Sunday 18th of November 2018

the donald trump's plan seen from an interesting angle...

trump's wall

During the US Presidential electoral campaign, we demonstrated that the rivalry between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump did not concern their style so much as their culture [1]. The outsider challenged the Puritan domination over the USA, and demanded a return to the original compromise of 1789 – the Bill of Rights – between the revolutionaries who were fighting King George, and the major land-owners of the 13 colonies.

Not as amateur in politics as people thought, he had already displayed his opposition to the system on the very day of the attacks of 9/11 [2], then, later, with the controversy he maintained concerning President Obama’s birthplace.

We did not interpret Donald Trump’s fortune as a clear signal that he would be taking action in service of the rich, but as proof that he would defend productive capitalism against speculative capitalism.

We pointed out that on foreign policy, Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama had chosen the option of war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, implementing the strategy of Admiral Cebrowski to destroy the state structures of all the States in the « Greater Middle East » [3] ; while on the interior, they suspended the Bill of Rights - all of which led to the depreciation and pauperisation of the « poor white » elements of US society.

On the contrary, Donald Trump continually denounced the American Empire, and announced the return to Republican principles. He espoused the ideas of Andrew Jackson (1829-37) [4], and was adopted by the ex-collaborators of Richard Nixon (1969-74) [5].

He synthesised his ideas in interior politics with the slogan « Make America Great Again ! », in other words, no longer the pursuit of the imperial mirage, but a return to the « American dream » of personal enrichment. As for his exterior politics, he used the slogan « America First ! », which we interpreted not in the sense it was given during the Second World War, but the meaning it had originally. Therefore we did not see him as a neo-Nazi, but as a politician who refused to engage his country in the service of transnational elites.

More surprisingly, we thought it would be impossible for him to reach a cultural agreement with the Mexican minority, and we forecast that he would finally facilitate a friendly separation for the independence of California (CalExit) [6].

Our analysis of the objectives and methods of Donald Trump nonetheless left open the question of the capacity of a US President to modify the military strategy of his country [7].

Writing for two years, and expressing ideas which were completely opposite to all other commentators, we were wrongly classified as partisans of Donald Trump. This is an incorrect interpretation of our work. We are not United States electors, and as as result, we do not support any candidate to the White House. We are political analysts, and we attempt only to understand the facts and to anticipate their consequences.

Where are we today?

- We must concentrate on the facts and eliminate all President Trump’s public relations statements from our analysis. 
- We must distinguish the effects for which Donald Trump is directly responsible from those which are the continuity of his predecessors and the effects due to ambient world evolution.

The interior

Donald Trump gave his support to a demonstration of white supremacists in Charlottesville, and also to the movement for the right to carry arms, including after the slaughter at Parkland. These positions were interpreted as support for far-right ideas and violence. On the contrary, however, it was for him a promotion of “Human Rights”, US version, as they were defined in the first two amendments to the Bill of Rights.

We may, of course, criticise the US definition of « Human Rights » as strongly as we like — and in the tradition of Thomas Paine [8], we do not hesitate to criticise it — but that is another question.

Lacking means, the completion of the Wall at the Mexican border, which had been built by his predecessors, is a long way from being finished. It is still too soon to draw conclusions. The confrontation with those Hispanic immigrants who refuse to speak English and to integrate the compromise of 1789 still has not happened. Donald Trump went no further than taking the Spanish service off the White House communication system.

Concerning the question of climate change, Donald Trump rejected the Paris agreement, not because he is indifferent to ecology, but because it imposes financial regulations which will only benefit those who control carbon trading [9].

As far the economy is concerned, Donald Trump has not yet managed to impose his revolution – exonerating exports and taxing imports. However, he withdrew his country from the free-exchange treaties which had not yet been ratified, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). While his Border Adjustment Tax was rejected by Congress, he is trying today to dodge the parliamentarians and to create prohibitive taxes on the import of certain products, a move which flabbergasted his country’s allies and provoked the anger of China [10].

Similarly, Donald Trump is slow to launch his Rooseveltian programme for the building of infrastructures, for which he has so far found only 15 % of the necessary finance. And he has not yet launched his programme soliciting foreign specialists to help improve US industry, although this was announced in his National Security Strategy [11].

But finally, the little he has already achieved has been enough to kick-start production and employment in his country.

The exterior

In order to liquidate the American Empire, Donald Trump had announced his intention to cease support for the jihadists, to dissolve NATO, to abandon the Cebrowski strategy, and to repatriate the occupation troops. It is obviously much more difficult to reform the primary federal administration, the armed forces, than to change the economic and financial regulations by decree.

In priority, President Trump placed trustworthy people at the head of the Department of Defense and the CIA in order to avoid all attempts at rebellion. He reformed the National Security Council by diminishing the role of the Pentagon and the CIA [12]. He immediately put an end to the « colour revolutions » and other coups d’etat which had characterised the previous administrations.

Then he convinced the Arab nations, including Saudi Arabia, to cease their support for the jihadists [13]. The consequences of this decision quickly became apparent with the fall of Daesh in Iraq and in Syria. Simultaneously, Donald Trump postponed the dissolution of NATO, to which he simply added an anti-terrorist function [14]. Meanwhile, in the context of the British campaign against Moscow, the Alliance is actively developing its anti-Russian plan of action [15].

Donald Trump only kept NATO in order to control the vassals of the United States. He deliberately discredited the G7, forcing his baffled allies to assume their own responsibilities.

To interrupt the Cebrowski strategy in the « Greater Middle East », Donald Trump is preparing a reorganisation of that zone around his withdrawal from the agreements with Iran (JCPoA and secret bilateral agreement) and from his plan for the solution of the Palestinian question. While this project, which both France and the United Kingdom are attempting to sabotage, has little chance of managing to install regional peace, it enables him to paralyse the initiatives by the Pentagon. However, the superior officers are preparing to apply the Cebrowski strategy in the « Caribbean basin ». [Gus note: read venezuela} 

The initiative for the solution of the Korean conflict, the last vestige of the Cold War, ought to enable him to call into question the validity of NATO. The allies only engaged in this organisation to prevent a European version of a situation like that of the Korean war.

In the end, the US armed forces should no longer be used to crush small countries, but exclusively to isolate Russia, even to prevent China from developing its « Silk Roads ».

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 
Pete Kimberley

chronic human rights against Israel...

The United States has withdrawn from the United Nations Human Rights Council accusing it of a "chronic bias against Israel", a move that activists warned would make advancing human rights globally even more difficult.

Key points:
  • Haley says there is "unending hostility towards Israel"
  • US was half way through its term on the council
  • Rights groups say Trump administration is not prioritising human rights

 

Standing with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley slammed Russia, China, Cuba and Egypt for thwarting American efforts to reform the council.

"For too long the Human Rights Council has been a protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias," she said.

"Regrettably, it is now clear that our call for reform was not heeded. 

"Human rights abusers continue to serve on and be elected to the council. 

"The world's most inhumane regimes continue to escape scrutiny and the council continues politicising and scape-goating of countries with positive human rights records in an attempt to distract from the abusers and their ranks."

She also criticised countries which shared US values and encouraged Washington to remain but "were unwilling to seriously challenge the status quo".

The United States is half way through a three-year term on the main UN rights body and the Trump administration had long threatened to quit if the 47-member Geneva-based body was not overhauled.

 

Read more:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-20/us-pulls-out-of-united-nations-hum...

peace

 

 

a mexican lefty donald trump...

Like a Dos Equis ad, Mexico is “keeping it interesante.” On July 1, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the veteran left-wing politician known as AMLO, will likely win Mexico’s presidential election, to the horror of policy analysts, U.S. government officials, and the Mexican business community. As head of the upstart National Regeneration Movement (MORENA, the Spanish acronym, also means “dark skin”), AMLO pledges to make Mexico self-sufficient on food, halt foreign investment in the oil industry, and grant amnesty to drug traffickers. AMLO hates the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—although he’s promised to stay in it for now—and “the Wall” even more.

Washington’s days of having a predictable and compliant partner in Mexico may be over.

This election is likely to radically transform Mexican politics. MORENA is surging in the polls and may give AMLO a strong legislative bloc. Nationalist-minded legislators from other parties could also defect to his agenda. That would cause a major Mexican political realignment, under which for the next six years it could be governed by a self-described “revolutionary nationalist” ruling coalition. It makes sense: Mexico’s neoliberal era had to end sooner or later. AMLO’s longtime critique of an unfair economy and a complacent and unresponsive political system has finally resonated.

What accounts for this sudden turnaround? Several factors have aligned in AMLO’s favor. Start with AMLO’s opponents, who, in a time of change, represent continuity, splitting the neoliberal vote in Mexico’s “winner-take-all” system. The conservative National Action Party (PAN), his strongest competitor, diluted its solid brand by running in coalition with two leftist parties. The ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) selected a well-qualified former finance minister who is out of his depth as a campaigner. That’s left the once-powerful PRI mailing this campaign in, and AMLO siphoning up its traditional voters.

 

Read more:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/mexico-readies-for-revol...

 

Read from top.

the donald's non-peace improvement plan...

We were wrong to believe that the US project for the Middle East was a peace plan for Palestine. Despite the communications from the White House, this is not what President Trump is seeking. He is approaching this question from a radically different angle than that of his predecessors – not attempting to render Justice between his vassals, as an emperor would, but to unblock the situation in order to improve the daily lives of the populations involved.

The Israëlo-Arab conflict, which was originally a late episode of the European colonial conquest, was developed in order to hinder Arab unity. It was no longer a case of affirming the strength of the Western powers in the Middle East, but of making sure that the Arabs did not constitute a bloc which could compete with them. At first colonial, the logic of the conflict became imperial by aligning itself behind the United States.

But today, the Western powers which have dominated the world for the last few centuries are in decline, while Asia, the bearer of other civilisations, has once again become the centre of the world. It follows that the pressure brought to bear on the Arabs is dwindling. It is in this context that President Trump is putting an end to the Cebrowski doctrine of the destruction of social and State structures in the region, and is attempting to pacify the Israëli conflict.

Donald Trump’s personal team for international negotiations - composed of his faithful lieutenants Jared Kushner (his son-in-law) and Jason Greenblatt (ex-vice-president of his conglomerate, the Trump Organization) – therefore approach the Palestinian question from a geopolitical angle . Since they have no diplomatic experience, their plan is not to find a solution which satisfies all the protagonists, but to reduce the pressure on this population in order that they might live a normal life according to the ideal of the right to happiness as it is set out in the US Constitution. This is a major objective for Donald Trump, who intends to dissolve US imperialism and replace it with the logic of commercial competition.

Of course, it is easier for Kushner and Greenblatt, two Orthodox Jews, to understand the Israëlis rather than the Arabs, but from the point of view they have adopted, it doesn’t really have much importance. Whatever they say, their objective is not to arrive at peace, but simply to unblock the situation. They use their Jewish identity as a winning card, because it influences them not to explore the question of responsibility – a question which will arise, however, if they seek to establish a fair and definitive peace .

The « Trump method » in which they have been trained for long years, may be resumed as follows: 
- first of all, to acknowledge reality, even if that implies abandoning well-tried official rhetoric; 
- secondly, to consider all the advantages that can be taken from anterior bilateral agreements; 
- and thirdly, to take multilateral Law into account as far as possible [1].

The two men, who abstain from any public declaration, travel throughout the region without ever revealing their plans for the next day. However, their interlocutors are much more talkative. Little by little, they allow the developing plan to become known.

Finally, Kushner and Greenblatt are giving new life to the initiative of Prince Abdallah (2002) [2]. At that time, the future King of Saudi Arabia stimulated the evolution of the Arab point of view, not by basing himself on the Oslo Agreements, but on Resolutions 194 (1948) [3] of the General Assembly, and 242 (1967) [4] and 338 (1973) [5] of the UN Security Council. His basic principle was « land for peace » - the Arabs were ready to recognise and live in peace with Israël on the condition that it withdrew to the borders of 1967. This was rejected by the Israëli Prime Minister of the time, Ariel Sharon, who had begun his career in 1948 as commander of one of the terrorist units which assassinated Arabs at random and forced the survivors to flee (la Nakba). Steeped in colonial ideology, he nourished the ambition of conquering all the land between the Nile and the Euphrates.

Kushner and Greenblatt readopted the principle of Prince Abdallah, but noting the daily theft of land by Israël, they considered the idea of giving up much more, just so that it would cease.

Today, approximately one third of Israëlis consider their destiny by referring to the racism in the Talmud. But for the majority of the Jewish Israëli population, they were born in Israël and have no connection with the dreams of yesterday. They are simply people who want to live in peace. They are not responsible for the crimes of their grandparents, unless we accept the idea of a collective responsibility. They can therefore accept to withdraw to the frontiers of 1967.

Just the same, there remain almost no survivors of the Nakba. International Law condemns this ethnic cleansing and obliges Israël to recognise the inalienable right of the victims and their descendants to return to the lands from which they were expelled. But the Palestinian Arabs lost the Israëlo-Arab war of 1948. They may therefore demand indemnities, but they can not claim to recover the real estate properties that their grandparents abandoned, then lost. This final point was implemented by the peace initiative of Prince Abdallah, but has still not been assimilated by Arab public opinion.

Furthermore, there are today as many Palestinian Arabs in Jordan than in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem together. Returning to an old Britannico-Arab hypothesis, Kushner and Greenblatt propose to fusion the four territories into a single State. New Jordan would still be a Hashemite Kingdom, governed by King Abdallah II (not to be confused with the previous Saudi Prince) and a Palestinian Prime Minister. Kushner and Greenblatt imagined that by absorbing the independent West Bank into the Jordanian Kingdom, they would force President Mahmoud Abbas (83 years old) to retire – one of the reasons for which the Republican has declared his undying hatred for them, and refuses to receive them.

Until 1967, Jordan included the West Bank and East Jerusalem – the Trump team wants to add Gaza. This last point is still in suspension. Another hypothesis would be to conserve the current situation of an autonomous Gaza. In this case, this territory would be attached to Egypt. A free-exchange zone would be organised with a part of the Sinaï in order to allow its economic development. The Gulf countries, led by Saudi Arabia, would finance the reconstruction of the waste-water collection system, a solar electricity centre, a port and an airport.

This is where things get complicated. Since they signed a separate peace agreement with Israël, the Egyptians have complicated relations with the inhabitants of Gaza. They participate regularly in the Territorial siege. A few years ago, the Egyptian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Ahmed Aboul Gheit (current General Secretary of the Arab League), closed the frontier and threatened the civilians who wanted to escape from their open-air prison that he would « break their legs ».

As for the historical Jordanians, who are the descendants of the Bedouin tribes, they only represent 20 % of the population of their country, which is drowning in an ocean of Palestinian refugees. After the fusion, if it were to be implemented, they would represent no more than 10 %. They could attempt to reinforce their culture by naturalising the Syrian refugees who are descendants of the Bedouin tribes to whom they have given asylum. Above all, the Hashemite monarchy only exists because of the dream of the founder of the dynasty, Cherif Hussein, to create Arab unity (the « Great Arab Revolt of 1915 »). If the Palestinians interpret fusion as a failure of this project faced with Israël, a revolt comparable to that of 1970 (« Black September ») would be inevitable, and the monarchy could be overthrown.

All of the bargaining presently under way is aimed at evaluating how to make this projet viable, and how to ensure that the other powers in the region do not sabotage it. Because as time went by, what was at first a localised colonial conflict has become Israël’s war with the whole region – not only with the Arabs, but also with the Turks and the Persians. If one of the protagonists should consider itself mistreated by this new configuration, it would not hesitate to scupper the project.

For seventy years, the United Nations has been quoting the Law and condemning Israël for not respecting it, but almost no-one acts in order to apply it. Today, not only is the political situation of the Palestinians in continual decline, but their daily existence has become unbearable.

The White House plan has already triggered bitter recriminations among the leaders of the region and the Western states, who still benefit from the situation. It seems to be much better accepted by the populations concerned.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 
Pete Kimberley

 

Read more:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article201676.html

 

Read from top.

a german in jordan...

The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel (Angie), is making an official visit to Jordan and Lebanon. Officially, she intends to prevent a fresh round of refugees arriving in Europe by helping Jordan and Lebanon respond to the Syrian crisis.

This visit is taking place while the US plan is being drawn up to unlock the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Angie was accompanied by a delegation of CEOs of German companies that hope to negotiate contracts, in particular, for the “reconstruction” of Lebanon.

In Amman, the Chancellor was received by King Abdallah II. His concern was that the pro-Iranian Hezbollah might lay down roots in South Lebanon which would threaten both Israel and Jordan. Angie released a 100 million dollar loan to help the Kingdom address its economic crisis, attributable in part to its welcoming 650 000 Syrian refugees and its responding to IMF demands. It appears that Angie supported the US Plan to establish a New Jordan that would bring together all the Palestinian territories (Cisjordan and Gaza).

The Chancellor also visited the German troops based at Al-Asrak after they withdrew from Turkey.

Whilst Jordan is an authoritarian monarchy, Lebanon is a State whose governance is divided into three: 
• the President of the Republic (Christian), 
• the President of the government (Sunni Muslim) and 
• the President of the Assembly (Shiite Muslim).

When she got to Beirut, Angie was received by the following dignitaries, one after the other: Prime Minister Saad Hariri, the President of the Assembly Nabih Berry and the President of the Republic, Michel Aoun. During their first meeting, she stressed the burden that the influx of Syrian refugees has for little Lebanon, pledged to help stabilize this population and to develop the Lebanese economy. Saad Hariri thanked Germany for participating in the Special Tribunal tasked with trying those that masterminded the assassination of his father, Rafiq Hariri (this tribunal with its vague mandate had been initially established to inculpate the Lebanese and Syrian presidents, Émile Lahoud and Bashar al-Assad respectively).

The President of the Assembly, Nabih Berry, a pedagogue, petitioned for improved coordination with the Syrian government in order to organize for the refugees to return.

You cannot compare the arrival of Syrians in Lebanon with the influx of Syrian in Germany. This is because Lebanon and Syria were historically the same country until the Second World War. If you must make a comparison, it is with German reunification, although today, noone is making any attempt to reunify Great Syria. Today the number of Syrians in Lebanon is well over a million. However not all are refugees.

The third meeting did not prove nearly so fruitful. President Aoun stressed the burden that the refugees presented for his country and requested their return to Syria, to areas which have now been liberated. The issue is that Germany, does not consider that the liberated zones are controlled by democratically elected authorities but by “moderate opposition” that President Aoun classes as jihadists. Michel Aoun’s position is that by proposing to help Libya welcome the Syrians, Berlin is seeking to make Lebanon participate in Germany’s anti-Syrian policy.

During the CEDRE conference, in April at Paris, Germany had promised to donate 61 million dollars to Lebanon. At the time, the same polemic had arisen and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Gebran Bassil (son-in-law of President Aoun) had threatened to refuse this money if it was conditioned on the naturalization of refugees.

The German Ambassador, Martin Huth, has assured the Lebanese media that his country had never envisaged forcing Lebanon to naturalize anyone. However, Angie stressed that, in her opinion, the refugees could only return to Lebanon under the responsibility of the United Nations (thus not the democratically elected authorities).

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 
Anoosha Boralessa

 

Read more:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article201681.html

a bolton in moscow...

US National Security Advisor John Bolton has arrived in Moscow on Wednesday afternoon amid speculation that he could lay the groundwork for a much-anticipated one-on-one between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Though an official announcement of the summit has not yet been made, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told MSNBC: “I think it’s likely President Trump will be meeting with his counterpart in the not too distant future following that meeting [Bolton’s visit].” 

Asked if Trump will visit Russia in the summer, Pompeo said he was not aware of the president’s schedule. Meanwhile, Moscow continues to maintain silence on the issue. “We’re not ready yet to speak of any deadlines,” Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for the Kremlin, told Russian media.

READ MORE: Russia can teach US how to better host World Cup – Putin to Bolton

During the trip, Bolton met with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the Russian capital on Wednesday. TASS news agency earlier reported that the pair were to “hold consultations about the potential meeting between the American and Russian presidents.” 

Paving the way for a Putin-Trump summit is the top goal on Bolton’s to-do list while in Moscow, said Konstantin Blokhin, an expert at Russia’s Center for Security Studies. Blokhin suggested the politician has also come to talk about disarmament and non-proliferation, Syria, and Iran.

Why Bolton?

Bolton, an arch-hawk in Trump’s administration, isn’t probably the best choice available to reach out to the Russians. He previously accused Putin of looking Trump “in the eyes and lying to him, denying Russian interference in the election,” and said he feels Russia is siding with a new “axis of evil” that includes Iran and North Korea.

Nevertheless, Russian experts believe Bolton’s standing provides an interesting opening for Moscow. The fact that the US side is represented by a hardliner means a lot for the success of the visit, Kirill Koktysh, a research fellow at Russia’s MGIMO University, told RT. He said such politicians are prone to “calculated compromise and measured stance during very tough talks on national security issues.” 

“Bolton obviously influences Trump and his policies very much,” the expert added. “They are apparently like-minded people and Bolton can persuade Trump to do a wide variety of things.”

Bolton “is not anti-Russian, he is a hawk who aggressively advances American interests,” commented Evgeny Minchenko, head of the Moscow-based International Institute for Political Expertise, told RT. 

The hawkish national security advisor “is on [the White House’s] payroll,” which means he will carefully follow Trump’s policy and not his own line, Minchenko said, disagreeing with Koktysh. “This is where [Steve] Bannon failed, this is where other administration officials failed,” the expert noted, adding: “Either Bolton does what Trump tells him to do, or he steps down just like his predecessors.”

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/431047-bolton-visit-russia-preview/

 

Read from top.

more busy than a bat in hell...

 

The official trump schedule is like that of a bat in hell playing golf on Sunday... for example:


JUNE 26, 2018

Tue, June 26, 2018: Trump meets with W.V. governor, presents Medal of Honor

11:30 am: Participates in the meeting with the Associated Builders and Contractors National Executive Committee; Roosevelt Room

Noon: Lunch with members of Congress; Cabinet Room

1:30 pm: Meets with the governor of West Virginia

3:30 pm: Presents the Medal of Honor


POSTED ONJUNE 25, 2018
Mon, June 25, 2018: Trump meets with Jordan’s king and queen, speaks at rally in S.C.

11:45 am: Meets with Secretary of State Pompeo

2:10 pm: With the first lady, meets with King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein and Queen Rania of Jordan

2:30 pm: Meets with King Abdullah

5:05 pm: Departs White House

6:50 pm: Arrives West Columbia, South Carolina

7:00 pm: Participates in a McMaster for Governor Rally; West Columbia, SC

8:20 pm: Departs West Columbia, South Carolina

9:55 pm: Arrives White House


POSTED ONJUNE 24, 2018
Sun, June 24, 1018: Trump goes golfing

President Trump today is at the Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia.

 

POSTED ONJUNE 23, 2018
Sat, June 23, 2018: Trump attends fundraiser, speaks on tax reform in Nevada

9:00 am: Departs White House

10:50 am PT: Arrives Las Vegas, Nevada

11:45 am PT: Attends a fundraiser; Suncoast Hotel & Casino; Las Vegas

12:15 pm PT: Delivers remarks at the Nevada Republican Party Convention; Las Vegas, Nevada

1:20 pm PT: Hosts a roundtable discussion on tax reform; South Point Hotel Casino and Spa; Las Vegas, Nevada

2:30 pm PT: Departs Las Vegas, Nevada

9:55 pm: Arrives White House


POSTED ONJUNE 22, 2018
Fri, June 22, 2018: Trump participates in ceremony for new ambassadors, speaks on immigration

12:15 pm: Participates in the credentialing ceremony for newly appointed ambassadors to Washington

2:30 pm: Makes remarks on immigration with Angel Families; South Court Auditorium

8:30 pm: Attends the United States Marine Corps Evening Parade; Washington


POSTED ONJUNE 21, 2018
Thur, June 21, 2018: Trump holds Cabinet meeting, lunches with governors

11:45 am: Holds a Cabinet meeting; Cabinet Room

1:00 pm: Has a working lunch with governors

3:00 pm: Meets with Secretary of State Pompeo

3:30 pm: Meets with Secretary of Defense Mattis

 

JUNE 20, 2018


Wed, June 20, 2018: Trump meets with members of Congress, holds MAGA rally in Duluth, MN

11:30 am: Meets with members of Congress; Cabinet Room

12:30 pm: Lunch with Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Pompeo

2:35 pm: Departs White House

4:35 pm CT: Arrives Duluth, Minnesota

5:05 pm CT: Participates in a roundtable discussion on protecting American workers; Duluth

6:30 pm CT: Participates in a Make American Great Again rally; AMSOIL Arena, Duluth

8:00 pm CT: Departs Duluth

11:50 pm: Arrives White House

 

trump did not start the fire...

Beijing swept past Italy, France, Britain, Germany and Japan to become the premier manufacturing power on earth and a geo-strategic rival. Now, from East Africa to Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean, and from the South and East China Sea to Taiwan, Beijing’s expansionist ambitions have become clear.

And where are the Republicans responsible for building up this potentially malevolent power that thieves our technology? Talking of building a Reagan-like Navy to contain the mammoth they nourished.

Since the Cold War, America’s elites have been exhibiting symptoms of that congenital blindness associated since Rome with declining and falling empires.

While GOP grassroots have begged for measures to control our bleeding southern border, they were regularly denounced as nativists by party elites, many of whom are now backing Trump’s wall.

For decades, America’s elites failed to see that the transnational moment of the post-Cold War era was passing and an era of rising nationalism and tribalism was at hand.

“We live in a time,” said U2’s Bono this week, “when institutions as vital to human progress as the United Nations are under attack.”

The institutions Bono referenced — the U.N., EU, NATO — all trace their roots to the 1940s and 1950s, a time that bears little resemblance to the era we have entered, an era marked by a spreading and desperate desire of peoples everywhere to preserve who and what they are.

No, Trump didn’t start the fire.

The world was ablaze with tribalism and was raising up authoritarians to realize nationalist ends—Xi Jinping, Putin, Narendra Modi in India, Erdogan in Turkey, Gen. el-Sissi in Egypt—before he came down that elevator.

And so the elites who were in charge when the fire broke out, and who failed to respond and refused even to recognize it, and who now denounce Trump for how he is coping with it, are unlikely to be called upon again to lead this republic.

 

Read more:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/buchanan/never-trumpers-join-the-...

smarter than the average bear...

Imagine you want to do something for the rapprochement of Europe and Russia. Your own troops of the Deep State, both in the GOP and in the democrats, hate Russia and want to control Europe. Facilitating such rapprochement with encouraging overtures would be seen as treason by your own people.

 

So what do you do? Well the smarter bear would appear to be sabre-rattling against the Russians (because we hate the Russians, don't we?) and the Germans, because they run a trade balance that is not favourable to the US. With this sabre-rattling, your own people will be happy you're really telling those guys where to go. And guess what, they are going... to get together.

Ipso facto, you achieved your original goal — the rapprochement of Europe and Russia — by trying not to achieve it, and everyone is snookered... Do you think that Trump does not know what he is doing?

 

"Germany is responsible (for world processes - ed.), and so is Russia, because Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, so we must work together to find solutions," Merkel said. Judging by the official agenda, Putin and Merkel talked about Syria, Ukraine, the Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline.

Merkel has changed her tone

Putin wants Germany to take part in the restoration of Syria, to let about 500,000 Syrian refugees return to their homes. Merkel, as it became clear from her speech, insists on preventing the humanitarian catastrophe in Idlib. Yet, she did not say a word about "that butcher Assad", etc. 

As for Ukraine, Merkel said that Germany wanted "blue helmets" to be deployed to achieve ceasefire. It is understood that UN troops are to be deployed on the entire territory of the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Putin emphasises the priority to implement the Minsk agreements, and UN peacekeepers fit into this picture. In addition, Merkel refrained from standard accusations on the subject of Russia's alleged aggression in the east of Ukraine.


See more at http://www.pravdareport.com/world/europe/20-08-2018/141424-putin_merkel-...

 

Meanwhile Der Spiegel still has not mentioned the meeting between Putin and Merkel which happened about three days ago now... But the German paper still try to bash Bashar Assad of Syria and bash Jeremy Corbyn's leadership for a (fake) anti-Semitism problem... 

 

Read from top.

the democratic mexicans...

United States President Donald Trump is threatening to deploy the military and close the country's southern border as more Hondurans and Salvadorans join thousands of migrants in Guatemala heading north.

Key points:
  • Mr Trump says he is asking Mexico to stop the migrant "onslaught"
  • He says the issue is more important than the new US-Mexico-Canada trade deal
  • Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is meeting with Mexico's president

 

Several thousand Honduran migrants travelled this week through Guatemala headed to Mexico, with some hoping to cross into the United States to escape violence and poverty in Central America.

Central American migrants hiked from Honduras through muddy jungle and residential streets, some toting babies along with backpacks, Reuters images show.

Mr Trump made the threat in a series of tweets, where he described the movement of migrants as an "assault on our country" by Central American nations, led by the Democratic Party.

 

Read more:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-19/trump-threatens-to-send-military-...

 

Read from top.