Nov 072024
 


Edouard Manet Berthe Morisot with a bouquet of violets 1872

 

A Good Morning in America (Paul Craig Roberts)
If The Election Outcome Is As I Expected .. (Bill Ackman)
Trump’s Win Is A Victory For The Non-Brainwashed Americans (Marsden)
Trump Has Sweeping Plans for His 2nd Administration (ET)
Musk Reveals Plans For Trump Government (RT)
The US Should Establish A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (Corva)
Trump Comeback Also Engineered A Significant Exodus From Democrat Party (JTN)
The Thrill is Gone (Turley)
DOJ Moving To Wind Down Trump Criminal Cases (NBC)
Rachel Maddow Threatens Musk Over ‘Russia Ties’ (RT)
84-year-old Pelosi Projected To Win Reelection (RT)
Trump to Seek ‘Pragmatic’ Deals, No Budget Money to Sustain Ukraine (Sp.)
Dave Smith: Will Trump Be Able To End The War In Ukraine? (ZH)
Biden To Speed Up Arms Deliveries To Ukraine – Media (RT)
Von der Leyen To Prepare EU For War – Defense Commission Nominee (RT)
How British Media Is Turning On Zelensky. And Why (Jay)
German Government Has Collapsed (RT)

 

 

 

 

Jennings

Joe AI

Speech

JD

Tucker RFK

Wallace

Tucker Elon

Epstein

UK

Decency

Right to Exist

 

 

 

 

 

 

“America now has a chance for renewal if Trump doesn’t blow it in forgiving his enemies, who still intend to destroy him.”

A Good Morning in America (Paul Craig Roberts)

I awoke this morning to Donald Trump’s victory. Apparently, the election was not close enough for the Democrats and media to steal it as they did in 2020. Trump’s victory is not only a defeat for Democrats but also a defeat for the ruling elite that pulls the strings of both political parties and a defeat for the American media that serves as an enforcer for the official narratives that serve the agendas of the elite. Trump’s victory is also a victory for the American people who love their country and respect the Constitution. It is their victory over the left-wing intellectuals and university law schools who have been working diligently to overturn the First and Fourth Amendments that are in the way of their revolutionary intentions that are clearly anti-American.

Trump’s determination and strength are rare. Trump was attacked viciously from day one of his first term. Hillary Clinton, the CIA, and the FBI fabricated a “Russian dossier” that alleged that Trump aided by “Russian interference in the election” stole the election from Hillary Clinton. Women were produced to make sexual allegations. The ruling elite made two attempts to impeach Trump. When Trump’s term expired, false claims buttressed by concocted allegations of mishandling national security documents and instigating an “insurrection” were turned into indictments. Democrat prosecutors and judges weaponized law to pursue the former president. The FBI staged a raid on Trump’s home. The corrupt American media poured lie upon lie.

Trump stood up to all of this. The people stayed with him, and he regained the office that had been stolen from him by utterly corrupt people. Trump seems to have won all sectors of the electorate except for college educated white liberal-left women, the most brainwashed and indoctrinated element in American society. I pity any man who marries one of them. America now has a chance for renewal if Trump doesn’t blow it in forgiving his enemies, who still intend to destroy him. The Democrat Party is no longer a political party. It is an ideological party with ideological agendas. It sees itself as a revolutionary force and has no intention of political comprise. If Trump repeats the mistakes of his first term, his victory will be pissed away.

Read more …

X thread.

“If, however, you have been active on @X for the last year, you have known the truth days, weeks and often months before the facts appear in the MSM..”

If The Election Outcome Is As I Expected .. (Bill Ackman)

If the election outcome is as I expected, it should cause the large minority of the country who supported @KamalaHarris and predicted her victory to begin to question their sources of truth. Half the country has believed that @X is filled with mis- and disinformation, and that they could only therefore rely on The NY Times, MSNBC, CNN and other mainstream media for their news. And they did. If, however, you have been active on @X for the last year, you have known the truth days, weeks and often months before the facts appear in the MSM. The MSM excerpted, clipped and cut to defame @realDonaldTrump while claiming that @JoeBiden was fit as a fiddle. Then when Biden’s polls collapsed, @KamalaHarris was anointed the candidate and her hagiography was written with glowing acclaim from the press. But this could not hold as she ducked the media and held fast to the teleprompter.

Citizen journalists with their phone cameras in hand captured the real Kamala forcing her to defend her record and her plans in more media appearances. It did not go well and the public demanded to learn more so @KamalaHarris had to risk more unscripted media. The doom loop was underway with perhaps 60 Minutes as one of the more dramatic examples, even after CBS tried to save her, most glaringly by excerpting one answer to replace a word salad response to another. But the citizen journalists on @X quickly caught and outed this fraud and demanded a transcript. As many who supported Kamala began to realize that they have been misled, they became open to Trump as an alternative, but they didn’t want to rely on the media to understand him because they did not want to be misled again.

They wanted to hear the candidate in his own words and that is where @lexfridman and@joeroganhq long form podcasts came to the rescue. When Kamala was offered the same opportunities to explain herself, she rejected them. And the voting public could only draw a negative inference. When the story of this election is written, I expect it will be as much about how half of America woke up to the reality that they have been manipulated by the media. This should lead to an abandonment by many of the MSM as their primary source of information. It will push more people to @X, to podcasts and other empirical sources, and it will lead to a more informed public. The other outcome I hope happens is the implosion of the Democratic Party. The Party lied to the American people about the cognitive health and fitness of the president.

It prevented, threatened, litigated and otherwise eliminated the ability of other candidates for the primary to compete, to get on ballots, and to even participate in a debate. The Party and the administration used lawfare in an attempt to imprison, bankrupt or otherwise kill off Trump as a candidate. These acts are collectively grave threats to our democracy. With the highest irony in order to hide these acts, the Party accused the opposition candidate of being the grave threat to democracy. The Democratic Party proved itself to be fundamentally undemocratic. It needs a complete reboot. The leadership should be thrown out and those responsible should apologize to the American people. Honest Abe said it best: You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

Read more …

“Are we done yet with the anti-Trump fake news now that the majority of voters see through it? Probably not, huh?”

Trump’s Win Is A Victory For The Non-Brainwashed Americans (Marsden)

Blowout alert! I guess average Americans don’t like being infantilized. At least Trump trusted them to be able to take a joke, unlike his opponents. So when’s Liz Cheney’s date with the firing squad already? Are we done yet with the anti-Trump fake news now that the majority of voters see through it? Probably not, huh? With the exception of those in a handful of states, Americans united to send former US President Donald Trump back to the White House and handed him carte blanche with Republican control of the Senate and likely the House as well. Not bad for a guy the establishment tried to brand as the reincarnation of Hitler. Did Hitler also have giant Israeli flags at his Madison Square Garden rally? Or hang out at the Jewish wall in Israel or with Hebrew-inscribed tablets in a yarmulke? That should have been the Democrats’ first sign that their branding attempt was off.

Yet, just like the fitting title of the upcoming Harris biography co-authored by Chelsea Clinton: She Persisted. Maybe next time, instead of persisting with their idiocy, they’ll come up with an actual agenda and a candidate who addresses questions and issues on point rather than punting them in favor of talking points and platitudes that leave voters guessing as to what to even expect if ever elected – beyond the usual establishment status quo, which, of course, sucks. Just ask the overwhelming majority of Americans who say that the country is headed in the wrong direction. Presumably, the Democrats figured that they could make a whole campaign about abortion rights – against a guy who, frankly, doesn’t actually seem too interested in the topic, which was recently re-opened by the courts.

It’s telling that, according to CNN exit polls, Harris won the female vote by five points less than Biden did in 2020 and three points less than even Hillary Clinton did against Trump in 2016, when abortion wasn’t even an issue. Certain categories of voters really capture the story of this election. The first is white women with college degrees, 11% more of whom voted for Harris than for Biden in 2020. Institutional establishment brainwashing and virtue signaling apparently works more effectively on well-formatted brains, female or otherwise. The message from the party hacks and their celebrity surrogates was that abortion was really all that should matter to women, reducing them to one-dimensional caricatures of actual human beings. But it turns out that many more women than they figured don’t like being talked down to and treated as little more than a walking uterus – even by other women.

Which would explain why white women with no degree voted overwhelmingly for Trump by 25 points over Harris, and even voters of color with no degree, generally considered a lock by Democrats, still voted by 14 points less for Harris than for Biden four years ago. The youngest voters, aged 18-29, who you’d figure would be most directly affected by reproductive rights issues, either as women themselves or their white-knighting male counterparts who were constantly told by Democrats that they had to cast their vote primarily in support of the reproductive rights of the women in their life, actually ended up shifting their vote to Trump by 11 points compared to 2020.

The bottom line is that women living real lives with a multitude of concerns and interests don’t like being paternalized, which is what the Democrats constantly do. Just because it’s a woman and her surrogates who are doing the talking down to them, doesn’t make it any more appealing. It just makes you a useful idiot of the patriarchal establishment – the same one that’s trying to emotionally manipulate women’s electoral choices to maintain the status quo that disadvantages women in every other possible way that actually matters to all of their lives, from cost of living to foreign wars in which their sons are sent to die and other countries’ sons are subjected to the same. All so Uncle Sam can turn a profit. It’s the guy you keep calling a misogynist who wants to take him on.

Read more …

“..the United States has 20 to 25 million illegal immigrants in the country. “What do we do with them? I think the first thing that we do is we start with the criminal migrants.”

Trump Has Sweeping Plans for His 2nd Administration (ET)

Immigration Since 2015, Trump has made curbing illegal immigration a cornerstone of his campaigns. As president, he built or reconstructed about 400 miles of border barrier along the U.S.–Mexico border and implemented a number of rules curbing illegal migration into the country. During the campaign, Trump often said that he would initiate the largest “mass deportation” effort in U.S. history if elected. Recently, he also warned Mexico that he would impose a 25 percent tariff targeting the country if it fails to curb illegal immigration and that he would raise that tariff if Mexico doesn’t comply. Also, he’s suggested more enhanced screenings for immigrants, ending birthright citizenship—which may require a constitutional amendment—and reimposing certain policies enacted during his first term such as the “remain in Mexico” protocol.

Tom Homan, a former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who is expected to join the new administration, told media outlets last year that the scale of deportations depends on what resources are available. During a “60 Minutes” interview in October, Homan was asked about whether families would be separated. Homan responded, “Families can be deported together.” Vice President-elect JD Vance said in his debate with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz on Oct. 1 that deporting criminals would be a second Trump administration’s initial focus. “You’ve got to reimplement Donald Trump’s border policies, build the wall, reimplement deportations,” Vance said, adding that the United States has 20 to 25 million illegal immigrants in the country. “What do we do with them? I think the first thing that we do is we start with the criminal migrants.”

Taxes and Regulations Throughout the 2024 campaign, Trump has promised to curb federal regulations that he said would limit the creation of new U.S. jobs. He also has pledged to keep intact a 2017 tax cut that he supported and signed while in office. His team has also proposed a further round of individual and corporate tax cuts beyond those initiated in his first term. Trump has pledged to reduce the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 15 percent for companies that make their products in the United States. In a bid to win Nevada, Trump earlier this year pledged to end the taxation of tips and overtime wages to aid some service workers and waiters. He has pledged not to tax or cut Social Security benefits. Trump also has said that as president, he would pressure the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates but wouldn’t make any demands on the central bank. Some of his proposals would require congressional action. As of Wednesday morning, the GOP is projected to retake the Senate, but the picture around the House is murkier.

Tariffs In multiple campaign stops this year, Trump floated the idea of a 10 percent or more tariff on all goods imported into the United States, which he said would eliminate the country’s trade deficit. He has also said he should have the authority to set higher tariffs on countries that have put tariffs on U.S. imports. He has threatened to impose a 200 percent tariff on some imported cars, saying he is determined in particular to keep cars from Mexico from coming into the country. Trump has targeted China in particular. He proposes phasing out Chinese imports of goods such as electronics, steel, and pharmaceuticals over four years. He seeks to prohibit Chinese companies from owning U.S. real estate and infrastructure in the energy and tech sectors. “To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariffs,’” Trump said in an interview with John Micklethwait, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, in October. “It’s my favorite word.”

He added at the time, “You see these empty, old, beautiful steel mills and factories that are empty and falling down,” referring to facilities that used to make goods in the United States. “We’re going to bring the companies back. We’re going to lower taxes for companies that are going to make their products in the USA. And we’re going to protect those companies with strong tariffs,” Trump said. Micklethwait said that some economists have projected that the former president’s economic policies, including tariffs, could add trillions to the U.S. deficit. But Trump said that a number of countries, including “allies” have “taken advantage of us, more so than our enemies. ”

More Drilling The former president said that he wants to cut federal regulations on drilling for oil and natural gas, a move that he says would lower energy costs and inflation. In multiple instances, Trump said he would reauthorize drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which was suspended under the Biden administration. Meanwhile, he would pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Accords, a worldwide plan that claims to reduce carbon emissions. Trump also said he would roll back some federal policies around electric vehicles. In his campaign, Trump has often said that gas prices were much lower under his administration than they have been under the Biden administration. He has suggested that prices would again fall when he takes office.

“When I left office … gasoline had reached $1.87 a gallon. We actually had many months where it was lower than that,” Trump told reporters over the summer. “But we hit $1.87, which was a perfect place, an absolutely beautiful number.” According to AAA, the average price for a gallon of regular gasoline stands at around $3.10. The highest recorded average price for a gallon was on June 14, 2022, when it reached $5.01, AAA figures show. The federal Energy Information Administration’s data show that the average annual price for a gallon of gasoline did not exceed $3 under the first Trump administration.

Social Policies Trump has pledged to require U.S. colleges and universities to “defend American tradition and Western civilization” and to purge them of diversity and inclusion programs, which he and Republicans have said are leftist in nature. He said he would direct the Justice Department to pursue civil rights cases against schools that engage in racial discrimination. At K–12 schools, Trump would support programs allowing parents to use public funds for private or religious instruction. Trump also wants to abolish the federal Department of Education and leave states in control of schooling.

Regarding abortion, Trump has said that a federal ban on abortion is not needed and that the issue should be resolved by states. He’s also said he backs rules that advance in vitro fertilization, birth control, and prenatal care. In campaign events and interviews, Trump has been critical of schools allowing transgender individuals to compete in women’s sports, saying that he would impose a ban on such practices. “It’s a man playing in the game,” Trump said at an October town hall event. “Look at what’s happened in swimming. Look at the records that are being broken.”

Read more …

A lot of public “servants” have good reason to be nervous.

Musk Reveals Plans For Trump Government (RT)

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has said he will seek to improve government efficiency by reducing the number of federal agencies if he is given a role in Donald Trump’s administration. Musk, a Trump supporter, made the remarks during an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s online show, broadcast from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate on Tuesday. Despite initially proclaiming political neutrality, Musk officially endorsed Trump after an assassination attempt on the president-elect in July. Trump promised the Tesla CEO that he would establish a special “government efficiency” commission, dubbed the DOGE, to be headed by the billionaire if he wins the election. Speaking with Carlson, the tech billionaire said that he would like to help Trump make the US government more efficient.

“I’d be happy to help improve government efficiency,” Musk said. “We’ve got a gigantic government bureaucracy, we’ve got overregulation, we’ve got agencies that have overlapping responsibilities… this translates into real costs to people, they’re hidden costs but they are very substantial.” Musk has invested millions of dollars in supporting Trump. According to media reports, he donated at least $118 million to the Republican’s political action committee, a group that focused on voter outreach. Speaking at a Trump rally last month, Musk pledged to help the Republican slash US annual budget spending by “at least $2 trillion” as part of a review of federal agencies that he would carry out if Trump returns to the White House. “Your tax money is being wasted and the Department of Government Efficiency is going to fix that,” Musk stated. The tech billionaire has repeatedly sounded the alarm over the US debt, warning just last week that the country is spiraling toward bankruptcy and will quickly go bust if Washington doesn’t curb its spending.

Read more …

“We embrace change in the United States. We can tell the world that we’re aware of Bitcoin’s numerous positive attributes and that we want to use them to our advantage..”

The US Should Establish A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (Corva)

Yesterday, the Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI) released a 53-page report on the pros of the United States establishing a strategic bitcoin reserve (SBR). As Bitcoin Magazine’s Frank Corva details below, the authors of the report touched on four key benefits of holding bitcoin as a strategic reserve asset:

• Economic and monetary stability – bitcoin is a hedge against currency debasement and debt instability

• Geopolitical competition – the US could gain a strategic advantage over other countries that are contemplating starting a bitcoin reserve and can reinforce the US’ influence over global financial standards

• Energy and climate – Bitcoin mining can be leveraged to accelerate the movement toward renewable energy

• Financial inclusion and human rights – the US can promote both the concepts of individual freedom and financial inclusion for both US citizens and those abroad

While I agree that the US’ establishing an SBR would have these benefits, I also think it would send a certain message loud and clear: We embrace change in the United States. We can tell the world that we’re aware of Bitcoin’s numerous positive attributes and that we want to use them to our advantage. In doing so, we can shift the narrative around Bitcoin from something to be feared and controlled to something that should be embraced and utilized, and we can stand behind a tool that can be used to increase the financial buoyancy of both people and institutions around the globe instead of standing in its way.

Read more …

Following the example of Tulsi, RFK et al. They made it look acceptable.

Trump Comeback Also Engineered A Significant Exodus From Democrat Party (JTN)

Donald Trump pulled off the most improbable comeback in American political history Tuesday night, securing a likely return trip to the White House by beating back a relentless tide of media, Big Tech and Democrat opposition that stretched from the courthouse to the social media sphere Trump was poised to become only the second American president to secure non-consecutive terms but he did so against far greater odds than Grover Cleveland a century earlier after being impeached and acquitted twice, indicted four times, facing two assassination attempts and enduring an avalanche of lawfare unparalleled in the nation’s history. But even more consequential than his personal journey to President-Elect 47, Trump engineered a once-in-a-generation political realignment, one more deep and pervasive than his 2016 shocker as he peeled away long-rooted constituencies from the Democrat Party.

The electoral movement may soon be known as D-Exit, the American equivalent of Great Britain’s Brexit departure from the European Union as black males, Hispanic voters and young voters showed up more strongly from Trump and less fervently for Harris compared to Joe Biden or Barack Obama. Arabs and Muslims also underperformed for Harris. The shifts were small but compelling, crumbling a coalition born in the Kennedy-Johnson era and key to the Obama-Biden dynasty that dominated 12 of the last 16 years. The shifts toward Trump were jarring for Democrats. Trump cut the Democrat margin of victory in half in one of America’s darkest blue states, New York, and by two thirds in Democrat-stronghold Illinois. He won Florida – scene of the 2020 hanging election – by 15 points, all but erasing the Sunshine State as a battleground.

He won Georgia and North Carolina and was poised to take Arizona and Nevada. Pennsylvania was called for Trump and Wisconsin and Michigan were leaning strongly in his direction. He won a Senate majority and was in decent position to keep the U.S. House, which would make Washington an all red town in 2025. Perhaps most painful of all to blue America, Trump was in a position to win the popular vote, something Democrats have long used as a cudgel to delegitimize earlier GOP victories, including Trump’s in 2016. Mark Penn, the strategist behind the Clinton dynasty, succinctly described D-Exit early Wednesday morning. “The Trump edge is turning into a Trump trifecta. It looks like despite a good effort in a short period of time, Harris is falling short especially with young people and turnout in core urban areas. Black and especially Latino voters showed some shifts,” he noted on X.

“Trump has brought home with working class and created a new coalition of governing but the country remains divided and whoever wins must remember it’s time to genuinely reach out to the many moderate voters looking for the right leadership,” he added. Trump did it by talking directly to constituencies Republicans often ignored in the past, and that Democrats long took for granted. He did it by inviting recovering Democrats or stubborn independents to his big stage: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Elon Musk, ex-Rep and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard and podcaster extraordinaire Joe Rogan to name a few. He went to places like the Bronx and Manhattan’s Madison Square Garden in New York to signal he wanted to be all Americans’ president. And when Democrats talked about ethereal ideological terms like ESG, CRT, and DEI, Trump talked about the kitchen table, the grocery cart and the gas tank. He warned of energy poverty, recognizing some were having a hard time to pay utility bills.

He made the EV revolution a debate about exporting jobs to China and the liberal transgender movement a debate about the safety and dignity of women’s sports and the sanctity of parents’ rights. Democrats did a historic switcheroo atop the ticket, subbing a younger female Harris for an aging Biden. But they didn’t change the debate. Trump chose the issues of insecurity, inflation and insanity and Democrats offered few specifics to counter. In the end, Trump’s prior record of economic growth in his first term seemed preferrable to Harris’ vagaries. Trump’s optimism that the nation’s woes could be solved was more appealing than Harris’ dark insistence that fascism, extremism and Hitler-like characters would destroy democracy.

Read more …

“Smith’s prosecutions ended with the 270th Electoral College vote secured around 2 a.m. Wednesday.”

The Thrill is Gone (Turley)

After years of thrill-kill prosecutions, the thrill is gone for lawfare warriors. Election Day’s greatest losers may be special counsel Jack Smith, New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Donald Trump’s victory was the largest jury verdict that some of us anticipated for years of unrelenting weaponization of the legal system. Smith’s prosecutions ended with the 270th Electoral College vote secured around 2 a.m. Wednesday. His unrelenting efforts to convict Trump and then, when prevented from holding a trial, to release damaging material before the election have collapsed with the blue wall in the Midwest. Trump has said he plans to fire Smith on Day 1. That means the end of both the January 6 and the classified documents cases. That leaves James and Bragg as residue of long-forgotten lawfare battles, but even there Trump’s prospects look good.

James was able to secure a fellow lawfare warrior in Justice Arthur Engoron, who imposed a grotesque $455 million in fines and interest. That ruling is pending an appeal that is expected to be a partial or even total victory for Trump. Unlike Engoron, the appellate judges expressed great skepticism in September over the size of the penalty and even the use of this law. Trump faced half a billion dollars in penalty in a case where no one lost a dime, and the alleged victim banks wanted more business with Trump and his company. Separately, there is a hearing scheduled in front of Judge Juan Merchan for Nov. 11 on the “hush money” case involving Stormy Daniels, and a possible sentencing on Nov. 26. If Merchan seeks to jail Trump, it is unlikely to be carried out, as Trump appeals the case and the many alleged errors committed by the judge.

Merchan made an utter mess of a case that should never have been filed, let alone tried. Even commentators like CNN’s senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, have denounced the case as selective prosecution and unfounded. The case should result in a conditional discharge with no jail time if Merchan can resist the temptation to unjustly punish Trump, a level of restraint that has largely proven difficult for him in the case. Merchan created layers of appealable errors in the case. Putting those alleged errors aside, any sentencing to jail would create its own constitutional conflict with Trump’s performance of his federal duties. The question is whether the election will bring a moment of sobriety for New Yorkers who have spent years in a full rage-driven celebration of lawfare.

Read more …

Turley gets it. NBC not so much.

DOJ Moving To Wind Down Trump Criminal Cases (NBC)

Justice Department officials have been evaluating how to wind down the two federal criminal cases against President-elect Donald Trump before he takes office to comply with long-standing department policy that a sitting president can’t be prosecuted, two people familiar with the matter tell NBC News. The latest discussions stand in contrast with the pre-election legal posture of special counsel Jack Smith, who in recent weeks took significant steps in the election interference case against Trump without regard to the electoral calendar. But the sources say DOJ officials have come to grips with the fact that no trial is possible anytime soon in either the Jan. 6 case or the classified documents matter — both of which are mired in legal issues that would likely prompt an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, even if Trump had lost the election.

Now that Trump will become president again, DOJ officials see no room to pursue either criminal case against him — and no point in continuing to litigate them in the weeks before he takes office, the people said. “Sensible, inevitable and unfortunate,” said former federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg, an NBC News contributor. How Trump’s legal jeopardy has unfolded over the past year, in terms of both the criminal charges and his sweeping election victory, is unprecedented. The sources said it will be up to Smith to decide exactly how to unwind the charges and many questions remain unanswered. Could the prosecutions resume after Trump leaves office or would they be time-barred? What happens to the evidence? What about the two other defendants charged with helping Trump hide classified documents? Will the special counsel write a report, as special counsels usually do?

At the same time, Trump’s legal team is weighing its own next steps for how to resolve the outstanding federal cases in his favor now that he is the projected winner of the election. The ultimate goal is to get all the federal and state cases wiped out completely — the strategic call is how best to accomplish that task, according to a person familiar with the discussions. If the Trump side, for example, moved again in court to dismiss the charges in Washington related to election interference, then the Justice Department could use its legal response to explain its position on not moving forward with that case. Trump’s New York criminal case presents different challenges with a felony conviction and sentencing hearing scheduled for Nov. 26. The immediate goal of Trump’s legal team is to get that postponed indefinitely or otherwise dismissed.

The Georgia election interference case against Trump remains tied up on appeals over ethical issues surrounding the district attorney. “The American people have re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. “It is now abundantly clear that Americans want an immediate end to the weaponization of our justice system, so we can, as President Trump said in his historic speech last night, unify our country and work together for the betterment of our nation.” The DOJ’s thinking on Trump’s federal cases flows from a 2000 memo by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which affirmed a Watergate-era conclusion that a prosecution of a sitting president would “unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the presidency.”

“In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’” the memo concluded, quoting the earlier conclusion. The practical reality of Trump’s electoral victory Tuesday is that he is unlikely ever to face legal consequences in relation to the serious federal criminal charges brought against him by career Justice Department prosecutors working with career FBI agents. Some commentators have said the charges were arguably more serious than the conduct in the Watergate scandal that cost Richard Nixon the presidency and left him banished from politics. In the case accusing Trump of conspiring to illegally overturn the 2020 election, he is charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights.

In the classified documents case, he is charged with willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, lying to investigators and withholding documents in a federal investigation. “The idea that you could win an election to avoid justice just cuts so deeply against my expectations for our legal system and for our politics too,” said Joyce Vance, a former U.S. attorney and NBC News contributor. “But the voters have spoken, and that’s where we are.” She added that it has never been a foregone conclusion that Trump would be convicted — that would be up to a jury. “What bothers me so deeply is that he’s avoided the quintessential part of American justice — letting a jury decide, based on the evidence.”

Read more …

“Rachel Maddow is a crazy person,” Musk said, describing her as “frothing-at-the-mouth crazy fascist, basically, sort of pretending to be a liberal.”

Rachel Maddow Threatens Musk Over ‘Russia Ties’ (RT)

Elon Musk can’t possibly keep his US government contracts because of his alleged secret contacts with “America’s worst enemy,” MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow has said. The Wall Street Journal claimed last week that Musk had communicated with Russian President Vladimir Putin and withheld the services of his Starlink network to Ukraine’s military. Both Musk and Moscow have dismissed the report as fake news. Maddow, however, proceeded as if the Journal’s reporting was a proven fact in her election day show on Tuesday evening. “You really can’t have the head of a company that is the primary rocket launcher for the defense department and NASA, you can’t have the head of that company in secret communications with America’s worst enemy while America’s enemy is actively waging a war against one of our allies, especially once you learn that he’s using his businesses to help the other side, to help Russia in that war,” Maddow said.

“Now that we know what we know about Elon Musk, this election – regardless of who wins – has produced a national security problem,” she continued, arguing that it will likely produce “tons of drama.” “So, buckle up. Even if [Donald] Trump doesn’t win, the Defense Department and NASA are gonna need a new arrangement for all their rockets and for all the multi-billion-dollar contracts Elon Musk’s companies have with the US government,” Maddow said. Either the government will have to get out of those contracts, or Musk’s companies “will have to unwind from him.” Musk has denied the Journal’s claims, pointing out that Starlink was “the BACKBONE of Ukrainian military communications at the front lines, because everything else has been blown up or jammed by Russia.” The founder of SpaceX and owner of X (formerly Twitter) addressed Maddow’s comments shortly afterward, speaking to journalist Tucker Carlson in a livestream from Mar-a-Lago.

“Rachel Maddow is a crazy person,” Musk said, describing her as “frothing-at-the-mouth crazy fascist, basically, sort of pretending to be a liberal.” Asked how much pressure he has been under because of his support for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, Musk resorted to a joke. “Well, apart from multiple Democrats saying they want to put me in jail, take away government contracts from my companies, nationalize my companies, deport me as an illegal, and have me arrested for apparently being Putin’s best friend, nothing besides those things,” he said. Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the Journal’s claims were untrue, “most likely linked” to Musk’s support for Trump, and should not be taken seriously. While the official count of votes in the US presidential election is still pending, Trump has secured the needed 270 electoral votes, according to multiple media organizations.

Read more …

“..while promoting her latest book this August, Pelosi called it her “goal in life” for Trump to “never step in the White House again.”

84-year-old Pelosi Projected To Win Reelection (RT)

Former US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi could return to Congress next year for a landmark 20th term, The Hill reported on Wednesday, citing voting projections. Congressional elections are being held along with the race for the White House, with 34 of 100 seats in the Senate and all 435 in the House of Representatives up for grabs. According to the report, the 84-year-old Democrat is expected to win reelection to the House in California’s 11th Congressional District, which includes most of San Francisco. The report came after 50% of the votes were counted, with Pelosi securing over 80%. First elected to Congress in 1987, Pelosi became the first woman to serve as House speaker, a role she held twice. She has also been the longest-serving leader in the Democratic Party’s history in Congress.

Pelosi publicly encouraged incumbent President Joe Biden to drop his reelection plans, which led to him quitting the race as the Democratic candidate and being replaced by Vice President Kamala Harris. Reports of Pelosi’s win come as the final votes are being counted in the presidential race. While the official results of the election have yet to be announced, Trump has already secured wins in key battleground states and passed the threshold of 270 electoral college votes required to take the White House, according to media projections. Pelosi is among the fiercest critics of Trump. She has called him a “snake-oil salesman” and “the creature from the Black Lagoon,” and led Democratic efforts during impeachment proceedings against Trump in his previous term in office. Speaking to reporters while promoting her latest book this August, Pelosi called it her “goal in life” for Trump to “never step in the White House again.”

Trump railed against Pelosi in his campaign’s closing speech on Tuesday, recalling her efforts to impeach him. He said Pelosi is an “evil, sick, crazy, horrible human being” and “trouble for our country,” adding that he wanted to call her the “B-word.” In an interview on Fox News last month, he called Pelosi America’s “enemy from within.” According to the latest media reports, the Republicans have won control of the Senate for the first time in four years. It is still unclear which party will control the House of Representatives, as there are too many races that have yet to be called.

Read more …

“..the Biden administration and its European acolytes fueling NATO’s proxy war “are history.”

Trump to Seek ‘Pragmatic’ Deals, No Budget Money to Sustain Ukraine (Sp.)

Throughout his election campaign, Donald Trump consistently expressed his reluctance to continue funding the Zelensky regime in Ukraine. Following his declaration of victory in the US presidential race, Trump addressed his supporters in a celebratory speech, promising to “stop wars” across the globe. As the 47th US president, Donald Trump will not guarantee the US budget “to keep Ukraine afloat,” strategic analyst Paolo Raffone told Sputnik. He conjectured that the Biden administration and its European acolytes fueling NATO’s proxy war “are history.” “Trump does not see any advantage for the US to continue spending enormous budgets and political capital in Ukraine. If a deal with Russia and Ukraine cannot be reached, it is possible that Trump will push for a ‘frozen conflict policy’ as a sort of damage control… Europeans will have to cover those costs. It will probably be the end of the EU,” the director of the CIPI Foundation in Brussels speculated.

On the foreign policy front, the Republican is likely to display openness to “pragmatic” solutions with allies and foes to achieve “maximum advantage” for the US, he surmised, adding: “I expect a great bargaining in which Trump will keep the centrality of the US as the ‘indispensable interlocutor’ in bilateral relations, also within the framework of multipolarity. Probably, there will be much less hysteria about Russia, Iran, China. The probable objective is ‘rebalancing the interchange’ with all these countries. They may not become friends, but deals are possible in mutual interest.” In his pursuit of a national interest agenda, Trump may redefine America’s contributions to NATO, emphasizing that US protection for Europe “is not a free ride,” Raffone noted. “Trump will guarantee the Europeans the military shield, but each European state will have to contribute much more to NATO. The previous US administrations asked to raise European military expenditure above 2% GDP. Such a target will probably be insufficient during the new Trump administration,” said Raffone.

It is difficult for Trump to “accept any idea of European strategic autonomy,” emphasized the pundit. He supposed that a new Trump administration would brandish “a combination of trade, tariffs, security levy to force the Europeans to increase their military budgets and buy more American.” “European energy and technology dependency is a fact… Europe must find space for compromise to deal with not only the US, but also with Russia, China and the Middle East. The current ideological positions in the EU Commission, Paris and Berlin are not encouraging,” stressed the pundit. Looking ahead to the US elections of 2028, none of the “old guard” will be running, conjectured Raffone, suggesting that “new forces will emerge during the current Trump term.” “The Trump administration will probably be a transition time. The outcome will be visible in US politics over the next decade. Currently, the two US parties live a populist momentum. Time will tell if politics will arise again in the US,” he concluded.

Read more …

“..if he listens to Tucker Carlson, and ‘Bobby’ Kennedy, and Vivek Ramaswamy, and all the smart people around him – then yes, he could negotiate an end to that war.”

Dave Smith: Will Trump Be Able To End The War In Ukraine? (ZH)

At a recent pre-election speaking and podcast event, comedian and Libertarian political commentator Dave Smith expressed his view that it is very realistic that the next President Donald Trump could successfully negotiate an end to the Ukraine war. Smith’s view is optimistic, as he articulated that he believes Trump’s expressed desire to end wars in Ukraine and Gaza is genuine. But Smith also laid out that much depends on who Trump puts around him in top national security positions. Below is the hard-hitting segment featuring the prominent commentator addressing the question: will Trump be able to end the war in Ukraine? Below are Dave Smith’s words from the segment on Trump and Ukraine below …

“Why the hell are we even expanding our military alliance to Ukraine? And listen, Donald Trump always says that the war ‘never would have happened if I was president, and I would negotiate an end to this.’ And I gotta say I think he’s right about that. I don’t think the war would have happened if he was president – I think he will negotiate an end to it. I don’t think he’s right that Hamas wouldn’t have attacked Israel if he was president – that seems kind of ridiculous to me. But he’s right: the Ukraine war could be over tomorrow if American wanted to negotiated a peace to it. Vladimir Putin has been trying to the entire time… Well the question becomes who does Donald Trump put around him? If Donald Trump puts Mike Pompeo, aka Liz Cheney’s pick for Defense Secretary… if he puts John Bolton, aka Hillary Clinton’s pick for national security adviser – then maybe not, maybe it doesn’t happen. But if he listens to Tucker Carlson, and ‘Bobby’ Kennedy, and Vivek Ramaswamy, and all the smart people around him – then yes, he could negotiate an end to that war.”

Indeed, the question ultimately becomes: will Trump really keep the ‘swamp’ out of his administration this time around? We hope so.

Read more …

“Politico described the plan as “the only option” to maintain the flow of weapons to Ukraine, although its sources acknowledged “immense” challenges..”

Biden To Speed Up Arms Deliveries To Ukraine – Media (RT)

The White House intends to expedite up to $9 billion in new military aid in a last-ditch effort to bolster Ukraine against Russia, before President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January, according to sources within the outgoing administration. The plan is driven by concerns that Trump, who has criticized President Joe Biden’s generous support for Kiev, may halt or significantly reduce US taxpayer-funded aid, as reported by sources speaking to Reuters and Politico on Wednesday. “The administration plans to push forward… to put Ukraine in the strongest position possible,” a senior official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. Politico described the plan as “the only option” to maintain the flow of weapons to Ukraine, although its sources acknowledged “immense” challenges. US officials worry that even if Biden approves new aid, it could take the Pentagon months to actually deliver munitions and equipment to Ukraine, and the next commander-in-chief could halt shipments at any time.

It remains unclear whether the US military would be willing to draw more deeply from its stockpiles – risking its own readiness – to expedite the deliveries. Since February 2022, the US Congress has approved more than $174 billion to support Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. The latest tranche of $61 billion was delayed for several months amid a standoff between Republicans and the White House. Of that package, only $4.3 billion remains, along with another $2 billion allocated for new contracts with the US arms industry. With $2.8 billion in previously announced shipments, the White House has just over $9 billion available for emergency supplies to Kiev. Trump’s victory will not change Washington’s antagonistic stance towards Moscow, but will make it more difficult for Kiev to access American taxpayers’ money, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Wednesday.

“As a dyed-in-the-wool businessman, he hates wasting money on all sorts of freeloaders and tagalongs: On wacko allies, misguided grandiose charity projects, and insatiable international organizations,” Medvedev wrote in a Telegram post. “The only question is, how much will Trump be forced to fork out on the war? He’s stubborn, but the system is more powerful.” Trump has said that Ukraine cannot win against Russia militarily and has criticized Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky as “the greatest salesman in history,” who secures billions every time he visits Washington without getting any closer to victory. Trump claimed on the campaign trail that he could end the Ukraine conflict in 24 hours if reelected. In his victory speech, Trump reiterated: “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.”

Read more …

“..the EU has already spent nearly €120 billion ($128.8 billion) on supporting Ukraine, with another €74 billion pledged but yet to be allocated..”

Von der Leyen To Prepare EU For War – Defense Commission Nominee (RT)

A top priority for the next European Commission will be making Europe self-reliant and ready for war, as the US is likely to focus on China in the coming decades, said Andrius Kubilius, the nominee for the EU’s new top defense post. Kubilius made this statement at his confirmation hearing in Brussels on Wednesday, after he was nominated to become the first-ever EU Commissioner for Defense and Space. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen designated the former Lithuanian prime minister for the position in September. The new Commission is expected to take office by December 1. “Defense is one of the top priorities for the next Commission,” Kubilius told MEPs. “Von der Leyen’s mission letter tasks me with helping Europe prepare for the most extreme military contingencies, which means preparing for the possibility of Russian aggression.”

While it is difficult to predict the policies of the upcoming administration of US President-elect Donald Trump, “we can anticipate that in the coming decades, the U.S. is likely to increase its focus on the strategic challenge posed by China,” Kubilius said. This shift “necessitates a more self-reliant European defense structure,” he added. “Adversaries and strategic rivals are rapidly outpacing us,” with Russia and China far ahead in defense spending, Kubilius noted. He claimed that Russia will spend more on defense than all of the bloc’s 27 states combined, in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). In the meantime, the best defense strategy for the EU would be to continue funding Ukraine, he stated.

Since 2022, the EU has already spent nearly €120 billion ($128.8 billion) on supporting Ukraine, with another €74 billion pledged but yet to be allocated, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. As emphasized by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the best investment in European security is investing in the security of Ukraine. Officials in Brussels are waiting for the US election results to determine their next steps in supporting Ukraine, Deutsche Welle reported earlier this week. During his reelection campaign, Trump has repeatedly suggested he would curtail funding for Kiev and focus on domestic American issues. The outgoing Biden administration intends to fast-track billions in military aid to Ukraine to reinforce Kiev’s military before Trump takes office in January, Reuters and Politico reported on Wednesday, citing anonymous sources.

Read more …

“Kursk is the ultimate meat grinder for Ukraine soldiers. No one comes back alive.”

How British Media Is Turning On Zelensky. And Why (Jay)

It’s a little-known fact that the two British media giants, The Economist and The Financial Times, enjoy a very cosy relationship with the European Commission, so much so that one could almost imagine them all being one family. Each does its own bidding for one another and each assists one another with its aspirations, its viewpoint. And it’s fake news. And so, when you read in The Economist that the war is not going at all well for Ukraine and its hapless president you can more or less assume that this is the interpretation also of the very highest echelons of the EU. Since the war started, Ukraine’s president has had the full support of western media, which has agreed to go along with the fake news racket which his people organize; curtailing the freedom of western journalists, blocking them from getting hard news stories, data, statistics but above all taking them by the hand and leading them to the stories which they want reported.

This game reached epic proportions in recent months as a parody of journalism reached its apex when the war turned on Zelensky in the summer of this year. Journalists didn’t report on it in such a way. Many stayed in Kiev and other large cities and were so desperate for a story which wouldn’t upset their hosts that they peddled the same one over and over again of the conscripts being bundled into the backs of vans. It was literally all they could do to keep active. But this business model of late appears to have run aground. Both the Economist and the BBC have each reported on the frontlines and really told it how it is: bleak. No one can turn a blind eye any more to the advancement of Russian forces. The capture of Selydove might be played down by the Kiez media machine whose list of hilarious fake news stories is too long to publish; but Pokrovsk, which is the next target for Russian forces, will be a considerable victory which might topple the entire confidence of Zelensky and his cabal of advisors and sycophants.

Pokrovsk is a town which is a transport hub, which supplies thousands of Ukrainian troops. If it is taken, it would effectively mean the mass surrender of most of them, or their hasty retreat as they won’t be able to eat or replenish their ammunition stocks. This itself will have a devastating blow on Ukrainian troops’ morale and we might well see a domino effect which accelerates Russia’s advance from a kilometer or two in a day to scores. How will western media report the fall of this city? If The Economist and BBC reports are anything to go by, with some zeal one would imagine. It’s as though big media, in particular British, is anxious to stay on the right side of history when things start to fall down and emerge from the dust as wise old men with that “I told you so” sparkle in their eyes. It’s also about collective guilt. Western Media has blood on its hands as the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers sent to the “meat grinder” is partly attributed to the support U.S. and UK media gave Zelensky.

What we are witnessing now from Zelensky is a panic mode which is accelerating at the same pace. His so-called “victory plan” hasn’t been taken seriously by any western leaders and he looks stupid now, alienated. His recent outburst about Biden leaking to the press about the ludicrous idea of using U.S.-made Tomahawk missiles might have been a defining moment which history writers obsess over then they write his eulogy. For now, the panic isn’t really even about the battlefield, although it must be hard for Zelensky to read the dispatches each day of the losses in Kursk which could be considered Ukraine’s own Battle of the Bulge where German troops fought hard at the end of WWII against larger, bigger numbers of allied soldiers in the Ardennes and ultimately lost. In many ways Kursk was a trap which Zelensky set for himself, as the failure to capture the nuclear power plant pales into insignificance compared to the losses of men. Kursk is the ultimate meat grinder for Ukraine soldiers. No one comes back alive.

The real panic for Zelensky is now about his own political credibility. He is only thinking now how to survive the inevitable loss to Russia and stay a president. He knows only too well that if a quick ceasefire happens under Trump’s leadership, the Martial Law status of the country will be cancelled and presidential elections will be obligatory. Under Harris, the pain will only be drawn out longer, but with even more lost ground, lost bargaining leverage as she will force Putin to shift gear with his advance and head for Kiev. The irony of The Economist piece and its timing is that it prepares the ground for a massive blame game which starts with those who have been doing it like pros for decades – The European Commission – and amateurs who have just started to learn how it works, like Zelensky. The Economist is just warming up.

Read more …

Economy is breaking down.

German Government Has Collapsed (RT)

Germany’s ‘traffic-light’ coalition has fallen apart, leaving Olaf Scholz at the helm of a minority government consisting solely of his Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Greens. This follows the Chancellor’s dismissal of Free Democratic Party (FDP) leader Christian Lindner from the position of Finance Minister. After failed crisis talks on Wednesday night, the Chancellor dismissed the Free Democratic Party (FDP) leader Christian Lindner from the position of Finance Minister. In response, the FDP’s parliamentary group leader, Christian Durr, announced that the party is withdrawing all its ministers from Scholz’s government, formally ending the three-way coalition. The Greens expressed regret over this development but stated they wish to remain part of a minority government, emphasizing the need for the EU – and Germany in particular – to demonstrate its capacity for action following Donald Trump’s election as US President.

“I want to say for us that this feels wrong and not right tonight – almost tragic on a day like this, when Germany must show unity and the ability to act in Europe,” said Vice Chancellor and Economy Minister Robert Habeck in a joint press statement with Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Wednesday night. “This is not a good day for Germany and also not a good day for Europe,” Baerbock added. Finance Minister Christian Lindner was fired after he reportedly proposed early elections when the leaders of the three coalition parties once again failed to find common ground on how to address the multibillion-euro deficit in next year’s budget. “All too often, Minister Lindner has blocked laws in an inappropriate manner,” Scholz stated, accusing Lindner of refusing to ease spending rules which among other things would allow for more aid to Ukraine.

Lindner, in turn, accused the Chancellor of ignoring the real “economic concerns” of the German people. “Olaf Scholz has long failed to recognize the need for a new economic awakening in our country,” Lindner said. Scholz said he now wants to reach out to opposition leader Friedrich Merz of the Christian Democrats to offer him the “opportunity” to collaborate with his government, adding that in light of the US elections, this is “perhaps more urgent than ever.” Meanwhile, the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) opposition party welcomed the coalition’s collapse as a long-overdue “liberation” for Germany.

“After months of gridlock and countless self-centered therapy sessions, we now urgently need a fundamental political fresh start to lead the economy and the country as a whole out of the severe crisis into which it has been plunged by the ideology-driven policies of the SPD, Greens, and FDP,” said AfD parliamentary leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla in a statement on X. Scholz announced that the Bundestag will hold a vote of confidence on January 15. According to the German constitution, if the Chancellor fails to secure sufficient support, he may formally request the President to dissolve the 733-seat lower house and call new elections within 60 days. This could push Germany’s parliamentary elections from next fall to March 2025.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Fishing

 

 

Mature tree

 

 

Flow hive
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854145206733373820

 

 

Slow motion fluid

 

 

Mesh

 

 

Hair
https://twitter.com/i/status/1854109578490782018

 

 

Pnut

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 252019
 


Yves Klein Leap into the Void 1960

 

Message to Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Kemala Harris, Tulsi Gabbard and the rest of the crew: you can stop asking for campaign donations, because you no longer stand a chance in the 2020 elections. Your own party, and the media who support you, made sure of that. Or rather, the only chance you would have is if you guys start another smear campaign against your president, and I wouldn’t recommend that.

I don’t want to start another Lock Her Up sequence, that’s too ugly for my taste. But three parties in this No Collusion disaster must be held accountable: US intelligence, the Democratic party, and the media. You can’t just let it go, too much water under the bridge. No can do. “The Democrats need to move on”, a recent ‘soft line’, is not good enough. They must be held to account.

Bill Barr can investigate the FBI and DOJ, but the obstacles there are obvious: investigating the investigators. The Democratic party would mean going after individuals, but sure, let’s see what Loretta Lynch, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Maxine Waters have to say for themselves and take it from there, before you get to Hillary. The media, though, is something else altogether.

Freedom of the press, and freedom of opinion, is one thing. Conducting a 2-year+ smear campaign against your own president is another. So what does US law say about this? Let’s hear it. Since Trump made Bill Barr the new Attorney General, Barr is instrumental in answering these questions. Is it a smear campaign? Is that acceptable? Is it legal? Asking for a friend.

Not a soul could blame me if I were to gloat because what I’ve said since the 2016 elections has been proven: there is no collusion between ‘the Russians’ and Donald Trump and there never was. But I don’t feel much like gloating because 1) it’s old news and 2) this tale is far from over. The media, and the Democrats, are not going to cave in, because they have nowhere left to ‘cave into’.

The biggest shame, I think, is not that the media will just keep doing what they have, but that a remnant, a residue of all the made-up narratives will remain in their audience’s minds, long after Robert Mueller has said it was all lies all that time. That the public will say: there’s been so much, surely some of it must be true?! The power of repetition.

 

The same media that has spun the collusion theme all this time will simply continue doing what it’s done, just perhaps without using that term -and not even that is sure. Don’t let’s forget, and I’ve said this 1000 times, that while there is a dose of genuine hatred of their own president involved, and some political issues, most of all it’s about their business model. Trump scandals mean readers and viewers. And money.

Because of that, or at least partly because of it, I would seriously like to ask what the odds are of putting Rachel Maddow behind bars. How many lies can you tell, and how often can you repeat them, about anyone, but certainly about your President, before someone calls you on it? Trump can’t really defend himself, or couldn’t as long as Mueller was busy, but this can’t be.

Does the fact that you work for the media protect you to the extent that you can just say anything? And Maddow of course is just an example, albeit an extreme one, but the same goes for CNN, New York Times et al. What freedoms do you have as a journalist? And at what point are you no longer a journalist at all? Who decides that?

BuzzFeed said Mueller was in possession of evidence that Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress. Mueller himself had to discredit that. The Guardian’s Luke Harding wrote a #1 NYT bestselling book called “Collusion” before writing an article with Dan Collins claiming that Manafort had met with Assange multiple times in London.

Not a word of that was true. But Harding And Collins and their editor still work at the Guardian, and no apologies or corrections were ever issued. And at some point you have no choice but to ask: where does it stop? Where do we draw the line? Can anyone who labels themselves a journalist and/or anyone employed by MSM, say anything they want? From sources:

The nonpartisan Tyndall Report pegged the total amount of time devoted to the story on the evening newscasts of ABC, CBS and NBC last year at 332 minutes, making it the second-most covered story after the Senate confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

According to a count by the Republican National Committee released Sunday, The [Washington] Post, The New York Times, CNN.com and MSNBC.com have written a combined 8,507 articles [since 2017] mentioning the special counsel’s investigation [into nonexistent collusion], some 13 articles a day. The cable news networks, particularly CNN and MSNBC, have added hundreds of hours of discussion about the topic, too.

And they wrote many more in 2016 as well. They were on a mission. Tyler Durden adds:

Mueller’s 40 FBI agents issued over 2,800 subpoenas, executed “nearly 500 search warrants,” and “obtained over 230 orders for communication records. They also issued 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.

All that time, and all those resources, dedicated to a figment of the imagination, invented out of this air to derail a presidential election and a presidency. Where do we think these people see their country go? I must admit I’m not sure about that one. But I see Bernie Sanders on the anti-Trump wagon, and AOC and Tulsi trying to get on, and I think: please don’t do that, it doesn’t go anywhere.

I’ve called for a second special counsel many times, and I can’t imagine there won’t be one, and as much as I think it’s desperately needed, it’s obvious at the same time that it can only divide the nation further.

There was a reason Trump was elected: people had gotten sick of what was there before, of what Republicans and Democrats had to offer. And there is absolutely nobody in either party who addresses that issue. In other words, there’s still nobody who is listening to those people. So they tune into Rachel Maddow and her kind of ‘reporting’.

Looks like Bill Barr will be badly needed. And that to restore the credibility of US intelligence, he will need to clean up the FBI and DOJ and get rid of all those who’ve taken part in the collusion debacle. A formidable task. I’d suggest he start with Maddow et al and take it from there. Find out who feeds the media their fantasy stories.

Oh, and now that collusion’s off the table, free Julian Assange. Let Robert Mueller show he’s not as much of a coward as he looks until now. To that end, let him swallow the Guccifer 2.0 nonsense as well. That Rachel Maddow makes things up from scratch, doesn’t mean Special Counsels should do that too. Mueller knows exactly what this is about.

A friend (not exactly a Trump fan) mailed me last night saying this was never a witch hunt. And I’m thinking: maybe that depends on how you define it. Here’s one definition: “an unforgiving, evidence-scant campaign against a group of people with unpopular views.” Not too far off, is it?

Time for spring cleaning, Bill Barr.