Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Intelligence Agencies Comprising the Intelligence Community & America's Military Dictatorship



Image source: http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/10/9/3/8/8652501034247105.gif  

Few Americans can comprehend the magnitude of America's spy networks that are the foundation for Police State USA or more appropriately America's Militarized Police State. While the CIA and the NSA are well known to most of us, 16 intelligence networks are collectively known in government speak as the Intelligence Community. LOL, the term 'community tends to invoke something warm and fuzzy but these dangerous agencies exist for only one reason - to solidify the power and control of the Deep State and its operatives.

After 911, the issue of the various intelligence agencies defending their turf and power became a serious concern because the lack of communication and intel sharing may have contributed to the massive intelligence failures that resulted in 911. Hence, the Office of Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was created, presumeably to coordinate the activities of the various intelligence agencies, foster better communications among the agencies and to strengthen national security. 16 federal intelligence agencies are now listed under the banner of the DNI as its own website confirms, here. The DNI has it's own agency logo.




The 16 intel agencies and the actual agencies they are under are as follows:

Central Intelligence Agency The CIA is typically listed as a stand alone independent agency. The CIA really isn't accountable to anybody and does it's own thing. It's currently the subject of a massive WikiLeaks information disclosure known as Vault 7.

Department of Defense or DOD (8 intelligence agencies)

National Security Agency: DOD
Defense Intelligence Agency: DOD
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: DOD
National Reconnaissance Office: DOD
Army Intelligence: US Army under DOD
Navy Intelligence: US Navy under DOD
Marine Corps Intelligence: US Marine Corp under DOD
Air Force Intelligence: US Air Force under DOD

Department of Justice (2)


Intelligence Branch of FBI which is under the Department of Justice (DOJ)
Office of National Security Intelligence which is under the DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) which is under the DOJ.

Homeland Security (2)

Coast Guard Intelligence, US Coast Guard is under Homeland Security
Office of Intelligence and Analysis is under Homeland Security

Department of Energy

Office of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence 

Department of Treasury 

Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence

US Department of State

Office of National Security Intelligence

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community

The number of intel agencies is insane and a sane person is asking the question: How much overlapping exists and are they all really necessary?  Also, we should be learning the number of employees in every one of these intel agencies, as well as their budgets. I strongly suspect that taxpayers are yet again being plundered to support big bad government and monstrous bureaucracies.

It was reported that President Trump's first National Security Advisor, Gen. Michael Flynn, who was forced to resign after only weeks on the job, intended to reform the intelligence communities.  Flynn was a retired general and former Director of the DOD's Defense Intelligence Agency.  Flynn was replaced with another general, H.R. McMaster.

President Trump nominated  Dan Coats, a 73 year old former senator from Indiana as his DNI in early January.  He has yet to be confirmed by the Senate. It's highly probable that Coats was recommended by VP Mike Pence, a former member of Congress and former Indiana governor.

The DNI job cannot possibly be an easy job, especially in the age of President Trump where the Deep State perceives a threat to its vast and unaccountable powers.  However, DNI Directors have long resumes of military and/or intel service. There is little to no civilian power or oversight of any intel agency. This is indeed troubling and further supports concerns that the military industrial complex or Deep State rules America.

The president's National Security Advisor always comes from the military and also has a long resume of intel agency and/or military service.

The very concept of civilian government was created specifically to avoid military dictatorships and undue military influence.  It's increasingly difficult to assume that we are even governed by an elected civilian government given that all the power appears to be definitely concentrated within the military, the MIC, the DOD, the DIA, intel agencies, the CIA and what is becoming known as the Military Industrial Security Complex. It's the Deep State on steroids.

None of this bodes well for liberty as government continues to attack and eradicate our rights and freedom.

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

It's the Saudis, Stupid!




This is a repost in its entirely from a January 31, 2017 post at www.cluborlov.com; I'd post the link but a link isn't available although the post is available on the website.  It's an extremely relevant and important article about Saudi Arabia, the US, Islamic terrorism and how the petrodollar funds ISIS, Al Qaeda and other Sunni terror groups.

It's the Saudi's, Stupid!

[I am still in recovery from the book tour (which went well), so here is a timely rerun. Trump just banned entry to migrants from a list of “terrorist” countries that had been concocted by the Obama administration. Missing from that list is terrorist country number one: Saudi Arabia. It would be too much to hope that Trump will amend Obama's list, however; no matter who happens to be president, the US and the Saudis are pretty much joined at the hip.] 

[Just nine days after I pointed out that Obama's latest “humanitarian” bombing puts American lives in danger, we have the video of the journalist James Foley's beheading at the hands of Daash, a.k.a. Islamic Caliphate, a.k.a. ISIS/ISIL. Well, that didn't take long! But there is more to the story: what stands behind this event, and others, such as 9/11, the Boston Marathon bombing, the Benghazi massacre and numerous other acts of terror is none other than America's best friend, the House of Saud. Here is a post by my friend Idris to explain this vital connection.] \

The recent rise of the Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq, along with its bedfellow Jahbat Al-Nusra (JN) is being viewed with alarm worldwide. It is the latest in a series of problems related to Islamic extremism for which Al Qaeda is the poster child. From Somalia to Yemen to Nigeria to the Levant to Afghanistan and Pakistan, to Chechnya to Xinjiang, China and even raising its head among the populations of western countries, both Muslim and non-Muslim are facing the ravages of the Salafi/Takfiri Nexus of Jihad.

However, there has been a failure to focus on the primary cause of these problems with their various manifestations worldwide. Saudi Arabia, with able assistance from several of its Gulf neighbors (with Qatar as the most prominent) has steadfastly promoted the rise of Islamic extremism. The extreme behavior now being manifested is the result of the extremist Wahhabi ideology that Saudi Arabia promotes and the billions of dollars it has spent to influence the entire Muslim world to adopt its extremist ideology or at least to remain silent as its poison spreads, particularly among the youth.

Saudi Arabia has for decades given scholarships to universities in the kingdom devoted to indoctrinating future Muslim leaders. It has funded Masjids, schools and Islamic Centers which have promoted their vitriol and which are usually staffed by graduates of their institutions. They have thus prepared the ground for what we are seeing now, as young Muslims from around the world flock to the Levant to wage Jihad under the banner of the various groups that the Saudis have long nurtured.

The Saudis and their Gulf co-conspirators have not limited themselves to promoting their hateful ideology. They have provided billions in material support for Muslims worldwide willing to take extremist action in accordance with Salafi/Takfiri principles. Any Muslim group worldwide willing to take violent actions that accord with this extreme Salafi/Takfiri worldview finds it easy to tap into the Saudi/Arab Gulf international network to receive funding and other forms of tangible support to launch their violent campaigns.

So next time you hear that Boko Haram or the Taliban or Abu Sayyaf or ISIL or some other Al Qaeda type organization has perpetrated some atrocity in the name of Islam... be sure to thank the Saudis! Its not that there are no just causes for which Muslims may feel compelled to resort to violent resistance... rather it is that Wahhabi ideology, propelled by billions of Petrodollars, has perverted nearly every corner of the Muslim world with its fanaticism.

The US, along with some its major allies, plays along with this travesty for several reasons. Most prominently, billions of Petrodollars recycled through their economies provide them with an exorbitant economic advantage. Secondly, they enjoy the ability to use crazy Jihadis against their enemies du jour. Want to push Russia out of Afghanistan? Send in the Jihadis. Want to topple Assad? Send in the Jihadis. Need to overthrow Gaddafi? Send in the Jihadis. Need to keep Somalia from developing its 100 billion barrels of oil and bringing down the price of oil to levels that would make US fracking uneconomical? Send in the (Ash-Shabab) Jihadis. Need to prevent Russian oil reaching the Caspian via Chechnya and Daghestan? Well you get the idea.

First they spend years priming Muslim groups with the backward, nihilistic Wahhabi ideology. Then, when frustration with their inability to achieve success (as a result of their backward, nihilistic ideology) makes these groups ready to take radical action, in come the suppliers of cash, arms, training and logistic support to make their dreams of Jihad a reality. Its a tried and tested formula that will continue to work until people realize that...

Its the Saudis, stupid!

Of course there are mischievous machinations on the part of imperial and former colonial powers to subjugate the Muslim world and in particular the hydrocarbon-rich Middle East. But both Muslims and non-Muslims need to realize that none of what we are seeing today would have been possible without the corrupting influence of Saudi and Gulf Arab sponsored Wahhabism/Salafism/Takfirism. Muslims in particular need to stop ignoring the dagger aimed at the heart of their religion by these sponsors of fanaticism. They must stop accepting their money, their books and their scholarships. It's all a poison pill!

Nor should the disguise of modernity used by those like the Qataris, who so strongly backed Morsi in Egypt, be allowed to hide their nefarious behavior. They are simply Wahhabis in suits. Just a week before Morsi was deposed, he publicly called on Egyptian youths to join the Takfiri Jihad in Syria. Muslims need to reclaim their true heritage from these usurpers.

On the other hand, Westerners should demand that their governments stop playing with fire by employing Islamic “berserkers” to do their dirty work. The blowback from their governments’ complicity with the Saudis has been extensive and includes highlights like 9/11, the Chechen Boston Marathon bombing, the consulate killings in Benghazi and the recent beheading of James Foley. Now with an entire well-armed and richly funded state spanning the borders of Syria and Iraq at their disposal and recruits flocking to their cause from all over the world, we can expect even more poisonous fruit from this tree planted and nourished by the Saudis and their helpers.

The first step to solving a problem is identifying its nature. Hence the importance of understanding the essential role that Saudi Arabia and its Gulf Arab allies have played in creating the world’s number one security problem. Thus far the Saudis, Qataris and their other Gulf Arab allies have managed to obscure the centrality of their role in spawning Al-Qaeda, ISIS/IS and their like. This needs to end!

Some people speculate that the ISIS/IS Frankenstein that they birthed may yet consume the Saudi Kingdom itself, but that would be little comfort to a world forced to deal with the furies that they have unleashed.




Monday, January 30, 2017

The Problem with Islam, What We Need to Know and How We Should Deal with Islam..

Disclosure:  As a Ron Paul supporter, I oppose US foreign policy as well as the invasion, bombing, droning and occupation of Muslim nations.  I believe that Islam has issues, severe and serious issues, but these issues cannot be resolved by America or the US military. They can only be resolved by Muslims.

Obviously, the above photo that was taken in London creeps us out as we ponder "what the hell are we doing allowing these anti-liberty Muslim theocratic nutjobs into our western nations". We consume alcohol, they don't (forbidden by the Koran).  We eat gobs of pork but Muslims believe that pork consumption will land them in the fires of eternal hell.  We are exceptionally tolerant (to varying degrees) while Muslims appear to be the epitome of intolerance.  We revere women's rights while a Muslim woman is considered the property of her father and husband and whose only function is to be the receptacle of the seed to produce more Muslims. Our laws and culture are so radically different that only a lunatic would miss pondering: Why would they choose to live among us booze swilling, pig consuming infidel swine and who among us would voluntarily choose to live among them? .

Most folks in the West are freaking out over Muslim immigration.  This should NOT surprise anyone considering that the 19 Muslim terrorists who brought down the World Trade Center and murdered nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001 were supposedly just practicing their jihad religion. Terror attacks in London, Moscow, Madrid, Bali, Mumbai and the bombing attack on the USS Cole that killed 17 US sailors were all major terror attacks committed by Muslims.

In France, Muslim terror attacks are responsible for many deaths and much destruction. In January, 2016, 17 folks were murdered by Muslims in the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, that also included the murder of 2 Jews at a Kosher market.

In November, 2015, 130 were murdered by Muslims in the nightclub attacks; 352 were injured.

In July 2016, a Muslim mowed down and murdered 86 folks with a truck in Nice, France as the French, including French Muslims, were celebrating Bastille Day.   A complete list of Muslim terror attacks in France is here.

There have been numerous Muslim terror attacks on US soil besides 911, here, which include the 11/5/2009 Ft. Hood, TX murder of 14, the murder of 3 at the Boston Marathon on 4/15/2013, the 12/14/2015 murder of 14 in San Bernandino, CA, the 6/12/2016 murder of 49 at an Orlando, FL nightclub and the recent January 6, 2017 Muslim terror attack at the Ft. Lauderdale Airport that killed 5.

These are not isolated deeds of religious fanatics acting alone or run of the mill bat shit crazies. They are indeed the work of folks who subscribed to a murderous religious ideology that happens to be Islam.

I have problems with Islam and even blogged about it. Dear Muslims: Why Nobody Wants You In Their Country

Also, Europe is experiencing a rape crisis as European women are being raped by Muslim immigrants. Islamic society is the most sexually repressed society on the planet. Females are expected to be virgins when they marry or they can be honor killed.  Many Muslim men view infidel women as whores who deserve to be raped because that's what they are taught at the mosque. Single Muslim men at peak sexual hormonal activity who cannot engage sexually with Muslim women function as sex starved rabid animals and it's not hard considering that Islam has no respect for women.  In Saudi Arabia women are banned from even driving a car.  Western societies view females as sovereign human beings who are free to do whatever they want; Muslim societies view females as property to be used in accordance with the principles of patriarchy.

Do I believe that all Muslims are homicidal genocidal religious fanatic lunatics?  No, I don't but here's what I do believe.  I believe that Sunni Salafist Wahhabism is a virulent strain of Islam that is spreading throughout the Muslim world and rapidly creeping into Western nations through immigration and the migrant crisis.  Wahhabism was spawned on the Arabian Peninsula. The Huffington Post actually had a decent and accurate piece on Wahhabism - How Saudi Wahhabism Is the Fountainhead of Islamist Terrorism.

Most mosques in America, Canada and Europe are funded by the Saudis.  The Saudi royal family doesn't even live an Islamic lifestyle.  In fact, many if not most of them live like degenerate western rock stars - they drink alcohol, do drugs, party etc .  However, the Saudi clergy is powerful, powerful enough to evict the House of Saud from power.  Still, this in no way implies that the House of Saudi is anti-Wahhabism.  In fact, it highly values the ideology as a method to conquer the world under the banner of Wahhabist Islam.  The Saudis and Wahhabists don't need armies, all they need is a bunch of dumb Western leaders to agree to massive Sunni Salafist Wahhabist immigration.  Low birthrate native Europeans and Americans will ultimately be wiped out by high birthrate Muslims. Though it may seem inconceivable to most westerners that a filthy, degenerate, debauched and disgusting tribe of Arabian savages whose only weapon is the Koran could ultimately conquer the planet, it's a goal of every devout Sunni Salafist Wahhabist.

Here's the real question: Do Muslims really want to be sucked into the Sunni Salafist Wahhabist cult? Take Syria. a Muslim nation that is 90% Sunni but not necessarily Sunni Salafist Wahhabist.  The US and Saudi War on Syria is really a war on Assad; Assad is an Alewite which is an offshoot of Shia Islam.  Sunni Islam and Shiite Islam have been at war with each other for 1400 years.  Islam is about 85-90% Sunni.  The US and Saudi Arabia believed that overthrowing Assad would be a cakewalk because of Syria's 90% Sunni population.  However, Syria's Sunnis detest and dread Sunni Salafist Wahhabism and support Assad who is not even a Sunni.  The bottom line is that Syria's Sunnis have overwhelmingly rejected Sunni Salafist Wahhabism.  I personally view Sunni Islam as critical to world piece because it alone holds the power to stop the spread of Wahhabism.

Why Sunni Islam is Crucial to World Peace and Crushing the NWO

In many ways, we are dealing with a Sunni-Shiite rift in which the Sunni Salafist Wahhabists seek to wipe out Shiite Islam and other minority Muslim sects. It's an ongoing Muslim civil war that the West has no business even being involved in, let alone taking sides in.  However, there is more to the issue than mere religion and it's rather oily as Sunni Islam and Shiite Islam vie for control of Middle East oil, gas and pipelines.

Why Syria is Serious - It's Where Oil, Monetary Power and Religious Feuds Collide

However, with oil being readily available all over the planet and to the point that we are swimming in it, and with advancing technology that renders its extraction possible and financially viable, the Sunni Muslim world is no longer the kingpin of oil, its price or its supply.  Global oil markets have successfully displaced the Middle East as the world's premier oil supplier. Oil competition has massively driven the price lower and lower and to the point where OPEC is irrelevant and powerless. More importantly, Muslim nations are overflowing with growing populations, hoards of impoverished people and no economies to support them.  Therefore, offloading them to western nations who will willingly support them with their generous welfare programs is desirable.

Few folks understand that the Muslim world is poor, very poor, despite significant oil wealth.  A big part of the problem is that royal and ruling families have siphoned off (stolen) the wealth. However, wealth isn't just about having a critical natural resource, it's also about secure property rights, non-oil economic activity, the ease with which capital can flow, political stability and a tolerant people.  The Muslim world is seriously deficient in all these categories.  What company in their right mind would even consider investing capital in the basketcase known as the Middle East or a Muslim nation? We read about companies investing in the US, Europe, Canada and many Asian direct foreign investment hotspots but none are in Muslim nations.  Gee, think Islam itself, jihadism, Sharia Law, intolerance and abuse of non-Muslims have anything to do with the fact that Muslim nations and Muslim people are indeed a nasty barrier to peaceful co-existence and world trade?  I can think of no worse place for a business to park and utilize capital than in a Muslim nation.  The risks are formidable and to the point of being unacceptable.

There are reasons why the most prosperous nations on earth are prosperous and there are reasons why the poorest nations are poor.

Property Rights Equals Prosperity Equals Freedom
Folks rarely think about what makes human societies prosperous. Some folks are sufficiently delusional to believe that prosperity comes from the government, considered by many to be the cornucopia of plenty. The truth is that government is a prosperity destroying machine and the more power government has the greater its ability to enforce perpetual property. 
Prosperity is derived from only one source: secure property rights. Failed and impoverished nations suffer a severe deficit of secure property rights.

It's no coincidence that nations with the most secure property rights also happen to be the most prosperous. If we look at the poorest countries it's clear that they are poor precisely because they lack secure property rights. The entire Middle East and the Muslim world is deficient in secure property rights. Hence, it's got some of the poorest nations on the planet. 
However, the Muslim world just isn't deficient in secure property rights, it's massively deficient in political freedom, gender tolerance, GLBT tolerance and social issue tolerance. The flow of capital, the lifeblood of economic prosperity, absolutely does flow to nations with political stability, liberty, tolerance and secure property right because these are all significant components in the equation to achieve prosperity.
Moving on to Muslim immigration to Western nations, it's largely been a big fail but not necessarily because Muslims refuse to assimilate as immigrants but because socialism, statism and western welfare states are bringing in hoards of folks in numbers way to big for meaningful assimilation and these folks are put on welfare.  The immigrants have no jobs, no work, no prospects, no education and most represent the bottom of the barrel.  They are angry, frustrated and have no place to go.  To make matters even worse, the migrants are frequently housed in facilities that resemble concentrations camps. Europe and America are already experience serious unemployment problems and economic fragility. It's totally insane to import welfare dependent foreigners.

The fatal flaw of mass immigration is that it's a monstrous welfare program.  Immigrants are literally stuffed into ghetto styled immigrant communities and they have nothing to do but collect their welfare and visit the mosques, most probably a Saudi funded Sunni Salafist Wahhabist mosque that teaches the art of jihad, hatred, intolerance and contempt for western values. What the west is actually doing is building micro nation communities within a nation, and that's a situation that leads to tribalism and division.  It will ultimately be fatal to the host nations who will lose their laws, liberty and values as it defers to migrants when it should be the other way around - migrants deferring to the host nation, its people and culture. Unfortunately, there are many barriers to successful assimilation starting with a hostile theology, a problematic culture, language barriers and a total lack of economic opportunities in the host nation.

Without the welfare incentive, Muslims would recognize that relocating to a Western nation is a major step - a massive change in culture, law, ideology - that absolutely requires a ferocious commitment to wanting to change, assimilate and adopt the culture, lifestyle and laws of the host nation.  Under western models of mass Muslim immigration, there are ZERO incentives to assimilate, to work or to interact with the native populations. This obviously creates a situation based resentment and hatred from folks who are already seriously confused, hostile and religiously hampered by a 7th century theology. They are miserable because their native countries have economies that suck and migrating to a western nation hasn't improved their lives.

Even worse, western media is outright lying about the immigrants and refugees. While the media shows photos of females, children and babies, the vast majority of Muslim immigrants into Europe are young males of jihad fighing age and many of them are ISIS, Al Qaeda and an assortment of other Sunni Salafist Wahhabist.

As America and most of the world are hysterical over President Trump's so called 'Muslim Ban' which isn't even a Muslim ban, but only a step toward vetting immigrants to reasonably guarantee that they are not dangerous jihadist whackjobs, we need to focus on real issues that affect the potential for the peaceful co-existence between Islam and the Judeo-Christian world. .

For starters, western prison systems are loaded with Sunni Jihadist Wahhabist preachers and a lot of folks are radicalized in western prisons; yes, western taxpayers even pay the salaries Imans who have substantially churned our prison systems into jihad factories.  Furthermore, we can't even begin to rationally address the Muslim issue without FIRST acknowledging that most mosques in America and Europe are funded by the Saudis, Qatar and other Sunni nations.

This is a VERY significant issue because of western religious liberty laws.  However, since when should a deviant FAKE religion of violence be allowed to masquerade as a legitimate religion and literally hide behind western religious liberty laws?  I submit that Islam in its present Sunni Salafist Wahhabist form is NOT a religion but an extremely well funded cult of barbarism, murder, intolerance, brutality, debauchery and unspeakable evil.  These are folks who strap bombs to children and detonate them in the name of Allah.  These are folks who love chopping off heads.

Meanwhile, the richly funded Sunni Salafist Wahhabist lobby has powerful organizations like CAIR (Council of American Islamic Relations) who have easy access to the brain dead US media. LOL, idiot Fox News and other media outlets always have CAIR on the air and allow them to outright lie. It's truly disgusting.  A CAIR founder, Omar Ahmed, is on record saying “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran is the highest authority in America, and Islam is the only accepted religion on earth.”, here, and for more on CAIR go here, There are other well funded Sunni Muslim groups that are propaganda machines for Sunni Salafist Wahhabism.

So what should we do about Muslim immigration?  The only logical thing to do is ban it until those immigrants can be properly vetted and that's not likely to happen anytime soon.  Moreover, OUTLAW all welfare for immigrants.  Besides, western welfare systems are magnet for freeloaders, regardless of religious belief.  Finally, the issue of Muslim immigration cannot be solved until the issue of mosque funding is resolved.  American religions are uniquely plentiful and that's because a religious group typically starts out in someones home, as the community of believers grow it moves up to a rented facility and they start a building fund to eventually construct a house of worship.  When it comes to Islam in America, the mosques are state funded by foreign government and/or rich Muslims. Although America has a strong tradition of separation of church and state and bans state supported religions, it's reasonable to assume that the ONLY state supported religion in America is Islam and it's funded by foreign nations and royal families who staff them with jihad imams. If this isn't a WTF moment, I don't know what is.

How long should we ban Muslim immigration?  In Saudi Arabia, all religions are banned except Islam and religious liberty in other Muslim nations, including the building of non-Muslim houses of worship, is severely restricted.  Therefore I propose banning all Muslim immigration and the building of mosques until the day dawns when non-Muslim houses of worship are allowed in Saudi Arabia and other Muslims nations.  Practitioners of every faith should be free to follow any sane and reasonable religion without persecution and fear of being murdered or beheaded.  That is NOT a situation that exists in Muslim nations.  How wonderful would it be if Saudi Arabia and other Muslim nations were flowing with Christian churches, Jewish synagogues, Hindu temples and other houses of worship? Now that would constitute a giant leap for mankind, a hope for peaceful co-existence and a mutual respect for all human beings regardless of how they choose to worship.

As the situation presently stands, it's a one way lose-lose horror for tolerant western nations so deeply ingrained with irrational and unjustifiable concepts of religious liberty that we have become suicidal based on fear and political correctness.  We shouldn't be bombarded with Muslims until Islam agrees to be bombarded with us, to love us and to tolerate us as human equals.  What's not to love?

Finally, I do believe that the Muslim world is headed for a civil war and it won't be the typical Sunni vs. Shiite war, it will be Sunni Muslims vs. Sunni Salafist Wahhabism.  That's a war that is playing out in Syria, Iraq and Libya, courtesy of Saudi Arabia and America's foreign policy neocons who love being in bed with the Wahhabists.

Meanwhile, we have an absolute duty and right to defend ourselves, our families and our country from a Muslim invasion that isn't likely to end well.  Islam has the problem, not us, and Muslims must deal with it because it's their responsibility to make themselves and their religion pleasing and acceptable to the rest of the world, its peoples and religions..





Friday, December 30, 2016

Neocon Panic and Agony



Unz.com is one of my favorite blogs and The Saker writes some great foreign policy articles for the website.  According to Russian Insider who also publishes articles of The Saker, ""The Saker" is a pseudonym for a top level American military analyst who lives in Florida...".  The Saker has a blog, here.

Anyway, I'm posting an article titled Neocon Panic and Agony by The Saker in its entirely because it's worth reading and dives deeply into the geopolitics of a region that can't seem to ever escape war and misery - the Middle East .  Saker legitimately raises the issue that Trump cannot forge a new foreign policy in the Middle East so long as he commits to appeasing Israel.

Neocon Panic and Agony

There are clear signs that the Neocons running the AngloZionist Empire and its “deep state” are in a state of near panic and their actions indicate they are truly terrified.

The home front

One the home front, the Neocons have resorted to every possible dirty trick on the book to try to prevent Donald Trump from ever getting into the White House: they have

*organized riots and demonstrations (some paid by Soros money)

*encouraged the supporters of Hillary to reject the outcome of the elections (“not my President”)

*tried to threaten the Electors and make them either cast a vote for Hillary or not vote at all

*tried to convince Congress to refuse the decision of the Electoral College and

*they are now trying to get the elections annulled on the suspicion that the (apparently almighty) Russian hackers have compromised the election outcome (apparently even in states were paper ballots were used) and stolen it in favor of Trump.

That is truly an amazing development, especially considering how Hillary attacked Trump for not promising to recognize the outcome of the elections. She specifically said that Trump’s lack of guarantees to recognize the outcome would threaten the very basis of the stability of the US political system and now she, and her supporters, are doing everything in their power to do just that, to throw the entire electoral process into a major crisis with no clear path towards resolution. Some say that the Democrats are risking a civil war. Considering that several key Republican Congressmen have said they do support the notion of an investigation into the “Russian hackers” fairy tale, I submit that the Republicans are doing exactly the same thing, that this is not a Democrat vs Republican issue, but a “deep state vs The People of the USA” issue.

Most experts agree that none of these tactics are going to work. So this begs the question of whether the Neocons are stupid, whether they think that they can succeed or what their true objective is.

My guess is that first and foremost what is taking place now is what always happens when the Neocons run into major trouble: they double down, again. And again. And again. That is one of the key characteristics of their psychological make-up: they cannot accept defeat or, even less so, that they were wrong, so each time reality catches up to their ideological delusions, they automatically double-down. Still, they might rationalize this behavior by a combination of hope that maybe one of these tricks will work, with the strong urge to do as much damage to President-Elect Trump before he actually assumes his office. I would never underestimate the vicious vindictiveness of these people. 

What is rather encouraging is Trump’s reaction to all this: after apparently long deliberations he decided to nominate Rex Tillerson as his Secretary of Defense. From a Neocon point of view, if General Michael Flynn was bad, then Tillerson was truly an apocalyptic abomination: the man actually had received the order of “Friend of Russia” from the hands of Vladimir Putin himself!

Did Trump not realize how provocative this nomination was and how it would be received by the Neocons? Of course he did! That was, on his part, a totally deliberate decision. If so, then this is a very, very good sign.

I might be mistaken, but I get the feeling that Trump is willing to accept the Neocon challenge and that he will fight back. For example, his reaction to the CIA accusations about Russian hackers was very telling: he reminded everybody that “these are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction”. I think that it is now a safe bet to say that as soon as Trump take control heads will roll at the CIA.
[Sidebar: is it not amazing that the CIA is offering its opinion about some supposed Russian hacking during the elections in the USA? Since when does the CIA have any expertise on what is going on inside the USA? I thought the CIA was only a foreign intelligence agency. And since when does the CIA get involved in internal US politics? Yes, of course, savvy observers of the USA have always known that the CIA was a key player in US politics, but now the Agency apparently does not even mind confirming this openly. I don't think that Trump will have the guts and means to do so but, frankly, he would be much better off completely dissolving the CIA. Of course, that could get Trump killed – messing with the Fed and the CIA are two unforgivable crimes in the USA – but then again Trump is already very much at risk anyway, so he might as well strike first].


On the external front 

On the external front, the big development is the liberation of Aleppo by Syrian forces. In that case again, the Neocons tried to double-down: they made all sorts of totally unsubstantiated claims about executions and atrocities while the BBC, always willing to pick up the correct line, published an article about how much the situation in Aleppo is similar to what took place in Srebrenica. Of course, there is one way in which the events in Aleppo and Srebrenica are similar: in both cases the US-backed Takfiris lost and were defeated by government forces and in both cases the West unleashed a vicious propaganda war to try to turn the military defeat of its proxies into a political victory for itself. In any case, the last-ditch propaganda effort failed and preventing the inevitable and Aleppo was completely liberated.

The Empire did score one success: using the fact that most of the foreign forces allied to the Syrians (Hezbollah, Iranian Pasdaran, Russian Spetsnaz, etc.) were concentrated around Aleppo, the US-backed Takfiris succeeded in breaking the will of the Syrians, many of whom apparently fled in panic, and first surrounded and then eventually reoccupied Palmyra. This will be short lived success as I completely agree with my friend Alexander Mercouris who says that Putin will soon liberate Palmyra once again, but until this happens the reoccupation of Palmyra is rather embarrassing for the Syrians, Iranians and Russians.

It seems exceedingly unlikely to me that the Daesh movement towards Palmyra was undetected by the various Syrian, Iranian and Russian intelligence agencies (at least once source reports that Russian satellites did detect it) and I therefore conclude that a deliberate decision was made to temporarily sacrifice Palmyra in order to finally liberate Aleppo. Was that the correct call?

Definitely yes. Contrary to the western propaganda, Aleppo, not Raqqa, has always been the real “capital” of the US backed terrorists. Raqqa is a relatively small town: 220,000+ inhabitants versus 2,000,000+ for Aleppo, making Aleppo about ten times larger than Raqqa. As for tiny Palmyra, its population is 30,000+. So the choice between scrambling to plug the holes in the Syrian defenses around Palmyra and liberating Aleppo was a no-brainer. Now that Aleppo has been liberated, the city has to be secured and major engineering efforts need to be made in order to prepare it for an always possible Takfiri counter-attack. But it is one thing to re-take a small desert town and quite another one to re-take a major urban center. I personally very much doubt that Daesh & Co. will ever be in control of Aleppo again. Some Neocons appear to be so enraged by this defeat that they are now accusing Trump of “backing Iran” (I wish he did!).

The tiny Palmyra was given a double-function by the Neocon propaganda effort: to eclipse the “Russian” (it was not solely “Russian” at all, but never mind that) victory in Aleppo and to obfuscate the “US” (it was not solely “US” at all, but never mind that) defeat in Mosul. A hard task for the tiny desert city for sure and it is no wonder that this desperate attempt also failed: the US lead coalition in Mosul still looks just about as weak as the Russian lead coalition looks strong in Aleppo.

Any comparison between these two battles is simply embarrassing for the USA: not only did the US-backed forces fail to liberate Mosul from Daesh & Co. but they have not even full encircled the city or even managed to penetrate beyond its furthest suburbs. There is very little information coming out of Mosul, but after three months of combat the entire operation to liberate Mosul seems to be an abject failure, at least for the time being. I sincerely hope that once Trump takes office he will finally agree to work not only with Russia, but also with Iran, to finally get Daesh out of Mosul. But if Trump delivers on his promise to AIPAC and the rest of the Israel Lobby gang to continue to antagonize and threaten Iran, the US can basically forget any hopes of defeating Daesh in Iraq.

Our of despair and spite, the US propaganda vilified Russia for the killing of civilians in Aleppo while strenuously avoiding any mention of civilian victims in Mosul. But then, the same propaganda machine which made fun of the color of the smoke coming out of the engines of the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov (suggesting that she was about to break down) had to eat humble pie when it was the US navy’s most expensive and newest destroyer, the USS Zumwalt, which broke down in the Panama canal and had to be immobilzed, while the Kuznetsov continued to do a very good job supporting Russian operations in Syria.

Over and over again, the AngloZionist propaganda machine has failed to obfuscate the embarrassing facts on the ground and it now clearly appears that the entire US policy for the Middle-East is in total disarray and that the Neocons are as clueless as they are desperate.

The countdown to January 20th

It is pretty obvious that the Neocon reign is coming to an end in a climax of incompetence, hysterical finger-pointing, futile attempts at preventing the inevitable and a desperate scramble to conceal the magnitude of the abject failure which Neocon-inspired policies have resulted in. Obama will go down in history as the worst and most incompetent President in US history. As for Hillary, she will be remembered as both the worst US Secretary of State the US and the most inept Presidential candidate ever.

In light of the fact that the Neocons always failed at everything they attempted, I am inclined to believe that they will probably also fail at preventing Donald Trump from being sworn in. But until January 20th, 2017 I will be holding my breath in fear of what else these truly demented people could come up with.

As for Trump, I still can’t figure him out. On one hand he nominates Rex Tillerson in what appears to be a deliberate message of defiance against the Neocons, while on the other hand he continues to try to appease the Israel Lobby gang by choosing a rabid Zionist of the worst kind, David M. Friedman, as the next US ambassador to Israel. Even worse then that, Donald Trump still does not appear to be willing to recognize the undeniable fact that the US will never defeat Daesh as long as the anti-Iranian stance of the Neocons is not replaced by a real willingness to engage Iran and accept it as a partner and ally.

Right now the Trump rhetoric simply makes no sense: he wants to befriend Russia while antagonizing China and he wants to defeat Daesh while threatening Iran again. This is lunacy. Still, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but somebody sure needs to educate him on the geopolitical realities out there before he also end up making a total disaster of US foreign policy.

And yet, I still have a small hope.

My hope is that the latest antics of the Neocons will sufficiently aggravate and even enrage Trump to a point where he will give up on his futile attempts at appeasing them. Only by engaging in a systematic policy of “de-neoconization” of the US political establishment will Trump have any hopes of “making America great again”. If Trump’s plan is to appease the Neocons long enough from him to be sworn in and have his men approved by Congress – fine. Then he still has a chance of saving the USA from a catastrophic collapse, but only as long as he remains determined to ruthlessly crack down on the Neocons once in power. If his hope is to distract the Neocons by appeasing them on secondary or minor issues, then his efforts are doomed and he will go down the very same road as Obama who, at least superficially, initially appeared to be a non-Neocon candidate and who ended up being a total Neocon puppet (in 2008 the Neocons had placed their bets on McCain and they only infiltrated the Obama Administration once McCain was defeated).

One way or another, we are headed for a crisis, the only open question whether the USA will come out of this crisis liberated or doomed

Saturday, December 10, 2016

Last Gasp of the Dems - Use the Courts to Nullify 2016 We the People Election Results and Make Clinton President



For most Americans, the general election of Nov. 8, 2016 is over and ended in the wee hours of Nov. 9th when AP declared Trump the president elect after reporting that Trump won PA, WI and MI.

For the Dems this election is far from over and Clinton and the Clinton Campaign are working behind the scenes to reverse the results of an election legally and constitutionally won by Trump. They've conned and/or bribed Jill Stein and the Green Party to file for recounts in PA, MI and WI, with a cumulative electoral college vote of 46.  Trump has 306 electoral votes to Clinton's 232.  If the Dems can reverse Trump's victories in those states, 46 electoral votes are subtracted from Trump's column and added to the Clinton column,  Clinton wins 278-260.  The recounts aren't going too well. The MI recount was stopped by a federal and Michigan court. In PA, a federal judge will rule on Monday if a recount will take place and in WI the recount is nearing completion  and nothing has changed. Trump still leads by over 22,000 votes.

Time is running out, today is 12/10 and the counts have to be completed by December 13th.

Why the Electoral College is December 13th, - not 19th.

The Dems, Clinton and the Clinton campaign refuse to accept defeat, the will of the American voters and have been whinning about everything from 'Putin did it' to fake news to demanding that the electoral college be abolished to accusing American voters of being racists, white supremacists, misogynists, deplorables, zenophobic and worse.

The 'Putin did it' angle has been amusing to Trump supporters and although there isn't a shred of evidence that Putin or Russia interferred in any way in the election, Obama ordered an investigation on December 9th.

Obama Orders Investigation Into Election-Related Hacking

Is there an end game here?  You better believe it. With the recount game rapidly fading, the Dems believe that if they can put together a sham fake news report alleging that they have proof that Putin did interfere in the election then the courts will intervene, nullify Trump's victory and declare Clinton president.

Does this sound far fetched and delusional?  Well, not according to the Huffington Post.  While the latest scheme concocted by the Democrats and Clintonistas to steal the presidential election from Trump may appear insanely ludricous and proof of Democrat derangement syndrome, they believe there is judicial precedent to accomplish such an astounding feat. Moreover, the CIA's absolutely false allegation that Russia and Putin intervened in the election for the express purpose of delivering victory to Trump just reeks of a classic CIA disinformation operation. LOL, you know when the CIA and Washington Post are offered up as credible sources of information that the whole damn scheme is one big fat lie. Nevertheless, the Dems believe they are on to something that is big, VERY BIG.

Russian Interference Could Give Courts Legal Authority To Install Clinton

A 1995 federal court ruling out of Pennsylvania may offer some clues to Clinton supporters as to possible legal authority for removing an elected official from office and replacing them with their erstwhile opponent.

In light of late-breaking reports Friday evening that Russians interfered with the 2016 presidential election to assist Donald Trump’s victory, Clinton supporters are furiously in pursuit of remedies.

At 10:45 p.m. Friday evening, the Washington Post broke an explosive story alleging that Russians had interfered with the 2016 presidential election in order to assist Donald Trump in a victory over democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The story reveals that a CIA assessment detailing this conclusion had been presented to President Obama and top congressional leaders last week.

The development has Clinton supporters and other concerned Americans confused and hot in pursuit of potential remedies. No clear constitutional remedy exists to halt the certification of the outcome. Article II of the U.S. Constitution vests Congress with the power to determine the date by which the Electoral College will cast their votes, presently set for December 19. In recent weeks, a massive online movement asking members of the Electoral College to become “faithless” or “conscientious” electors and to vote for Clinton instead of Trump has garnered national attention.

The electors would be well within their constitutional authority to do so, say groups like Hamilton’s Electors, which claims that the purpose of the Electoral College is to prevent demagogues like Mr. Trump from assuming the nation’s highest office. A petition urging the Electoral College to make Hillary Clinton president has gained nearly 5 million signatures.

Proponents of this strategy are concerned, with good reason, about the likelihood it will succeed. With Donald Trump having won 306 Electoral College votes, 37 Republican electors would need to switch their votes to Clinton, a tall order, and in the event that no one candidate has 270 electoral votes, the decision would go to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.   
Some social media users have begun circulating the phone numbers of various state attorneys general, urging fellow citizens to contact them and request that the Electoral College voters be enjoined from casting their vote until such time that all formal investigations in Russian hacking conclude. Once the electors cast their votes on December 19, they fear, any constitutional means for preventing Trump’s road to the White House will be exhausted.

However, at least one court decision suggests there is some federal authority to invalidate the election outcome after the fact.

In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand the ruling of a federal district judge in Pennsylvania that invalidated a state senate election and ordered the vacancy be filled by the losing opponent.

The Pennsylvania state senate held a special election in November 1993 to fill a seat that had been left vacant by the death of the previous democratic senator, and pitted Republican Bruce Marks against Democrat William G. Stinson for the spot. Stinson was named the winner, but massive fraud was later uncovered that resulted in litigation.

Two of the elected officials who testified in the Pennsylvania case said under oath that they were aware of the fraud, had intentionally failed to enforce laws, and hurried to certify Stinson the winner in order to bury the story. The narrative recalls the Washington Post’s revelation that Republican Mitch McConnell was aware of the CIA’s conclusion that Russians had intervened and opted to do nothing.

In February 1994, after Stinson had already taken office, a federal judge ordered he “be removed from his State Senate office and that [his opponent, Bruce Marks] be certified the winner within 72 hours.”

Stinson appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, but ultimately, this was the first known case in which a federal judge reversed an election outcome. In January 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the ruling to stand.

The high court’s decision to not interfere with the lower court’s ruling indicates at least some federal legal precedent that high courts may rule the outcome of an election invalid due to fraud or interference. Which is to say, that if after Donald Trump assumes office it is shown that Russian hacking (or any fraud, for that matter) robbed Hillary Clinton of the presidency, there is some legal authority on point that implies courts could seat Clinton instead.

Obviously both the stakes and the office in question are much higher than in the 1994 case. There has been no case of first impression with regards to the presidency being overturned to the wrongful winner’s opponent.

There is also, of course, no constitutional Electoral College process or system in Pennsylvania, so the situations are not exactly analagous. But the reasoning behind the federal court’s decision may hold muster.

It is not clear how the 1994 federal case would impact a presidential election. Furthermore, that case involved the judge throwing out all absentee ballots and requiring the vote be decided only by those ballots cast at the machine, which would be problematic in the case at present.





Thursday, December 8, 2016

Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Campaign and the NYT - A Case Study in Profound Arrogance.



The 2016 presidential election will go down in history as an event unparalled in US election history; the shock and awe election is still reverberating everywhere. The media, the pollsters and pundits were ALL wrong.  With the media, especially the NYT and Washington Post, pimping heavily for Clinton 24-7 while dissing Donald Trump 24-7 with one vile hate piece after another, Trump's astounding victory is even all the more amazing.

Anyway, I've tried to read everything leading up to Nov. 8, 2016 as well as the post mortems after the election.  Throughout this process, there is one piece in particular that really stands out for sheer arrogance, cocky confidence and incredibly STUPID campaign strategy.  It's a New York Times piece dated Oct. 17, 2016 in which the NYT, in cahoots with the Clinton Campaign no doubt, squeals uncontrollably about a resounding anticipated victory with big margins as well as a burning desire to heap scorn and humiliation upon Trump and his supporters by winning a few red states just for the fun of it.  The NYT piece is posted in its entirety.  I've highlighted the really salient passages in yellow.  My comments are in red.


Showing Confidence, Hillary Clinton Pushes Into Republican Strongholds


Hillary Clinton’s campaign is planning its most ambitious push yet into traditionally right-leaning states, a new offensive aimed at extending her growing advantage over Donald J. Trump while bolstering down-ballot candidates in what party leaders increasingly suggest could be a sweeping victory for Democrats at every level.

The Clinton camp always thought that they had bagged the election and that there was no chance that Trump could ever win.  To the Clintonista camp, Nov. 8 really wasn't an election but the crowning of a conquering queen who had long ago vanquished all her opponents and challengers. In fact, there is considerable documented evidence that that Clinton was THRILLED when Trump won the nomination because he was perceived as the easiest Republican to defeat in a general election.

Signaling extraordinary confidence in Mrs. Clinton’s electoral position and a new determination to deliver a punishing message to Mr. Trump and Republicans about his racially tinged campaign, her aides said Monday that she would aggressively compete in Arizona, a state with a growing Hispanic population that has been ground zero for the country’s heated debate over immigration.

Mrs. Clinton is “dramatically expanding” her efforts in Arizona, her campaign manager, Robby Mook, told reporters on Monday. She is pouring more than $2 million into advertising and dispatching perhaps her most potent surrogate, Michelle Obama, for a rally in Phoenix on Thursday. 

In Indiana and Missouri, Mr. Mook said, the campaign will spend a total of $1 million to drive voter turnout, despite what he acknowledged was an “uphill battle” for Mrs. Clinton in two states that could determine control of the Senate. Mrs. Clinton is also directing more money to a series of presidential battleground states with competitive House races.

The maneuvering speaks to the unexpected tension facing Mrs. Clinton as she hurtles toward what aides increasingly believe will be a decisive victory — a pleasant problem, for certain, but one that has nonetheless scrambled the campaign’s strategy weeks before Election Day: Should Mrs. Clinton maximize her own margin, aiming to flip as many red states as possible to run up an electoral landslide, or prioritize the party’s congressional fortunes, redirecting funds and energy down the ballot?  

Amusingly, the Clinton Campaign was so confident that it actually abandoned some blue states as well as swing states in the hope that they could pile on massive landslide sized electoral victories to totally eviscertate Trump and lay him to waste. The game wasn't to win because they truly believed that they had already won, but to heap massive humiliation upon Trump, his supporters and the Republicans by ratcheting up an already anticipated whopper of a margin of victory.  For Clinton and her campaign, it was a game of humiliation and degredation and the goal was to seize several big red states to really pile it on.

Thanks to an infusion of contributions in recent weeks, and what aides describe as a war chest they had maintained in case the opportunity arose, Mrs. Clinton is in effect trying to do both. 

The double-barreled assault illustrates her priorities three weeks before Election Day. She hopes to hand Mr. Trump a loss so humiliating that it jars him and Republicans, removing any doubt about the wisdom of running on a grievance-oriented platform. But she also is demonstrating to the congressional Democrats with whom she may soon be working that she is also is dedicated to expanding their ranks.

LOL, when you run a presidential campaign that lacks issues and focuses exclusively on vengeance and humiliation, you are setting yourself up for even bigger humiliations should your strategy backfire, blowup and you lose.  

“I think it’s an act of good will, because her numbers look good and some of our races are tighter,” said Representative Dina Titus of Nevada, one of the states receiving cash. “But it’s also an important move, because she’s going to need friends to get her appointments approved, to have our help breaking through the obstruction on the other side to get legislation through.”

After nearly eight years in which Democrats on Capitol Hill grumbled about a lack of such support from President Obama, Mrs. Clinton has taken care to stay in frequent contact with Senator Chuck Schumer, her former New York colleague, about down-ballot races.

Mr. Schumer, poised to be the incoming Senate Democratic leader, and the current leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, met with Mrs. Clinton’s top campaign aides in Washington last month and pressed them to offer financial support for the Senate races, according to a Democratic official briefed on the meeting. And Mr. Schumer has not been shy since about his hope that if Mrs. Clinton clearly appeared on her way to winning the race, she would redirect some money to congressional races.

“This is one of many things that the Clinton campaign is doing to help us win a majority in the Senate,” Mr. Schumer said through a spokesman.

While party strategists are glad to have the money that Mrs. Clinton is directing from the Democratic National Committee to voter-turnout efforts in Indiana and Missouri, they have little appetite for Mrs. Clinton to visit those states, where she is likely to lose, because that would make it easier for Republicans to tie Democratic Senate candidates to her.

Mrs. Clinton is also pouring money into two congressional districts, in Nebraska and Maine, that both apportion their own presidential electoral vote and have competitive House races. And she is sending an additional $6 million to seven presidential battleground states with hotly contested Senate and House campaigns. 

Clinton started celebrating her victory long before Election Day and used her substantial warchest of special interest dough to fund Democrat House and Senate campaigns.

Democrats are also attempting to unseat Senator John McCain of Arizona from the seat he was first elected to in 1986, but Mrs. Clinton’s late decision to swoop into that state is not related to his race, which few Democratic leaders believe they can win. Her incursion there is about her own campaign — and the Democrats’ desire to focus attention on the damage Mr. Trump has done to Republicans with Hispanics.

In particular, Democrats hope to make an example of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, an ardent Trump supporter, by defeating the Phoenix lawman, whose incendiary comments about Hispanics and aggressive tactics with immigrants have garnered attention far beyond his jurisdiction in Maricopa County.

“If Democrats were going to win in Arizona in 2016, you’d need a Republican who turns off Republican women, who really energizes Latinos, and you’d need other races on the ground that can really drive engagement — and we have all that,” said Andrei Cherny, a former state Democratic chairman.

Alexis Tameron, the current state Democratic chairwoman, said Republican stumbles had allowed local Democrats to “jump our own timeline” for when officials expected to make the state competitive on the presidential level.

“I give credit where credit is due,” Ms. Tameron said. “And I have been thanking a lot of people, including Donald Trump.”

Mr. Trump’s campaign did not respond to messages seeking comment on Mrs. Clinton’s plans.

Mrs. Clinton’s team had weighed for weeks how seriously to look beyond core battlegrounds like Pennsylvania, Florida and North Carolina, another state that Republicans carried in 2012.

Eager to torment Mr. Trump, and the Republicans straining to navigate his erratic bid, her team has also planned at least faint, attention-grabbing plays in other states with little history of Democratic success. 

Hilariously, PA, FL and NC (total of 64 electoral votes) were all key battleground states that Trump actually won because the Clinton Campaign had made the decision to look beyond them to other states just to torment Trump. 

In Texas, the campaign has prepared an ad highlighting Mrs. Clinton’s endorsement from The Dallas Morning News. And Mrs. Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine, has begun sitting for local media interviews in Utah, where Mr. Trump has struggled to break away from Mrs. Clinton and an independent candidate, Evan McMullin, in recent polls. (On a conference call with reporters on Monday, Mr. Mook mentioned Mr. McMullin by name.)

The Clinton Campaign had to be totally delusional to even think that they stood a chance in TX but they went for it.  The farce candidate Evan McMullin got 21.5% in Utah to Trump's 45.5. Utah was another state the Dems thought they could easily bag.  There was no struggle for Trump in Utah and Clinton only got 27.5%.

The most brazen push, though, is in Arizona, where the campaign has also scheduled appearances on Mrs. Clinton’s behalf from her daughter, Chelsea, and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Mr. Mook added that Mrs. Clinton may appear there herself in short order. “We certainly hope to get her there,” he said.

Mrs. Clinton’s aides were intrigued by both Arizona and Georgia, and they surveyed voters in each state. Arizona appeared more promising, officials said, because of its combination of Mormons, Hispanics and Native Americans and because the officials found white voters in Georgia to be more resistant to Mrs. Clinton.

Who knows what it is about AZ and GA that so fascinated the Dems but they believed they could bag them. 


Mrs. Clinton has more conspicuously emphasized congressional and state races during campaign appearances, taking particular care to mention fellow Democrats on the ballot.

Some Republicans seem inclined to capitalize on the attention. A fund-raising email on Monday from Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican in a competitive re-election race in Florida, went out under the subject line “Hillary wants me gone.”

 “Hillary Clinton’s campaign has SO much money on its hands,” the message read, “that they are now focusing on down-ballot races instead of her own campaign.”

Yes, the Clinton Campaign was swimming in a ton of money - they outraised Trump 2:1.  However the real delusion is that they didn't believe that they needed to spend campaign money in blue states like MI, WI and PA or in critical swing states.  They dumped a ton of money into red states and congressional races.  Clinton never visited WI after she won the primary. 

When this campaign is fully analyzed, the Clinton Campaign will go down in history as perhaps the most incompetent, blundering, arrogant, snooty and pompous collection of  insufferable pricks in presidential campaign history.   

In the final analysis, Hillary Clinton built a campaign team with folks who mirrored her own evil, sordid and dark soul. Forget about fake news and blaming Putin, the Clinton's campaign was done in by its own arrogance and this is what the DEPLORABLE American voters saw and came to know. The equally pompous and incompetent US media became a drug dealer for Clinton and her staff because they inhaled, injected and snorted every media utterance to keep them and their delusions flying high.  Every high is always followed by a crash.

In the end it was Clinton who crashed and was tormented and humiliated.  That's what I call a beautiful ending!




Saturday, December 3, 2016

The Libertarian Vote Failed to Elect Clinton, as Intended, but Cost Trump 6 States and 38 Electoral Votes



Let's be clear; those who voted for Gary Johnson and Bill Weld knew they stood no chance of winning and their goal was to siphon off Trump votes to facilitate a Clinton victory. Maybe it's even understandable on some level.  After all, the Johnson-Weld duo endorsed forced vaccinations, the TPP, carbon taxes and even gun control.  The Libertartian Party has a lot more in common with the statist Dems and neocons than it does it does with Trump and his mission to foster a more peaceful and less interventionist foreign policy,  Furthermore, Trump campaigned heavily on restoring US manufacturing because the offshoring and outsourcing of domestic manufacturing has devastated America's poor and middle classes.

Anyway, the LP hurt Trump somewhat but not nearly enough to cost him the election despite coming in with 3.2% of the vote (4,042, 291 votes, source here).   Trump easily won the states that Romney won in 2012 but what delivered him victory was the swing states - they are typically the general election kingmakers.  Also, blue states that typically aren't in play came into play for Trump's decisive victory.

Trump managed to peel off some fickle purplish states as well as some reliable blue states, all states that Obama won in 2012 with the exception of NC,  The Democrat loss of FL (29 EV), OH (18 EV), IA (6 EV),  PA (20 EV), MI (16 EV) and WI (10 EV) blasted a staggering 99 electoral votes into the Trump column.  The loss of reliable blue PA, WI and MI was especially painful for the Dems because the Dems could afford to lose big swing states like FL and OH but they couldn't afford to lose PA, MI and WI.

Hence, the Clinton Campaign and Jill Stein are demanding recounts in  PA, MI and WI because if successful it will swing victory to Clinton.

Trump has 306 EV to Clinton's 232. A flip of 46 EV in PA, MI and WI subtracts 46 electoral votes from Trump's column and puts them in Clinton's column.  Clinton wins.278-260.

Moving along, let's focus on the effect of the Libertarian vote. In what states did the Libertarian vote cost Trump victory:

NM - 5 EV
Trump:    40.0
Clinton    40.3
Johnson     9.3

CO - 9 EV
Trump     43.3
Clinton    48.2
Johnson     5.2

ME - 4 EV
Trump     45.1
Clinton    47.8
Johnson     5.1

NH - 4 EV
Trump    46.5
Clinton   46.8
Johnson    4.1

MN - 10 EV
Trump    44.9
Clinton   46.4
Johnson    3.8

NV - 6 EV
Trump    45.5
Clinton   47.9
Johnson    3.3

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president

The Libertarian vote delivered 6 states and 38 electoral votes to Clinton.  Without the Libertarians, Clinton would have had a paltry 194 EV's to Trump's 344.

Also, the Libertarian vote is responsible for the razor thin Trump victory margins in WI, MI, PA, FL and also cost Trump breaking 50% in these states.

WI - 10 EV
Trump   47.5
Clinton  47.3
Johnson  3.6

MI - 16 EV
Trump   47.5
Clinton  47.3
Johnson   3.6

PA - 20 EV
Trump    48.4
Clinton   47.3
Johnson    2.4

FL - 29 EV
Trump    48.6
Clinton   47.4
Johnson    2.2

Although it's not likely that Clinton will reverse the results in PA, MI and WI (she needs all 3), what is clear is that the LP played a key role in making POTUS2016 more difficult and challenging for the Republicans. Still, it appears that the LP has failed to elect Clinton and that's a damn good thing for America and the entire world.

The Libertarians sought to play the role of spoiler in POTUS 2016, which it came close to accomplishing, despite not winning one single state.  However, America seems to be trending Republican-Libertarian.  Trump won 30 states and would have won 36 if he got the Libertarian vote. This does not bode well for the Democratic Party that only won 6 states because of the Libertarian vote.

The Democrats also got clobbered in the Senate which it expected to flip to Democrat control with the anticipated huge Clinton victory that never materialized.  The Republicans kept both houses of Congress, won a least 3 more governorships and cleaned up in state legislatures.

Finally, the mood of American voters is that government is failing them so they once again voted for hope and change.













Popular Posts