Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 11, 2020

How Trump Might Still Win

Trump currently seems likely to lose the fight over the election outcome. So far he has not shown any evidence that a significant extend of fraud has happened. While there will always be some votes in doubt the numbers in play now are not large enough to explain Biden's presumed victory. The courts are therefore likely to reject Trump's current challenges.

The media, including Murdoch's stable of right wing organs and the social media giants, have firmly declared a Biden victory and are thereby of no help for Trump.

But the Republican Party and Trump will want to keep fear, uncertainty and doubt alive at least until January 5 when the two Senate run-offs in Georgia get decided.

While the Republican incumbents are leading the race the Democrats will put a lot of resources into the state to move those seats to their side. They would give a Harris/Biden administration control over the Senate.

It is also possible that Trump may actually try to stay in office by manipulating the Electoral College process.

There are several more steps and deadline in the elaborate election process for the presidency.

  • Dec  8 - States determine their electors for the Electoral College.
  • Dec 14 - Electors meet in their states to cast their votes for the new President and Vice President.
  • Dec 23 - Certificates of the electoral vote results get delivered to the president of the Senate, who is Vice President Mike Pence
  • Jan  3 - Members of Congress are sworn in.
  • Jan  6 - Congress meets to count the electoral votes and declare the results.

Trump could, even without finding the necessary votes, (ab-)use the Electoral College process to shift the result to his side. He can try to block or delay certifications in certain states and/or he can push Republican state legislators to appoint Trump electors.

There is precedence for that from the 1876 election:

Then as now, each state must decide on a group of electors to meet with a joint session of Congress on January 6 where the winner of the presidential election is declared. The normal practice in a state where Biden won the popular-vote total would be for state election officials to certify the results and send a slate of electors to Congress. But state legislatures have the constitutional authority to conclude that the popular vote has been corrupted and thus send a competing slate of electors on behalf of their state.
The 12th Amendment to the Constitution specifies that the “President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” That means that in the case of disputes about competing electoral slates, the President of the Senate—Vice President Pence—would appear to have the ultimate authority to decide which to accept and which to reject. Pence would choose Trump. Democrats would appeal to the Supreme Court.

Alternatively, if at that point, no candidate has the required 270 electoral votes, the 12th Amendment stipulates, “the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote.” Currently, Republicans have a state delegation majority with 26 of the 50 states and they appear almost certain to keep that majority in the new Congress. A vote of the states would then elect President Trump for a second term. And again, Democrats would appeal that outcome to the Supreme Court.

In both cases the Supreme Court, with six of its nine judges nominated by Republicans, is likely to find in favor of Trump.

There are some variants of such a play:

If a lawsuit successfully stops certification of results in a state, legislators there could step into the void and pick a pro-Trump slate of electors.
  • The lawyer, who requested anonymity to speak about the scenario, said Trump's team now appears to be trying to throw enough dirt at the process for counting late ballots to argue that accurate results can't be ascertained.
  • The next step could be to try to get federal or state courts to enjoin secretaries of state from certifying results.
  • Any move to provide an alternative slate of electors could force the first real test of the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and could land before the Supreme Court.
  • Among the key swing states, Arizona and Georgia have GOP governors and legislatures. Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have Democratic governors but GOP legislatures.

The Democrats are of course aware of such a possibility. They therefore play up the certainty of a Biden's victory even as the election process is far from decided.

But one should never count Trump out. Despite four years of getting Russiagate bullshit thrown at him he has managed to stay in office and to proceed with much of his program. He is also the first president in a 100 years who resisted the intense pressure to launch a new war. He is therefore unlikely to fold and to concede that he has lost the race.

There is only one person that could stop Trump from being successful with a 'dirty' Electoral College strategy. That is of course he himself. Over the last four years he has failed to select competent advisors. He will now need the best strategists and lawyers that are available. Jared Kushner and Rudi Giuliani will not do. Trump will also need the full backing of his party to put pressure on state legislators.  He will have to make concessions to get the necessary support.

Meanwhile we all, as bystanders, will have to up our popcorn supplies to sustain the next two month.

Posted by b on November 11, 2020 at 17:36 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

If there is one unfailing indication of the presence of an idiot it is the suggestion that the Bolshevik Revolution was funded by bankers and carried out by their dupes.
Posted by: bevin | Nov 12 2020 18:19 utc | 271

---
What a liar you are, Mr Bevin.

There is literally a mountain of evidence of the Bolscheviks being financed by NY Bankers. Jacob Schiff alone gave the at least 5 million, more than. Decade prior to the revolution.

I'd call you an idiot, but for that to be true you'd have to actully be ignorant regarding Schiff's financing of the Bolsheviks. But I know you're not, i have seen others inform you of this before, and seen you try to dismiss it. So, "liar" it is then

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 9:58 utc | 301

Truly there's no need to call people idiots. It would be more useful if you'd critique Sutton's work for us, which I know you're eminently capable of doing

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 12 2020 19:41 utc | 275

---

Guaranteed the liar Bevin won't do that because he's had ample opportunity to do so in the past and has refused to engage each and every time, preferring instead to sit there drooling puerile schoolgirl-level insults.

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 10:03 utc | 302

Just fyi: the 5 million dollars given to the Bolsheviks in 1905 would be equal to more than 125 million dollars in todays money

That's what was given to the Bolsheviks by just ONE of the Wall St bankers who financed the Bolsheviks prior to the revolution.

That is major financing, not minor amounts easily dismissed by puerile schoolgirls like Mr Bevin appears to be

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 10:28 utc | 303

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 13 2020 2:26 utc | 292 -- "When the US has fallen low enough that the normal height of China seems high enough to aspire to, the Demonstration Effect will work its way with the exhausted minds of the US populace. To use a Tibetan term, like working butter into leather, gradually the leather becomes pliable. All of this will take time.... a different timescale.... a different allocation of personal energy.... to offer all that we have into its building while we live.... It's not about us. It's about our descendants.... No point getting upset because we can't see immediate gratification.... Frustration and despair are both killers of the daily energy needed to help build this new world. It will never bear its great fruit in our lifetimes...."

Yes, due to systemic inertia alone, the collapse (Walter calls it the abyss) will not be for another 50 years, at least. Then we might see MASA... Make America Supple Again.... supple, like good, useful leather.

Appreciate your reminder to give all that we have while we still have time, to inform those just waking up in the future from their deep state deep sleep.

And yes, we just might meet at the barricades if this slo-mo toilet swirling should accelerate into total collapse of the Evil Empire. Never can tell.

Thank you kindly for your wise, nuanced thinking. Looks like you have been through fire and flood.

Posted by: kiwiklown | Nov 13 2020 10:56 utc | 304

The very obviously one-sided press coverage before and during the voting period, coupled with 'opinion polls' showing 7 to 10% leads for Biden (RCP average fluctuated between 7 and 8% few days before Nov 3) would make any reasonable, non partisan individual wonder as to what really was going on. If not election day fraud, I believe in many developing nations they call it pre-poll rigging. As for what happened on election day, the jury is still out and given the prior coverage by media, claims of fairness might just be dubious this time around.

Posted by: UnderTheDome | Nov 13 2020 11:24 utc | 305

@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 10:03 utc | 302

Sutton himself doesn't conclude Wall Street was behind the Bolsheviks. He just said that a "colorful picture" arises when taking into account some marginal documents included in the archive he researched into. His book is just a random collection of documents and don't form any thesis at all.

Schiff was a declared enemy of Tsarist Russia. He also financed the Japanese against the Russians in the 1904-5 Russo-Japanese War. He clearly was more interested in destroying Russia as an imperialist power (competitor) than propping up Communism per se. As I've said before: nobody seriously believed the Bolsheviks were a serious threat at the time.

You also forgot to mention his Wall Street book was actually a trilogy: he also published a book titled "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler" and "Wall Street and FDR". So, you clearly have a situation here where Wall Street appears to be behind everything.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 11:31 utc | 306

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 13 2020 0:14 utc | 285 -- "The writer has such a bad memory he can't recall his D-Party did the same in 2016 and continued to be "Bad Losers" for 3.5 years more; and of course, he's only one of thousands.... the election outcome chaos is the most revealing aspect of the election."

That writer is one of those "go-along-to-get-along" types useful to the owners of the One Percent money making machine, and as you have illustrated above, exposing such slime balls today is almost instantaneous. In today's internet age, we get to see the fawning and the lying almost the next day, unlike the olden days when we had to wait for the rich and famous to die and someone writes a tell-all biography. The speed of revelation has telescoped from decades down to days now, and therein lies some hope for an earlier demise of the present systems of unfairness, and the possibility for rebuilding America -- the idea, not the political state per se.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 13 2020 0:49 utc | 287 -- ".... ask myself perhaps too often if it's worth the effort.... the Truths I have to tell would appear quite radical.... It's clear that getting people to think and reason critically isn't enough...."

Truth looks like nonsense to fools. Truths are 'radical' to fools because their worldview has been corrupted, perverted, inverted. They are beyond reason, having not only failed to learn how to learn, but their itching ears have been seduced, captured, owned by others. They possess a confounding ability to sense the truths we are about to tell them, and then amazingly, they reject it out of hand, and some even have a chuckle at their cleverness.

But then, cleverness is not wisdom. Just look at Schumer. Look at Pelosi. Look at them all. Clever, but clever fools. And evil ones too. They pretend to govern, but they benefit at the expense of their citizenry's welfare, their nation's best interests. They think that if they accumulate enough money, that their money will protect the generations after them. But the Chinese have a saying that wealth does not last 3 generations -- the first makes money, the second manages it, the third generation wastes the fortune. What does it profit a man to gain the whole world but loses his soul? Fools.

From the little that you have written here, your books will be useful to those just waking up from the generational abuse by the One Percenters. I see you as a sort of Trail Guide, one who leaves crumbs along the trial to revelation, one who leaves gems of logical reasoning for the youth of the future. Don't try to convince the old foggies: they already know all there is to know under the Universe.

Posted by: kiwiklown | Nov 13 2020 11:33 utc | 307

@306 vk

Follow me to the Open Thread. I want to take up the subject there. It's too important to leave buried here.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 13 2020 13:29 utc | 308

Sutton himself doesn't conclude Wall Street was behind the Bolsheviks. He just said that a "colorful picture" arises when taking into account some marginal documents included in the archive he researched into. His book is just a random collection of documents and don't form any thesis at all.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 11:31 utc | 306

------

Sutton doesn't have to conclude it for it to be an obvious conclusion. And Sutton's book isn't the only source for this info. Sutton is but merely ONE source, an easily accesible one since his work is available free in many places on the internet.


----


Schiff was a declared enemy of Tsarist Russia. He also financed the Japanese against the Russians in the 1904-5 Russo-Japanese War. He clearly was more interested in destroying Russia as an imperialist power (competitor) than propping up Communism per se.

---

But Schiff is not the only Wall St entity that finaced the Bolsheviks. Far from it in fact. He is but ONE easily provable source of Wall St funding for the Bolsheviks


And you're being decidely disingenuous by neglecting to mention that Schiffs funding in 1905 was funnelled toward imprisoned Russian soldiers, captured by the Japanese, in order to indoctrinate them with Bolshevik propaganda. THAT is why he was declared an enemy of Tzarist Russia, becuase of his financing of Bolshevik propaganda efforts.

If you're going to tell a story, tell the whole story, not just the part that suits your flawed narrative, vk


------

As I've said before: nobody seriously believed the Bolsheviks were a serious threat at the time.

----

Well they certainly would have been a LOT less of a threat had Wall St bankers , like Shiff and several others, not lavished millions of dollars of funding on them, now wouldn't they?

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:22 utc | 309

Well they certainly would have been a LOT less of a threat had Wall St bankers , like Shiff and several others, not lavished millions of dollars of funding on them, now wouldn't they?

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:22 utc | 309

------

Hundreds of millions of dollars in 2020 dollar figures

There's almost no political movement that couldn't become major force to be reckoned with, given that level of funding.

vk's ridiculous pretence that the Bolshevik rise to power was somehow 'unforeseeable' is simply laughable, given the amounts of money being thrown at them by Wall St, both before and after the revolution.

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:30 utc | 310

The Russian population was recorded in 1897 as being approx 125 million people.
This was a mere 8 years before Schiff and several other Wall St oligarchs started funding Bolshevik propaganda efforts.

Schiff's funding alone would have given a massive boost to the effectiveness of the Bolshevik revolutionary efforts.

Add in the combined effect of all the other Wall St oligarch's Bolshevik financing efforts and it would be hard to claim that the Bolshevik rise to power was somehow 'unforeseeable', our friend vk is now disingenuously trying to claim.

Vks ridiculous claims are the equivalent of those modern day "who could have known" claims we hear so often from western imperial war apologists regarding US/NATO funding of islamic militant headchopper mercenaries, like Al Queada/ISIS

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:41 utc | 311

Vks ridiculous claims are the equivalent of those modern day "who could have known" claims we hear so often from western imperial war apologists regarding US/NATO funding of islamic militant headchopper mercenaries, like Al Queada/ISIS

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:41 utc | 311

.... and every bit as dishonest and ridiculous as those modern day "who could have predicted it?" claims.

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:43 utc | 312

@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 14:30 utc | 310

The evidence overwhelmingly points to the direction Schiff wanted to destroy Russia at any cost, not to promote the Bolsheviks.

USD 125 million is little money if the other side also received similar or greater quantities. How much money did Wall Street paid to the Japanese or the Nazis? Banks lend money, that's what they do.

The Bolsheviks' rise to power was completely unexpected. There's too much evidence from too many disparate sources that prove that.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 14:50 utc | 313

karlof1 @Nov13 0:59 #289

CitizenX @286--

How the fuck do you know Trumps[sic] 2016 win was not rigged?

The reverse question could be asked of you, nor could your answer be indisputably correct. The great mass of evidence says Trump's 2016 win was genuine, but the only way to really know is to go back and count every single vote ...


IMO Those who claim that the 2106 election was NOT rigged have the burden of proof given that it is highly unlikely that a TRUE "populists outsider" can win a major Party nomination in USA, let alone the Presidency.

We already KNOW that elections are rigged via money-in-politics (AIPAC Congress), controlled opposition (like Bernie Sanders), controlled media (access journalism, CIA's project mockingbird, etc.) and a Duopoly Monopoly run by an EMPIRE FIRST Deep State.

But some quibble about voter fraud as if that alone constitutes 'election fraud'.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 13 2020 15:41 utc | 314

The evidence overwhelmingly points to the direction Schiff wanted to destroy Russia at any cost, not to promote the Bolsheviks.

USD 125 million is little money if the other side also received similar or greater quantities. How much money did Wall Street paid to the Japanese or the Nazis? Banks lend money, that's what they do.

----

What evidence?

You have presented exacty ZERO evidence so far, for you ridiculoys "who could have foreseen?" Narrative, preferrring instead to utter evidence-free assertions, equivalent to simply saying "everybody knows..." over and over again and for some reason you expect your evidence-free nonsense to be taken seriously.

The Bolsheviks' rise to power was completely unexpected. There's too much evidence from too many disparate sources that prove that.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 14:50 utc | 313

______

"USD 125 million is little money if the other side also received similar or greater quantities. How much money did Wall Street paid to the Japanese or the Nazis"

Well if you were half the expert you pretend to be, you'd be able to provide the figures and quote your sources.

But you don't, so it's fair to assume you're no expert.

So far you just look like a mere shifty propagandist, clutching as straws to shore-up his leaky narrative.


-----

"The Bolsheviks' rise to power was completely unexpected. There's too much evidence from too many disparate sources that prove that."

No it wasn't. Stop with your evidence free nonsense vk. Funnelling the equivalent of hundreds of millions of dollars(in 2020 figures) in their direction absolutely ensured their rise to power.

As mentioned already you have supplied no evidence at all to counter anything presented so far regaring massive amounts of Wall St financing for the Bolsheviks, from at least as early as 1905

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 16:00 utc | 315

Posted by: EoinW | Nov 11 2020 18:40 utc | 16

LOL, clearly we have a European who has never been to Texas.

Who cares how many counties went for Trump or Biden? If you had ever been there (I grew up and lived all over the state for 40 years) you would know that MOST counties have a population of less than 5-10,000 people. Even if Trump took those, there were probably more Biden votes in those places than there are usually for a Democrat. Furthermore, the major population centers - Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, El Paso etc. all went heavily for Biden. Hence the closest a Democrat has come to challenging for the state in many years.

TDS clearly works both ways and you have the version of it that is known as Trump Denial Syndrome.

Posted by: _K_C_ | Nov 13 2020 16:08 utc | 316

@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 16:00 utc | 315

The guy you're quoting literally wrote a trilogy on Wall Street and you're ignoring two of the three books, in order to picture a situation where the Bolsheviks were entirely a Wall Street fabrication.

You're the one falsifying History here.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 16:17 utc | 317

Posted by: _K_C_ | Nov 13 2020 16:08 utc | 316

Regarding my own post, I actually went and looked it up. It has been a while since I drove across Texas. What I should have said is that MOST counties in that state have less than 20,000 people. It's grown a bit, not just in the big cities.

Biden took the bigger counties, even some that had previously gone Republican and out-performed Hillary in most places OTHER than a few border counties, which is where I have explained there have been big local economic/jobs booms due to the fence, wall and other border infrastructure projects with which I was well acquainted as a geotechnical engineer before I retired.

A look at the Trump/Biden Texas Vote

Posted by: _K_C_ | Nov 13 2020 16:21 utc | 318

The guy you're quoting literally wrote a trilogy on Wall Street and you're ignoring two of the three books, in order to picture a situation where the Bolsheviks were entirely a Wall Street fabrication.

You're the one falsifying History here.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 16:17 utc | 317

Still spouting evidence-free assertions and expecting to be taken seriously.

What a joke you are

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 16:24 utc | 319

@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 16:24 utc | 319

My goodness, illiteracy really is one hell of a malaise in the West...

Here's the excerpt that allegedly sustains your whole argument from the Sutton book:

Churchill then argues that this conspiratorial Spartacus-Weishaupt group has been the mainspring of every subversive movement in the nineteenth century. While pointing out that Zionism and Bolshevism are competing for the soul of the Jewish people, Churchill (in 1920) was preoccupied with the role of the Jew in the Bolshevik Revolution and the existence of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.

Another well-known author in the 1920s, Henry Wickham Steed describes in the second volume of his Through 30 Years 1892-1922 (p. 302) how he attempted to bring the Jewish-conspiracy concept to the attention of Colonel Edward M. House and President Woodrow Wilson. One day in March 1919 Wickham Steed called Colonel House and found him disturbed over Steed's recent criticism of U.S. recognition of the Bolsheviks. Steed pointed out to House that Wilson would be discredited among the many peoples and nations of Europe and "insisted that, unknown to him, the prime movers were Jacob Schiff, Warburg and other international financiers, who wished above all to bolster up the Jewish Bolshevists in order to secure a field for German and Jewish exploitation of Russia." According to Steed, Colonel House argued for the establishment of economic relations with the Soviet Union.

Probably the most superficially damning collection of documents on the Jewish conspiracy is in the State Department Decimal File (861.00/5339). The central document is one entitled "Bolshevism and Judaism," dated November 13, 1918. The text is in the form of a report, which states that the revolution in Russia was engineered "in February 1916" and "it was found that the following persons and firms were engaged in this destructive work":

(1) Jacob Schiff Jew
(2) Kuhn, Loeb & Company Jewish Firm
Management: Jacob Schiff Jew
Felix Warburg Jew
Otto H. Kahn Jew
Mortimer L. Schiff Jew
Jerome J. Hanauer Jew
(3) Guggenheim Jew
(4) Max Breitung Jew
(5) Isaac Seligman Jew

The report goes on to assert that there can be no doubt that the Russian Revolution
was started and engineered by this group and that in April 1917 Jacob Schiff in fact made a public announcement and it was due to his financial influence that the Russian revolution was successfully accomplished and in the Spring 1917 Jacob Schitf started to finance Trotsky, a Jew, for the purpose of accomplishing a social revolution in Russia.

The report contains other miscellaneous information about Max Warburg's financing of Trotsky, the role of the Rheinish-Westphalian syndicate and Olof Aschberg of the Nya Banken (Stockholm) together with Jivotovsky. The anonymous author (actually employed by the U.S. War Trade Board)2 states that the links between these organizations and their financing of the Bolshevik Revolution show how "the link between Jewish multi-millionaires and Jewish proletarians was forged." The report goes on to list a large number of Bolsheviks who were also Jews and then describes the actions of Paul Warburg, Judus Magnes, Kuhn, Loeb & Company, and Speyer & Company.

The report ends with a barb at "International Jewry" and places the argument into the context of a Christian-Jewish conflict backed up by quotations from the Protocols of Zion. Accompanying this report is a series of cables between the State Department in Washington and the American embassy in London concerning the steps to be taken with these documents:

[...]

This information was apparently developed and a later British intelligence report makes the flat accusation:

SUMMARY: There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international movement controlled by Jews; communications are passing between the leaders in America, France, Russia and England with a view to concerted action....4

However, none of the above statements can be supported with hard empirical evidence. The most significant information is contained in the paragraph to the effect that the British authorities possessed "letters intercepted from various groups of international Jews setting out a scheme for world dominion." If indeed such letters exist, then they would provide support (or nonsupport) for a presently unsubstantiated hypothesis: to wit, that the Bolshevik Revolution and other revolutions are the work of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.

Moveover, when statements and assertions are not supported by hard evidence and where attempts to unearth hard evidence lead in a circle back to the starting point — particularly when everyone is quoting everyone else — then we must reject the story as spurious. There is no concrete evidence that Jews were involved in the Bolshevik Revolution because they were Jewish. There may indeed have been a higher proportion of Jews involved, but given tsarist treatment of Jews, what else would we expect? There were probably many Englishmen or persons of English origin in the American Revolution fighting the redcoats. So what? Does that make the American Revolution an English conspiracy? Winston Churchill's statement that Jews had a "very great role" in the Bolshevik Revolution is supported only by distorted evidence. The list of Jews involved in the Bolshevik Revolution must be weighed against lists of non-Jews involved in the revolution. When this scientific procedure is adopted, the proportion of foreign Jewish Bolsheviks involved falls to less than twenty percent of the total number of revolutionaries — and these Jews were mostly deported, murdered, or sent to Siberia in the following years. Modern Russia has in fact maintained tsarist anti-Semitism.

It is significant that documents in the State Department files confirm that the investment banker Jacob Schiff, often cited as a source of funds for the Bolshevik Revolution, was in fact against support of the Bolshevik regime.5 This position, as we shall see, was in direct contrast to the Morgan-Rockefeller promotion of the Bolsheviks.

The persistence with which the Jewish-conspiracy myth has been pushed suggests that it may well be a deliberate device to divert attention from the real issues and the real causes. The evidence provided in this book suggests that the New York bankers who were also Jewish had relatively minor roles in supporting the Bolsheviks, while the New York bankers who were also Gentiles (Morgan, Rockefeller, Thompson) had major roles.

What better way to divert attention from the real operators than by the medieval bogeyman of anti-Semitism?

(SUTTON, p. 140-142).

Sutton, therefore, explicitly describes the speculations that ran amok in between the British and American intelligence as a "conspiracy", not only with no evidence whatsoever, but with plenty of evidence that it was false. Churchill and other intelligence agents from the UK and the USA were enamored with the idea that the October Revolution was a Jewish black ops - but that was their point of view in the aftermath of the unexpected Bolshevik victory (1919-1920), not the truth.

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 16:58 utc | 320

Hahaha

What a bullshit artist you are vk.

The claim here is NOT that Bolshevik = Jewish conspiracy, as you are now disjonestly trying to claim.

The claim is that Wall St entities financed the Bolsheviks (and indeed many other "revolutionaries")


The preface of the book makes this clear:


    PREFACE
    Since the early 1920s, numerous pamphlets and articles, even a few books, have sought to forge a link between "international bankers" and "Bolshevik revolutionaries." Rarely have these attempts been supported by hard evidence, and never have such attempts been argued within the framework of a scientific
    methodology. Indeed, some of the "evidence" used in these efforts has been fraudulent, some has been irrelevant, much cannot be checked.

    Examination of the Topic by academic writers has been studiously avoided; probably because the hypothesis offends the neat dichotomy of capitalists versus Communists (and
    everyone knows, of course, that these are bitter enemies).

    Moreover, because a great
    deal that has been written borders on the absurd, a sound academic reputation could
    easily be wrecked on the shoals of ridicule. Reason enough to avoid the topic.

    Fortunately, the State Department Decimal File, particularly the 861.00 section,
    contains extensive documentation on the hypothesized link. When the evidence in
    these official papers is merged with nonofficial evidence from biographies, personal papers, and conventional histories, a truly fascinating story emerges.

    We find there was a link between some New York international bankers and many
    revolutionaries, including Bolsheviks. These banking gentlemen — who are here Identified — had a financial stake in, and were rooting for, the success of the Bolshevik Revolution.
    Who, why — and for how much — is the story in this book.
    Antony C. Sutton

I guess you missed that in your rather frenzied slapdash attempt to pretend you'd actually read the book by conducting a hasty and poorly thought-out search, using the search option in your pdf reader

So there's only one person here attempting to falsify here, and it ain't me, vk

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 17:28 utc | 321

So, the fact that you keep repeating "there's so much evidence" without ever supplying any of this so-called "evidence" suggests quite strongly that, far from being an expert on this topic you are, as usual, engaging in your favourite sport of doling out tons of bullshit and hoping no one will notice or call you out on what is at the end of the day, just more of your usual bullshit.

Consistent as ever, vk.

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 17:34 utc | 322

@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 17:28 utc | 321

The claim is that Wall St entities financed the Bolsheviks (and indeed many other "revolutionaries")

No, that's not your claim. Your claim was this one:

Funnelling [sic] the equivalent of hundreds of millions of dollars (in 2020 figures) in their direction absolutely ensured their [the Bolsheviks] rise to power.
(@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 16:00 utc | 315)

So, your thesis is that that single loan of USD 5 million "absolutely ensured" the Bolshevik victory in October 1917.

Why do you keep lying?

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 17:38 utc | 323

No, that's not your claim. Your claim was this one:

Funnelling [sic] the equivalent of hundreds of millions of dollars (in 2020 figures) in their direction absolutely ensured their [the Bolsheviks] rise to power.
(@ Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 16:00 utc | 315)

____


Yes, and so far despite your repeated evidence-free assertions to the contray nothing you have posted has any relevance nor does anything you posted so far, counter it (with evidence.)

____


So, your thesis is that that single loan of USD 5 million "absolutely ensured" the Bolshevik victory in October 1917.

Why do you keep lying?

Posted by: vk | Nov 13 2020 17:38 utc | 323

____

Schiff's 5 million in 1905 (125 million in 2020 dollars) wasn't a loan.


And Schiff was not the only banker financing them. As you alrwady know because I already mentioned ot, as did Sutton, whom you quoted after your so recent half-assed frenzied search of the pdf.

You'd know all this if you had ever really taken the time to study this topic, rather than posting knee-jerk evidence-free denials in order to shore up a leaky propaganda narrative.


Its a measure of your willingness to be dishonest that you would even make such a claim.


Of course, if all you intend to do is lie at every opportunity then no evidence is required, I guess.

Now, why would you lie about that?

Tsk tsk, vk.

Posted by: Triden | Nov 13 2020 17:53 utc | 324

all of a sudden, just like that, moonofalabama became a worthless Trump fanboy shit web site. How quickly they show their true colors. See ya, faker! Rt, Sputnik, Saker the faker, now this. Sad.

Posted by: Hoyeru | Nov 13 2020 21:36 utc | 325

Hoyeru @ 325
I feel your pain brother, you just said what i’v been thinking. Stay strong we will win 🦁

Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 15 2020 12:45 utc | 327

Well Mark2 you could always just F**k off and stop posting here then, couldn't you.

That way no one would have to listen to your idiotic, hate-filled cry-baby whining.

Don't let the door hit your no-doubt humongous arse on the way out

Posted by: Ford Prefect | Nov 15 2020 14:42 utc | 328

The wrong is so patently wrong that it must be countered by all means possible and feasible.
All that is needed for evil to consume all humanity is that good men do nothing.
If all boats are not rising then it is time to pull their blood-sucking syphon on us.

Posted by: Woodie | Nov 21 2020 14:34 utc | 329

« previous page

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Working...