On the morning of June 24, 2022, I woke up, checked my phone and saw that nearly 50 years of legal precedent had fallen. We’d heard it was coming, but that didn’t make reading the headlines any easier: That day, in a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court had overturned Roe v. Wade. But SCOTUS didn’t stop there. Since 2022, the conservative supermajority — which includes three justices appointed…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
As human rights groups continue to call out war crimes committed by the Israeli military, we speak to the only U.S. diplomat to publicly resign from the Biden administration over its policy on Israel. We first spoke to Hala Rharrit when she resigned from the State Department in April, citing the illegal and deceptive nature of U.S. policy in the Middle East. “We continue to willfully violate laws…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Western colonialism and imperialism are the roots of the Palestinian struggle. A common characteristic of western powers is their shared history of colonization and oppression of indigenous populations. This distinction is important because it is clear that there is heavy bias against Palestinians in both western political policy and western mainstream media. The United States and Israel share similar histories and politics as settler colonialist nations, each established through the violent dispossession of indigenous populations. Both countries utilized dehumanization of the indigenous populations they displaced to obtain the land they have settled upon. Native Americans were called “merciless Indian savages,” while Palestinians are called “animals” and “terrorists.” Examining relevant histories with a broader view will demonstrate how western interpretations of Palestine are biased. The prevailing western standard has been nonobjective and heavily promotes dishonest and biased narratives, omitting relevant histories and current event considerations. This biased narrative reads as a prejudiced tale meticulously designed to promote the interests of the more powerful side, an oppressive colonial regime and its imperial supporters.
Framing as a Tool of Erasure
The Palestinian struggle and foundations of Israel are a matter of modern-day colonialism achieved through atrocities. Israel is widely supported by the west over their imperialist interests and maintained by political and media propaganda. Criticism of a brutal occupying force is often harshly censored. The matter is frequently mischaracterized as a religious matter, labeled as complicated, or described as a conflict. Framing the Palestinian struggle as a “religious matter” generally encourages people to reduce politics to faith-based tensions. Dismissing something as “complicated” deters any type of engagement because the implicit message is that the issue is too difficult for most people to understand. Referring to the matter as a “conflict” implies symmetry, leaving no conceptual room for the disparity of power that defines a colonial struggle. It is none of those things. At its core, this is an ongoing process of colonization, resulting in the displacement of the Palestinian people and the violent military occupation of Palestinian land.
The strategic framing of Palestine has been used to support zionism for over 76 years. During a 1970 interview with renowned Palestinian activist and author Ghassan Kanafani, Australian media correspondent Richard Carleton referred to the matter of Palestine as a conflict. Kanafani countered that it is not a conflict, but a liberation movement fighting for justice, continuing, “This is where the problem starts. Because this is what makes you ask all your questions. This is exactly where the problem starts. This is a people who are discriminated against fighting for their rights. This is the story.” Fifty-four years later, these same issues about the framing language persist.
Foreign Policy and Domestic Repression
There are several elements to consider when examining the western distortion of the Palestinian struggle. First, we must look at United States foreign policy as it pertains to Middle Eastern, North African, and Muslim-majority nations. Interconnected to these foreign policies are United States domestic policies designed to target American citizens of MENA and/or Muslim backgrounds. These policies are rooted in the Palestinian struggle. Secondly, we must take a closer look at zionism, a western colonial project supported by the US in large part due to its imperialist goals and American interests in the MENA region. Interconnected to the matter of zionism is the strategy of intentional false conflation of antisemitism to criticism of zionism or Israel intended to suppress and silence criticism so that zionism can continue without accountability. These propagandist tactics are supported and reinforced by the United States over their imperialist goals in the MENA region. Third, we must look at the state of Israel more closely, the brutality in which it was created and maintains itself, and Israel’s influence on American politics and media. Interconnected to the matter of Israeli influence, we must look at lobby and special interest groups such as AIPAC and the ADL. These powerful groups use large sums of money to influence media organizations and exert influence and control over American elections and US policy both foreign and domestic.
United States foreign policy in the Middle East has always been in the absolute interest of western imperialism. This has continuously come at the cost of the suffering of MENA nations and their civilians for over a century. President Joe Biden, while serving as a United States Senator, gave a speech on the Senate floor on June 5, 1986, speaking to US foreign policy in the Middle East. He stated that the US should “operate and move in the naked self-interest of the United States of America.” Referring to Israel, he said, “It is the best three-billion-dollar investment we make. Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to invent an Israel to protect our interests in the region.” His current position and statements regarding Israel and the Middle East remain unchanged thirty-eight years later. Biden has openly referred to himself as a zionist to the media on numerous occasions for several decades. He has made repeated statements of support for Israel, even as Israel has been accused of the ongoing genocide of Palestinians, and after several decades of its numerous violations of international law. In December of 2023, Biden stated, “I got in trouble many times for saying you don’t have to be a Jew to be a zionist, and I am a zionist. I make no apologies for that. That’s a reality.” The statements then-Senator Biden made on the Senate floor in 1986 speak volumes to the reasons behind the United States’ predisposition to show favorable bias towards Israel and, therefore, against Palestinians.
The matter of Palestine has always been at the core of United States antiterrorism laws. Palestinian liberation efforts continue to be a central target of both foreign policies and domestic laws oppressive to Arab Americans. The idea of the Arab or Muslim terrorist was introduced to the west by Israel’s current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu in 1979. Netanyahu used the term in Washington, DC, in 1984 at the “Second Conference on International Terrorism” he organized where he pushed this label and agenda into American politics. On December 22, 1987, he achieved his goal as the Palestinian Liberation Organization was formally declared a terrorist organization by the United States. This was the “first and only time” Congress designated a group as a terrorist organization. These series of events are directly related to escalations that led to the first intifada in 1987. It was also during these conditions that Hamas, a resistance organization, had formed. The region endured continuous turmoil, and heightened escalations continued until the Oslo Accords in 1993.
Journalism vs. Propaganda: A Brief History
While the media is a very influential source in shaping views on important matters, the United States mainstream media has long ago lost its journalistic integrity. Yellow journalism is a type of journalism that uses exaggerated and sensationalist reporting often based on false accounts of events to boost sales and attract readers. The peak of early-stage yellow journalism began as a competition between the publications of two major newspaper publishers in the late 1800s, Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst. To drive public appeal, the two pushed out sensationalist newspapers, which prominently featured political coverage. In 1898, both Pulitzer and Hearst published misleading newspapers pushing a rumor that Cuba had sank a US battleship when, in fact, a coal fire aboard the ship led to an explosion. The US Maine sinking in the Havana Harbor contributed to the outbreak of the Spanish-American War. Propagandist publications have tainted American journalism to this day and continue to incite both conflicts and hate.
The New York Times’ publishing controversies began in the 1800s and include numerous instances pertaining to significant events from the Russian Revolution to the Iraq War. In more recent times, the New York Times has been cited for publishing articles based on misinformation leading to incitement. In 2003, the Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics found that “the New York Times is more favorable toward the Israelis than the Palestinians, and the partiality has become more pronounced with time.” This trend continues today and is an ongoing ethical and moral problem. During the current genocide in Gaza that began in 2023, The New York Times has been cited multiple times for publishing false accounts of events, from false claims of rapes to disproven accounts of beheaded babies. In April of 2024, The Intercept obtained an internal New York Times memo that instructed journalists to avoid “use of the terms ‘genocide’ and ‘ethnic cleansing’ and to ‘avoid’ using the phrase ‘occupied territory’ when describing Palestinian land.” They were additionally instructed to avoid the use of “Palestine” or terms such as “refugee camps.” Numerous other mainstream media outlets have also been accused of both biased and inaccurate reporting on Palestine. This trend is commonplace and has persisted for over a century.
A Definitive Bias
The issue of Palestine is deeply intertwined with the rise of anti-Arab hate, contributing to the dehumanization and stereotyping of Arabs. The Middle East and North Africa have rich cultural variances and diverse ethnicities, but there is a strong cultural ignorance in the west about the geography and geopolitics of the MENA region. To many, “an Arab is an Arab” without any thought or attention to regional or political distinctions. The mainstream media promotes this cultural ignorance, flattening public understandings of MENA communities and struggles as a result. Media bias is not only harmful to the populations they target but is a catalyst driving discriminatory hate within their audience here in the United States as well. Media bias plays a role in contributing to harmful stereotypes toward people of Arab, Middle Eastern, and North African ethnic backgrounds, regardless of their religion. Media bias has also contributed to the western racialization of Muslim Americans and has played a destructive role by inciting Islamophobia, giving rise to hate crimes against individuals from these ethnic groups in the US. Natalie Khazaal, associate professor of Arabic and Arab Culture at the Georgia Institute of Technology, published an article for The Conversation, an independent news organization, highlighting anti-Palestinian bias in US corporate media: “Reporting can prime audiences to see a Palestinian fighter in a mask as either an icon of terrorism or a hero resisting occupation, depending on how the news is presented.” This one sentence encapsulates the issue Palestinians face in the west. Media portrayals are often biased and tend to leave out crucial histories and background information of events they report on, often totally omitting decades of Palestinian suffering at the hands of an oppressive military colonial settler regime. A definitive bias controls the narrative and information available to the public, leading to a widespread impact and sway on public perception. The media bias infects public viewers and drives large-scale public prejudice against Palestinians.
The convenient western amnesia of Palestinians’ history of suffering must end. We cannot only look to condemn Palestinians, who are blamed for their own suffering. We are now over a year into Israel’s ongoing genocide of Palestinians. Media disinformation has played a significant role in justifying Israel’s criminal actions. Media bias has grave consequences. The Palestinian fight for liberation will persist as long as Palestinians continue to be dehumanized by mainstream western media and imperialist political agendas. The ongoing Palestinian struggle for liberation remains in a state of great peril. There is no true peace process without taking a more critical look at histories and current event considerations through a more honest lens.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
While some have argued that the Biden administration’s industrial policy offered too much to the private sector, these bills were designed to serve multiple constituencies.
This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.
Dozens of House Democrats are urging President Joe Biden to end Israel’s ban on foreign journalism and attacks on journalists in Gaza, saying that press freedom in the Strip is “more critical than ever” as Israel embarks on a brutal ethnic cleansing campaign against all Palestinians left alive in north Gaza. In a letter sent to Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken earlier this month…
A U.S. weapons system has landed and is “in place” in Israel, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin said on Monday, as the Biden administration beefs up U.S. support of Israel and Israeli forces prepare to attack Iran and continue their bombardments of Lebanon and Gaza. The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, worth between roughly $1 billion to $1.8 billion and made by…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Israeli forces killed Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar in combat on October 17, briefly raising questions about the next phase of Israel’s war on Gaza. Though Israel has long claimed Sinwar as one of the most high-profile targets of its military campaign, there is still no end in sight to the war after 13 months of carnage and mass death. The death of Sinwar, who is widely considered the architect of the…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
The majority of Cubans support Castro…every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba…to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.
— Lester D. Mallory, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, 1960
Despite draconian coercive measures by the US – overwhelmingly condemned every year by the UN General Assembly, with the next vote slated for October 29-30 – the Cuban Revolution has had extraordinary successes. This small, impoverished, formerly colonized island nation has achieved levels of education, medical services, and performance in many other fields, including sports, that rival the first world, through the application of socialist principles.
Cuba has rightly become a model of internationalism and an exemplar of socialism. As a consequence, every US administration for over six decades has targeted this “threat of a good example.” Back in its early days, the Cuban Revolution was bolstered by socialist solidarity, particularly from the Soviet Union.
The contemporary geopolitical situation is very different. Most notably the socialist bloc is defunct. Meanwhile, Cuba continues to be confronted by a still hegemonic US. In turn, the Yankee empire is now challenged by the hope of an emergent multipolar order. Cuba has expressed interest in joining the BRICS trade alliance of emerging economies and will attend their meeting in Russia, October 22-24.
Successes turned into liabilities
Today, Cuba is confronting perhaps its greatest challenge. The ever intensified US blockade is designed to perversely turn the successes of the revolution into liabilities.
For example, the revolution achieved one hundred percent literacy, created farming collectives and cooperatives, and mechanized cultivation, thus freeing the campesinos from the drudgery of peasant subsistence agriculture.
But now, most tractors are idle, in need of scarce fuel and embargoed spare parts. Agricultural production has subsequently contracted. In May, I was on a bus that traveled the length of the island. Mile upon mile of once productive agricultural fields lay fallow.
Historical yields of key crops are down nearly 40% due to lack of fertilizers and pesticides, according to a Cuban government statement. The daily bread ration has been slashed, Reuters reports.
In order to feed the nation, the state has had to use precious hard currency to import food; currency which otherwise could be used to repair a crumbling infrastructure. Broken pipes have caused widespread shortages of drinking water.
Under siege, some 10% percent of the population, over a million Cubans, have left between 2022 and 2023. This has, in turn, led to a drain of skilled labor and a decrease in productivity, contributing to a vicious cycle driving out-migration.
Le Monde diplomatique cautions: “Cuba is facing a moment that is extraordinarily precarious. While numerous factors have led to this…US sanctions have, at every juncture, triggered or worsened every aspect of the current crisis.”
The Obama engagement
Of the some 40 sovereign states sanctioned and slated for regime-change by Washington, Cuba is somewhat unique. Until recently, the island did not have the domestic social classes from which a counter-revolutionary base could be recruited.
In Cuba, most bourgeoisie under the Batista dictatorship left the country shortly after the revolution. The large US corporations that they had operated were expropriated. Similarly, when the government nationalized many small businesses in the 1960s, others fled to US shores.
By 2014, then-US President Obama lamented that Washington’s Cuba policy had “failed to advance our interests.” Obama’s new strategy was to engage Cuba in the hope of fostering a counter-revolutionary class opposition.
Obama reestablished diplomatic relations with Cuba after a hiatus dating to 1961. Travel and some trade restrictions were lifted. And more remittances from relatives living in the US could be sent to Cuba.
In his famous March 2016 speech in Havana, Obama proclaimed to rousing applause: “I’ve called on our Congress to lift the embargo.” This was an outright lie. The US president had only remarked that the so-called embargo (really a blockade, because the US enforces it on third countries) was “outdated.”
Obama lauded the cuentapropistas, small entrepreneurs in Cuba, and pledged to help promote that stratum. He promised a new US policy focus of encouraging small businesses in Cuba. “There’s no limitation from the United States on the ability of Cuba to take these steps” to create what in effect would be a potentially counter-revolutionary class, Obama promised.
Obama warned the Cubans, “over time, the youth will lose hope” if prosperity were not achieved by creating a new small business class.
While normalizing relations with Cuba, Obama took a more adversarial stance toward Venezuela. He declared the oil-rich South American nation an “unusual and extraordinary threat” and imposed “targeted sanctions” on March 2015. The successes of Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution in promoting regional integration were challenging US influence in Latin America, prompting Washington to adopt a “dual-track diplomacy” of engagement with Cuba and containment with Venezuela.
Obama spoke of the “failed” US policy on Cuba, which had not achieved “its intended goals.” Often left unsaid was that the “goal” has been to reverse the Cuban revolution. Obama’s intent was not to terminate the US regime-change policy, but to achieve it more effectively.
His engagement tactic should not be confused for accord. Obama still championed the three belligerent core elements of the US policy: a punishing blockade, occupation of the port of Guantanamo, and covert actions to undermine and destabilize Cuba.
Trump undoes and outdoes Obama
Donald Trump assumed office at a time when the leftist Pink Tide was ebbing. Taking advantage of the changed geopolitical context, the new president intensified Obama’s offensive against Cuba’s closest regional supporter Venezuela, while reversing his predecessor’s engagement with Havana. His “maximum pressure” campaign against Venezuela devastated their oil sector, thereby reducing Cuba’s petroleum subsidies from its ally.
Trump enacted 243 coercive measures against Cuba. He ended individual “people-to-people” educational travel, banned US business with military-linked Cuban entities, and imposed caps on remittances. In the closing days of his administration, he relisted Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, which further cut the island off from international finance.
Biden continues and extends Trump’s policies
Joe Biden, while campaigning for the presidency, played to liberal sentiment with vague inferences that he would restore a policy of engagement and undo Trump’s sanctions on Cuba.
By the time Biden assumed the US presidency, Cuba had been heavily impacted by the Covid pandemic. Temporary lockdowns reduced domestic productivity. Travel restrictions dried up tourist dollars, a major source of foreign currency.
Once in office and Cuba ever more vulnerable, Biden continued and extended Trump’s policies, including retaining it on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list.
At the height of the Covid pandemic, Belly of the Beast reported how scarcities in Cuba fueled anti-government demonstrations on July 11, 2021. Eleven days later, Biden imposed yet more sanctions to further exacerbate the scarcities.
As an article in the LA Progressive explained, “Cuba’s humanitarian crisis – fueled by the sanctions maintained by Biden – seems to have only encouraged his administration to keep tightening the screws,” concluding “his policy remains largely indistinguishable from that of Trump.”
Biden, however, continued the Obama policy of empowering the Cuban private sector. He allowed more remittances, disproportionately benefiting Cubans with relatives in the US (who tend to be better off financially). He also facilitated international fund transfers involving private Cuban businesses. Amendments to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations enhanced internet access to encourage development of private telecommunications infrastructures for “independent entrepreneurs.”
What about Democratic Party presidential hopeful Kamala Harris?
“When evaluating the impact of a possible Kamala Harris electoral victory on the United States’ Cuba policy,” On Cuba News admits, “the first thing that should be recognized is the lack of evidence or antecedents to form a well-founded forecast.” Likewise, the Miami Herald finds Harris’s current Latin American policies a mystery with “few clues and a lot of uncertainty.”
Going back to when she was on the vice-presidential campaign trail in 2020, Harris commented about the possibility of easing the blockade on what she called the “dictatorship.” She said that won’t happen anytime soon and would have to be predicated on a new Washington-approved government in Cuba.
Alternative for Cuba
If Cubans want to see what an alternative future might be like under Yankee beneficence, they need only look 48 miles to the east at the deliberately made to fail state of Haiti.
In the US, the National Network on Cuba, ACERE, and Pastors for Peace are among the organizations working to end the blockade and get Cuba off the State Sponsors of Terrorism list.
As the US Peace Council admonished: “No matter how heroic a people may be, socialism must provide for their material needs. The US blockade of Cuba is designed precisely to thwart that and to discredit socialism in Cuba and anywhere else where oppressed people try to better their lot…The intensified US interference in Cuba is a wakeup call for greater efforts at solidarity.”
The post Cuba under Intensified US Sanctions Confronts its Greatest Challenge first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
The Biden administration on Wednesday deployed B-2 stealth bombers to launch multiple airstrikes on Yemen, attacks that underscored the United States’ deep involvement in a deadly regional war that is threatening to engulf the entire Middle East. The U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement that the strikes targeted “numerous Iran-backed Houthi weapons storage facilities within…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
On October 8, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a landmark rule aimed at tackling lead contamination in drinking water. Utility companies are now required to identify and replace their lead pipes within the next 10 years, the EPA announced, and the threshold for acceptable lead levels in drinking water has been lowered from 15 to 10 parts per billion — the strictest guidelines…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Human rights groups are demanding international powers intervene to stop Israel’s creation of an “extermination zone” in northern Gaza this week, as Israeli forces are attacking hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who they have trapped in the region, and are demanding that hospitals evacuate. Several advocacy groups have raised alarm as Israel has embarked on a campaign to seemingly…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Early after Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022, Turkey, which is a NATO member but not as subservient to the U.S. Government as almost all of its European members are, broke with the U.S. Government’s opposition to there being any negotiations to settle the Ukraine war; and peace talks, negotiations to end the conflict, were held in Istanbul. As Wikipedia notes regarding those negotiations:
In a surprise visit to Ukraine on 9 April [2022], British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said “Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with,” and that the collective West was not willing to make a deal with Putin. Three days after Johnson left Kyiv, Putin stated publicly that talks with Ukraine “had turned into a dead end”. Naftali Bennett said in 2023 that both sides had wanted a ceasefire, the odds of the deal holding had been 50-50, and that the Western powers backing Ukraine had stopped the deal.[79]
Mr. Johnson had received U.S. President Joe Biden’s authorization to do that — to go to Ukraine’s President Volodmyr Zelensky to inform him that The West (the U.S. empire, including NATO) would cease supporting Ukraine’s Government if Ukraine would sign the till-then-agreed-upon but not-yet-signed peace treaty with Russia, which entailed Russia’s ceasing its invasion in return for Ukraine’s returning to its neutral status which had prevailed prior to the US. Government’s take-over of Ukraine on 20 February 2014, and Ukraine’s ceasing its efforts to restore to Ukraine the 22% of the former Ukraine’s territory that Russia then was occupying. Biden insisted upon the Ukrainian Government’s pursuing an all-or-nothing strategy to defeat Russia in the battlefields of Ukraine — or else Ukraine would lose Western support in its war against Russia. (The reason for this policy from Biden is that though such a peace treaty would have been far better for Ukraine, since the million-or-so deaths, that continuing the war entails, would have been prevented, such a treaty would have totally ended America’s ownership of Ukraine, which was won by the Obama-Biden Administration’s stunningly successful coup in February 2014, which grabbed control of Ukraine away from the people of Ukraine. The U.S. Government wants to continue controlling Ukraine’s Government.)
Publicly, the U.S. Government continues to insist upon a total defeat of Russia in the battlefields of Ukraine. However, it also states that, “as we have been consistently saying, it’s going to be up to President Zelenskyy, if and when he wants to negotiate an end to this war. Certainly, a negotiated end is the most likely outcome here. But when that happens, and under what conditions and circumstances, that’s going to be up to President Zelenskyy.” In other words: if Ukraine’s Government will lose the war against Russia, and Russia will win the war against Ukraine, then (according to the Biden Administration) only Ukraine’s Government will have lost it; the U.S. Government and its NATO military alliance won’t also have lost it. This is the message from the White House, two-and-a-half years after it had ordered Ukraine’s Government to continue this war until Russia will have been defeated.
All U.S. regime media are trying to either blame Ukraine’s Government, or else blame the Government (i.e., the U.S. Government) that has, in fact, been controlling Ukraine’s Government, for Ukraine’s losing this war. Domestically within the United States, the Biden Administration and its Vice President Kamala Harris would rather that Ukraine’s defeat be held off till after the November 5 elections, so that their Party will win on November 5. But, if the defeat comes after she has won the election, then there will be total pressure upon Zelensky to quit before she becomes inaugurated on January 20th, so that this loss won’t be blamed upon her — won’t occur during her Presidency.
On September 30, The Atlantic magazine, which is owned by the Democratic Party billionaire Laurene Powell Jobs, the intensely neoconservative widow and heir of Steve Jobs, headlined “The Abandonment of Ukraine: The American strategy in Ukraine is slowly bleeding the nation, and its people, to death.” It argued against “the most unsettling thing we saw [in Ukraine] was the American strategy in Ukraine, one that gives the Ukrainian people just enough military aid not to lose their war but not enough to win it. This strategy is slowly bleeding Ukraine, and its people, to death.” And it closed:
The war in Ukraine is at risk of being lost — not because the Russians are winning but because Ukraine’s allies have not allowed them to win. If we encourage the Ukrainians to fight while failing to give them the tools they need for victory, history will surely conclude that the Russians weren’t the only ones who committed crimes against Ukraine.
How can this be “not because the Russians are winning”? How not only definitionally false, but outright stupid, is that statement? 925,872 people in the deceived U.S. empire are paying subscription fees for such neocon propaganda, basically pushing for WW3. What Ms. Jobs’s agents are arguing for there is to escalate this war to being a direct war between the U.S. Government (and all of its ‘allies’ or colonies) versus Russia’s Government and Russia’s people. How many Americans really even want that — WW3 — in order to continue the U.S. Government’s control over what still remains of Ukrainian territory? Is Ukraine necessary for protecting U.S. national security? Of course not. But if you are a rabidly neocon Democrat, then you want the Biden-Harris Administration to go at least to the brink of WW3, if necessary, in order to prevent the loss of Ukraine.
What the Democratic Party half of America’s Deep State — and Ms. Jobs is part of that — are doing is to try to force the Democratic Party officials to go all the way up to WW3 if that’s what it takes in order to ‘win’ against Russia in Ukraine. This is what’s called a “proxy war.” It has, all along, been part of the U.S. regime’s long war to conquer Russia. Russian citizens have been well informed about this, but the subjects in the U.S. empire have not.
On 2 October 2024, EurAsia Daily headlined the video of a former adviser to the head of the office of the President of Ukraine, Alexei Arestovich, who had advised President Zelensky at the Istanbul peace negotiations in 2022, “The Ukrainian front is collapsing, the loss of Coal is only the beginning of a catastrophe — Arestovich,” and presented him saying, “The training system has failed, there is no basic motivation in the troops, but there is an understanding that the stated goal of the war — reaching the borders of 1991 — is unrealistic in these specific circumstances. In addition, there is no motivation due to domestic politics, where every day those in power put forward new proposals on restrictions on citizens – from cultural and language bans to economic ones, new corruption scandals open almost every day and the mess in the management of the army and the state intensifies.”
A “DavidZ” posted also on October 2nd lengthier quotations from Arestovich’s video:
“In two to three months, well, three to four, the front, which is currently crumbling in two directions, and slowly retreating in three, will begin to crumble in six or seven. This flow will become uncontrollable. This means a collapse of the front,” he said.
He stated that in this case, the Russian army will shift the war to maneuver warfare, leading to “the collapse of the front as such.”
“When all these 700,000 with automatic weapons and artillery cannot hold the front line, the enemy will start to rapidly advance inward, cutting off Kharkov and reaching Poltava, Dnepr, and Zaporozhye. This will lead to the loss of key industrial centers of Ukraine,” the former presidential office advisor noted.
Arestovych identified the main reason for what is happening as the lack of a reserve of motivated infantry.
“No drones can help reach the borders of any year if infantry soldiers do not walk this path under enemy fire… The training system has failed, there is a lack of basic motivation in the troops, but there is an understanding that the declared goal of the war – reaching the borders of 1991 – is unrealistic under these specific circumstances,” he explained.
“Moreover, motivation is lacking due to internal politics, where every day new proposals are put forward by the powerful to limit citizens’ rights: from cultural and language bans to economic restrictions. Almost every day, new corruption scandals emerge, and the chaos in the management of the army and the state intensifies,” added the former presidential office advisor.
Arestovych believes that “now the only way out is to sober up, stop the war, and begin a complete reorganization of the state system.”
On 26 October 2024, the widely respected military-affairs blogger “Simplicius,” headlined “SITREP 10/5/24: Post-Ugledar Landscape Unfurls into Dark Ukrainian Future,” and reported, from numerous reliable sources on both sides of the conflict in Ukraine, the end closing-in on the existing Government of Ukraine. One in Ukraine headlined on October 2nd, (translated) “’We Simply Had No One and Nothing Left to Fight with’ — A Rpresentative of the 72nd Brigade Battalion Headquarters on Leaving Vuhledar.” It reported:
After two years of defense of Vuhledar, the Ukrainian military withdrew from the city. Today, the Khortytsia operational and strategic grouping of troops officially announced this: ‘Having suffered numerous losses as a result of prolonged fighting, the enemy did not give up trying to capture Vuhledar. In an attempt to take control of the town at any cost, they managed to send reserves to conduct flanking attacks that exhausted the defenses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. As a result of the enemy’s actions, the city was threatened with encirclement. The Higher Command gave permission for a maneuver to withdraw units from Vuhledar in order to save personnel and military equipment, and to take up a position for further actions.’
That was a long and strategically crucial battle.
Also on October 6, Russia’s RT News headlined “Russian ambassador to US returns home: Anatoly Antonov has left Washington, during a period of fractured ties between the two countries,” and reported that, “‘The Russian ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, has ended his service in Washington and is on his way to Moscow,’ the Foreign Ministry said in a brief statement carried by Russian news agencies. The ministry did not provide any additional details and has so far not named his successor.” This is normally the sort of thing that happens shortly before a war breaks out between two countries, in order to protect their diplomats from dangers where they are, such as becoming hit by their own country’s weapons.
Both of the two U.S. Presidential nominees have been saying nothing about whether, as the President, they would go all the way to WW3 in order to prevent Russia from winning in Ukraine. And none of the ‘news’ media have asked about that. The only possible exception is that on September 17, Donald Trump co-authored with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at The Hill, “Negotiate with Moscow to end the Ukraine war and prevent nuclear devastation,” which contradicts not only what Kamala Harris has said, but some of the things that Trump has said. It is entirely consistent, however, with what RFK Jr. has been saying. On the other hand, even Mr. Kennedy has not addressed specifically the question of whether, as the President, he would go all the way to WW3 in order to prevent Russia from winning in Ukraine. So: there has been no public discussion of such a question. Perhaps the American pubic don’t even care about it. Would most people be interested in a candidate’s position on it? If not, then is this a democracy? And if so, then is this a democracy? In fact, wouldn’t a democracy be focused upon this issue above any other? Americans aren’t focusing upon it at all. Nor are the publics in any of the U.S. Government’s colonies.
The post Biden-Harris Killed the 2022 Ukraine-War Peace Deal first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Biden officials have reportedly admitted that ceasefire negotiations amid Israel’s war on Lebanon and genocide in Gaza have been suspended, despite public insistence by high-powered figures within the administration that they are working around the clock for a ceasefire. The Biden administration has given up on ceasefire talks after first proposing a deal for a 21-day ceasefire between…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
2024 presidential candidates: Former President Donald Trump (left) and current Vice President Kamala Harris IMAGE/ABCNews
When faced with two adverse unethical options, a person may try to avoid the more harmful immoral choice. This is ancient strategy people have talked and written about, and applied in various situations. In the US political parlance, the term “lesser of two evils,” is choosing the evil that will be less damaging.
There is talk about voting for the “lesser of two evils.” The rationale behind this thinking is to prevent the greater “evil” from gaining power and thus causing more havoc. This is an intelligent thing to do especially in countries where million of peoples’ future is at stake — but when the United States is involved, the well being of the entire planet is at stake.
In the US, it is understood by many that the greater evil is the Republican Party or the proverbial Charybdis. Noam Chomsky once said, “Republican Party is the most dangerous organisation in human history.” The lesser evil’s title goes to the Democratic Party or the proverbial Scylla.
In dire situations, one could accept voting for the lesser evil – Democrats. But when the Democrats don’t want to address the root causes then voting for them election after election turns into a futile exercise, while the sick state keeps on deteriorating. This is a serious problem. It’s like a person who has a tumor that in initial stages is ignored due to carelessness. However, a timely realization as to the consequences rushes in emergency for treatment as if he/she had not headed for the doctor, the malignancy would have proved fatal.
The above example is equally applicable to the United States — a Sick Empire — physically, that is, in economic decline and mentally, “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today,” to use Dr Martin Luther King Jr’s words spoken on April 4, 1967. The US has steadfastly held on to the title of “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today” as if it doesn’t want to prove Dr King wrong in his assessment.
The Republican Party openly supports the capitalist class by lowering taxes for the rich, opposing unions, resisting pay raises, waging foreign wars or domestic ones, such as “war against drugs,” etc. In return, they get favors and election campaign contributions.
But there is something to be said about the lesser evil of the two choices.
Democratic Party is not that naked — it uses a fig leaf to cover up its hypocrisy, it pretends to be what it is not; it claims it is working for the common folks, complains about rich not paying taxes (but does not do anything), and so on. In reality, they do very little for the general public because they too get lots of money from the big donors to contest elections. LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman (worth $2.5 billion), in 2024 gave $10 million to Biden-Harris campaign donated another $7 million to Kamala Harris (after Biden quit the presidential bid and nominated Harris as the Democratic candidate, without any intra-party election). Hoffman wants Harris to fire Lina Khan, the FTC chair who is fighting big corporate mergers and monopolistic corporate practices. This is what Hoffman said:
“I do think that Lina Khan is a person who is not helping America in her job in what she’s doing. And so, I would hope that Vice President Harris would replace her.”
Expedia Chairman Barry Diller (worth $4.5 billion) called Khan a “dope,” but then he said he misspoke; he wants her fired. Who knows, may be Harris would listen to her paymasters, as has been the custom.
It is sad that people like Lina Khan, who are honest, incorruptible, and are working for the welfare of the majority, and are rare to find in government, have to face so much opposition from the billionaire class. Lina Khan and people like her are hated by the rich, like Hoffman because they try to enforce laws which assist most people rather than fattening the already obese (financially) like Hoffman and his ilk.
The Young Turks put it rightly: “… we don’t have a democracy. We have an open auction 100%.“
Biden, when he was running for president, had told the wealthy donors:
“I mean, we may not want to demonize anybody who has made money.” “The truth of the matter is … nobody has to be punished. No one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change.”
One cannot not sympathize with the Democratic presidential candidates who are (or aiming to be) multimillionaires, who hobnob with billionaires, are mostly interviewed by anchors making millions of dollars, who have to feign they are for ordinary people, in order to get their vote.
But the problem with this line of strategy is that it is simply prolonging the onset of the overdue implosion rather than trying to eliminate the rot in the system. If you watch or read the news and various commentaries or watch late night shows in the liberal news media, many a times they are making fun of Donald Trump, his wife and children and portray him as an evil person and thus imply Biden/Harris are virtuous people. (In the mid 1980s, then President Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an “evil empire” hinting that the US is a sanctimonious entity.) These same people never accuse Biden or his cabinet, as bloodthirsty murderers.
So why go for the lesser evil?
The Democrats and the Republicans are almost twins,1 as far as warring against foreign countries or overthrowing their governments is concerned. It’s within the US, where the slight difference comes into play. Democrats would not want to go total fascist at home — they permit some freedom to maintain the facade of the US being “the greatest democracy.” On the other hand, the Republicans want to treat, actually mistreat, most people indiscriminately, within and without the US, in the same fascist manner. Many people in the US don’t mind foreign countries becoming victim of US imperialistic fascist policies, either due to their ignorance or indifference or are misled by Republicans’ and Democrats’ warmongering or news media’s and think tanks’ fear inducing presentation etc. On the other hand, many people are frightened now that, it seems if Trump wins, fascism is going to hit most people in the US. That’s why most people prefer the lesser evil.
Mind you, fascism has never been absent in many people’s life in the US, such as incarcerating a huge segment of population, people who are victims of police violence (injured or killed), PTSD-(Post traumatic stress disorder) traumatized soldiers returning from fabricated bloody wars, homeless people, and so on. Most Democrats haven’t created meaningful improvement in the lives of these people.
The Democrat and Republican led governments have overthrown many governments and are still trying to overthrow many more but Democrats don’t want Trump to do that in the US, such as the purported January 6, 2021 attempt.2 It was an unorganized, clumsily executed foolish attempt. Trump should have consulted the experienced hands from both parties and also the CIA before the January 6 attempt. He would have succeeded, for sure.
Is there a difference between Trump and Harris etc.?
Without a second thought, one has to admit that Trump’s virile oral member is long and ejects idiocies and hate on a non-stop basis. Trump is a very cruel person, indeed. But the question is: are Biden, Harris, Anthony Blinken, Lloyd Austin, Harris’ supporter greater evil Dick Cheney any less cruel?
No.
In fact, they are more cruel and have excessively more blood of innocents on their hands than Trump has, that is, until now. His next term will be full of vengeance and who knows, greater bloodshed. Isn’t Biden too full of hate for Palestinians, Lebanese, and Iranians or anyone fighting for their rights and want to go their separate ways? Biden, a grandfather, who still grieves for his son Beau Biden’s death in 2015 due to glioblastoma has neither shed a tear nor has grieved for the 42,511 Palestinians (including 16,660 children) plus 1974 [A Lancet article from 10 July 2024 reported a much higher estimate: “Applying a conservative estimate of four indirect deaths per one direct death9 to the 37 396 deaths reported, it is not implausible to estimate that up to 186 000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza.” — DV ed.] (which includes 127 children) Lebanese killed by Israel with US encouragement, arms and ammunition, money, personnel, and intelligence –without which Israel could not have caused such incredible loss of lives. The opposition to war within the US is squashed by the Israel Lobby.
At this juncture in human history, who deserves more loathing, Trump or Biden and Harris? Of course, today the answer is the Biden/Harris team.
ENDNOTES:
The post Is the “Lesser Evil” Really Less than the “Greater Evil?” first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
As the anniversary of the beginning of Israel’s genocide in Gaza approaches, a group of nearly 100 American health care workers back from Gaza have estimated that the true death toll in Gaza is at least four times higher than the official reported count, if not far higher. In a devastating letter sent to President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris this week, 99 health workers who…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Last year, just days into Israel’s genocide in Gaza, a bureau within the State Department raised objections to over a dozen arms shipments to Israel, citing “gross violations” of human rights by the unit slated to receive them. But these objections were ignored, a new report finds, and that unit would later be involved in the single deadliest massacre of the genocide so far.
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
The Israeli military killed American citizen Hajj Kamel Ahmad Jawad in a bombing on Lebanon on Tuesday, in the latest instance of Israel killing an American amid its U.S.-sponsored massacres. Jawad hailed from Dearborn, Michigan, and was visiting his hometown of Nabatieh in southern Lebanon when he was killed by an Israeli airstrike, according to his family. Jawad was there taking care of his…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Advocates are calling for the ousting of a top Biden administration official who has acted as the “shadow president” on Middle East policy, directing much of the administration’s decisions in the region as the U.S. has enabled Israel to plunge it into chaos and destruction. On Tuesday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said that Middle East adviser Brett McGurk “must go” after…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
President Joe Biden and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib on Saturday had notably different responses to Israel’s intense bombing campaign in Lebanon over the past 24 hours, which killed hundreds of people including key Hezbollah leaders. “Our country is funding this bloodbath,” Tlaib (D-Mich.) said on social media Saturday morning, sharing a post from Zeteo’s Prem Thakker with videos of the…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
The president of the AFL-CIO sent a letter to House Republicans on Thursday asking them not to intervene in contract negotiations between the International Longshoremen’s Association and the U.S. Maritime Alliance, which could lead to the first East Coast port strike since 1977 if a deal is not struck by October 1. The letter came in response to another letter sent by Republican lawmakers to…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups are sharply criticizing the Biden administration for its decision this week to deploy additional troops to the Middle East as Israel is carrying out a major escalation of its attacks on Lebanon. Outspoken advocates for Palestinian rights, including Representatives Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) and Cori Bush (D-Missouri), have said that bolstering the U.S.
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Israel has forcibly displaced nearly 100,000 people in Lebanon over the course of just a few days, the UN has reported as Israeli forces appear to be gearing up for a ground invasion of Lebanon. Just since Monday, at least 90,530 people in Lebanon have been forced to flee their homes, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported Wednesday.
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Calls have grown for Secretary of State Antony Blinken to resign or be impeached, after a bombshell report revealed that he lied to Congress about internal Biden administration recommendations that the U.S. suspend weapons shipments to Israel over myriad human rights violations — a move that one advocacy group said is “egregiously illegal.” Muslim and Arab rights groups and commentators said…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
As the death toll continued to climb in Lebanon amid Israel’s attacks on the country this week, President Joe Biden suggested in an address to the UN that Israel’s bombing campaign is legitimate, even as other officials in the chamber have warned that Israel’s massacres amount to war crimes. In his final address to the UN General Assembly as the U.S. president on Tuesday…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
The Pentagon has announced that it is sending additional U.S. troops to the Middle East “out of an abundance of caution” after Israel launched a series of attacks on Lebanon that have killed hundreds of people in a major escalation of its war. Pentagon Press Secretary Pat Ryder said in a press conference on Monday that the U.S. is sending some military members to the region to bolster the 40…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) reiterated a call for the U.S. to stop sending weapons to Israel on Monday as Israeli forces have launched an all-out assault on Lebanon in the 12th month of their genocide in Gaza. In response to the American embassy in Beirut advising that U.S. citizens flee Lebanon amid Israel’s major escalation of attacks on the country, Tlaib quipped, “It’s easier to stop…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Two new books reveal the shortcomings at the heart of the liberal critique of Trump voters.
This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.
Can we expand the state’s role in the economy while diminishing its capacity for war?
This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.
More than 33,000 Boeing factory workers in the Pacific Northwest voted to strike on September 13, in a monumental moment for labor that could determine the future of the already embattled aircraft company. After 95 percent of unionized workers rejected a tentative agreement with Boeing, 96 percent voted in favor of authorizing a strike — currently the largest in the country.
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Dr Alex Vickery-Howe wonders aloud if we’re going to wake up before American democracy implodes.
I’m calling it now: Democrats are idiots for turning on the incumbent and giving Donald Trump a clear path to the White House.
The news that donors were willing to withhold millions of dollars was stomach turning. Of course, people have the right to withhold a donation – it’s their money – but publicly knifing a president and playing into a conman’s hands was hardly a good look.
Now, the knife has sunk, and a good man has left the race. It’s almost like the Democrats and their key supporters have somehow forgotten what’s at stake in this upcoming election.
Here’s a refresher…
Trump’s resurgence is genuinely horrifying and may well see the end of contraception, the weaponisation of the justice department, the erosion of LGBTQI+ rights, the forced deportation of recent immigrants, an all-out assault against the American education system and the eventual installation of a Christian dictatorship. This isn’t fantasy… this is the stated intention of Project 2025. Despite his denials, Trump is a big fan of their work.
I could describe all of this as ‘unconstitutional’, because it’s the exact opposite of what the Founding Fathers wanted… but I’m not sure America cares about its own constitution anymore. That went out the window when Republicans sided with Russia and decided they were fine with Hitler being quoted in campaign rallies.
All of this, however, is what Margaret Atwood predicted when she wrote The Handmaid’s Tale. Should we be moving it off the ‘Fiction’ shelf and replacing it with something more far-fetched, such as Lance Armstrong’s biography, or The Art of the Deal?
Trump is so busy conning others that he probably doesn’t even realise that he too is being conned, used, and played. I don’t think Donnie wants to live in a country where pornography is banned. He was, allegedly, pretty upset that he couldn’t watch his favourite movies while he was living in the White House. He’s going to be more upset when he clicks on Stormy Daniel’s profile and finds a frustrating ‘Error: file not found’ message. I’ve a sneaking suspicion he’ll be put out when his next illegitimate child is carried to term too.
While we’re speaking about the benefits of the morning after pill… I don’t care about Hunter Biden any more than I care about Eric Trump. The desperation with which people are making this race about the children of the candidates is pitiful. Marjorie Taylor Greene whipping out Hunter’s penis has to be the low point. Parading poor Barron like mini-me is a close second. Haven’t we moved on from political dynasties?
Before I deconstruct the unfolding disaster around the betrayal of Biden, let me pivot to something else I’ve raised before that I really think Republicans need to consider…
You should be uniting around Tim Scott.
The collaboration between Trump and his previous Vice-Presidential stooge, Mike Pence, was bully and victim, or daddy and sub. It was an abusive relationship that plausibly could have ended in Pence’s death. Tim Scott has a stronger personality, and he’s well-liked in Washington, so it’s odd to me that he wasn’t the clear frontrunner to stand beside Trump on the GOP ticket this time.
The answer to that conundrum is probably that Scott is unwilling to be a stooge at all, and would actually challenge Trump. I guess the party faithful couldn’t handle that. Better to install J.D. Vance, a man who once linked Trump to both ‘Hitler’ and ‘heroin’, but whose moral code seems as changeable as the climate he denies.
When all the talk about replacing Biden in the top job – with little voter research beyond falling for the opposition’s argument – reached fever pitch among the Democrats, it was strange to me that no Republican strategist was watching Trump rave about wrestling with sharks and thinking that, maybe, Tim Scott could be the saner choice. Why didn’t that come up?
It’s one of those peculiar quirks of partisan alchemy that the Democrats had a workable candidate they decided to shank for nobody in particular, while the Republicans have a terrible candidate they still refuse to substitute for the younger, smarter ideologue waiting in the wings.
It just goes to show….
The right knows how to unify. The left turns on its own if the lattés aren’t the perfect temperature.
If the recent electoral process in France has taught us anything it’s that the French know how to get their act together and take on the far-right. The left and the centre-left saw the existential threat and joined forces in the name of reason. I wish the same could have happened to America in 2016, when Bernie and Hillary played tug-of-war with the leftist vote. Sarah Silverman’s cries to ‘unify’ were on the money. We’re seeing the same division play out in leftist circles now, and it may well lead to the same awful result.
I admire Bernie Sanders and I admire Hillary Clinton. They could have shared the ticket.
I admire Kevin Rudd and I admire Julia Gillard. They actually did share the ticket, and they still managed to knife each other until Australia was saddled with the idiocy of an Abbott government. The left needs to learn the value of loyalty. Sure, the right is disloyal too – Turnbull crept up behind Abbott and Scotty from Marketing crept up behind Turnbull – but they don’t tend to do it when they’re winning.
The left does.
Do you know who won more votes that any presidential candidate in US history? Joe Biden.
Do you know who won 95% of the delegates in the August Democratic convention? Joe Biden.
In the crucial Rust Belt states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, who do you think the people want to vote for? Steady Biden from… wait for it… Scranton, Pennsylvania… or a new candidate picked at the whim of Hollywood powerbrokers? Nothing feeds more into the ‘coastal elite’ narrative than that. It’s gonna be a gift for class warriors and catnip for Vance.
I knew that Biden wasn’t going to make it through to Election Day when comedian Bill Maher said:
“Above any matters of politics, or what’s right or wrong, the one thing I know for sure about America is this… it’s run by mean girls. Mean girls. In the press and in politics, and in life… and when they smell blood in the water, the lust to finish off a vulnerable person will never be denied.”
Maher is catching up to George Carlin in terms of astute philosophical observations made in jest. Once the blood hit the water, the opposition, the media, and erstwhile friends and allies, swarmed to feast on Biden’s reputation.
Where have I seen this before?
Remember, Clinton was the target of a smear campaign that boiled down to a bogus FBI search, a lot of cultish hype – ‘but her emails!’ – and a schoolyard nickname: Crooked Hillary. There was also a whiff of misogyny in her constantly being linked to her husband’s infidelity, which she, more than anyone, had the right to be pissed off about.
Even my own brilliant (I said brilliant… brilliant… please don’t fire me, sir) editor couldn’t resist making a crack about Bill in relation to Hillary when I pointed out that none of Trump’s political rivals could get away with sleeping with a porn star and bullying her into silence. Bill never stood against Trump, his tryst was 27 years ago, and Hillary is not her husband. It must irk her no end to have to keep asserting her individual worth.
But that’s the essence of playground politics. Throw mud. Invent a nickname. Repeat until it all sticks. Mean girls. Mean little boys. Adolescents who lack nuance, perspective, stakes, or a shred of empathy.
When Trump wheeled a group of women out for his debate with Hillary to make accusations against Bill, fresh on the back of Trump’s own ‘pussy grabbing’ scandal, I laughed out loud at the transparent desperation of the tactic. It shocked me then that his manipulative crap actually resonated with people. It shocks me today that the same dirty tricks are still resonating as he throws his toddler taunts at Biden.
‘Crooked’ Hillary was a lie. We now know Trump is the criminal with a list of convictions to his name, including being found liable for sexual assault.
‘Sleepy’ Joe is also a lie. Trump is exhibiting clear signs of dementia. Medical professionals have been highlighting this for years. Did you sit through his chat with Musk? I’ve literally had more coherent conversations with residents in nursing homes.
It’s the same trick: deflect your failings back on your opponent.
Both my grandmother and a close teacher died of dementia. It’s important to clock the difference between normal decline – slowness, reaching for words, lethargy – which Biden absolutely 100% exhibits vs the verbal glitches Trump slips into with scary regularity. Those glitches are a very, very different thing and a sign of actual dementia. You know, the clinical kind, as opposed to a pop cultural diagnosis.
For the people in my life who suffered from this disease, it was those tell-tale glitches that were the clearest sign to doctors. The same tell-tale glitches Trump is showing now. Eighteen months later and they were severely declined, didn’t know where they were, couldn’t string a sentence together and couldn’t decipher a gas bill. It’s a distinction between a slow but normal 80-year-old and the glitching, rambling early signs of true cognitive impairment.
Case in point: Biden quickly corrected himself when he accidentally introduced President Zelenskyy as ‘President Putin’ while Trump has repeatedly confused Nikki Haley for Nancy Pelosi without catching himself in the moment or showing the slightest hint that anything is amiss. And that’s before we mention the cats and the ducklings.
My expectation, had Biden stayed on, was that he would slow further and wouldn’t necessarily make a full term, but that the people around him would be stable and professional, and the President’s decision-making process would remain unhurried but sound until the day he left.
Trump, on the other hand, may not make it through the next few years without degenerating significantly, losing speech, losing his sense of self-awareness (if he has any now), and requiring full-time care. He’ll be like Boris Yeltsin, literally propped up by his minders, and we all know how that chapter in history ended… with the rise of Vladimir Putin.
Cognition can slip very quickly once those signs kick in and, for Trump, those signs kicked in a while back. My teacher was working until her 80th birthday but she was in care, thinking I was an actor on tour with her, by her 82nd. My grandmother, a habitual smoker, was offended when I suggested a box of cigarettes on her bedside table belonged to her. One day I walked into her room… and she had no idea who I was.
It is also a fact, of which I’m acutely aware, that some forms of dementia do run in families. Trump’s own father succumbed to Alzheimer’s and this, curiously, hasn’t been widely analysed by the media.
I’ve yet to see a medical professional declare that Biden is unwell in any way. Lots of unqualified journalists have suggested it. George Clooney has suggested it. A guy at my gym has suggested it. I’m not sure how that became headline news. I’m stunned that it shattered the candidacy of an outstanding President.
Meanwhile, Trump is freewheeling about sharks, Hannibal Lecter, the ‘oranges’ of the Mueller investigation, the dangers of solar power after dark, and random thoughts that not only lack coherency in the moment but any sense of objective reality.
If Biden had said half of these wacko things, he’d have been splashed all over the tabloids. Somehow, Trump sidesteps scrutiny because the press still treats him like the harmless character actor from The Apprentice. That’s not who he is. He’s the guy who wants to usher in martial law and take retribution against his enemies.
I look back respectfully on honourable Republican leaders, like the late John McCain who refused to belittle his political opponents and defended American healthcare shortly after his own surgery and not long before his death. Like Biden, McCain was a man of integrity. Draft dodger Trump mocked McCain for being captured during the Vietnam War. That’s not just low… it’s slimy.
It would be challenging, I’m sure, for an old-school politician to be confronted by someone as fundamentally unscrupulous as Trump, and I do understand why Democrats became concerned by Biden’s subdued response, but fracturing into warring pieces was not the answer.
It was time to rally. The Democrats chose to collapse.
The truth has never mattered when it comes to Trump. Hillary isn’t a criminal but Trump himself is. Biden isn’t mentally unfit, but Trump himself is. Haven’t we caught on yet? It’s the same con, the same projection, and America is about to fall for it all over again. To quote one of Trump’s own catchphrases – something I hardly ever do – there’s really only one word for this: Sad.
I wonder if the Romans were this smug when Rome fell. I’m seeing a lot of people revel in these attacks against Biden. Cenk, you’re great, but you’re never gonna be President. George, I’m a fan, but the guy who starred in Batman & Robin shouldn’t be giving anyone career advice.
Attacking Biden four months out from a potentially catastrophic election wasn’t edgy or clever. It certainly wasn’t wise. It was very, very far from tactically sound. I’m not an American national, so I’ll leave it for others to decide if it was ‘patriotic’… but, from a global perspective, what we’re seeing is a country handing its honour back to a criminal. America might not make it through another Trump term.
Tom Nichols summed it up:
“The real tragedy is that, in a serious country, Biden might step down without incident, and a normal race would continue, because decent people would have banished Trump from the public square long ago.”
I’ll risk being laughed at for saying it earnestly: Biden is a good guy. He is. Look into his history, look at what he has confronted and transcended in his life, and ask yourself how a weak coward like Trump would have fared under those same circumstances. Ask yourself who has integrity, who has character, and who is a fragile man-baby pretending to be tough while shadowy figures, like Miller and Bannon, and foreign rulers, like Putin and Kim Jong Un, merrily pull his strings.
Trump is not a good guy, and he’s not even a particularly capable bad guy. He’s just an empty guy. So sad.
It disgusted me to watch Biden being assaulted by his own party and by a wider network of media hacks and “activists” who may as well be on the GOP’s payroll. Some people are still enjoying this pile on. Well, enjoy four more years of the felon-in-chief. You won’t have anyone else to blame but your own mirrors. There are several reasons why this strategy is suicidal:
Michael Moore once put a Ficus forward for political office to demonstrate that a plant was a stronger candidate than the opposition. The same applies here. In a choice between Trump and literally anyone – or anything – you don’t vote Trump.
If anyone is still interested in being objective rather than kneejerk and emotional, the fact is, Biden has been a very successful president. In everything from birth control to gun safety (admittedly two things Republicans hate) Biden has been effective.
He has responded to the climate emergency with positive green initiatives that benefit rather than alienate farmers; he has given food producers a direct boost; he has relieved student debt; he has cracked down on cybercrime; he has repaired crumbling infrastructure; he has actually been tough with America’s foreign adversaries instead of just telling people he’s tough; he has strengthened the NATO alliance; he has lowered drug prices for families; and he has presided over skyrocketing employment figures. What do people want?
Joe Biden’s opponent is not in the same league.
Besides being an outlaw and a rapist, Donald Trump was a rat-shit president who bailed out the rich while stifling minimum wage growth (i.e. directly betraying his supporters); refused to believe Covid-19 was a problem, even as record numbers of Americans lay dying (i.e. directly betraying his supporters); and cosied up to dictators eager to exploit the US (i.e. directly betraying his supporters).
History has judged him and there is little to redeem the Don from the ash heap of persistent failure. For his supporters, bringing him back is like cutting off your own hand to resurrect Voldemort. He’s never gonna be grateful.
I don’t understand how there was even a contest.
In the blue corner: A man who overcame personal tragedy to become a strong and empathetic leader when history needed him. Biden proved himself to be intelligent, measured, hardworking and kind. He remains a stable choice, surrounded by excellent people. His weakness – if it can be called that – was being undervalued by a nation that equates belligerence with heroism.
In the red corner: A man who was given everything by his rich daddy to become a petulant, vindictive, dishonest, sleazy, stupid criminal. Trump is a textbook illustration of what happens when narcissism goes unchecked. He’s a pathetic candidate, surrounded by nationalist extremists, proud Nazis and Christofascist thugs. Small of mind if not in stature, he only wants to get back into power to settle his grievances. He doesn’t give a damn about his flock. If this monster returns to the Oval Office, he will decimate and humiliate his country a second time.
And the Democrats who fight internally and let him waltz back in while they bitch about each other will have no right to complain on election night. They’ll have opened the door.
Both of the original candidates are probably too old for the gig. Both are older, in fact, than Bill Clinton is now. Both of the original candidates have some decline. Biden is slow and prone to gaffes. Trump is a raving half-wit who is obsessed with faucets and afraid of windmills.
One presided over a calm and prosperous America. The other turned his nation into a global punchline, betrayed his own base by favouring the wealthy, saluted North Korea, worshipped Russia, and pretended Covid wasn’t killing his own citizens.
One planned for the future and put initiatives into place that will continue to bear fruit and have a positive impact for decades to come. The other sticks his fingers in his ears whenever anyone mentions climate science, boasts about tax evasion, preys on the vulnerable, enjoys casual sexual assault, mocks American veterans, and gets a little coy if Jeffrey Epstein’s name comes up in an interview. Go figure.
One cared about voters. The other harasses poor people for donations to his personal legal fund.
One respected democracy. The other is a hypocrite and a sore loser who calls his opponents ‘snowflakes’ and then launches a coup when an election doesn’t go his way.
One wanted to be president. The other wants to be dictator for life.
For reasons that history will regard as insane, America chose to axe the former… and now the latter is laughing.
There is now, of course, a new candidate in the blue corner…. Fresh from her strong debate performance, Vice-President Kamala Harris is riding a wave of popularity, which, hopefully, extends into those crucial states I’ve mentioned above. That is where this contest will be decided. It doesn’t really matter if Los Angeles loves her.
While I’m unnerved by her repeated advocacy for the fracking industry, her militarism and her love of guns, I’m hooked on the poetry of Kamala, a seasoned prosecutor, stepping up to humble Trump, a seasoned gangster.
Nevertheless, the wisdom, or otherwise, of replacing a proven winner in President Biden remains to be seen. Further internal division will be terminal, so the Democrats better unite now and unite clearly.
Regardless of who steps into his shoes and into the Rose Garden, I’m happy to go on record and say that Biden deserved better. Clooney and I can agree to disagree. The Ides of March is an underrated Clooney film – most of his films are great, really – but the title feels somehow apt in the wake of this betrayal of the President by those who should have been defending him.
One thing we should all see now is the pattern.
‘Crooked’ Hillary.
‘Sleepy’ Joe.
It looks like they’re struggling to find something that sticks with Kamala, but they will….
Next time a stupid nickname comes up in the playground, let’s not fall for it again. Ten to one it will just be another example of Donald Trump deflecting from his own inadequacy.
The post ‘Crooked’ Hillary and ‘Sleepy’ Joe: Let’s Not Fall For This Act a Third Time appeared first on New Matilda.
This post was originally published on New Matilda.