Nov 202019
 November 20, 2019  Posted by at 7:35 pm Primers Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

Rembrandt van Rijn The resurrection of Christ 1639


Man, I don’t want to do this but I get drawn back in all the time. I haven’t followed the latest episode of the Schiffwives of DC live today, I wasn’t behind my laptop, but I did make a bunch of notes on my phone and mailed them to myself. And all the time I’m thinking: we do remember how this all started, don’t we?

Ukrainegate got started on the premise that Trump wanted to hurt Joe Biden for the 2020 election. But what we see today from Gordon Sondland, and before from Taylor, Volker, Vindman, et al, goes back to spring/summer 2019, a year and a half before the election. Isn’t that premise at least a little bit flimsy, then?

Yeah, Joe Biden was leading in the Dems polls earlier this year, but there are now 28 candidates if I’m not mistaken, and Biden is not shoe-in for the nomination. So is Trump playing the same kinds of games he’s accused of playing with Biden with a handful of others, Bernie, Warren, Buttigieg? How much of this makes sense to you?

Tyler Durden earlier today said something to the effect that Sondland was supposed to be the BIG ONE, but that Taylor, Volker, Vindman were previously going to be just that as well, and turned out not to be. And that reminded me of Russiagate, in which every week or even day there were announcements of this is the BIG ONE, and we all know where that went: Robert Mueller turned out to be America’s biggest loser in decades.

So isn’t it perhaps a reasonable assumption (just as Trump targeting Biden for 2020 is also merely an assumption for now) that what Trump was looking for is fact finding about what happened in 2016? See, I would think it IS reasonable. We’re talking assumptions, not facts, no matter how much either side wants to believe their view is the BIG ONE.

And sure, I’ll admit that I have trouble believing that Trump wanted to hit Biden because of 2020, and I find it more credible that he wanted to figure out what happened in 2016, if only because that is what -perhaps indirectly, but still- led to the Mueller investigation and him being investigated from even before he took office.

And, this is again me speaking for myself, I don’t find Joe Biden’s line that “nothing has ever been proven” about him, his son Hunter and Burisma, particularly strong, because there’s never been an investigation. Or, rather, if we may believe former Ukraine prosecutors, investigations were shut down more than once.

In that light, how crazy exactly is/was it for Trump to ask Zelensky for such an investigation? Only Ukraine can do that, it’s not like the FBI can, or at least not officially. Biden/Burisma/Ukraine warrants an investigation, and saying no such thing should happen because “nothing has ever been proven” is the -apple- cart before the horse. So why are they trying to sell us the idea that Trump wanting to find this out is close to Judas betraying Jesus?


As I said, I was following proceedings on my phone earlier, and this headline from the Guardian stuck out: “Sondland’s Bombshell Testimony Blows Holes In Trump’s Ukraine Defence”. And that was after I read Tyler Durden quoting Michael Every at Rabobank:

“Impeachment rumbles on in the US, and while one’s reading of events depends on one’s political leanings, an objective analysis shows very little damage being done to Trump so far.”

And I thought: yeah, not damage to Trump, but what about to the nation? Here are two quotes form BBC and Guardian “live commentaries” on the Sondland testimony. Because these things change on the fly, it’s not much use adding URL’s. But just read them and tell me what you think. Note that both news outlets are strongly anti-Trump.

Sondland put two and two together and figured out the military aid was conditioned on the investigations, he said: “President Trump never told me directly that the military aid was conditioned on the investigations,” Sondland said, but Giuliani said “the Burisma and 2016 elections were conditioned on the White House meetings.” That contradicts Bill Taylor testimony about the nature of the quid pro quo, that Sondland told Taylor that Trump demanded investigations for aid. But “I never heard from president Trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of elections [sic],” Sondland says. 

Now Sondland is talking about a phone conversation in which Trump told him there was no quid pro quo. Earlier Sondland had said he took the president at his word. Now Sondland is saying he and everyone else knew there was a clear quid pro quo.  Sondland said after “frantic emails to me and to others about the security assistance” from ambassador Bill Taylor, Sondland called Trump and asked, “what do you want from Ukraine… what do you want?”
It was a very short abrupt conversation, he was not in a good mood. He said I want nothing, I want nothing, there’s no quid pro quo. Tell Zelenskiy to do the right thing.”


And then this, I don’t remember if it was BBC or Guardian, but what’s the difference anyway?:


Vice president Mike Pence’s office denies that the scene with Sondland in Warsaw happened. From Pence chief of staff Marc Short, per @maggieNYT: “Marc Short responds to Sondland: “The Vice President never had a conversation with Gordon Sondland about investigating the Bidens, Burisma, or the conditional release of financial aid to Ukraine based upon potential investigations…”

1/ “Ambassador Gordon Sondland was never alone with Vice President Pence on the September 1 trip to Poland. This alleged discussion recalled by Ambassador Sondland never happened…” 2/ “Multiple witnesses have testified under oath that Vice President Pence never raised Hunter Biden, former Vice President Joe Biden, Crowdstrike, Burisma, or investigations in any conversation with Ukrainians or President Zelensky before, during, or after the September 1 meeting”.


Presumption, assumptions, interpretations and “I thought (or I was sure) he meant” are not facts. They are what they are: personal reflections on what someone thought they had observed. They mean zilch in a court of law. or rather, they are not the kind of thing that can get someone convicted: witnesses in a court room may say what they think happened, but no judge or jury can convict based solely on that.

You need evidence. You need the body. You need the weapon. You need the BIG ONE. But Sondland, like all witnesses before him thus far, doesn’t have the BIG ONE. Or it would have been presented by now, either by him or by Adam Schiff. How many more of these supposed witnesses are we going to have to listen to in the Schiff theater?

I fully agree with people who say Schiff himself should be sworn in and conduct his theatrics under oath. Presently, he can say what he wants, accuse Trump of whatever he wants, and he can never be held to account for any of it. As he attempts to hold Trump accountable for a myriad of things that a myriad of civil servants “think” he meant to say or do. The playing field must be leveled. This is not a fair game.

Moreover, do remember that this whole impeachment thing must go to the Senate to get any real meaning; until it does it’s just a circus in which the clowns – or any of the animals- cannot be held to account. And the crows will insist that Jumbo did it. But, you know, that’s still just Disney, it’s entertainment.


Please support the Automatic Earth on Paypal and Patreon so we can continue to publish.

Top of the page, left and right sidebars. Thank you.




Home Forums The BIG ONE

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • Author
  • #51480

    Rembrandt van Rijn The resurrection of Christ 1639   Man, I don’t want to do this but I get drawn back in all the time. I haven’t followed the la
    [See the full post at: The BIG ONE]


    I left an interesting link at debt rattle

    KYIV. Nov 20 (Interfax-Ukraine) – Ukrainian members of parliament have demanded the presidents of Ukraine and the United States, Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump, investigate suspicions of the legalization of $7.4 billion by the “family” of ex-President Viktor Yanukovych through the American investment fund Franklin Templeton Investments, which they said has ties to the U.S. Democratic Party.


    Holy Mother of Jesus jump-starting Lazarus over and over with battery cables, Batman! It keeps coming back to life!


    I’m watching some more of the Sondland “testimony” and it’s a trainwreck for the Dems. Multiple times someone asks him a question to which he answers I Don’t Recall, and they say: “Oh that means you don’t deny it could be true, right?” If you don’t deny, you’re suggesting it is true, even if you have no idea what it’s about.

    I’m paraphrasing of course, but good Lord. This is just stupid. Take it into a court in which everybody is under oath. This is just, as I wrote above, the crows accusing Jumbo. And then Schiff says: “This is a seminal moment in our investigation”.

    It is not. Believe me on that one. It is a circus.

    Maxwell Quest

    I think others on this forum had it nailed from the get-go, and frankly it’s not very hard to see through the charade: that this ‘circus’ has no more substance than Russiagate, and is strictly a political maneuver to keep the pressure on Trump.

    Why now, after Pelosi previously stated that impeachment would be bad for the country and was not a good idea? Well, certain underlings discovered that Trump was digging around where all the 2016 bodies were buried and was getting too close for comfort. There were more hands in the Ukrainian $cookie$ jar than just Hunter Biden’s. Why else would Hillary scream to her staff, “If he [Trump] gets elected we’ll all hang!”?

    V. Arnold

    Moreover, do remember that this whole impeachment thing must go to the Senate to get any real meaning; until it does it’s just a circus in which the clowns – or any of the animals- cannot be held to account.

    …and you know? The worst part is; none of this is funny; clowns and all…
    God I’m glad you include some of the world’s most beautiful art; lest it be otherwise, completely unbearable…


    Regarding Schiff:

    <p lang=”en” dir=”ltr”>Agreed</p>— Nicole Foss (@NicoleFoss7) November 21, 2019

    <script async src=”; charset=”utf-8″></script>


    Sorry, the embedding of Nicole Foss’s tweet didn’t work. Go to:


    Wow. I don’t know whether to be elated or deflated. Nicole’s tweet shows this aging sot that person can be as magnificently coherent and articulate on a very dense collage of complex data such is her immaculately detailed yet succinct descriptions of our eco-nomic/logic/energic dilemma yet be entirely delusional about political realities. It’s beyond my imagination, or was, until now. As a writer and a sometimes jaded old man, this is delightfully refreshing in its revelation of Something New, but dismally depressing in its expression of the Same Old Shit.

    But I’m a logician at heart. Diogenes is my man. So I’ll posit this unseemly and disturbing question: what if Ms. Foss decided a little payoff money on the side was the best way to raise short term capital by which to buy physical resources when the Price of Things goers downslip? What if she has lost all faith in politics (that’s OK; so have I), and deemed that justification to lose all faith in essential principles?

    It happens, and I don’t know if I could blame her. No one’s gonna hear about Trump or Shiff when food and water are scarce, etc.

    If that’s insulting to our dear Nicole, oh well: her position on the matter, and dismissal of Raul thereby, is also insulting. Live by de sword, die by de sword. Either way, I am grateful for the raw amazement she has thrilled my tired old soul with. It’s like watching Fergie speak of how honest and forthright our Prince Andrew was in his recent disastrous interview regarding Epstein and shared victims. Except that I totally wasn’t surprised that Fergie did that. She’s an old whore from ages past.

    But Nicole?

    Let’s go to the movies. Something light and amusing, a break from all this insanity

    A Boy and His Dog


    I have a little “conspiracy theory”. I think Trump and his guys orchestrated this whole thing to get the Dems to make fools of themselves. The whistleblower is really working for Trump. Probably not but I just can hardly believe the Demd to be this stupid, but I guess they are.


    Its obvious Raül and Nicole has fallen on different sides of the fence, wish they would both stay up above the theater but apparently they had to take sides in this elite charade between protofacist Trump, yes this critique of him is easily verifiable and closetfascist Dems. Its a mess and there are no good guys involved. And I dont care that Raül says he is not a Trump fan, obviously he is not looking to convey a balanced analasys, and ai known its out of contrarianism to the news but still the effect is support for the man. Matt Taibbi and Naked Capitalism manages to show the hollowness and madness of the Dems and still tell us how awfull Trump is. Still enjoy TAMs take on it through Raül but its squarly on the Trump side of the balance while Matt and NC are the ones rising above the rest.


    “And I dont care that Raül says he is not a Trump fan, obviously he is not looking to convey a balanced analasys, and ai known its out of contrarianism to the news but still the effect is support for the man. ”

    You miss something important in your analysis.

    Firs, I’ll note that you commit the sin you accuse Raul and Nicole of: “apparently they had to take sides in this elite charade between protofacist Trump, yes this critique of him is easily verifiable and closetfascist Dems”

    Second, Raul understands quite well that Trump is also a predatory scoundrel. Anyone with half a brain left in the fridge knows this. I’ve never seen Raul applaud or ignore the existence Raul Trump’s bad actions.

    Third, you’re missing an uber-critical point: the Dems, the only established opposition to this strange beast in the White House, almost entirely ignore Trump’s real sins and instead focus on his imaginary sins or at most penny ante sins.

    At times, in fact, the GOP has been a more effective critic of Trump than his oh so loyal “opposition”, the DNC/Dems.

    Raul points this out because he despairs of seeing even token effective remedy from either party.

    However, it is the Dems who consistently cry Trump Bad Bad Bad! with no punch ever reaching him even though there is powerful ammo should they choose.

    Why? Because it’s a dog’n’pony house of mirrors act to keep the American people from identifying the truly egregious sins that both parties have committed, not to mention the many evils Trump has perpetrated by his cute widdle flossy-eared self with the help of whatever bunch of crooks willing to take a chance on him.

    Trump makes a fine whipping boy scapegoat for the Dems who, if you’ll recall, ran on a platform little more than “we are not Trump”.

    Which reminds me: “Are you now or have you ever been Donald Trump?” The sole merit in the logic of your post resides on that single crucial fact, after all. Everyone knows this. The TV told them so.

    What’s With You?


    One more thing: Raul somewhat depends on his loyal readers to provide nuanced counter-balance when needed, not needle him for an editorial strategy they obviously don’t fully comprehend.

    You’re Right, I’m Left, She’s Gone


    Dedicated to our dear Prince Andrew:

    I Forgot to Remember to Forget Her


    almost entirely ignore Trump’s real sins and instead focus on his imaginary sins or at most penny ante sins.

    I’m not sure why you think it matters how they get him, as long as they get him. Definitely not imaginary sins, though. What worries me is what they end up with if they do get him (which seems unlikely, given the gutless Republicans’ position). Still, it seems like it would be hard to find a worse president than the current one.


    boscohorowitz: That is how you interpret Rauls strategy. You are probably right but I dont feel he has ever told it as clearly as you do which makes me think this is more your view than his. I agree with you and Raül if he agrees that you interpret him correctly. But I just dont see the strategy of ignoring all critique of Trump as an antidote to there being no serious opposition to him in the U.S. It is up to him of course and like I said I enjoy it as well but only because there are other good places online to get what I think TAM is missing.

    I am chocked by Nicoles twitter feed but I guess she is even more afraid of what Trump represents than what the status quo represents which if you choose other venues than TAE is not completely illogical. For example Trumps prostitution service buisness Trump International seems to be connected to Robert Maxwell and so to Epstein and so to Israeli surveilence firms and so on, interesting thing to follow since the Whitney Webb articles. Normally TAE is where I would follow these things but increasingly I have to turn elsewhere. I still love Raüls writing but I wont be silent about the things I dont like or dont understand in his writing. Apparently many readers fell confused, maybe its not just because we are dumb but also because Raül has not managed to be clear enough? I am open to being less bright than most who usually post here but hey there seems to be plenty of us among his readers. I know he has explained his position qnd it is the same as Kunstlers but maybe if he gets that much missunderstanding from loyal readers who are not confused pro-dems he should make it even clearer? TAE Stance On Trump for Dummies could be a good post? Its his choice and I respect the choice but it makes TAE a little bit less central to my daily orientation.


    *Trump International Escorts that is

    V. Arnold

    God’s be good Ilargi; so many speak for you, and you’re POV; hell, you don’t even need to post anymore…
    And the comments flying about Nicole? And you’re relationship to her? Amazing, just amazing…
    Keep on keeping on…


    V. Arnold: Well honestly that is just the curse of being influential on other peoples worldview, no? Especially in controversial times and topics. Something you sign up for when you put your thoughts into writing and post them online and especially when you try to make a living from it? He generates debate, one of the most important functions of thinkers making their ideas public.


    I think Raul is right to posit the bullshit thrown at Trump, not because poor Donald needs our defence but because we are looking for the truth in the lies here. Sure Trump is a dickhead but the circus going on to win the minds of the voters is tearing the country apart it would seem. Just make some good policy and go for it. Sell it. DO SOMETHING in opposition.

    And as for Dr D’s comments on the climate yesterday – typically ‘yawn’ Northern Hemispheric view – it’s okay, I grew up with it – we are called Down Under after all but It is so goddam hot here it is not funny and I reckon your chilly bidness that is apparently so cold that farming is a drag must be getting eclipsed here by our heat 16 heat records for November broken in a day in One State Alone. 44 celsius in spring aint no cold world. Nope
    Not At All Cold. Not even slightly. It’s just fire in every state of our Union down here. Summer is December and January and Feb and it’s not here yet. God Help Us.

    V. Arnold

    V. Arnold: Well honestly that is just the curse of being influential on other peoples worldview, no?


    …that is just the curse of being influential on other peoples worldview, no?

    No! It’s not!
    What I object to is the rude invasion of our host’s privacy. Yes, he did bring it up; however, the actual dynamic is between Nicole and Ilargi; the rest? None of our god-damned business…


    Based on my small, biased sample of people, nobody sees the issues with this investigation. A bit scary.
    What helps put things in perspective for me is that here in Ontario Canada we recently elected our very own Minnie Trump aka Doug Ford. This is in spite of watching Toronto go thru the train wreck of his brother Rob Ford as mayor of that city. Internationally we have a few real interesting characters finding their way to leadership positions too (Boris Johnson is one that comes to mind). Seeing Trump as part of a trend rather than an anomaly just seems to better fit the information. I also remember that in my vege garden there is never just one weed…


    V. Arnold: Nicole was part of TAE. Her dissapearence is interesting to me at least. Its not just a personal relqtionship, its an intelectual relationship that has been exposed publicly. That the polarisation of our time has reached in to TAE, actually breaking it apart is something that concerns me deeply, and saddens me. I would have thought they were immun to it. To me TAE is very important and now that the reason for the split is becoming clearer its almost like realizing my intelectual parents divorced. Its obviously ideological/intelectual i. e not necessarily private. But if Raül says this should not be disscussed here I will respect that.

    V. Arnold


    Thanks for the reply; it clarifies your comment; I understand…

    Dr. D

    So much good stuff here. They keep us so busy with non-crimes that we don’t have time to chase real crimes. So…The President called a leader and wanted to trade (and I’m not even sure that’s proven), but gave up everything and got nothing? Well first you’d have to prosecute every world leader ever. Then I guess his crime would be to be unable to communicate clearly, and totally fail at bribing, extorting, and negotiating.

    On the flip side: NSA/CIA still wiretapping everyone on earth, at home a violation of the 4th, breaking a million times a day the first ten laws passed in the U.S. Federal Register. Sending arms to Saudi and Israel, which they use, having no Congressional Declaration of War, and indeed, in the case of both, not even the imaginary one against al-Q. Interfering in national governments in Hong Kong and Boliva. Attempting to throw elections in Russia. Failing to enforce the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments at home. Enforcing federal drug laws which the 18th Amendment proves can only be done via an anti-drug Amendment process we never had. Ditto Obamacare, for which interference into BOTH non-delegated powers AND contract law are specifically prohibited and illegal. It’s also a proportional tax, which the 16th tells us can only be legal via Constitutional Amendment. We have a variety of cases of bribery and human trafficking unprosecuted, and 33,000 emails — minimum — which are EACH a felony, and whose mishandling got 18 U.S. agents murdered in China.

    …That’s just 60 seconds, and I would guess all of those warrant removal from office. But NOPE! They LIKE all those things. What they DON’T like is for war, bribery, power-grabs, spying to blackmail, and mishandling documents to END. …Which really amazes me, since you’d just impeach, get the public support, then lie, double-cross the public, and do it all over again harder the minute you’re back in power just like every day of the last 100 years. …And it’s not like they have an aversion to lying or anything, I think they’re just literally incapable of having the words of truth in their mouths at any time, even when that’s the winning play here. It’s a religious thing, like pork.

    So yes, sadly, and thanks to the DNC and media, we don’t get to bring those things up enough. Because why bother? Much as Cheeto likes those (illegal) things, his enemies like them 10x harder. Removing him will grease the pipe for worse, to trample us fast, not slow. …I’ll take slow, maybe our rear-guard action will think of something.

    On that note: YOU CAN’T BE FASCIST, proto, crypto, or otherwise, IF YOU WANT SMALLER GOVERNMENT. Also you’re against fascism if you want free speech. Also counter to fascism, to allow the people, minorities, and even your enemies, to legally arm themselves. Also not fascist if you STOP foreign wars instead of increasing them. So tell me how this works: Trump is a fascist that wants lower tax intake, smaller government, less regulation and control, less spying, more states’ rights, no (internet) book burning, more free speech from his enemies, allows protests and discussion even up to the sidewalk of Trump Towers, to be a peaceful, prosperous trading nation where the ethnic groups he’s supposedly purging are both well-armed and untouchable without a search warrant because he’s obedient to every Federal Judge even when they’re clearly wrong and going to be overturned in the Supreme Court?

    How does it even make sense to you to say a platform that is the diametric OPPOSITE of fascism, is fascist? Is this like how they routinely call blacks and latinos “white supremacists” here? Like that literally makes no sense.

    The only way to have a fascist state is to have a bigger internal spy agency getting more centralized power that they use to stop free speech and outlaw self-defense (and thereafter attack their neighbors). And as above, no I’m not thrilled, but to accuse someone, you have to do so correctly. You can’t accuse a man of embezzlement when in fact it was murder. You’re also not going to win any tactical battles if what you believe about your enemy is entirely, diametrically wrong. You’ll constantly mis-position and mis-fire, exactly as everyone worldwide seems to be doing, every day for three years without ever once noticing “Hey, I haven’t hit the target even ONCE! Maybe I’M the one who’s mistaken here!” Nope! This is really the infuriating part. Like I’m looking at a football pitch covered 3 feet deep in spades, and all I hear is “sandwich, sandwich, sandwich”. No! Use your eyes: NOT sandwich! Spade! Touch! Feel! See! Try! Handle, wood, iron! “sandwich, sandwich, sandwich.” In the meantime holes aren’t being dug and everybody’s hungry and can’t figure out why.

    But the problem is, we don’t dislike him ENOUGH? Where did you get the information that we ought to dislike him at all? From the same people who can’t tell fascism from Liberty, or a shovel from a sandwich? …Go check those guys first. Their assumptions have not been good and their predictions have not played out. Pretty much the retraction of each article is written WITH each article, posts before midnight, and is ignored the following day like it never happened, 900 days in a row. They don’t have credibility, unlike TAE. TAE has predicted what would happen, what was likely to be true and false accurately for years, while CNN and MSNBC drifted into lizard-alien plane-eating black-hole Russians-shutting-off-Minnesota conspiracy nonsense that would make Alex Jones blush. But you BELIEVE CNN and the NY Times, who are universally mistaken, but not the bloggers who have been accurate for decades. Spade. Sandwich. Believe the believable and not the failed and discredited.

    Dr. D

    It IS a setup, but not from the whistleblower. I believe knowing the media would ONLY report on his crimes, he set up a mirror of Biden, called Zelinsky, then posted a fake transcript to the server and put it around that he was withholding funds. Since all the Bolton-moles talk to each other to undermine constantly — which he can see with real, legal FISA warrants — the moles got the CIA to illegally spy on a U.S. citizen and President, in open sedition to overthrow him, read it, and made their play. That’s why they discuss the “secure server” (like the White House isn’t ‘secure’?) and the ‘8 times’ transcript Schiff tried to read into the Congressional record, and their whole impeachment and actions, as you see even today, all depended on him NOT releasing the transcript. Because they thought they HAD the transcript. But what’s Schiff, Brennan, and “Charlie” gonna do? Say they hacked the White House server so they can start “I love Disney girls” Zaid’s coup to begin? That’s why top dummy Colonel “I’ve never-heard-of-the-largest-gas-company-in-Ukraine” Vindman testified he tried to access the transcript and edit it for us, although later testifying that it was correct. Seems odd. In fact, it would be a major felony, except he took no material actions, because he couldn’t. That’s a trap, and that’s how you get CNN to voice the name “Burisma, Biden” in public.

    Weather, yes, I did see the snow on your kangaroos, and as you know, record cold here for 2-3 years now. But as weather is specific, we saw this with my other article on early cold in Sweden: there seemed to be a line across Europe this year, and if you were above it, like Sweden, too cold, but if you were below it, like France, too hot. Not like last year where it snowed in Spain, Turkey, and the Sahara. …Which is odd since it’s the loose jet stream from Alaska to Texas that makes the cold here, and yet a life-locked jet stream in Europe? But these things happen. My point is, they ONLY report on Paris, and NEVER report on Sweden. Always warm, all events are warm, even snow is a signal of warming, but never on the increasing glaciers and record snowfalls we are only now beginning to see. Which is predominate, averaged over a year? Not sure yet, but the tipping seems to suggest we’ll have confirmation of cooling soon, after the 20 year plateau we just ended.

    Check what the weather was from 1850-1600, and see if the weather is headed that way. You’ll notice all the geopolitical interest, in Sudan, Libya, Ukraine, are in the grain-growing belts that exist and green up only in that cooling. Like Libya this year having rain and record crop production, just like back in Roman times.


    Facism ran very much on promising German and Italian buisness more freedoms, if they followed Hitlers lead and Nazi doctrine, and at the same time promising the people more wealth and power in the nationalist collective. Its well documented in the documentary Fasiscm Inc. and in other places. And Trump, Guilliani and Bill Barr is shrinking the surveillance sector? Not so sure about that. They are definitly trying to take controll of it but Trumps “law and order” rethoric is classical totalitarian lingo. I guess we’ll see. Me I have not spent one our watching or reading any of the media you cite in one year so I am not among the people you try to bunch me together with, and I am not at all sure Raül agrees with the views you hold on this because he never stated it clearly. Yes I question Trumps motives and I could build aålmost as cohesive narativ showing he’s bordering on fascism. And thats the problem I guess and why it fractures friendships in a fractal way from personal friendships up to states and blocks of states. I guess Noam Chomsky, Chris Hedges, Michael Hudson are way to left to you but I value their point of view and from what I can tell they are conserned about the similarities to fascism. You are way more well read than me, probably older and wiser and seemingly extremely sure of yourself and how everything fits together so I’ll yield and try to keep the similarities to the rise of fascism I see until its a clearer, if it ever becomes clearer. Maybe the othersneaky totalitarians manage to get him out or dead and we’ll never know so that friends and allies can bicker for all forseeable time.


    And by the way it doesnt take much digging to see libertarianism and facism being much more cozy companions than you would excpect from time. Hayek has been a big favoirite of plenty of facists for example.


    So much good stuff here. They keep us so busy with non-crimes that we don’t have time to chase real crimes.


    Wake up.
    You want to drain the swamp!
    It was made by lawyers, accountants, and bankers.

    Hire, if you can, lawyers, accountants, and bankers who will get rid of all those loopholes etc.
    Then you will see that those rich people are all naked.
    Those rich people couldn’t find their way out of a paper bag.
    Go after the hired enablers, lawyers, accountants, and bankers.

    I guess that there is Nobody here to read my comment. I doesn’t matter, because none of us can go after lawyers, accountants, and bankers to drain the swamp.


    I didn’t see that piece of the testimony, Raul, but, from the parts I’ve seen, the republicans aren’t denying what took place, instead trying to deflect attention to the process and stuff around the inquiry. Nunes constantly uses his closing remarks to completely ignore the testimony. So I don’t know why you rail against the Dems when the republicans are far worse, from what I’ve seen. It’s clear, to me, that Trump did abuse the office in this matter (and many other matters), so it all comes down to whether that’s an impeachable offense or not.

    At least Nunes, today, didn’t try to pretend that the American people elected Trump, rather that it was an “Electoral College landslide”. And they like to think of themselves as a democracy.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.