'John Bolton must go'

[Ursus Minor]

I never quite understood why John Bolton was made National Security Adviser in the first place.
Despite of his rumblings Trump doesn't actually seem to be a war hawk.
Maybe the Deep State had forced the President to accept him by some sort of a deal.

Surely it's good to see John Bolton go.

Even the Deep State might have felt that Bolton had gotten too awkward for his role.
I think the next edition of a National Security Adviser might be made to look new and improved (at first).

Expect someone who is sly, slick but nonetheless wicked...

 

[Ennio]

Wait and see. At least, I cherish a hope that help is on the way; It could well be in the form of common sense arriving suddenly into some brains (including mine) or some kind of Intelligence pouring into the planet and allowing the not so psycophatic elite to make decisions like this. (I prefer to forget the meteors at the moment)

There is much to be said about holding out hope and celebrating victories, and we simply don't know what kind of knock-on effects such a move may have on the non-linear nature of things - so I also don't want to be too cynical, or a debbie downer about this development either! A few weeks ago I was delighted to read Trump's comments about Bolton's willingness to wage war on the whole world if it was up to him. Bolton's firing, coupled with Trump's very outspoken stance on waging war willy nilly ala Bolton, is all for the good. And I agree with you ma, this does send some kind of signal to the universe.

By the same token, we still have psychopathic elitists like Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Sigal Mandelker who are in positions of power - and relentlessly pushing for polices designed to wreck Iran's economy and stability. Or Elliot Abrams who was basically hired to help overthrow Maduro in Venezuela. Then there's the entrenched State Department that pursues the demonization of Russia - even as Trump tries to make overtures towards detente. And this list goes on. US aggression towards Iran and Venezuela has arguably become worse over the last couple of years, not better.

Can we hope and assume that Trump is trying to bring on some kind of geopolitical healing crisis - where things sort of have to get worse before they can get better? Maybe. But in the meantime, some situations have been brought close to brink; and I cannot help but think that the new tensions have the neocon and neoliberal types beying for more blood, as they can already smell it in the water. Can Trump really turn back the tide now that things have gotten so far? I don't think that he has that much power, and is simply, in the medium to long-term, outgunned.

Maybe Trump has been doing "both" and Bolton is just the latest "to fall from grace"?

It's obvious, the elite establishment and the neo-cons were completely against Trump from the very beginning of his Presidency. Trump had to know what he would be up against? One of the first things he did, as President, was sign "a bunch of indictment's" which were then "sealed". I reason, he couldn't have done that without some sort of pre-planned blueprint to follow - a game plan of his own?

There's no doubt that the elite establishment underestimated Trump's resolve or depth of vision. Apparently one of reasons that Gen Flynn may have been hired was because he had the know-how to implement military tribunals to prosecute cases against the deep state 5th column in the US. So yes, I'm sure Trump had something of a game plan going in, and meant what he said about intending to drain the swamp.

Trump may have acted like "he acquisitioned to the pressure" and let the neo-cons have their way but in reality, he's allowed them - to dig their own hole and when it gets deep enough where they have perjured themselves - he calls them out, discredits them and opens the door. Their career's ruined - by their own actions and deeds.

I think you mean 'acquiesced' to the pressure? Sounds like a good assessment to me; Mattis insisted to Trump in a cabinet meeting that Trump was a "war time President" and therefore just had to go along with 'the plan' in Somalia and elsewhere. Now Mattis, and Trump's other generals, are gone.

Political maneuvering might only be one part of a larger plan - that of exposing and interrupting the International syndicates that provide financial funding, through elicit acts (drugs, prostitution, etc.). Trump may have had a hand in the timing and arrest of Jeffery Epstein?
Epstein's activity and connections to Israel may have further weaken Netanyahu's prospects for re-election?

Quite possibly - I've wondered if Trump's ridiculously lopsided 'Deal of the Century', embassy move to Jerusalem, recognition part of the Golan Heights coming under Israel's thumb - was really just a ruse designed to give Netanyahu and the large body of hardliners in Israel "enough rope" so to speak. And giving the crocodile enough meat to chomp on in order to buy some time to maneuver. There has also been an uptick in the crackdown of sex trafficking operations in the US, from what I can tell.

So there is good - or potential good in a lot of what Trump does or would seem to want. I think, too, that it would be wrong to assume that we see all the peices and moves that Trump has to make simply to be as viable as he is. His position is difficult in the extreme, and he is embattled on many fronts. Having said this, Trump's sanctions and other policies towards Iran go way too far. We're at an utter stalemate there. His rhetoric and unleashing of the dogs towards Venezuela is also awful. So while we'd be incorrect in poo pooing Trump's efforts, I think he's likely finding it very difficult to walk back some of the very bad decisions he's made that seem, to me, to have been unnecessary. And even if those decisions were mostly out of his hands, its then a testament to just how little ability he's had to prevent situations from worsening given the systemic influence of the power-mad in DC and elsewhere.

 

[Ennio]

Some more on why Trump hired Bolton to begin with, and the "payment" owed to Sheldon Adelson for Adelson's strings-attached contribution to the Trump presidential campaign:

Patrick Armstrong: Bye bye, Bolton - but why?

Trump campaigned in part on the idea that the American wars had been a disaster for the country; John Bolton never met a war he didn't want more of. So the mystery is not what the two disagreed about but why Trump hired him in the first place.

I can't help wondering if the late Justin Raimondo was right when he suggested Trump had appointed Bolton as a cunning plot: "Instead of taking on the neocons directly, Trump embraces them - and we can see the knife go in as this whole scenario plays out." Certainly everything Bolton has had a hand in has been a spectacular flop and Trump is now in a position to tell the war party "see, we tried that, and it didn't work".

Why fire him now? It might be connected with the re-evaluation of weapons supplies to Ukraine or getting out of Afghanistan before the US and its minions double the Soviet time there on 25 January. Or the undoubted failure of the regime change in Venezuela. Or the fact that Tehran has outwitted Washington at every step; a desire to finally improve relations with Russia; Bolton's sabotage of the North Korea initiatives or many other things where the two would have been at odds.

[...]

But we'll have a better idea when we see whom he appoints next. And whom he fires next. It is rather a mystery why Trump has chosen to surround himself with representatives of the war party.

and: Sheldon Adelson needs Donald Trump more than Trump needs Adelson (no kidding!)

Today in an unprecedented show of autonomy, Donald Trump fired the fire-breathing national security adviser John Bolton. Bolton was gifted to the Trump administration in 2018 by Sheldon Adelson, Trump's biggest donor, and Trump duly ended the Iran deal once Bolton came aboard.

Now Trump has fired Bolton, thereby signaling that he is open to renegotiating the Iran deal. And Trump's Defense Department has all but criticized Israel for its drone war in Iraq and Syria that is threatening Americans and American proxies.

Trump is showing more independence of the rightwing Israel lobby than he has his entire administration - after three years of doing everything for Israel that the rightwing lobby wanted, from Jerusalem to the Golan to UNRWA.

The simple explanation for Trump's conduct is that he at last has the upper hand in his relationship with Netanyahu and Sheldon Adelson.

Benjamin Netanyahu desperately needs Trump to deliver on a huge deliverable, greenlighting the annexation of the Jewish settlements and the Jordan Valley, a historic achievement of Zionists in completely colonizing the land of Palestine- "forever," as Netanyahu promised today in his own desperate announcement of his intentions. In that speech, Netanyahu pleaded with Israeli voters to vote for him not Benny Gantz, because Netanyahu would be able to "recruit" Donald Trump in this plan in the weeks to come, in conjunction with Trump's deal of the century, yet to be announced.

No one else can deal with Trump as I can, Netanyahu said. No one else can "recruit" Trump.

Netanyahu's Hail Mary should be seen for what it looks like: a sincere moment of Flop Sweat. Now he really needs Donald Trump to come through. We have a historic opportunity here, Netanyahu said, to go forward on annexation. I.e., to kill the idea of a Palestinian state, "forever."

Does that opportunity really exist? Trump knows that Netanyahu's future rides on his next gesture. The rightwing annexationist program rides on Trump's signals in the next few days.

Whatever Sheldon Adelson's differences with Netanyahu, Sheldon Adelson's own agenda, of ending the idea of a Palestinian state, and establishing Jewish sovereignty throughout the ancient biblical land of Israel, is on the line here.

If Gantz and Yair Lapid and Blue/White get into the prime minister's office, they are not likely to proceed with annexation. Blue/White need to satisfy their center-left base, much of which still believes in a Palestinian state. Netanyahu has been running away from any idea of a Palestinian state (Just yesterday Likud leaped to object when Naftali Bennett said that some in Likud support a Palestinian state).

All eyes are on Trump. After doing anything for Adelson's $170 million over the last three years, after being Sheldon Adelson's "perfect little puppet" as Trump warned us Marco Rubio would be —

Trump is finally free. For a few weeks anyway, the hammer is in his hand. All those Adelson millions are ancient history, and 2020 might as well be the next century.

Who is king now? Adelson is the humble petitioner.

All Netanyahu's marbles are on the line, his freedom too. And Donald Trump has warmed to the haggling by cutting off Adelson's proxy: John Bolton.

The deal is likely to be just what was predicted last month. Netanyahu will win on West Bank annexation. Donald Trump will do his part, signing off on apartheid forever, telling Palestinians they are subhuman. Telling Israelis that he and Netanyahu are peers. Netanyahu's only hope to hold on to the premiereship.

Trump will deliver for Netanyahu, but he will extract a price. He will gain autonomy to deal with Iran; Netanyahu will lose on Iran.

And P.S. the biggest victor in all this process will be...

Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. Europe will totally be on board. A movement smeared as anti-Semitic by US legislatures and Bari Weiss and the New York Times and all the Israel lobby groups will emerge as the only real opposition to apartheid.

 

[angelburst29]

angelburst29 said:
Political maneuvering might only be one part of a larger plan - that of exposing and interrupting the International syndicates that provide financial funding, through elicit acts (drugs, prostitution, etc.). Trump may have had a hand in the timing and arrest of Jeffery Epstein?
Epstein's activity and connections to Israel may have further weaken Netanyahu's prospects for re-election?

Quite possibly - I've wondered if Trump's ridiculously lopsided 'Deal of the Century', embassy move to Jerusalem, recognition part of the Golan Heights coming under Israel's thumb - was really just a ruse designed to give Netanyahu and the large body of hardliners in Israel "enough rope" so to speak. And giving the crocodile enough meat to chomp on in order to buy some time to maneuver. There has also been an uptick in the crackdown of sex trafficking operations in the US, from what I can tell.

That's my general impression, also. As for "Sanction's", Trump has tried to rescind and remove some of the Sanction's Obama set in motion, not only those placed on Russia but in other incidences. Roadblocks were quickly set up, as soon as he took on the Presidency.
Note this report from June 2, 2017 in Newsweek:

"All the sanctions regimes have mechanisms built in to alleviate them"

Donald Trump sought to lift sanctions on Russia in the earliest days of his administration

Former officials say that the Trump administration moved quickly in January to develop plans to lift sanctions on Russia.

President Donald Trump's administration moved quickly to try and lift economic sanctions on Russia and other punishments former President Barack Obama had put in place as soon as it took office in January, according to multiple sources who have spoken with Yahoo News.

"There was serious consideration by the White House to unilaterally rescind the sanctions," according to Dan Fried, who retired in February as Coordinator for Sanctions Policy at the State Department.

Fried told veteran investigative journalist Michael Isikoff, a former national investigative correspondent for NBC News and Newsweek alumnus, that in the early weeks of the administration he got several "panicky" calls from U.S. officials. They asked: "Please, my God, can't you stop this?"

The sanctions in question included those imposed by Obama for Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and others inflicted late last year to punish Moscow for its suspected efforts to interfere in the 2016 election. The plans Trump's administration considered early on including returning Diplomatic Compounds seized from Russia in late 2016 - recent reports say Trump is currently working to put this plan into action.

In April, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said clearly that the U.S. would not lift sanctions on Russia until President Vladimir Putin hands Crimea back to Ukraine.

But Fried and Malinowski heard differently at the beginning of the administration. Both joined efforts to lobby Congress to bring in bipartisan legislation to prevent the rollback of sanctions.

At the beginning of this year senators Ben Cardin, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and John McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, moved to table legislation which would codify the sanctions and give Congress control of rescinding them. That bill stalled in early May after Republican Senator Bob Corker, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, opposed it.

This week the bipartisan leaders of the Senate Banking Committee proposed their own bill to increase sanctions on Russia, hitting the country's mining and railway industries.

In its early days, the Trump administration sought to strike a deal with Russia by seeking cooperation against the Islamic State militant group in Syria in return, two former officials said. This came in the form of a "tasking" order at the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs within the State Department. The order asked officials to draw up a list of options, including sanctions relief and the return of the seized diplomatic buildings in Maryland and New York.

The Washington Post reported on May 26 that Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and then chief foreign policy adviser, Michael Flynn, met with Russia's ambassador to Washington during the presidency's transition period. Kushner reportedly attempted to set up a communications back channel with Moscow from Russian diplomatic facilities. The plan was rejected, but picked up by American intelligence in communications between Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and his superiors.

According to leaked intelligence reports, Flynn reportedly indicated to Kislyak during a phone call during the transition that Russia could expect a review of the sanctions under the Trump administration.

"We've been reviewing all the sanctions—and this is not exclusive to Russia," a senior White House official told Yahoo News. "All the sanctions regimes have mechanisms built in to alleviate them." they said, adding they hoped "the Russians would take advantage of that" by returning Crimea to Ukraine.

Trump administration moves toward returning sanctioned Russian buildings

Killenworth, an estate built in 1913 for George du Pont Pratt, is one of two Russian diplomatic buildings under sanctions in the U.S.

6/1/17 - The Trump administration is looking to hand back two Russian diplomatic properties in the U.S. that were shuttered late last year after an intelligence probe found they were used to meddle in the 2016 presidential election.

The properties in Maryland and New York were closed on December 30 when former President Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats—including members of Russia's intelligence services—and sanctioned Russian businesses for attempts to interfere in the election.

In early April, the Trump administration proposed trading the return of the properties for permission to build a new U.S. consulate in St. Petersburg. But when Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak visited Washington, D.C. on May 10, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told them the return came with no obligations.

'We'll see what happens,' Trump says about possible easing of Iran sanctions (Sept. 11, 2019)

U.S. President Donald Trump left open on Wednesday the possibility that the United States could ease sanctions on Iran, adding he believes Iran wants to strike a deal with Washington on its nuclear program.

Netanyahu sees U.S. staying 'very, very tough' on Iran despite Bolton ouster (Ben - check voice mail - John wants a list of job openings?)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu played down the impact of hawkish John Bolton's exit from the post of U.S. national security adviser, predicting on Wednesday that Washington would hold to a tough line on Iran.

* U.S. will not release Mideast peace plan before Israeli election
* Netanyahu says he expects U.S. peace plan 'very soon' after Israel's Sept. 17 election

I speculate - The Deal of the Century is to dethrone Netanyahu?


And it may have started here:

By Jack Crosbie on May 22, 2017

On Sunday, Trump attended the opening of a new Global Center for Combating Extremist Ideology in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, with King Salman bin Abdulaziz and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. During the ceremony, Trump, Abdulaziz, and al-Sisi officially opened the center by touching a large glowing orb. Local media like the Saudi Gazette explained a bit more: touching the orb “officially activated the center and launched a splashy welcome video.” Here’s a tweet with a different angle of the center that shows at least press on the ground were warned of the orb ceremony.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/866348793230311424

 

[kenlee]

Quote from Miguel angel: Wait and see. At least, I cherish a hope that help is on the way; It could well be in the form of common sense arriving suddenly into some brains (including mine) or some kind of Intelligence pouring into the planet and allowing the not so psycophatic elite to make decisions like this. (I prefer to forget the meteors at the moment)

Just a theory here with a big FWIW:

Considering the hyper-intensity of all that's going on in the world today including the intensity of the weather there may be more openings in the very fabric of reality itself that allows more intense and closer communications between higher and lower orders of reality and Trump may very well (probably unknowingly) be connected to the more STO levels of reality in 4th density.

If you (theoretically) look at 4th density as having 7 levels of 'vibrations' that comprise this realm (I don't really like using that word because of the New Age connotations. Maybe 'vivifyness' might be better), from the coarser to the finer, the lowest level of fourth density being STS directed and the highest level being STO directed then when they mix and partition themselves there results 4 levels or 'points of reality' or what (I guess you can call) points of harmonic stabilization. It's much like a yin/yang symbol. 4 levels of reality within this realm. The lowest extreme is primarily STS directed, the next one up is primarily STS directed but with some STO elements, the next higher up is basically STO directed with but with STS elements, and the highest level is purely STO directed. So it would pretty much has the configuration of a Yin/Yang symbol.

If Trumps intent to help mankind is pure enough beyond a certain threshold point (in spite of all the chaos that's going on within the administration) then he may very well be communicating unknowingly with higher STO intelligences and getting rid of Bolton may be a major step in this, pending forthcoming events the nature of which determines what happens next in this psychic/physical 'battle'. What determines the nature of these events may very well be dependent on what people on Earth do to communicate and receive the Truth of the reality of the human condition. Basically, I think, what is required on this planet, more then ever, is a working partnership between these higher and lower orders of intelligence. Trump may be evidence of this or at least I would like to think so.

 

[angelburst29]

Sep 12 2019 - Report: White House Considers Giving Bolton’s Job to Pompeo

Sources in the administration of President Donald Trump announced Mike Pompeo might become the second person in US history to combine the duties of secretary of state and national security advisor.

One day after US National Security Advisor John Bolton’s departure, administration officials are discussing the possibility of giving the job to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, a long-term opponent, CNN reported on Wednesday, citing sources close to the talks.

An additional title would not free Pompeo of his responsibilities as secretary of state, and he would be the second person to have both jobs at the same time – the first being Henry Kissinger during Richard Nixon’s administration.

It is unclear whether Pompeo is on Trump’s short list of Bolton replacement candidates, as the president only hinted he has “five people that [he considers] very highly qualified, good people”.

Even if Pompeo’s candidacy is not on the table, he will act as de-facto national security advisor until a permanent replacement is found, the source told CNN.

The source also speculated that the “Kissinger model” could make Pompeo far too powerful within the Trump administration.

According to the CNN source, top contenders are Brian Hook, US special representative for Iran (and senior policy adviser to Pompeo), and Steve Biegun, special envoy to North Korea. The two are equally unlikely to challenge Trump on his diplomatic deal-making methods.

Three aides of Bolton have also resigned on Wednesday, The Hill reported. The departing aides are Bolton’s former spokesman, Garrett Marquis, his former communications director, Sarah Tinsley, and Christine Samuelian, who served as Bolton’s scheduler. The aides have reportedly worked with Bolton for years.

While Trump’s initial foreign policy course was characteristically un-diplomatic - including unilateral withdrawals from both the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal and the 2016 Paris accord global climate treaty, as well as slapping new sanctions on Iran and creating trade wars with China - he recently adopted a different stance, meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and expressing a willingness to sit down at the table with the Iranians.

The conflict between Trump’s perceived diplomatic approach and Bolton’s hard-line hawkish policies are believed to be a key reason why the national security advisor was forced out of the administration.

Regardless of who will be the next advisor, sources stated that Trump is determined to make his own foreign policy, acting as his own advisor – not unlike acting as “his own communications director and chief of staff”, despite having people for these roles, the sources told CNN.

On Tuesday, Trump announced that he had informed Bolton that his services were no longer needed in the White House. Bolton maintains that he resigned on his own volition.

Speaking for the first time about reasons for firing Bolton, Trump noted on Wednesday that he was “way out of line” on Venezuela, even as the state department doubled down on regime change.

“I disagreed with John Bolton on his attitudes about Venezuela. I thought he was way out of line,” Trump told reporters at the Oval Office.

The failed attempt to effect regime change in Caracas – which Bolton has been at the forefront of since January – was only one of the issues the president brought up. Bolton’s sabotage of denuclearization talks with North Korea, earlier this year, was another.

“We were set back very badly when [Bolton] talked about the Libyan model” with North Korea, Trump added, saying, “That's not a question of being tough, that's a question of being not smart to say something like that.”

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi had agreed to give up his nuclear and chemical weapons programs to the US, only to be violently overthrown and murdered by US-backed rebels in 2011.

Bolton also “wasn’t getting along with the people in the administration that I consider very important”, Trump stated, making sure to point out that he had opposed the 2003 Iraq War while Bolton was an unapologetic advocate of it.

None of that explains why Trump hired Bolton and kept him on as his principal foreign policy adviser for nearly 18 months, however.

Nor does it explain why Trump agreed to appoint Bolton’s colleague Elliott Abrams as Washington’s point man on Venezuela, despite a history of his Trump-bashing public comments.

The Trump administration on Wednesday showed no signs of abandoning the approach to Caracas championed by Bolton and Abrams since January, despite it having failed miserably. Shortly after Trump’s comments, Pompeo announced that the US has invoked the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (TIAR), which would give legal framework for military intervention in Venezuela.

Pompeo’s pretext is that this was requested by Juan Guaido, the self-proclaimed “interim president” of Venezuela recognized by the US and a handful of its allies, but no one else in the world. Guaido’s repeated attempts to take over power in Caracas since January have failed miserably.

Trump maintained that his policy on Venezuela is “humanitarian” and designed to “help” people there, and blamed “socialism” for the country’s economic woes. He has framed his 2020 re-election bid as stopping the "socialist” Democrats from taking over the US.

“I don’t want to talk about that,” Trump announced when asked if he would be willing to meet with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

This was in stark contrast to his readiness to meet with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, another thing Bolton reportedly opposed.

 

[angelburst29]

Trump says Bolton a ‘disaster’ on North Korea, ‘out of line’ on Venezuela
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that John Bolton, dismissed a day earlier as national security adviser, had been a “disaster” on North Korea policy, “out of line” on Venezuela, and did not get along with important administration officials.

Trump said Bolton had made mistakes, including offending North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un by demanding that he follow a “Libyan model” and hand over all his nuclear weapons.

“We were set back very badly when John Bolton talked about the Libyan model ... what a disaster,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

He’s using that to make a deal with North Korea? And I don’t blame Kim Jong Un for what he said after that, and he wanted nothing to do with John Bolton. And that’s not a question of being tough. That’s a question of being not smart to say something like that.”

Trump also said he disagreed with Bolton on Venezuela but offered no specifics. “I thought he was way out of line and I think I’ve proven to be right,” the president said.

Trump said Bolton, with his abrasive, hard-line approach, “wasn’t getting along with people in the administration that I consider very important.” “John wasn’t in line with what we were doing,” he added.

Trump said he got along with Bolton and hoped they parted on good terms, but added: “Maybe we have and maybe we haven’t. I have to run the country the way we’re running the country.”

Trump had been growing more impatient with the failure to oust socialist Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro through a US-led campaign of sanctions and diplomacy in which Bolton was a driving force.

Bolton was also a chief architect of the Trump administration’s hard-line policy on Iran.

Asked whether he would consider easing sanctions on Iran to secure a meeting with its leader President Hassan Rouhani at this month’s UN General Assembly, Trump replied: “We’ll see what happens.” Bolton had opposed such a step.

North Korea has denounced Bolton as a “war maniac” and “human scum.” Last year, it threatened to call off a first summit between Kim and Trump after Bolton suggested the Libya model of unilateral disarmament. In the past Bolton had proposed using military force to overthrow the country’s ruling dynasty.

Trump’s efforts to engage with North Korea nearly fell apart altogether in February after he followed Bolton’s advice at a second summit in Hanoi and handed Kim a piece of paper that called for the transfer of Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons and bomb fuel to the United States.

Trump announced he had fired Bolton a day after North Korea signaled a new willingness to resume stalled denuclearization talks, but it then proceeded with the latest in a spate of missile test launches.

Analysts say Bolton’s removal could help US efforts to revive the talks but will not make it easier for Washington to persuade Pyongyang to give up nuclear weapons.

Washington has given no indication so far that it will soften its demand for North Korea’s ultimate denuclearization, even though with Bolton gone, the risky all-or-nothing gambit is unlikely to be repeated so bluntly.

“This change in personnel could carve out some space for new approaches or thinking about what defines success and how to achieve it,” said Jenny Town at 38 North, a Washington-based North Korea project. “Whether it actually does or whether Bolton’s view was more deeply entrenched in US thinking on this matter is yet to be seen.”

 

[Cosmos]

I think RT is right in speculating that Bolton was basically Netanyahu's man in the white house and that it was no coincidence that he "resigned" at this point in time. Bolton is basically adhering to the Zionist/Israeli commands and not to the US-President and the American people. As we know from the "From Yahweh to Zion" book, the national security advisor position is one of the main ways the Zionst agenda gets enforced on the government level in America.

 

[SummerLite]

Bolton is basically adhering to the Zionist/Israeli commands and not to the US-President and the American people. As we know from the "From Yahweh to Zion" book, the national security advisor position is one of the main ways the Zionst agenda gets enforced on the government level in America.

Reading Yahweh to Zion has greatly broadened my perspective on the PTB and whats going on. Seems things haven't changed much in the last 1000 years or so, history repeats over and over again. What you/RT say here Pashalis is interesting. I've also been thinking a lot about Trumps overwhelming support for Israel... Something that needs to be done or else perhaps. And what about Omar in Congress with her anti-Israel ranting? The Democrats/MSM are giving her a platform for some reason but why? What a surprise, the neocons where (are) pro-zionists, like Bolton.

 

[angelburst29]

I think RT is right in speculating that Bolton was basically Netanyahu's man in the white house and that it was no coincidence that he "resigned" at this point in time. Bolton is basically adhering to the Zionist/Israeli commands and not to the US-President and the American people. As we know from the "From Yahweh to Zion" book, the national security advisor position is one of the main ways the Zionst agenda gets enforced on the government level in America.

Maybe Bolton will write a book on his mis-adventures, especially now, since it looks like King Bibi is no longer pulling all the strings?

Sep 18 2019 - Bolton May Write Book About Job Under Trump

Former White House National Security Adviser John Bolton is reportedly planning to write a book in which he will reveal secrets about his tenure in the administration of President Donald Trump.

Following his abrupt departure from the White House, Bolton has stated that he would have his “say in due course”.

In recent days, he has been in contact with literary agents interested in helping him write his book, two people with knowledge of the situation stated, according to The Daily Beast, which said this could provoke Trump’s ire.

“He has a lot to dish,” said one of the sources, who also noted that it was still unclear if Bolton had settled on an agency yet.

The Daily Beast contacted Bolton and asked him about his plan; however, he only replied, “No comment.”

His bitter departure reportedly took place after Trump proposed the idea of lifting some US sanctions on Iran as an incentive for the Islamic Republic to come to the negotiating table.

Trump suggested easing sanctions against Iran as a means of encouraging Tehran to renegotiate the 2015 nuclear deal, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but the idea did not sit well with Bolton, according to NBC News citing a source familiar with the matter.

Bolton, a well-known Iran hawk, made clear to the US president during their discussion in the Oval Office in September that he strongly disagreed with the proposal, the source added.

A day later, Trump fired Bolton, saying he disagreed with many of his proposals.

On Tuesday, Trump listed five people as a replacement for Bolton, most of whom are already familiar faces from within his administration.

 

[Cosmos]

Reading Yahweh to Zion has greatly broadened my perspective on the PTB and whats going on. Seems things haven't changed much in the last 1000 years or so, history repeats over and over again. What you/RT say here Pashalis is interesting. I've also been thinking a lot about Trumps overwhelming support for Israel... Something that needs to be done or else perhaps. And what about Omar in Congress with her anti-Israel ranting? The Democrats/MSM are giving her a platform for some reason but why? What a surprise, the neocons where (are) pro-zionists, like Bolton.

It is interesting to watch indeed and my guess is that big parts of Trumps "strong support for Israel" are just a cover story that he needs to proclaim out loud in order to get some things done that he promised (like "no more war" and "making America great again") while keeping the Zionists at bay. On the other hand "the strong support" Trump seemingly receives from all sorts of Israeli/Zionists players does appear to me to be more like a not sincere pressure kind of thing they put on Trump in a doublespeak kind of way. I could be wrong though.

Maybe Bolton will write a book on his mis-adventures, especially now, since it looks like King Bibi is no longer pulling all the strings?

I guess we don't have to be prophets to predict that what he will put in his book is nothing more than the same old Propaganda BS he is known to enforce for decades now in the name of the "deep state".

 

[angelburst29]

It is interesting to watch indeed and my guess is that big parts of Trumps "strong support for Israel" are just a cover story that he needs to proclaim out loud in order to get some things done that he promised (like "no more war" and "making America great again") while keeping the Zionists at bay. On the other hand "the strong support" Trump seemingly receives from all sorts of Israeli/Zionists players does appear to me to be more like a not sincere pressure kind of thing they put on Trump in a doublespeak kind of way. I could be wrong though.

My opinion aligns closely to your assessment - that Trump is just "playing along - to get along" but working behind the scenes on his own prospects of getting the U.S. out of the gutter and hopefully, breaking the "iron-grip" that Israel has on the U.S.? One of the reasons, I suspect Trump might have had some influence on the results of this Israeli election? Kind of - a BIG pay back - "an eye for an eye" - where Netanyahu supported Hillary and worked diligently against Trump. Netanyahu is now getting a heavy dose of his own medicine!

Question remaining now, "With Netanyahu's down fall, where does that leave the minions on the Israeli payroll in U.S. Congress and high positions in Government?" Do they genuflect to a new supreme Zionist Gawd?

Sep 19 2019 - Netanyahu Admits Election Results Won't Let Him form Government, Calls on Gantz to Unite

With all the votes counted, the Blue and White won 33 out of 120 Knesset seats, with Likud lagging behind with 31 seats. But neither result is enough to form a majority government, forcing both rivals to seek like-minded allies.

 

[Cosmos]

My opinion aligns closely to your assessment - that Trump is just "playing along - to get along" but working behind the scenes on his own prospects of getting the U.S. out of the gutter and hopefully, breaking the "iron-grip" that Israel has on the U.S.? One of the reasons, I suspect Trump might have had some influence on the results of this Israeli election? Kind of - a BIG pay back - "an eye for an eye" - where Netanyahu supported Hillary and worked diligently against Trump. Netanyahu is now getting a heavy dose of his own medicine!

I must admit that this scenario would be just great and hope that something along those lines is actually going on!

Question remaining now, "With Netanyahu's down fall, where does that leave the minions on the Israeli payroll in U.S. Congress and high positions in Government?" Do they genuflect to a new supreme Zionist Gawd?

I'm afraid that Netanyahu is just one of many, many similar types with similar agendas and even more power. So by him "being out of the game" (which isn't really clear anyway, even if he will really lose this term), the US-Congress is packed full of powerful Zionist interests at every corner in one way or the other. One thing is for sure, Netanyahu and others like him will continue to insert their poisonous influence in every way they can, even if they are removed from the immediate spotlights.

 

[Cosmos]

As far as I could see this was not posted before: Donald Trump pretty much explains the reason why Bolton basically got fired. Bolton exclaimed another horrible insane foreign policy plan/idea, this time about North Korea, in calling for a "Libyan model" for the country. What an insane person Bolton is. Trump was right to use that opportunity to finally get rid of the guy.

 

[angelburst29]

Sep 19 2019 - Report: Bolton Blasts Trump's Foreign Policy in Closed-Door Meeting

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton took aim at the Donald Trump administration's foreign policy strategy on Wednesday at a closed-door lunch, reportedly ripping the US president in all but name.

Politico reported that Bolton tore into the president's efforts to negotiate with North Korea and Iran, which he warned were “doomed to failure", and also blamed Trump for not taking stronger action after Iranian forces downed a US spy drone earlier this year.

“He ripped Trump, without using his name, several times,” one anonymous attendee of the lunch told Politico. The White House did not immediately return a request for comment on Bolton's reported remarks from The Hill.

Some of the former White House official's strongest remarks were reportedly reserved for Trump's called-off meeting with top Taliban officials at Camp David, which Trump announced within days of the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Bolton reportedly called plans for the meeting "disrespectful" to 9/11 victims and their families, attendees told Politico, adding that it sent a "terrible signal" to US allies.

Bolton was ousted from the White House last week, with the president and Bolton publicly disputing the terms of his departure. Trump later argued that his former national security adviser was "holding [him] back", and blamed Bolton for some "very big mistakes".

"Frankly he wanted to do things — not necessarily tougher than me — You know John’s known as a tough guy. He’s so tough he got us into Iraq … but he’s actually somebody I had a very good relationship with. But he wasn’t getting along with people in the administration that I consider very important," Trump stated last Wednesday at the White house.

Asked to respond to Bolton’s reported criticism of his policies on Iran and Afghanistan, Trump told reporters, “Well, I was critical of John Bolton for getting us involved with a lot of other people in the Middle East.”

“John was not able to work with anybody and a lot of people disagreed with his ideas, and a lot of people were very critical that I got him involved in the first place,” Trump added, noting that Bolton “got stuck in quicksand” in the Middle East post-9/11.

Trump also addressed some of Bolton's criticism regarding North Korea, saying, “He may be right and he may be wrong.”

"The relationship is good, and I think that’s better than somebody that goes around saying, we want to use the Libyan model,” Trump said, adding, "that set us back."

Ex-CIA analyst on why he predicted John Bolton’s firing
Ex-CIA analyst John Kiriakou discusses why he accurately predicted John Bolton’s ouster as National Security Adviser; who might replace him; and the Democratic leadership’s anemic response.

Guest: John Kiriakou, former CIA analyst who was imprisoned after blowing the whistle on the agency’s torture program.

Published on Sep 14, 2019 (8:31 min.)

CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou predicts that President Donald Trump might tap Stephen Biegun or Douglas Macgregor to be his next national security adviser.

“When you look at at the quickness with which the 2020 election is approaching, and you couple that with the fact that Donald Trump has literally not one single foreign policy victory, he may be looking for someone who can help him gain that victory before the election,” Kiriakou said.

He also criticized centrist Democratic Party leaders for using Bolton’s firing as a way to attack Trump.

“I think that that so many Democrats are so desperate in their hatred of Donald Trump that they’ve come down solidly, squarely on the wrong side of this issue,” Kiriakou argued. “It’s sickening to me frankly to see so many Democrats lining up on the side of ‘the devil we know is better than the devil we don’t.”

“I have to agree with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders that the world is a safer place without John Bolton being in a position to make these decisions of war and peace,” Kiriakou continued.

“I don’t care that we don’t have a national security adviser in place right now; it’s better to have nobody in the position than to have John Bolton in the position.”

“He actively tried to overthrow the Venezuelan government; he actively tried to overthrow the Iranian government; he actively tried to overthrow the Syrian government — and that’s just in the last year! So yeah, it’s better to not have John Bolton in this position,” Kiriakou said.

John Bolton is out, but neocon agenda stays
September 16, 2019 - Wilkerson, the former chief of staff to Colin Powell, addresses Bolton’s legacy as a war hawk who promoted regime change and undermined global arms control; the anti-interventionist views of a potential successor, Douglas Macgregor; and the lasting influence of neocons inside the national security state.

Guest: Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Currently a distinguished professor at the College of William and Mary.

Published on Sep 16, 2019 (18:00 min.)

John Bolton’s firing as National Security Adviser has set off frenzied speculation over the reasons for his ouster, and who might replace him. Lawrence Wilkerson, who served alongside Bolton in the Bush administration as the chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, shared his thoughts in an interview with The Grayzone’s Pushback with Aaron Maté.

“It’s sad to say I served with him [Bolton] in the Bush administration,” Wilkerson says. “The Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and I spent a lot of time trying to get rid of John Bolton, but we never could. He was very disruptive, and very acerbic. I don’t agree with the people who say he’s bright. I don’t think he’s all that bright — he’s just adamant and he stays on the same ruthless theme all the time, which is usually making war with people and destroying arms control agreements.”

Wilkerson believes Bolton was sacked for “political purposes.” President Donald Trump, Wilkerson says was “doesn’t want people competing with him, and Bolton was competing with him big time.”

Bolton has personally overseen the dismantling of two critical arms control treaties – the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABMT) under George W. Bush, and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) under Trump. “Bolton never met an arms control agreement that he liked,” Wilkerson comments. “I can’t tell you how many arms controllers in the State Department came into my office week after week almost in tears — one of them in tears. They couldn’t understand why they were having to work under Bolton — the man who hated arms control — when it was their profession, their mission, their responsibility, to advocate for arms control and secure arms control agreements… Bolton’s theory — at least as expressed to me — was that you bomb everybody in the world if you have to. You don’t have arms control because people will cheat.”

In comments made the day after Bolton’s firing, Trump faulted his now former National Security Advisor for invoking the “Libya model” for North Korea. In 2018, Bolton said that the U.S. had “very much in mind the Libya model” when it comes to reaching a nuclear deal with North Korea. North Korean officials – and many Western analysts — interpreted that comment as an implicit threat. After giving up his weapons program under a U.S.-backed agreement in 2003, Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi was overthrown by the U.S. and other NATO allies in 2011 and brutally sodomized to death later that year.

“[Bolton] made some very big mistakes,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “When he talked about the Libyan model for Kim Jong Un, that was not a good statement to make. You just take a look at what happened with Gaddafi.”

“That was an absolutely idiotic thing for John [Bolton] to do,” Wilkerson says. “I mean that was even beyond what I consider John’s mind.”

Asked if he has any predictions for Bolton’s successor, Wilkerson sees one rumored candidate, Col. Douglas Macgregor, as a likely option. Macgregor has been critical of US regime change and military occupations overseas, as Trump claimed to be during the 2016 campaign. Macgregor has also echoed Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Macgregor’s views on US militarism, Wilkerson says, are “aligned with mine, very much so, in terms of ending these stupid wars and stopping the train of what many scholars now are calling the “Deep State,” the bureaucracy that maintains this empire.”

Macgregor, Wilkerson adds, “believes, as do I, that the current four & three star leadership of the Armed Forces is brain-dead. It is utterly brain-dead. It has no imagination, no creativity — it does nothing but ask for more money, and more money, and more money… With that kind of attitude, with respect to the loyalty function that Trump demands out of DoD, and essentially DoD gives him, that’s going be a real problem for Donald Trump, if Doug should become the National Security Adviser.”

Even with Bolton out, Wilkerson warns that the influence of neoconservatives on US policy very much remains. Wilkerson points to the Trump administration’s ongoing regime change attempt in Venezuela through crippling sanctions and attempts to foment a military coup. “We’ve got people, neoconservatives, embedded in that system right now and I would bet you Trump doesn’t know half of them, if that. And they’re working hard on one of the dumbest policies the United States is trying to pursue right now – and that is sanctions on Venezuela and the removal of Nicolas Maduro. What we’re doing is forcing another 2 or 3 million Venezuelans through our sanctions to have to emigrate… That’s a stupid policy, but it’s still being implemented.”

“There are many little pockets like this where neoconservatives like Elliott Abrams and others are still orchestrating policy beneath Trump’s tent — he really doesn’t know what they’re doing.”