Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Melania Trump Kneecaps Top Bolton Aide


By Daniel McAdams - November 13, 2018 at 03:42PM

undefined

Hooray for First Lady Melania Trump! In a refreshingly - and shockingly - frank statement, the relatively quiet First Lady has issued a statement through her spokeswoman today making it clear that top National Security Council aide Mira Ricardel needs to hit the bricks. 

Ricardel, Deputy National Security Adviser under John Bolton, is said to have "berated people in meetings, yelled at professional staff, argued with the first lady and spread rumors about [Defense Secretary] Mattis." But denying NSC resources to the First Lady in support of Melania Trump's recent trip to Africa may have been the last straw. That and her tussling with the First Lady's staff over seating assignments on the Africa-bound plane.

According to, Stephanie Grisham, the First Lady's spokeswoman, "It is the position of the Office of the First Lady that she no longer deserves the honor of serving in this White House."

In the Kremlinology of White House power watching, what is most interesting about this dust-up is that Ricardel is firmly in the Bolton wing and has repeatedly clashed with White House Chief of Staff Kelly and Defense Secretary Mattis. 

While it is currently unclear whether Ricardel has actually been fired, the reported move by the First Lady marks her most public foray into personnel issues. Is the First Lady looking out for President Trump's flank as second-tier neocon attack dogs nip at his ankles? We can only hope so!

What does that mean for the NSC's top dog? Might the days of John "Regime Change" Bolton be numbered as President Trump's National Security Advisor? We can only hope!

Last month Bolton's chief of staff, Fred Fleitz, unexpectedly resigned his position after just a couple of months on the job. Bolton has described Fleitz as "a longtime friend and adviser." Adding that, "he's been a valuable member of the National Security Council team."

Fleitz claimed that he decided to ditch his powerful position at the right hand of National Security Advisor Bolton because he was promised the top job at the relatively minor neoconservative think tank, Center for Security Policy. Insiders claim Fleitz's hardline neoconservative views, particularly his previously stated position  that Islamic Sharia was "creeping" worldwide, had been a political liability to the White House.

Why the move on Ricardel by Melania? The First Lady only became a permanent US resident two years after the neocons pushed President Clinton into an unprovoked attack on her native former Yugoslavia. Is it possible the quiet Melania has retained memories of what monsters they are and is now determined to rid the Trump Administration of those scheming murderers? We shouldn't slip too deeply into this fantasy, but if that is your intent, Madame First Lady, please allow us to provide you with our top ten pink slip recommendations...


from Ron Paul Institute NeoCon Watch

via IFTTT

Friday, November 2, 2018

Do They Even Understand Economics?

 
I know, I know, we should be more civil. We should be nice to one another. Well, I tried that for many years. I tried having civil discourse, using reason and logic, trying to reach a consensus, but it just doesn't work when you are dealing with stupid people. When they have nothing to offer, when they can't debate on the merits or facts, they just call you names and try to shout you down. My patience with that bullshit ran out a long time ago.

There is no excuse for the stupidity I see out there. I used to accept that people can be ignorant of something, because they just haven't learned it yet, but times have changed. We live in an information age, where anything you want to know is at your fingertips. A few clicks on a computer and education is right there on the screen and through your speakers. Ahh, but why learn something that will disturb, maybe even destroy your world view? You believe something to be true, you do not want to have that belief proven wrong, so you choose not to learn anything that might refute it. This is the case with liberals and economics today.

Listen, I am going to break this down for you and try to make it as simple as possible. Once again we see idiots like Shumer catering to his base, by promising to "stick it" to the big corporations. he wants to "punish" them for making too much money and not paying enough taxes. I have even seen liberals who have or have had their own business buy into this insanity and they should know better.
OK, here goes; The ABC Company makes widgets. They sell so many widgets in a year that they make a very good profit. They pay the prescribed current tax rate on their income. Ah, but some politicians and the useful idiots who support them don't think the company pays enough, so the politicians dutifully seek to increase the tax rate on companies like The ABC Company. Let us say that this time the liberals get their way and the corporation has to pay a higher tax. Great, say the liberals, that will show them. But, the ABC Company did not get to be where they are by being poor businessmen...or stupid. They know that they can still sell widgets, because lots of people and other businesses need widgets. What to do?

Cut back on production? That may ultimately have to be done if sales drop. Lower the price on widgets? No, that is not going to bring more money into the company's coffers. What else could they possibly do? I know - RAISE PRICES! Of course! There are still people who need the widgets and they will buy them. There will be others who will not be able to afford them and they won't buy them. By not buying them their own business, which needs the widgets, will suffer. People will have to be let go, the business may even go under. Those individuals who buy widgets may or may not continue to buy them, but if they do they will pay a higher price, so that The ABC Company protects its own profits and business model.

In the end who is actually suffering because of the liberal desire to "punish" the mean old corporation? That's right, boys and girls, you and I, the consumer, suffers. We suffer by paying higher prices and we suffer when businesses that can no longer afford the cost of the widgets have to close, thus putting people out of work. Ah, but that is the insidious plan, isn't it? If they no longer have a job they will seek help from the government and the government, especially liberals, wants that dependence. If you depend on the government to take care of you then you are more likely to vote for liberals, right?

This is economics broken down to its most basic parts. It is so simple that even middle and high school students can understand it, when it is presented to them. Thus, we are to draw only two possible conclusions from this continued willful ignorance by liberal adults; 1) They really are that stupid and not capable of grasping the concept of economics or 2) They know exactly what they are doing and it serves their agenda.

Which do you think it is?

Friday, October 26, 2018

Digital Book Burners


By Kurt Nimmo - October 26, 2018 at 01:03PM

undefined

Jamie Fly, a former high-ranking Bush era neocon, believes you shouldn’t have the right to post on social media.

“Fly went on to complain that ‘all you need is an email’ to set up a Facebook or Twitter account, lamenting the sites’ accessibility to members of the general public. He predicted a long struggle on a global scale to fix the situation, and pointed out that to do so would require constant vigilance,” write Jeb Sprague and Max Blumenthal.

This attitude shouldn’t come as a surprise. Neocons believe they are a special breed, the chosen few of an intellectual crème de la crème, and the rest of us are merely bread and circus spectators on the sidelines as they forge our collective history (and increasingly possible ruin).

Fly is a research associate at the Council on Foreign Relations. He “served” in the National Security Council and the Defense Department during the Bush presidency. He also worked at the Claremont Institute and the American Enterprise Institute. Fly tutored presumptive presidential candidate Marco Rubio on foreign policy and he is the former director of the Foreign Policy Initiative, a staunch neocon advocacy group founded by arch neocons William Kristol, Robert Kagan, and Dan Senor.

He is now a senior fellow and director of the Asia program at the German Marshall Fund, an organization funded by the US government and NATO. The German Marshall Fund organized the Alliance for Securing Democracy and its Hamilton 68 effort to destroy alternative media under the false (and largely debunked) claim it is a cutout for Russia and Vladimir Putin who are, we are reminded daily, dedicated to destroying democracy and taking down the exceptional and indispensable nation.

Jamie Fly and his coconspirators Laura Rosenberger and J.M. Berger know the Russians aren’t responsible for thousands of alternate media websites and social media accounts. They know this phenomenon, which began with the birth of the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s, is homespun and has absolutely nothing to do with Russia. It is their mission to make sure the establishment is free to promulgate its lies and war propaganda without counterbalance and the interruption of truth.

These folks are digital book burners on par with Nazis who burned books in Berlin on the Opernplatz in May of 1933. Like the Nazis, they want to silence those who counter the narrative. For the Nazis, the targets were communists, socialists, anarchists, and all who opposed fascism, while our new book burners—liquidators of heresy against the ruling elite—are focused on groups and individuals challenging the lies and half-truths of the state regardless of ideology.

For the elite, populism and nationalism represent a twin threat to the emerging globalist scheme of a one-world government and currency directed by a cadre of unelected bureaucrats and ideologues.

Donald Trump portrayed himself as a patriot and nationalist—Make America Great Again—however after the election the same old crowd of CFR operatives, Goldman Sachs alumni, and hardcore neocons staffed his administration, thus making the realization of his campaign promises virtually impossible.

The ruling elite, their functionaries and proxies have declared war on “alternative facts,” that is to say information contrary and even hostile to the narrative. While it is true the corporate media has lost some influence, it still projects a powerful influence on public opinion, especially in the current highly polarized political climate.

Fly and his digital book burning associates will not stop until the last vestiges of the alternative media are wiped out. This process is underway now with a number of popular alternative media websites losing significant traffic following removal from social media.

As Mr. Fly says, this is only the beginning. They will not stop until the challenge is defeated and the digital information landscape is once again completely in control of the psychopaths at the top and their well-paid minions pushing the idiotic lie that Putin and the Russians are responsible.

Reprinted with permission from KurtNimmo.blog.

from Ron Paul Institute NeoCon Watch

via IFTTT

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s New Regime Change Target: Saudi Arabia


By Adam Dick - October 16, 2018 at 04:10PM

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has long been among the most vehement advocates of foreign intervention in the United States Senate, supporting US interventions for “regime changes” across the world. Now Saudi Arabia has joined the list of countries where Graham has demanded regime change. Interviewed Tuesday morning at the Fox News show Fox & Friends, Graham declared that Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman “has got to go.”

While proclaiming in the interview that he has been Saudi Arabia’s “biggest defender on the floor of the United States Senate,” Graham says that bin Salman is “toxic” and a “wrecking ball” and had Jamal Khashoggi “murdered in a consulate in Turkey” earlier this month. So long as bin Salman is in charge in Saudi Arabia, Graham promises to refuse or “do business with” or visit Saudi Arabia. Graham also says in the interview that he will be pushing to “sanction the hell out of Saudi Arabia.”

Watch Graham’s interview here:




from Ron Paul Institute NeoCon Watch

via IFTTT

Saturday, October 13, 2018

Max Boot: The Purists of NeverTrumpers


By Jack Kerwick - October 13, 2018 at 08:45AM

undefined

While there doubtless exists exceptions to the rule, the Trump era has made it painfully clear to those who are willing to look that, generally speaking, the left is devoid of principle.

For example, during George W. Bush’s tenure in the White House, the American (and European) left was vociferously “anti-war.” Most Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq, but once Americans began to recognize the war for the unmitigated debacle that it was, Democrats, being the crassest of opportunists, not only turned against it; they led the left’s campaign of vilification against Bush.

Now, the Iraq War was indeed a conflagration, one for which every politician and media personality who used their influence to advocate on its behalf should be eternally apologetic. And GW Bush is as richly deserving of the judgment passed upon him by the American public near the end of his second term as any public figure has ever been (and I’m saying this as someone who has always voted Republican and who, to my eternal shame, supported Bush both in 2000 and 2004).

However, Bush and his war’s critics on the left have proven themselves to be unequivocal frauds.

Although “conservative” media personalities and the Republican bureaucrats and politicians for whom they had customarily run cover still speak as if Barack Obama was some kind of pacifist, the truth of the matter is that Obama enjoys the dubious distinction of having used the American military to wage war with more countries and over a longer period of time than any other president in the country’s history:

For eight (long) years, Obama dropped over 100,000 bombs on seven countries.

Yet the left’s “anti-war” stance evaporated overnight once Obama was elected to the presidency.

Now that Donald J. Trump has become the left’s chief villain of choice, Bush and virtually every one of the left’s Republican villains from yesteryear—i.e. those who are either “Never Trump” or who distance themselves from Trump—derive the same benefit that Obama reaped insofar as they now receive a pass for the crimes with which the left once charged them.

One Republican—or is it a former Republican?—who is particularly conspicuous in this regard is the man who once served as a foreign policy adviser for John McCain: Max Boot.

Boot, a neoconservative pundit who describes himself as a “military historian,” is every bit the war monger as was the man whose presidential aspirations he tirelessly endeavored—and failed—to realize. A one-time star of sorts of Big Conservatism, Boot’s voice could once be heard quite regularly on talk radio, Fox News, and in the pages of The Weekly Standard, Commentary, and other staples of neoconservative media.

Admittedly, though, his voice is not hard to miss, for it belongs to a chorus composed by his fellow ideological travelers, a chorus that, almost without exception, repeats a single song: the call for American hegemony over the planet.

Remarkably, Boot’s voice may have been the loudest. Even among this crowd, Boot’s crowd, of militarist zealots, Boot’s bellicosity proved itself second to none. This is no mean feat.

Boot was a tireless advocate for the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions, short-term battles, by his lights, in the long-term neocon project to fundamentally remake the Middle East in the image of “Democracy.” Even after well over a million inhabitants of these Islamic countries were killed, nearly a million children orphaned, and hundreds of thousands more displaced, maimed, and traumatized, Boot was among those who turned his attention away from the bloody mess that he helped to create and toward Syria, the next Middle Eastern Islamic country upon which he wanted to unleash the full might of the American military.

Not only did Boot exercise his influence toward the end of bringing about the incalculable suffering and carnage of massive numbers of Middle Eastern Muslims. Thousands of American men, soldiers, died for the sake of prosecuting Boot’s crusade for global Democracy, a dream that has been a nightmare for the families of the deceased, as well as for the many more who survived Boot’s wars over there, but who struggle here daily with the varieties of psychological and physical trauma with which the pursuit of Boot’s utopia has burdened them.

This is all worth revisiting, for Boot is now as staunchly “Never Trump” as he has always been staunchly in favor of war. In fact, he is among those Never Trump neoconservatives, lifelong Republicans, who is calling for the defeat of the GOP next month. This is necessary, Boot insists, in order to “rescue” the party and the conservative movement from the ravages visited upon it by the President and…“white nationalism.”

Not long ago, Boot—who now writes for The Washington Post and who contributes to MSNBC—wrote that he had just discovered the myriad of ways in which has benefitted from his “privilege” as a white male. His immense arrogance aside, that Boot is the consummate virtue-signaler, ever eager to ingratiate himself to the militantly anti-Trump left, is readily obvious by the fact that in this confessionary essay, Boot doesn’t once so much as hint at the possibility that it is his white male “privilege” that blinded him to the death and devastation of legions of Islamic peoples of color that could result, and that did result, from pursuing his own ends.

Nor, of course, did Boot apologize for any of this mayhem.

And yet this is the same man who now assumes the moral high ground over those like President Trump and his millions of supporters who not only don’t have any of the blood that Boot and his comrades have on their hands, but who want a more peaceful and humble foreign policy.

Max Boot is at least as contemptible, and perhaps even more so, than his new friends on the anti-Trump left. They truly deserve one another.

Reprinted with permission from LewRockwell.com.

from Ron Paul Institute NeoCon Watch

via IFTTT

Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Pompeo, Bolton To Headline Shady Anti-Iran Event During UNGA


By Eli Clifton and Derek Davison - September 25, 2018 at 03:01PM

undefined

On Tuesday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton are scheduled to deliver keynote addresses at United Against Nuclear Iran’s (UANI) annual “summit” during the United Nations General Assembly. This raises troubling red flags, to say the least, about the Trump administration’s Middle East policy and its ties to the most aggressive anti-Iran forces in the United States and in the region itself, including the ambassadors from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Bahrain.

The Trump administration insists that the goal of its “maximum pressure” policy toward Iran is not to effect regime change but rather to change the “behavior” of the Iranian government. If that’s the case, then the decision to send two senior foreign policy officials to this UANI event is puzzling. According to the organization’s guest list, in attendance will be virtually every prominent official both in the United States and overseas who has pushed for a military confrontation with Iran—a veritable who’s who of warmongers.

Beyond that, the decision to send Pompeo and Bolton to this event may be deeply inappropriate. UANI’s murky financial ties include links to questionable businessmen and shadowy foreign actors with possible ties to the massive 1MDB corruption scandal in Malaysia under investigation by the US Justice Department.

Uniting for War

UANI was founded in 2008 to “inform the public about the nature of the Iranian regime, including its desire and intent to possess nuclear weapons.” Its board, chaired by former US senator and ardent Iran hawk Joe Lieberman, includes a number of influential neoconservatives with well-known anti-Iran views, such as former Senator Mark Kirk, Ray Takeyh of the Council on Foreign Relations, and Wall Street Journal columnist Walter Russell Mead of the hardline Hudson Institute. Bolton himself is a past UANI board member and received at least $165,000 in consulting fees from the group’s partner organization, the Counter Extremism Project (CEP). UANI stridently opposed the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA), going so far as to part ways with its then-president, arms control expert Gary Samore, after Samore (who remains on UANI’s board) came out in support of the final deal.

The US intelligence community, Israeli intelligence, and the International Atomic Energy Agency have repeatedly contradicted UANI’s contention that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Likewise, its claims that Iran was involved in the 9/11 attacks have never been proven. Nevertheless, UANI has been a reliable source of talking points on both fronts for anti-Iran policymakers in Washington. It has pushed for a comprehensive array of measures intended to isolate Iran internationally, weaken its economy, and increase the possibility of a US-Iran military confrontation.

Though UANI has become one of the most prominent organizations in the anti-Iran policy world, relatively little is known about its internal workings or its financing. Financial documents acquired by LobeLog reveal that trusts controlled by billionaire investor Thomas Kaplan contributed $843,000 to UANI in 2013, nearly half of the group’s $1.7 million revenue in that year. GOP and Trump megadonors Sheldon and Miriam Adelsonalso contributed $500,000 in 2013. (That same year Adelson suggested that the United States should fire an “atomic weapon” at Iran rather than negotiate.) UANI’s budget ballooned to almost $5.2 million in 2016, but the source of the group’s ongoing funding is largely shrouded in mystery.

Evidence suggests that UANI has an array of sketchy relationships with foreign intelligence agencies and financial interests. Many of the questions about UANI swirl around its convoluted relationship with precious metals speculator Kaplan.

Fair Use Excerpt. Read the whole article here.

from Ron Paul Institute NeoCon Watch

via IFTTT

Monday, September 17, 2018

Republican Congressman Calls Syrian President Assad ‘the Butcher of Baghdad’ in War Geography Fail


By RT - September 17, 2018 at 06:54PM

undefined

In a clumsy attempt to attack a non-interventionist congressional colleague, Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger got his war geography mixed up — referring to Syrian President Bashar Assad as “the Butcher of Baghdad”.

In an interview with CNN at the weekend, Kinzinger lashed out at his Democratic House colleague, Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, for her controversial decision to meet with Assad in 2017, but ran into some geography trouble when trying to insult the Syrian president.
Kinzinger said that it was possible for Gabbard to be “against intervention” but “to meet with the Butcher of Baghdad is a whole other thing". Baghdad, of course, is the capital of Iraq, not Syria — but that didn’t seem to matter to Kinzinger or the CNN host, conservative political commentator S.E. Cupp, who seemed eager to condemn Gabbard herself, suggesting that the Hawaii congresswoman was “parroting Assad and Russian propaganda”  for pointing out that the US has taken the side of jihadist militants against Assad in the war-torn country.

During the interview, Kinzinger appealed for stronger US military intervention in Syria to protect the anti-Assad militants in Idlib. The Russian military has estimated that Idlib is about 70 percent controlled by various terrorist groups, including the Al-Qaeda-linked Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which were previously known as the Al-Nusra Front.

Ironically, Kinzinger should probably have known that Baghdad was not in Syria, given that he served in the US air force in both Iraq and Afghanistan during his military career.
Earlier this month, US President Donald Trump urged Russia and Syria not to launch any new offensive against the militant enclave, tweeting that Moscow and Damascus should not “recklessly attack” Idlib province and saying that it would be a “grave humanitarian mistake”.

Reprinted with permission from RT.

from Ron Paul Institute NeoCon Watch

via IFTTT