syria. She favors a heavy hand with the military. That’s just a fact. And she’s admitted it herself, claiming that she’s plans on being “to the right of Obama”.
You want to talk snake oil? Let’s discuss how Hillary labels herself as a “progressive” while supporting Republican positions on the military, Wall Street, corporations, campaign finance, and fracking, and trade policy.
Is the shite getting thick or what?
Do you like IsUS?Should we caress them?let them the run amok?(as we have let them btw)Or end them?They are not freedom fighters,but mercenaries for Zion,and US.Hopefully Trump will exile the traitors who’ve promoted these criminal gangs.
Rania Khalek, how great to see you published here! Yes, one can’t believe a single thing Donald Trump says, but it’s excellent that he’s saying these particular things. Of course, he’s also pandered to the neoconservative Israel Lobby, and his son-in-law is a huge Lobby funder and booster. Trump said nice things about the Lobby at AIPAC’s convention.
Who knows what he really believes and what he’d actually do if he became POTUS. But to the extent those specific positions of his resonate with the electorate, it’s great news. And yeah, how odd (not!) that the establishment media hasn’t said much about it, given All-Trump-All-The-Time.
Trump was right. Hitlery is a warmonger, probably as bad as GWBush.
The only question about Clinton is whether or not she’ll take Dr. Kissinger as secretary of states. He did such a marvellous job back in the days, and they are good friends: she “welcomes his advices”.
And in case of technical issue on how to bomb civilians, she can also count with her buddy bibi, who gained lots of experience last year in gaza.
But to her credit, she’s sometimes a real pacifist. During the coup in Honduras in 2012, she didn’t send a single bomb, she just was the first to step in to recognised the newly appointed government, while the OAS and all other decent countries were denouncing a coup.
Secretary of State? Hillary could always appoint Condoleeza Rice. She will have just the right experience.
Holy crap, you just reminded Cheney’s still available and there’s no limit to years as a veep.
Um, thanks?
True, Rice s a good fit too. Probably part of a deal with the republican to secure power.
This again show here great skills to “making compromise”, as all her supporters says. Working with the worse war criminals, talking (for large fees..) to bankers and all lobbyst paying good money, and arm deals with saudi arabia and support of the occupation is actually is an “open attitude” or “pragamatism”.. the theory goes on that it’s normal that after the years in politics, she got scars from so much pragmatism.
They say her pragmatism showed the effective good she wanted to do.
I say she has a terrible records, despite her multi million super pac in charge of “correcting the record”, which is a laughable name: Are they going to change her 2003 vote on the iraq war?!?! buy a time machine?
Politically, she is the absolute antithesis of integrity: she backtracked and compromised on all topics: social (LGBT), environment (fracking), economics (TTP/TTIP), international politics (iraq war, libya). However, she shows a constant commitment at making the top 0.1% richer
But more probably Albright, with a dash of Nuland-Power. A Harpy hiring Gorgons.
“Of course, Trump is hardly the candidate of peace.”
That’s true.
“Nor is he a credible messenger.”
Well, he is when the message is the obvious and indisputable truth, as is the case here.
;^(
If there’s one thing Trump doesn’t do, is tell the truth.
Well, he sometimes does, when it coincidentally seems to be the thing to say at the moment. As in this instance.
“If there’s one thing Trump doesn’t do, is tell the truth.”
We’d have to get you to elucidate a bit to determine whether your fallacy is ad hominem or tu quoques. Regardless, it’s just silly to assert that he never tells the truth.
I mean, sheesh, we can’t even say that about Hillary, who is the undisputed master liar of this year’s political theatre of the absurd.
Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight.
“tu quoque”
Not sure why my fingers added that “s” without permission from my brain — and I don’t want to think about it. ;^(
Brainfart. ;-}
Oh, damn! Again?
Thank you The Intercept for giving us Rania Khalek!
And thank you, Rania, for never being a stenographer.
“If we would’ve done nothing,” Trump argued, “we would’ve been in much better shape.” Take Trump’s quote out of the article, and he could talking about Hillary’s warmongering , or his own financial situation and all the inheritance he lost through bad business deals. Hillary is unreliable and Trump is unbelievable! I’m not young; I’m not uninformed, and I’m not voting for either one of them. Bernie still has my vote.
“And the Clinton campaign is proudly boasting.. of establishment Republicans who.. have openly defected to Clinton.”
They recognize one their own.
…and how will it leave Slick Willy feeling, when he learns the “hard dog to keep on the porch” is not the only Koch in the hen-house…
Trump knows exactly what he is doing and that is the scary part. I could probably support Hillary, despite her wall street ties, if she were not such a warmongering hawk. A large portion of the population is tired of our interventionism and, if Hillary is the nominee, the Democratic platform is weak. Despite Trump’s apparent inconsistency here, I see him picking up lots of independents with this stance. Well written Rania! It’s good to see your work on The Intercept.
If he picks up ind. with this stance it is only because he is in some ways repeating what Bernie has been saying before the war in Iraq and has been 100% right about the outcome. Trump said it himself that he will be taking from Bernie, talking points to attack Hillary. I doubt that he believes what he is saying as he wants to bomb in the middle east.
Excellent work Rania!
Neither of these establishment warmongers will get my vote (anybody that believes Trump will actually pursue an isolationist policy is delusional) but it is still nice to see Hillary getting called out for her gung ho militarism.
The neocons rallying around Hillary is also proof that the criticism about her from the Left has been accurate and deserved… with Hillary’s courtship and embrace of them further proof that she was blatantly lying when claiming to be progressive…
… and maybe, just maybe, these public, unassailable, undeniable events that expose Hillary’s true nature will be the needed wake up call for the Democrats in the states that haven’t yet voted… and give Bernie the necessary votes for a come from behind victory.
As this article points out, the refusal by the corporate media to report on this should be a further wake up call. It is no accident, as the corporate media is owned and run by neolibcon warmongers who are perfectly content with our reckless, counterproductive and financially wasteful military interventionism.
So, anybody reading this who lives in or knows people in Kentucky, Oregon, California, the Dakotas, NJ etc. please share this story.
Hillary courting and openly embracing neocons is completely at odds with what the vast majority of Democrats want, completely at odds with how Hillary has presented herself to Dem voters, and is even a weakness that the idiot Trump may be able to use effectively against her.
Share it.
Put it on social media.
Make it known, because the establishment is trying to hide it.
( actually, share it in combination with the article about the Republicans and lobbyists and the pro-fracking and anti-Social Security Dems who are organizing the Democratic convention… because that too is at odds with the direction most Dems want to see the party going.)
TI- please move this story to the top of the page… posting it below older stories almost made me miss it.
Thanks.
Someone as sane as Mr. Trump can’t win a presidential election. The clearest signal is the rats are now abandoning the Republican ship.
However, in the long term, this could be good for the Republican Party. Once they no longer have any supporters, they’ll be free – free to pursue a brand new agenda. It may take a while to build a new ship, but in the meantime, the Democrats, piloted by the neocons, will have sailed theirs into the rocks.
So while I may be pulling for Hillary, I see this as a positive development for everyone.
Hillary will make sure the bombs rain down on poor brown middle easterners on time.
She’s motivated, not by malice, but by her underlying belief that in all cases, the best policy is: ‘more of the same’.
she’s always wanted to known as a rainmaker..
Personally I see Hillary as much more of a threat to peace and freedom than Trump. Why? Considering the opposition to Trump by both the neoliberal and neoconservative camps (probably 90% of congress) the level of obstructionism that would exist during a Trump administration would make what has happened under Obama look like a honeymoon. But if Clinton were to win, she would have substantial backing on both sides of the aisle for her warmongering and the continuing pillaging of the middle class by the 0.1%.
Not to worry; with Mrs. Clinton, the US will continue to enjoy unrivalled peace and freedom.
Exactly what I am worried about.
Spot on. It’s unlikely he’ll make it thru four years without being impeached. HRC? I see nothing but eight years of her BS.
It’s interesting, Duce, that it’s difficult to call the Donald a true fascist because he doesn’t seem to have an ideology that’s consistent or coherent. It’s more like he’s the love child of Archie Bunker and Ayn Rand, with a touch of Howard Beale. The thing is, though, that he does represent the will of the rank-and-file GOP electorate, whose rage has been maintained for years by the GOP leadership and now that leadership can’t turn it off. And the rank-and-file is furious: one can only maintain an erection for so long a time before it starts to hurt.
“It’s more like he’s the love child of Archie Bunker and Ayn Rand, with a touch of Howard Beale.”
Eeuww!!!
Mr. Trump routinely makes statements which are diametrically opposed. Previously, politicians would sheepishly admit they had flip flopped (e.g. ‘I was for it before I was against it’), and be mercilessly mocked. But Mr. Trump adamantly maintains his position has never changed.
This gives voters options:
– believe whichever of the two statements they prefer.
– believe some hidden nuance will eventually explain the seeming disconnect.
– stop trying to understand altogether and place their faith in Mr. Trump
In the meantime, Mr. Trump gains the flexibility to adopt either position, or some compromise. If you write a book called ‘The Art of the Deal’, you never limit your options.
Since all successful political techniques are copied, this will become the new normal. While all politicians fudge things – Bill Clinton (double meanings), George W. Bush (confusing syntax), or Barack Obama (careful qualifications) – none have reached the level of Donald Trump.
Americans can’t help the fact that you can’t understand the words coming out of Trump’s mouth; perhaps Trump should speak more slowly so you can understand him. Trump has never flip flopped on any issue, rather he has not held on to previous ideas if there is a better way to get things done. It’s called adapting to your situation and is vital to survival; that is why Hillary will not win because she is unable to adapt and only runs on falsehoods contradicted by her past actions.
“Trump has never flip flopped on any issue, rather he has not held on to previous ideas if there is a better way to get things done.”
That’s precious.
You might want to Google “Trump inconsistency” for a quick review of how amazingly quickly and frequently your candidate fails to “hold on to” his “previous ideas.”
Hard to hang onto anything when your hands are so tiny. ;-}
(Sorry, couldn’t resist…)
Of course you couldn’t resist, Pedinska. ;^)
Trump seems to have more of a porcine DNA cell construct.
as distinguished from Hillary’s, which differs by perhaps .0000003% from that of the filarial worm, or perhaps, ascaris.