Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 17, 2016

"Fake News" About Trump Continues Unabated

Clinton makes some twenty different issues or person responsible for her loss - everyone and everything except the DNC, her staff or herself. But a campaign that did just enough to get the states it thought it needed and not one bit more was going to lose no matter how much money it would spend. Shunning progressives and implausibly blaming Russia for her own mistakes did not help either. Clinton failed as a politician and presidential candidate. She just isn't good enough in those roles. It is as simple as that. But now another culprit responsible for her loss is rolled out. "Fake news" that somehow was not censored out of social networks.

But "fake news" was and is a daily occurrence even in major media. What were the "Saddam's WMDs" stories if not fake news? The Clinton campaign spread fake news about Sanders. The news about Clinton's email were (mostly) not fake even as she claimed otherwise.

My personal impression is that there was more fake news about Trump than about Clinton. The NYT, like most other mainstream media, was so much off from reality that its publisher now wrote a letter to request that staff "rededicate .. to the fundamental mission of .. journalism". He thereby admits that the NYT had failed as a news organization. 

But there is no rededication, neither in the NYT nor elsewhere, that I can see. The fairy tales about and around Trump seem not to stop for a minute. It will be claimed in top headlines that Trump will make John Bolton or Rudy Giuliani Secretary of State, lunatic Frank Gaffney will be his advisor. Trump wants security clearances for his children! Of course hardly any the active promoters of such nonsense will put the official denials of these lies on top of their pages or mention them at all. Poltico today told me that Wall Street is celebrating the Trump win, implying that Clinton would have been much better. Trump received some $5 million in donations from the finance sector, Clinton received $105 million - guess why.

Trump wants to abandon a No-First-Strike policy for U.S. nuclear weapons is one current scare (650 retweets!). That is a policy the U.S. never-ever had. Obama, like Clinton, rejected a NFS policy. How could Trump abandon it?

Trumps wants to register all Muslims? The National Security Entry-Exit Registration System was introduced in 2002 and only applied to visitors and residents from majority Muslim countries. In 2011 the system was phased out because it was "redundant" - some other system currently holds the data of mostly Muslim in the U.S.  The no-fly-lists are largely lists of Muslim - even four years old ones. Obama waged drone war in seven countries and bombed five. All were majority Muslim. So what please could Trump actually do to Muslim people that would be worse than what Bush or Obama have done?

Trump is a racist and his voters are white supremacists is a fake news claim that is still rolled out on a daily base. The facts do not support it. If they were true why did he get more votes from blacks and hispanics than Romney or McCain?

Why not take Trump for what he is? A fast talking salesman, born too rich, but politically a centrist who long supported Democrats and who will simply continue the political path Clinton, Bush and Obama created and walked before him. There is some hope that he will be less "globalist", neoconned and belligerent in his foreign policy but that still needs to be proven. On many of his announced policies there will likely be more Democrats in Congress supporting him than Republicans.

The man should be attacked on his politics and policies whenever that is justified. There will plenty such opportunities, especially with his economic and tax plans. Instead we get a daily dose of fake news about Trump this or that and one scare story after the other.

Is it so difficult, or even impossible, for journalists and media to "rededicate" themselves from feverish pro-Clinton and anti-Trump advocates back to (semi-)serious reporting?

That would be bad news for everyone.

Posted by b on November 17, 2016 at 18:25 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

@103, there's only on party; there can only be one party. Naturally, no one will admit it or face up to it, so besotted are they with the two-party myth. The differences are strictly ones of detail: country music vs hip-hop, hollywood vs talk radio, fried chicken vs tofu, southern crackers vs snooty liberals etc. The Imperial Project, buy cheap & sell dear, while promising more freedom and pizza, sails on undisturbed.

Posted by: ruralito | Nov 18 2016 18:41 utc | 101

Circe @ 104 says:

Are you willing to be suckered in by Trump and lower your standards to the gutter...

you have no choice. your standards are gonna be lowered(to the gutter) regardless. in fact, economic collapse, along with polical/societal/environmental collapse will likely be the catalyst i was referring to earlier. that 45% of non-compliant Americans will swell rapidly to 95% plus.

Posted by: john | Nov 18 2016 18:42 utc | 102

Circe's analysis (#104) did disappear.
His opinion:
All 3 nominees today are Iranhaters.
Trump wants to attack Iran.
Either with a UN-reolution (needs the help of Russia)
Either without.
The proof is in the planned military build-up.
Hugging Russia, throwing some bones to Putin, is meant to deceive Russia/Putin.

Posted by: From The Hague | Nov 18 2016 18:54 utc | 103

re 100

Likely to be a smear. Body parts accusations are par for the course in smearing, much like throwing babies out of incubators, particularly if it involves murdering the unfortunate subject. Few of those killed in the Syrian war will have died in a way that made the harvesting of their organs technically possible.

Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 18 2016 18:54 utc | 104

re 106

100 is now 96.

Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 18 2016 18:55 utc | 105

# 104 Circe, speaking only for myself, it's only been 10 days since Trump won the election...10 days. Before casting a wide net over all who voted for Trump over Clinton, b/c Stein nor Johnson had a snowballs chance in hell, you might want to give some time to let all shake out before pouncing.

For me, at least, I don't cast my vote on emotion...policy positions only...thus, Trump, nor any other candidate for that matter, will never be regarded as my BFF. And I hope you'll forgive me for throwing my support behind Trump. I didn't want WWIII with Russia and I wholeheartedly believe the Syrians have suffered long enough at our hands.

Add to this calculation the fact the U.S. economy is in the crapper and all indicators are pointing to collapse. If such predictions regarding the U.S. economy are in fact correct,
well, there won't be any leftover change to build more forces and weaponry. We'll be paying off the trillions in debt the Bush's and the Obama's and the neocons and the neolibs and the banksters and the renewables etc saddled 'We the Deplorable People' with.

Your concerns about Iran are warranted given Adelson's unwavering support of Trump and the Trump Israeli position paper released a couple of weeks prior to the election. As well, Pompeo, Sessions and Flynn are all on record wanting to unwind the Iran deal. No question.

But before projecting 'what ifs' let's see where all of this is heading. Politics is a long game and I'm thinking Iran has a much longer history dealing with such petulance than the U.S. and Israel does.

Posted by: h | Nov 18 2016 19:00 utc | 106

oops, numbers getting mixed up. Didn't mean to refer to myself, ulp!

Posted by: ruralito | Nov 18 2016 19:02 utc | 107


Wrong. Syria needed to go because the Shi'a crescent whooped Israel in 2006. They tried just Lebanon. Then they tried just Syria. Do you really think that after the recent collapse in their effort they are going to drop the scuffles with the small potatoes in the west and try a go at the big fish in the east? Gimme a break. When Syria reconstitues, Israel will have no choice but to share the region. There is no way that Putin or Russia would forsake Iran. Besides, the jihadi bank is running low and who is to say that Iran would be the kind of pushover that neocons portend it to be. Thinking Iran is doomed is a dollar store magic eightball analysis.

Iran is safe for decades to come. It won't be long for the Trump administration to show this in their action and through the state dept.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Nov 18 2016 19:08 utc | 108

@Circe 100 - you echo my concerns. I'm not sad that Clinton lost, but I'm not celebrating that Trump won, either. I kind of feel it's more like: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss.

People keep extoling how Trump's going to be an outlier and make all of these great changes. I'm not seeing it, myself, but I just hope I'm wrong. I think Trump's just going to be more of the same old same old. Tax cuts for the super wealthy and the corporations (do any big corporations even pay any taxes anymore??), tax increases for what remains of the middle class, gargantuan MIC expansion, no infrastructure projects (expect maybe some for extraction industries), sell off federal lands to the highest bidder, gut EPA, do nothing really helpful to reform ACA, gut SS & Medicare. A woman's right to choose is a gonner. Plus, no jobs, so sorry, just joking.

As I said: hope I'm wrong. Trump's Cabinet picks so far don't inspire confidence.

Posted by: RUKidding | Nov 18 2016 19:13 utc | 109

Wikipedia bio of Mike Pompeo, appointee for CIA director.

Posted by: ben | Nov 18 2016 19:15 utc | 110
Opposing regime change
It should come as no surprise that Trump opposes military interventions aimed at toppling governments, making it a policy point to "end the current strategy of nation-building and regime change," as his campaign website states.
In numerous instances, he has lambasted Washington's support for "moderate" rebels fighting to overthrow the Assad regime.
In an interviewed aired by CBS' "This Morning" show in February, Trump questioned the ultimate aim of supplying armed opposition groups in Syria. "Assad's no baby, he's not good. But who are the people we are backing?" Trump said. "We're giving all this money and all of this equipment to people we have no idea who they are. They're probably worse than Assad," he added.
One of the show's presenters asked whether better ties with Russia would allow him to pressure Moscow for Assad to step aside.
"Well, they've been trying to do that. Could I? I don't think it's that important, to be honest with you. I think, frankly, you get rid of Assad or you knock out that government, who is going to take over, the people that we're backing? Then you're going to have (something) like Libya," he said.

Posted by: okie farmer | Nov 18 2016 19:18 utc | 111

Wikipedia bio of Jeff Sessions, appointee for Attorney General.

Posted by: ben | Nov 18 2016 19:22 utc | 112


An addendum:

Check out Sakers post about Putin finally purging the Medvedev government. These are the Atlantic- integrationists linked to western finance. If there was doubt that Russia would not come to Irans aid, that should help dispel this.

Russia has come so far with Putin. I may have starry eyes for Trump, but just look at what Putin has done post-Yeltsin, post-neoliberal-plunder. Why is it so crazy to hope?

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Nov 18 2016 19:25 utc | 113

Bolton yesterday repeated his extremist and aggressive vision on Iran.

WASHINGTON ― John Bolton, a top candidate to serve as President-elect Donald Trump’s secretary of state, is publicly calling for the U.S. to help overthrow the existing government in Iran. “The only long-term solution is regime change in Tehran,” the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations told SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily on Thursday morning.

“The ayatollahs are the principal threat to international peace and security in the Middle East.”

The call for regime change is very much in line with past statements from Bolton, a hyper-hawkish Bush administration official who stands by the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. He has repeatedly urged the U.S. to help Israel bomb Iran or do it alone. Even as Iran was in the final stages of negotiating an international agreement that requires it to dramatically scale back its nuclear infrastructure, Bolton recommended a military attack.

Thursday’s remark suggests that he has no plans to tone down his adventurist foreign policy views, which run counter to Trump’s repeated promises to focus resources domestically and to avoid unnecessary entanglements abroad.

Posted by: From The Hague | Nov 18 2016 19:31 utc | 114

> Trump is a racist and his voters are white supremacists is a fake news claim

Trump has now surrounded himself with 2 of them: Sessions & Bannon. No getting around that. Sessions is hardcore... very dark undertones. I'd bet those late-breakers for Trump, especially minorities, are reaching for a lot of Excedrin about now.

As others have said, Donald's team so far has a decidedly anti-Iran bent... in the extreme. Ignorant. And scary. Throwbacks to Bush's Likudniks that who were not content with Iraq, wanted immediate "push" into Iran. I imagine this is giving Putin serious pause.

Pompeo & Sessions both hardline climate deniers. Pompeo's wealth largely financed by Koch Bros. Myron Ebell (leading transition team's environmental strategy) hardcore denier, in bed with AEI, avowed commitment to killing or cutting off EPA at the knees. Unwinding enviro regs.

A few around here pull up denier nonsense claiming AGW is a "hoax" etc. etc. 65% of American believe otherwise, as does official position of just about every other developed nation on the planet.

I voted for Stein. I had resolved to give Trump a chance. Not going to hit the streets quite yet, but these are not (as b says) "guesses" or "leaks", this is the real deal. And it's starting to look to me like Bush Jr.'s transition... on steroids.

Posted by: jdmckay | Nov 18 2016 19:36 utc | 115


My post got stuck at the end of the previous page. Thanks. Anyone who believes the U.S. has two different parties is buying into the mirage. The only difference is that the Democrats wanted Damascus to be the road to Iran; it would have been less messy. The goal is the same; the only difference is strategy.

Putin stepping into Syria complicated things for everyone. So now the Republican side are taking the approach they agreed on with Netanyahu all along.

The goal in the region has always been IRAN even before they invaded Iraq. Netanyahu always argued for striking Iran first. Now that Putin put a wrench in the plan to take out the smaller states and use the fall of Damascus to topple Iran; they had to scramble that idea. So now, Netanyahu's finally getting what he wants. The entire focus is being directed towards IRAN. Russia's involvement in Syria IS a complication; so they're going to allow Putin his distraction for now, because in some respects he's mopping up certain elements that they would have gotten rid of later anyway. Those elements (Nusra and rebel Wahhabi co.) were only necessary before to bring down Assad. Besides, they no doubt believe that allowing Putin to squander military resources in Syria will benefit the empire when they try to go after Russia with somewhat depleted military resources and maybe a people weary of this adventure.

Putin messed things up in Syria, no doubt about that. So now they're taking the short route and only Republicans can do it this way, because the Left, liberals, would tear down the house if Democrats took on Iran with force at least without a humanitarian angle like they fabricated in Syria. Democrats tried to get the green revolution going on the ground in Iran supporting terrorists like Jundallah and others, and it failed so then they tried toppling Assad with the same strategy, and now that that's not going so well, Republicans are stepping in to fast-track the plan with military force against Iran.

After IRAN, Syria will easily tip over and Assad will either be forced into exile or suffer Gaddafi's fate. And then there remains Putin. I'm convinced that once their Iran mission is complete and maybe even before it is, Putin will be next in the empire's crosshairs and you know they tried the rebel/revolution angle there before Putin was elected. Putin is a thorn in the empire's side and they're not going to give up on finding a way to get him out of the way. Count on it.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 18 2016 19:45 utc | 116

@jdmckay 117

I agree that a lot of MSM "noise" about Trump's racism, xenophobia, sexism, etc, was over exaggerated because it was click bate and generated revenue. I also don't believe that all of Trump's voters are racists, bigoted, homophobic, sexist, etc. They're not.

The vote was mainly about economics. However, now that Trump is picking his cabinet, we see facts on the ground, not nooz propaganda. This was my concern about Trump. I have already seen alternative propaganda insisting that Steve Bannon is not an anti-semitic white supremacist. I happen to disagree with that quite strongly. And Jeff Sessions? Geez.

So, no, I'm still not quite seeing how Trump's going to end being this amazing President who'll do all these wonderful things that his supporters are promising. I doubt that the our overseas partners will even be forced to pony up for their own military protection, and I'd really like to see that happen.

Time will tell, but color me skeptical ...

Posted by: RUKidding | Nov 18 2016 19:49 utc | 117

psychohistorian, do go to perimetr's link at #49 (and all others as well). I for one am very impressed. Thank you, perimetr.

Posted by: juliania | Nov 18 2016 19:52 utc | 118

Posted by: juliania | Nov 18, 2016 2:52:27 PM | 120

Yes, Thanks.


Bannon now has Trump’s full backing to destroy the UniParty, defeat the Globalists, banish the warmongers of the MIC and help the legal prosecution of the corrupt. This is the Revolution to end the domestic Tyranny and the global Hegemon.

The usual weapons of personal destruction have been launched at Bannon to destroy him and to deprive Trump of his most effective counselor and field marshall. Bannon has been branded a racist, an anti-semite, a white supremacist, an Islamophobe and a misogynist. In every forum and media outlet, the meme of Bannon being the worst human on the planet played as intensively as how the Dems attacked Trump during the campaign.


The fear and loathing of the Deep State is focused on another nemesis and threat in the person of General Flynn. Flynn challenges the Deep State’s incompetence, particularly its lack of results in the fight against terrorism. Flynn dealt with this in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He wrote a white paper on the state of US military Intelligence and the need to fix it.

Flynn also is sickened with the 2012 Benghazi event and coverup, the lies of Clinton and the abandonment by the command structure of CIA, Pentagon, State and NSC. The Syrian war, the attempted coup of Erdogan, and the carnage wrought by bad policies, sheepish leadership and less-than-best methods of Intelligence gathering and usage motivated the General to join Trump.

Flynn is now Trump’s guide into the Presidential raw data Intel reports and briefings. General Flynn is Trump’s personal analyst for interpretation of the data. Flynn has attended every briefing Trump has received. He is in place and the Deep State is out. So, they have mounted their counter-attack as soon as it was clear he would head the reform of the Intelligence community, and serve the newly elected President.

Flynn has recruited over two hundred generals and admirals and twenty-two Medal of Honor recipients to the successful Trump campaign. Now some of the generals are possible cabinet or undersecretary department nominees or agency appointees.

The Deep State is in deep trouble. General Flynn will probably be NSC head and I think he will have real power over fifteen other Intelligence agencies. Flynn may have great power over huge swaths of the MIC. He certainly will assist in the cleaning out of neocons and feckless employees, managers, supervisors and directors.

Posted by: From The Hague | Nov 18 2016 20:07 utc | 119

@ juliania

I read the article at the Saker and noticed quite clearly that there is no mention of eliminating private finance nor neutering the laws of inheritance.

Until and unless that is done, we look like we are headed for another "bad people" purge. But will that change the underlying tenets of our social organization? I am not seeing it explicitly but maybe its a hidden agenda that is above my pay grade.

I just see lots of people dying as cannon fodder for the global plutocrats to continue to hide their power and control behind misdirected hate and pent up anger....about the wrong things.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 18 2016 20:27 utc | 120

Nah, you guys are right! This Trump guy is gonna be freaking AWESOME!!!

Trump settles Trump University fraud lawsuit for $25 million

“U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has agreed to settle lawsuits relating to his Trump University series of real estate seminars for $25 million, a source familiar with the situation said on Friday.

Claims brought by New York’s attorney general will represent roughly $4 million of that amount, the source said. ”

Posted by: Ron Showalter | Nov 18 2016 20:53 utc | 121

So here is a ZH story about an interview with Bannon.—ed-over

Read it and come back here and explain how this part will work in our interconnected won't!

“Like [Andrew] Jackson’s populism, we’re going to build an entirely new political movement,” he says. “It’s everything related to jobs. The conservatives are going to go crazy. I’m the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. With negative interest rates throughout the world, it’s the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything. Ship yards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We’re just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks. It will be as exciting as the 1930s, greater than the Reagan revolution — conservatives, plus populists, in an economic nationalist movement.”
And the last quote in the story
“I am,” he says, with relish, “Thomas Cromwell in the court of the Tudors.”

I suggest folks go read up on Cromwell and substitute Henry VIII for the global plutocrats that own private finance and the noblemen of the day for the goyim hangers on of private finance that Bannon is being used to show are just uppity folks with no relevant history.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 18 2016 21:19 utc | 122

I don't know if it's correct to say that Trump got more black and Hispanic votes than did Romney or McCain. Trump got a larger share of those votes but the turnout was smaller (11% drop in the case of blacks). It would be correct to say that less blacks and Hispanics voted against Trump than voted against Romney and McCain.

The big story on the identity politics of this election is how Clinton overestimated the effectiveness of the identity-themed messages on which she based her campaign and how Trump correctly read the rise of socioeconomic class as a primary identifier that can cross racial lines. Elite issues such as the so-called glass ceiling affecting bourgeois women and how many brown faces there are in the top levels of federal bureaucracy (affected mostly by political patronage) just aren't as important as the economic and safety issues that affect most black and Hispanic voters. Trump talked to female and minority voters like adults in his crude way; Clinton harped on tired emotional appeals to those groups. Interestingly, Clinton's emotional appeals to blacks were more effective for black women than for black men. If the apparent cracks in the Democrats' anticipated demographic firewall keep growing, we could see a paradigm shift in electoral competition the likes of which we haven't seen since the 1960s.

Posted by: Thirdeye | Nov 18 2016 22:55 utc | 123

Here is some more "fake news" related to Trump

I keep reading how Trump is skirting/violating the nepotism laws by including Jared Kushner in his administration by not paying him....maybe more fake news but better than what folks get on TV, I suspect.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 18 2016 23:41 utc | 124

Fake news is nothing new it has been around for as long as fishwraps and probably much much longer given town criers & chinese whispers.

Remember Gulf of Tonkin incident or, what about the way that the amerikan left's only successful action - ridding the world of the debauched, corrupt plaything of warmongers, prez Kennedy, was blamed on anyone and everyone other than an angry amerikan lefty, or how just a few years later when his brother copped what he deserved, the action was passed off as a madman's delusion rather than admitting that a christian Palestinian was so pissed at amerika's unquestioning obeisance to zionism that he shot the prime israel appeaser.
This was back in the day before total amerikan hegemony and no one wanted the looney toons all shouting for war against the USSR just because a soviet sympathiser did the bizzo - getting into a war that won't go on forever & can't be won by amerika without blowin' up the entire shitshow just didn't have an upside.

The Sirhan Sirhan action is particularly relevant because around the same time that the amerikan disinformation service scuttled away from explaining why it was that a good xtian bloke would assassinate amerika's latest toy boy, they leaned on LBJ to shut the fuck up about the butchery of 34 navy men on the USS Liberty, if he didn't want to spend the '68 primary explaining to zionist bankrollers that he wasn't an "anti-semite" who secretly believed A Hitler was the best thing since sliced bread.

The big difference right now isn't that false news is easier to disseminate - that has always been as easy as slinging a sausage up an alley - if your 'news' is gonna help the gang. The difference now is that false news is easier to refute quickly - remember us humans being the worthless fans of a 'good goss' that we are, only remember the breakthrough story long term - either the initial fanfare salute as we get swamped in a diarrhea of bullshit - or the big furore created when someone proves that big msm story is a complete crock immediately the neolib sphincter opens.
Coming out with the truth the day after the big swamp is pretty much a waste of time, likely to give a few who already questioned the initial untruth a coupla talking points for the next barroom debate, but seriously damaging to the credibility of whoever tried to set the record straight. 12 months later, once the lie has been fully accepted & integrated into the common reality of deception which media subscribe to, the failed truth teller who made the error of telling the truth one day too late, will be dismissed as a deceiver & probable traitor and subjected to the usual round of bashing & witch-huntery doled out to saboteurs of the meme...

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 19 2016 2:14 utc | 125

ot - i see killary pac is no longer around.. all of their posts have been removed, except the one @28 which was originally @32... i have no desire to take away from anything anyone says, but when their first comment on this thread was 'more popcorn' and nothing more, it seemed like they weren't all that interested in engaging others in a conversation. that was the basis for my comment @16.. i might have been wrong in my view @16, but it seems it struck a nerve as b has removed their posts, excepting what @28 - a good quote from someone taken from elsewhere.. peace be to you killary pac either way..

Posted by: james | Nov 19 2016 2:57 utc | 126

@118 Sorry but your post makes no sense at all to me. Even if true that the future administration would shift its focus against Iran, what can they accomplish militarily against it? Nought. SAA & ISA would send militias to support Iran, nothing would prevent Russia from using Hamedan airbase just as it uses Hmeimim and deploy S-400 et al systems to bolster Itan's already existing ones. Plus on what grounds politically could they intervene? Nobody is buying Bibi's "Bomb" bs seriously anymore. Forget it, with Syria prevailing Iran is safe..

Posted by: Lozion | Nov 19 2016 3:55 utc | 127

The MSM is dead, they committed suicide during the electoral run with their overt bias and hypocritical lies. They are dead, finished and irrelevant. What we are witnessing here is called the dead cat's bounce.

Posted by: legal eagle | Nov 19 2016 4:29 utc | 128

Jerusalemites recite call to prayer from their rooftops

In response to the Israeli government’s plan to prohibit the call to prayer in the city, Jerusalemites climbed onto the roofs of their houses and recited the call to prayer all together.

In video footage which is circulating on social media, residents can clearly be heard reciting the call to prayer in protest of the law to ban it in Jerusalem.

Silence on the ban on the call to prayer. I thought this was fake news when I read it, but it's not. Fake news by omission?

Can you imagine the headlines if Jews anywhere in the world - let alone in Israel, for Jerusalem is in the middle of Palestine - were forbidden to practice their religion?

Trump is on record as recognizing Jerusalem as capital of Israel. He'll be down with the Isaelis' Final Solution to their 'Palestinian Problem' as well. Trump is a 100% opportunist. And his sharing the goals of the neo-cons gives him cover with Obama/Clinton and the rest of neo-libraconia, although that news has not yet sunk-in at the grassroots level.

He just named Mike Pompeo as his CIA Director designate. It is becoming harder and hard to regard the horseshit between my toes as evidence of my having been gifted with a pony.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 19 2016 5:51 utc | 129

@jfl #130

Pompeo is gross, but it seems Flynn is the one who truly has Trump's ear on intelligence matters.

Posted by: Thirdeye | Nov 19 2016 6:44 utc | 130

This is not fake news but what is really happening to our country

This looks to me like the beginning of the American monarchy as I commented at that site.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 19 2016 7:06 utc | 131

Gee, did Trump already get inaugurated? And here I thought Thanksgiving hadn't even occurred yet.
Will Trump fulfill all our dreams, and everything will be "happy happy joy joy" or will he continue Bobama's communist agenda?

Just reading all the articles online about Trump will do this, or won't do that...perhaps we should focus on what happens after he takes office? Hard to imagine he could be worse than Clinton or Bobama.

Posted by: farang | Nov 19 2016 7:19 utc | 132


Spot on. The last four administrations (Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama) have pursued identical domestic and foreign policies. Each of them curtailed liberties under the banner of the GWOT. Each promoted aggressive war for the purposes of resource looting and protection of the petro-dollar. Each grabbed more and more power for the executive branch. Each handed Wall Street and the TBTF banks gifts in the form of removal of restrictive legislation (Glass-Stegal) and/or "all you can eat" access to the public treasury, a.k.a. "QE".

Given the "Lucy and the football" pulled by Mr. Obama on the voters during the last two elections, it is disappointing to see so many people are back to smoking Hopium again.

Posted by: Ageless Yankee | Nov 19 2016 15:09 utc | 133

133;Yes it seems all the people that didn't vote for Trump don't like him.Sheesh.
I highly doubt Trump wants war with Iran,over what?They aren't making nukes,and the terror angle doesn't wash,as they are working with the Russians against the headchoppers.
Serial liars lie serially,and yes,lets see what Trump is about after 1-20-17.
And his choices so far are definitely not mainstream neolibcon,in fact the zionists hate Sessions,look at their coverage.
We will see kids.

Posted by: dahoit | Nov 19 2016 16:09 utc | 134

Remember, the Dems and Repubs share and swop their ‘wars.’

The Reps - Bush Junior - attacked Afgh, which didn’t create much of a stir. It was agreed to by the Intl’ community before 9/11, in any case the inhabitants are non-ppl, cool, there might be some gold in the hills or a pipeline in the works, Unocal, and the drug trade is hyper lucrative, damn the Russkies etc.

But the Iraq ‘war’ - merciless bombing after years of sanctions - created some ire in the US, and elsewhere, some mild US refusniks now tout their opposition, ineffective at the time, now blazed out as a hypocritical ‘badges of honor.’

The Dems post-Bush Junior went on a rampage, mostly in favor of KSA and Israel, the MIC, and subservience to many others, by once more attacking/ controlling the shit out of Afgh and Iraq (under cover.) Plus, mercilessly destroying other countries such as Lybia and Syria, and color-revolutionising Ukraine, as well as interfering massively in e.g. Venezuela, Brazil, Egypt, etc.

Hunky-dory, nobody of any stature peeped a tweet.

Millions of people died, became handicapped, ill, lost everything, were displaced…

DT seems to have taken on board that Russia can never be defeated, so best to collaborate, negotiate, influence, control.

Real men go to Teheran.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 19 2016 16:29 utc | 135

Fake News is only part of the problem.

People accept 'Fake News' when it is reinforced by 'fake myths' that promulgated as "who we are as a people". These myths - which people "know to be true(!)" - are really the levers by which propaganda succeeds. Myths like:

> exceptionalism: means never having to say you're sorry
an elite replacement for 'rugged individualism'

> "best of all worlds": democracy as cure-all
BUT is it really democracy? or the semblance of one?

> freedom: over fairness
'freedom' is not the 'liberty' of the founding fathers

One example of the misuse of identity myths is the attempt to create an equivalence between Israel and America. Israel's Zionist settler's, we are told, are just like than America's settlers.

Israel used to appeal to Americans as "the only democracy in the middle east" but their apartheid state makes that unjustifiable. So they now attempt to construct a false shared identity that conflates America of hundreds of years ago with America today.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 19 2016 18:20 utc | 136

@82 h

You're right of course on the technicality: if the electors actually do vote for Trump as they 'should' next month, then he will be the POTUS.

But I think the electoral college is a 'mistake' - or worse - and I think that most Americans would agree with me: that the person with the most votes should win. I think we should eliminate the Senate and add 100 Representatives. We could limit them to three consecutive 2 year elected terms, as a compromise.

I'm not at all sure the person with the most votes can be determined any longer in the USA. I also advocate for paper ballots, with the official totals being arrived at in public in the precinct where they were cast, and all precinct totals subsequently published. And I advocate for poll-to-majority. No mere plurality ought to be allowed to determine a winner in any constituency on any issue.

Watching you defend the electoral college is not a pretty sight.

You're right that I'm a US born American citizen living in Asia - would it make a difference to you if I were a naturalized American citizen living in Asia? - and that calling for us Americans to organize at the precinct level is easy for me to say. Yet I still think it's what must be done to effect real change in the USA.

But maybe you think such change is unneeded? You do seem to be down with the electoral college ... I was assuming above that you felt forced to defend the electoral college in order to defend Trump's presidency. Do you actually believe that the doubly-indirect electoral college is the way to go to elect the president of the USA? If so, you must be a hardcore small 'r' republican. I'm definitely a hardcore small 'd' democrat.

A republic is by definition an oligarchy in my book. I do think that as a matter of day-to-day convenience we ought to have a representative government, but I know that we ought also to be able to undo at the polls anything our representative government has done wrong. We ought also to be able to legislate ourselves when our representatives are unwilling to do so. And we ought to be able to recall any of our representatives, including the president and judges, and/or any of their appointees whenever a majority of their constituents feel the need and have voted to do so.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 19 2016 23:43 utc | 137


In short I think that the American people ought to be sovereign in America, as should all peoples, everywhere.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 19 2016 23:49 utc | 138

just a spoonful of Britannia's lying CFRtv or the CFR printed media shows a failing flailing monarchy getting its just desserts.

Posted by: Howard T. Lewis III | Nov 20 2016 0:47 utc | 139

So is this real or fake news? Trump meeting with folks this week to expand his personal business interests in India....EGAD!

Crimes involving moral turpitude have an inherent quality of baseness, vileness, or depravity with respect to a person's duty to another or to society in general.

Given the above Trump would not be allowed to immigrate to the US.....just saying...

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 20 2016 4:31 utc | 140

@ jfl | Nov 19, 2016 6:43:27 PM | 138

Your statement:

But I think the electoral college is a 'mistake' - or worse - and I think that most Americans would agree with me: that the person with the most votes should win. I think we should eliminate the Senate and add 100 Representatives. We could limit them to three consecutive 2 year elected terms, as a compromise.

is the most stupid, idiotic and ill-reasoned piece of garbage encountered to date. First it is only your opinion about the electoral collage, and as for being a mistake, it is probably beyond your comprehension that it just might be the result of a political compromise that enabled the constitution to be agreed upon. Your ignorance is showing. And NO, most Americans are satisfied with the constitution and its provisions AS WRITTEN. Evidence is the few numbers of amendments needed in a quarter millennium since it was written. How misleading can you get. And had you not noticed, in each state, exactly, precisely, the person receiving the most votes controlled the electoral college vote, just as you are demanding. That the aggregate for the country can be something different, is a seldom experienced fluke that has no standing whatsoever. Yes, your ignorance shows for all to see. Keep up the good work, your credibility follows.

Only Nebraska has a unicameral legislature, and that legislature is not required to issue a national budget nor consent to treaty or commission officers of national office and military position. It would seem a unicameral legislature would fall prey to some single interests far more easily than the division currently in place. You art an unthinking idiot to hold otherwise. Join Penelope in the elision bench these pages.

Not once have you recognised a simple solution to assuage your imagined problems; don't return incumbent members to the 'old boys club' unless they serve the public interest. The Democratic party curtailed seniority and more closely serves the public than the rigidly controlled Republican party in Congress. Tip O'Neil warned of the consequences but was overridden just before he retired. Given the costs of running for national public office, wet-behind-the-ears neophyte congress-criters will be enormously more difficult and expensive for the deep state to control, or so it would seem.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Nov 20 2016 10:18 utc | 141

@142 ftb

Never any doubt in my mind that you are a hardcore small 'r' republican.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 21 2016 1:47 utc | 142

Anyone who still believes this entire charade is about the so called "republicans" vs equally mythical "democrats" is a hardcore idiot.

Likewise someone who thinks that tinkering with the vote counting system will solve anything.

FFS, you Americans have two incredibly corrupt, totally bankrupt parties that represent the SAME FUCKING CORPORATE INTERESTS to fight for, with tiny, shifting differences from one election cycle to another.

In fact, the difference between the average republican and a Trumpist far exceeds the difference between your average republican and a democrat.

You effective have ONE two-winged FASCIST party left to choose from. Both wings very closely coordinate with the largest corporations (which is how Fascism was originally defined I believe).

You are living in the SOVIET UNION of AMERICA and have essentially zero democracy left.

Your main media are absolute, hard-core whores in 100% collusion with the corporate and political interests.

Your political elite should not even be able to control your own political destiny, let alone the destiny of the rest of the planet.

You are NOT a solution.

You are a PROBLEM.

The America of today is THE MAIN FUCKING PROBLEM of the entire planet Earth.

There is 1% chance that someone within Trump's coming administration may try to solve the problem and possibly salvage most of the actual America.

There would have been 0% chance under Hillary. Not because she's a Democrat (clearly not), nor even because she's a democrat (clearly so, but totally irrelevant).

It's because she is fundamentally part of the system, while Trump might just be a rogue and hostile to it. Even if only partially so. Even if he tries and doesn't achieve much at all. Or even if he gets assassinated, and thereby mobilizes the followers.

That, to me, was a no-brainer.

An aggressive, possibly death-causing treatment is far better to just surrendering to the cancer that is exemplified by Hillary.

Let's face it. You actually still have a tiny chance of major upheaval and recovery without a another civil war given the Trump administration. What if Hillary won instead?

I am still reluctantly optimistic. With a bit of luck, ok with a WHOLE LOT of luck, you guys have just had a counter-coup which might make your civil war still very avoidable.

Posted by: Quadriad | Nov 21 2016 2:31 utc | 143

@144 Well said Quadriad. My sentiments as well..

Posted by: Lozion | Nov 21 2016 3:45 utc | 144

Those of us like myself who wanted a Trump presidency did not vote naively thinking the thing could be put back together. Anyone here who actually has any beef with a Trump supporter like myself, please take heed: he is gonna guide this burning plane down. Because it can't land on just one engine and the others on fire. There is no winnable situation for America as empire. The Saker has outlined this well, as well as various other analyzers of well-repute. It is illogical and nonsensical for someone to think, for instance that Iran is next on the docket for Uncle Sam. This is impossible, both logistically as well as feasibly. There is no road to Tehran unless one overlooks the logical outcome of icbms. Look at Donald...does he look like a true zionist-evangelical? Unless Satan has commandeered his sunless - tanned head and is playing him so well to steer the world to holocaust, then we are all in for a treat: the waning days of empire, viewable from an unirradiated sofa. Face it people, if nukes were gonna fly, they'd have flied by now. So kiss your wife. Hug your children. Stock up on food and bullion. Hillary was defeated and the neocon window has closed. Now we gotta hope he can stick the landing, cause high finance has left our carcass, parachuted like DB Cooper over the wilderness. Where are they gonna show up next?

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Nov 21 2016 5:15 utc | 145

@ jfl | Nov 20, 2016 8:47:47 PM | 143

Of course I am, the only other possibility to govern the herd of cats the species has made of itself is some form of autarchy. My preference actually is anarchy but so few are qualified to participate. That leaves small 'r' republican as the greatest good for the largest number - until that fails as well. Shelf life of republics is about two centuries before adhesive forces come undone.

But since you're not responding to the assertion stated #142, there is no return on continuing this discussion.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Nov 21 2016 8:58 utc | 146

The Adelson angle;I saw him listed as a large contributor to the HBs campaign also,so he was only preserving a path to power by playing both sides.
Which is also borne out by Orthodox Jews saying give Trump a chance outside Trump Tower.
Modus operandi one;suck up to power.
Palestinian prayer;I read that in Brooklyn NY there is a temple that blows their own horn every Saturday and startles the neighbors out of their wits.
Curtailment in their future?sheesh.

Posted by: dahoit | Nov 21 2016 15:26 utc | 147

@116 jdmcay

"A few around here pull up denier nonsense claiming AGW is a "hoax" etc. etc. 65% of American believe otherwise, as does official position of just about every other developed nation on the planet."

Sorry, but what 65% of Americans believe and what developed nations "positions" are is not a proof of anthropogenic Climate Change / Global Warming, and is certainly not a justification for me to open my wallet for such a "cause"

You might as well have said "4 out of 5 dentists agree"...

Posted by: xLemming | Nov 22 2016 15:04 utc | 148

104;Circe was the woman who kept Ullyses captive on his return from Troy.Doubt she is a he,and her hysteria confirms it.
Trump calls MSM liars.Oy,yeah,hes a zionist sleeper agent.Hahahahaha......
Bannon a no show at ZOA!
Give it a rest propagandists,there is a new game in town,its called America First.
Hoo boy!

Posted by: dahoit | Nov 22 2016 16:57 utc | 149

- Nope. Disagree. I DO/DID NOT like BOTH candidates.

What about this ?

Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 23 2016 8:52 utc | 150

Interesting take on the Clinton/Stein recounts ...

The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.

Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time this happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

... the only thing this exercise shows me is that Stein is just an employee of 'the Green Party', which is now working with the Clinton Foundation, apparently.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 28 2016 13:33 utc | 151

jfl @152, quoting

The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate ...
A rather benign and myopic interpretation, isn't it?

Somehow they forgot about the establishment's love for Hillary and GOP resistance to Trump.

Anyone that has followed this election should already know "the answer": the recounts are being done to make Hillary the next President.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 28 2016 17:20 utc | 152

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.