Trump era: Fascist dawn, or road to liberation?

Pashalis said:
Washington Post and CNN report that Trump ordered the CIA to stop funding extremists in Syria a month back and are apparently not happy about it:

_https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-ends-covert-cia-program-to-arm-anti-assad-rebels-in-syria-a-move-sought-by-moscow/2017/07/19/b6821a62-6beb-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-low_ciasyria-310pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9c1a15135f95

_http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/20/politics/cia-syria-anti-assad-rebels/index.html

If that is what Trump did, it is certainly a good thing.

Indeed. When you say 'they' are not happy, do you mean the CIA or the media? I know the media didn't like that, but that's what we could expect from such a bunch. And the CIA, we can safely assume they are also not happy at having their 'fun and games' in Syria come to an end. So it was a brave and decent move from Trump, but I'm sort of bracing myself for the retaliation of the CIA.
 
Windmill knight said:
Pashalis said:
Washington Post and CNN report that Trump ordered the CIA to stop funding extremists in Syria a month back and are apparently not happy about it:

_https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-ends-covert-cia-program-to-arm-anti-assad-rebels-in-syria-a-move-sought-by-moscow/2017/07/19/b6821a62-6beb-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-low_ciasyria-310pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9c1a15135f95

_http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/20/politics/cia-syria-anti-assad-rebels/index.html

If that is what Trump did, it is certainly a good thing.

Indeed. When you say 'they' are not happy, do you mean the CIA or the media? I know the media didn't like that, but that's what we could expect from such a bunch. And the CIA, we can safely assume they are also not happy at having their 'fun and games' in Syria come to an end. So it was a brave and decent move from Trump, but I'm sort of bracing myself for the retaliation of the CIA.

Yes, they would not like the "fun and games" to end so prematurely and some within would take exception to Trump's defunding message if true. The 'they" likely could expand to many entities aside from the CIA and media; the MIC - and the revolving door of ex generals/intel on their Boards, consultants galore, shareholders that live off the strife that the extremists produce and the weapons sold to counter same, think tanks, banks, congress - a big machine that depends on the extremists continuing, and that is just 'they' in the U.S. So, good for Trump if he is trying to pair this all down. However, I would brace myself too cause even if pressure is abated somewhat in Syria (and Russia is right there to help that reality along) history sadly shows that they will just turn up the pressure somewhere else, even if they have to load up their extremist proxies and export and re-brand them to another war on terror potential. They, are more than just the MIC, they are like TIC's (Totalitarian Industrial Complex) and they don't seem to ever stop sucking the blood out of everything and everybody as long as money can be made and they can maintain constant global chaos and control of same, osit.
 
voyageur said:
Windmill knight said:
Pashalis said:
Washington Post and CNN report that Trump ordered the CIA to stop funding extremists in Syria a month back and are apparently not happy about it:


_https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-ends-covert-cia-program-to-arm-anti-assad-rebels-in-syria-a-move-sought-by-moscow/2017/07/19/b6821a62-6beb-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-low_ciasyria-310pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9c1a15135f95

_http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/20/politics/cia-syria-anti-assad-rebels/index.html

If that is what Trump did, it is certainly a good thing.

Indeed. When you say 'they' are not happy, do you mean the CIA or the media? I know the media didn't like that, but that's what we could expect from such a bunch. And the CIA, we can safely assume they are also not happy at having their 'fun and games' in Syria come to an end. So it was a brave and decent move from Trump, but I'm sort of bracing myself for the retaliation of the CIA.

Yes, they would not like the "fun and games" to end so prematurely and some within would take exception to Trump's defunding message if true. The 'they" likely could expand to many entities aside from the CIA and media; the MIC - and the revolving door of ex generals/intel on their Boards, consultants galore, shareholders that live off the strife that the extremists produce and the weapons sold to counter same, think tanks, banks, congress - a big machine that depends on the extremists continuing, and that is just 'they' in the U.S. So, good for Trump if he is trying to pair this all down. However, I would brace myself too cause even if pressure is abated somewhat in Syria (and Russia is right there to help that reality along) history sadly shows that they will just turn up the pressure somewhere else, even if they have to load up their extremist proxies and export and re-brand them to another war on terror potential. They, are more than just the MIC, they are like TIC's (Totalitarian Industrial Complex) and they don't seem to ever stop sucking the blood out of everything and everybody as long as money can be made and they can maintain constant global chaos and control of same, osit.

Guess that would answer my curiosity, as to why the Pentagon has been in a frenzy giving out mega-million dollar contracts, since the G20 meeting between Trump and Putin - the first week of July?

In the past few months, Sputnik has published about a handful of military contracts since Trump was sworn in (January) - on average about 5-6 Contracts a month .... below is a listing from July 4th to today's date - the 22nd. Is the Pentagon afraid that Trump will "sanction" and cut back military spending? Or is the Pentagon preparing for "Trump's removal" and jumping into a Middle Eastern War (with VP Pence at the helm)?

22.07.2017
US Army Wins $279Mln to Install Electronic Security Systems at Domestic Bases
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707221055778796-domestic-bases-security/

Lockheed Martin Wins Over $93Mln to Install AEGIS Defense Systems on Warships
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707221055777957-lockheed-martin-aegis-warships/

21.07.2017
US Awards $30Mln for Construction Projects at Navy Base in Singapore - Pentagon
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707211055743023-us-navy-base-singapore/

US Awards $43Mln to Develop Next Gen Aerospace Adhesive Technology - Pentagon
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707211055742960-pentagon-aerospace-adhesive/

US Awards $133Mln for Base Operations Support in Iraq - Pentagon
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707211055742754-pentagon-iraq-award/

Lockheed Martin Wins $76Mln to Streamline Aegis Missile System Production
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707211055742107-lockheed-martin-aegis-contract/

BAE Wins $45Mln to Provide Systems Support for New US Nuclear Missile Program
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707211055740780-bae-systems-nuclear-program/

US Awards $300Mln for Rapid Development of Navy Enterprise System - Pentagon
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707211055741920-navy-information-technologies-contract/

20.07.2017
Pentagon Looking To Buy More Than 100 Additional Black Hawk Helicopters
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707201055737728-pentagon-wants-more-black-hawks/

US Awards $409Mln for Air Force Next Generation Power, Controls
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707201055703414-us-air-force-controls/

19.07.2017
Booz Allen Wins Nearly $50Mln to Assist US Chemical Weapons Recovery Efforts
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707191055668658-booz-allen-chemical-weapons-recovery/

US Air Force Orders New $24Mil Research Into Expanded Use of Radio Frequencies
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707191055668613-us-air-force-radio-frequences/

US Shipbuilder Wins $148Mln for Aircraft Carrier Construction Materials
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707191055668560-us-aircraft-carrier/

18.07.2017
Northrop Grumman Wins $98Mln to Operate STRATCOM's Nuclear Command, Control
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707181055632003-northrop-grumman-stratcom-nuclear-command/

Johns Hopkins University Inks $92Mln to Help Air Force Plan for Nuclear War
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707181055631666-johns-hopkins-air-forse-war/

US Earmarks $3.5Mln for Research With S. Korea on Robotic Disaster Relief
https://sputniknews.com/world/201707181055631031-us-south-korea-disaster-relief/

General Dynamics Wins Mission Command Network $15 Min Contract for US Army in S. Korea
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707181055630879-general-dynamics-mission-command-network/

15.07.2017
US Awards $49Mln to Upgrade Hundreds of Bradley Fighting Vehicles - Pentagon
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707151055564959-pentagon-bradley-upgrade/

14.07.2017
Boeing Inks Over $26Mln to Upgrade Heavy-Lift Choppers for Special Forces
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707141055530070-boeing-helicopters-upgrade/

12.07.2017
US Allocated $25Mln in Security Aid to Ukraine in July - Embassy in Kiev
https://sputniknews.com/world/201707121055485040-us-embassy-aid-ukraine/

US Awards $27Mln to Support Surveillance Air Control Tracking System
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707121055458237-us-air-control-tracking/

US Awards $818Mln for Air Force Next Generation Power, Controls
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707121055456428-us-air-force-northrop-grumman/

Lockheed Martin $41-million contract to Provide Aegis System Support for Australian Navy Warships
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707121055456377-lockheed-martin-aegis-australia/

11.07.2017
US Army Orders $15-million contract to modify Hardware Upgrade for Armored Vehicle Replacement for Bradleys
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707111055425120-us-hardware-upgrade-bradleys/

08.07.2017
Boeing Air Force contract Wins Nearly $93Mln for NATO, Saudi AWACS Aircraft Support
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707081055353719-boeing-saudi-awacs-support-contract/

Raytheon Wins Nearly $50Mln to Upgrade Obsolete B-2 Bomber Radar Components
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707081055352380-raytheon-bomber-upgrade-contract/

06.07.2017
US Awards $8Mln for Engineering Cost Overruns on Bradley Fighting Vehicle
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707061055273126-bradley-engineering-cost-overruns/

US Awards $9Mln for Environmental Cleanup at Navy, Marine Installations
https://sputniknews.com/environment/201707061055273016-navy-marine-installations-cleanup-contract/

US Tech Firm Wins $16 million Contract to Upgrade Military Satellite Communication System
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707061055272944-usa-satellite-communication-system/

Lockheed Martin Scores $50Mln for F-35 Strike Fighter Simulation Software
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707061055270664-lockheed-f35-simulation-software/

US Navy Orders nearly $10-million modification contract for Refueling Operation for Aircraft Carrier George Washington
https://sputniknews.com/military/201707061055270372-george-washington-carrier-refuelling-contract/

04.07.2017
US Pours Additional $43Mln Into Production Work on F-35 Combat Jet
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707041055198684-us-production-f-35-jet/

Boeing Wins Additional $8 million Contract to Upgrade F-18 Super Hornet Jets for US Navy
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707041055198622-boeing-us-navy-contract/

Digirad Wins $100Mln Contract for X-Ray, Ultrasound Testing Military Personnel
https://sputniknews.com/us/201707041055197606-digirad-contract-military-personnel/
 
With all the discussions of Obamacare in mind .....

Joseph Rago's smart, conservative takes on American health care won him the ear of policymakers from both parties — and a Pulitzer Prize.

Joseph Rago, Wall Street Journal Editorial Writer, Found Dead In Manhattan At Age 34 July 21, 2017
https://patch.com/new-york/east-village/joseph-rago-wall-street-journal-editorial-writer-found-dead-manhattan-age-34

EAST VILLAGE, NY — Joseph Rago, 34, a prodigious Wall Street Journal editorial writer who won a Pulitzer Prize for his smart takedowns of Obamacare circa 2011, was found dead Thursday night in his East Village apartment at 10 St. Mark’s Place, near Third Avenue, according to the NYPD.

Rago's editor at the newspaper asked police to check on him after he didn't come into work Thursday, the Wall Street Journal reported.

He was found "with no obvious signs of trauma," according to the Journal. His cause of death has yet to be determined by the NYC Medical Examiner.

“It is with a heavy heart that we confirm the death of Joseph Rago, a splendid journalist and beloved friend,” Paul Gigot, his editor, said in a statement Friday. “Joe and his family are in our thoughts and prayers, and we will be celebrating his work in Saturday’s paper.”

Rago, a native of Falmouth, Massachusetts, reportedly started as a summer intern at the Wall Street Journal in 2005, right after he graduated from Dartmouth College.

“I immediately hired him,” his editor remembered Friday. “He was just too good not to hire.”

By 2011, Rago had won the Pulitzer Prize for editorial writing. The judges praised him for his “well crafted, against-the-grain editorials challenging the health care reform advocated by President Obama."

But in more than a decade of political critique, despite his conservative leanings, Rago earned respect from policymakers on both sides of the aisle for highly discerning, deeply reported takes that spared no one. The 34-year-old published his final editorial — a blistering review of the U.S. Senate's botched attempts at health care reform under Trump, titled "The ObamaCare Republicans" — just two days before he died.

"The nightmare of a hard decision is finally over, and now on to supposedly more crowd-pleasing items like tax reform," he wrote in the piece. "But this self-inflicted fiasco is one of the great political failures in recent U.S. history, and the damage will echo for years."

Rago's friends, fans and colleagues paid tribute to him online Friday.

James Panero, executive editor of the New Criterion, called him the "smartest writer in any room." David Feith, another editorial writer for the Wall Street Journal, tweeted: "Terribly tragic. Joe's writing was a masterclass." Barri Weiss, staff editor of the New York Times' opinion section, wrote: "This is heartbreaking news. Impossible to imagine @WSJopinion without Joe."

And in an extended tribute written by Yuval Levin for the National Review, Rago was remembered not only as a "brilliant, thoughtful, lucid, careful" opinion writer, but as an "utterly unpretentious" and "instinctively considerate" soul who was, in the end, "most extraordinary for his decency."

Levin said he last ran into Rago a few months ago at a press briefing on Capitol Hill.

"He wasn’t satisfied with what we were told by the member of Congress who had called us together," Levin recalled. "He asked question after question — nicely, calmly, but persistently, and helped the rest of us see that we shouldn’t be happy either. In retrospect, his questions were a kind of preview of the problems Republicans went on to encounter on health care."
 
To add to the (above) Military Contracts:

Trillions of Dollars in U.S. Military Spending Is Unaccounted-For. Tax Payers’ Money is Missing July 22, 2017
http://www.globalresearch.ca/trillions-of-dollars-in-u-s-military-spending-is-unaccounted-for-tax-payers-money-is-missing/5600525

Now, and for many decades past, the American public has displayed far higher confidence and trust in “The Military” than in any other “Institution” (including than churches, schools, the Presidency, the police, courts — any).

And yet — according to the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Defense — many billions, and sometimes even trillions, of dollars, in the Department’s periodic financial reports, are not documented. What has happened to the taxpayers’ money is unknown — it’s missing (alleged to have been spent, but to payees unidentified).

According to the DOD’s IG, this goes on year-after-year (yet without at all reducing Americans’ trust in “The Military”). Apparently, Americans, as a lot, are gluttons for punishment — or else our ’news’media haven’t sufficiently reported the “waste, fraud, and abuse” that “The Military” are doing to the American public. Either way, there is this extraordinarily high public confidence in the military ongoing year-after-year though the U.S. DOD continues to be the only unauditable federal Department, and expenditures amounting (over the years) into trillions of dollars remain unaccounted-for. But here will now be the American ‘news’media’s chance to call to the public’s attention this discrepancy between the military’s reality and the public’s perceptions of that reality, by publishing this documentation:

On July 14th, Catherine Austin Fitts posted to her website links to some of the key relevant federal documents. Her site is linked-to below, and some of the documents that refer to trillions of dollars unaccounted-for are also linked-to below, and are then quoted from, so that a reader can obtain a sense both of the enormity of the corruption, and also of the authoritativeness of the official statements that are being made here, regarding that corruption.

I am using here the word “corruption” because whenever an official finding by a U.S. government agency is reporting trillions of dollars of taxpayer money that have been spent for purposes and recipients that are unknown, I call it “corruption,” on the basis that: regardless of whether or not the matter is intended or is instead sloppiness, even mere sloppiness is heinous if it ranges into trillions of dollars of taxpayer-money missing or wrongly spent. Even sloppiness of that magnitude, in the expenditure of taxpayer funds, reflects corruption, if it continues on for years, or especially (as it is shown to do here) for decades, and still has not been stopped.

In fact, the most recent such IG report makes clear (on page “7 of 74”) that “Army and Defense Finance and Accounting Service Indianapolis personnel did not adequately support $2.8 trillion in third quarter adjustments and $6.5 trillion in yearend adjustments made to Army General Fund data during FY 2015 financial statement compilation.”

These “adjustments” had been made to prior unacceptable reports, but were still failing to explain where the money had gone. Here is the main site (solari, of Catherine Austin Fitts), and excerpts from the main documents, which excerpts are posted immediately below it:

***
_https://solari.com/blog/dod-and-hud-missing-money-supporting-documentation/

DOD and HUD Missing Money: Supporting Documentation

Catherine Austin Fitts, News & Commentary on July 14, 2017 at 11:07 pm

***
1. 2015 Semiannual Report to Congress

_http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2016-113.pdf

“We determined that 236, totaling $2 trillion, of the 263 third quarter JV adjustments in our sample, and 170, totaling $2.1 trillion, of the 194 yearend JV adjustments in our sample, were in fact unsupported.”

***

6. 2010 Testimony of the Deputy Inspector General, DOD

_http://www.dodig.mil/IGInformation/IGInformationReleases/DoDIG_Testimony_Final%20(HOGR-20110923).pdf

“We found the Department’s review process included less than half of the fiscal year 2010 first quarter gross outlays.10 Comptroller officials stated that the $167.5 billion in outlays the Department did not examine for improper payments included internal and intragovernmental transfers. Those outlays were not subject to the OMB reporting requirements since the payments did not leave the Government. However, we later determined that Comptroller officials did not perform a reconciliation to determine whether these outlays were internal or intragovernmental transfers. A complete reconciliation is still needed to demonstrate that all outlays are being examined for overpayments and in order to accurately report the extent of the overpayments. Specifically, DoD did not review approximately $167.5 billion of the $303.7 billion in gross outlays for high dollar overpayments. Additionally, some overpayments that we or the Department identified were not reported, and the First Quarter FY 2010 High Dollar Overpayments Report did not include sufficient information about recoveries and corrective actions.”

“Unless DoD improves its methodology to review all its disbursements, it will continue to understate its estimate of overpayments and will likely miss opportunities to collect additional improper payments.”

“We are concerned with the accuracy and reliability of the Department’s estimation process. Without a reliable process to review all expenditures and identify the full extent of improper payments, the Department will not be able to improve internal controls aimed at reducing improper payments. 12 The Department’s financial management processes are not always adequate to prevent or detect improper payments. For example, in our recent audit of a contract supporting Broad Area Maritime Surveillance, we found DoD personnel did not validate that the contractor was entitled to $329.3 million it received as of January 12, 2010. These are costs paid to contractors that Defense Contract Audit Agency questioned because they do not comply with rules, regulations, laws and/or contract terms which meets the definition of an improper payment. These improper payments the audit agency identified are greater than the $1.3 billion of improper payments the Department identified during 2004 to 2010.”

***
_https://solari.com/00archive/web/solarireports/2017/unsupported_adjustments/DOD/DODIG-2016-113.pdf

Inspector General U.S. Department of Defense Report No. DODIG-2016-113 JULY 26, 2016 Army General Fund Adjustments Not Adequately Documented or Supported.

“OASA(FM&C) and DFAS Indianapolis personnel did not adequately document or support adjustments made to AGF data during FY 2015 financial statement compilation. Specifically, OASA(FM&C) and DFAS Indianapolis personnel did not adequately support $2.8 trillion in JV adjustments for third quarter and $6.5 trillion in JV adjustments for yearend.17”

***
_https://solari.com/00archive/web/solarireports/2017/unsupported_adjustments/DOD/00-167.pdf

STATEMENT OF ROBERT J. LIEBERMAN ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BEFORE THE TASK FORCE ON DEFENSE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Report No. D-2000-167 DELIVERED: July 20, 2000

“The audits of the FY 1999 DoD financial statements indicated that $7.6 trillion of accounting entries were made to compile them. This startling number is perhaps the most graphic available indicator of just how poor the existing systems are. The magnitude of the problem is further demonstrated by the fact that, of $5.8 trillion of those adjustments that we audited this year, $2.3 trillion were unsupported by reliable explanatory information and audit trails or were made to invalid general ledger accounts. About $602.7 billion of accounting entries were made to correct errors in feeder reports.”

***
IN CLOSING:

Here, from the list of the 100 largest, are the 20 largest recipients of U.S. federal government money:
_http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Top-100-Defense-Contractors-2015.html

1. Lockheed Martin Corp.

2. The Boeing Company

3. Raytheon Company

4. General Dynamics Corp.

5. Northrop Grumman Corp.

6. United Technologies Corp.

7. L-3 Communications Holdings Inc.

8. BAE Systems plc

9. Humana Inc.

10. Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc.

11. Bechtel Group Inc.

12. Health Net Inc.

13. Unitedhealth Group Inc.

14. SAIC Inc.

15. General Atomic Technologies Corp.

16. McKesson Corp.

17. Bell-Boeing Joint Project Office

18. AmerisourceBergen Corp.

19. Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp.

20. United Launch Alliance L.L.C.

As is obvious, all or almost all of these firms are contractors to (recipients of money from) the U.S. Department of Defense; and they may reasonably be presumed to be benefiting significantly from some of the unaccounted-for payments from the U.S. DOD. However, if the money isn’t going to them, then where is it going? And why? And for what? Why is there no congressional investigation to answer these questions? And why are U.S. ‘news’media not publicizing this matter so as to force such investigations? Are payoffs involved — payoffs for silence? Why are none of the ‘news’media that have the resources to explore these questions, publishing their own investigations into it, since Congress won’t investigate? And, since the Inspector General’s reports into these matters have had no impact, why isn’t the focus finally shifting away from studying to find how much is missing, toward instead prosecuting the people who — at the very least — failed to do what they were being paid to do: keep track of every cent of taxpayers’ money? If doing that job is too dangerous, then shouldn’t the people who are tasked to do it be paid more, so as to cover their exceptionally high personal risk? Is all of this secrecy really necessary in order to keep “The Military” way on top as the most respected of all institutions in the United States — even after all of the harms that the U.S. military has actually caused in Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc., destroying those countries and others? How much would the public’s respect for the military — the mass-killing institution — be brought down, if the truth about it were known? Would the mass-killing institution deserve to be the most respected institution even if it weren’t so corrupt?
 
Meanwhile a new bill is expected to pass congress on tuesday. Basically this piece of nonsense is supposed to hinder Trump on changing or stopping any sanctions against russia (and I think iran and north korea as well) on his own accord. If it singed into law, Trump has very little chance to do anything in that regard because the congress basically decides. Hope Trump will veto that bill, which would get him into more trouble of course.

_http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/23/us-congress-agrees-agrees-new-russia-sanctions/
 
Interesting new article by Free Beacon about the open war between the State Dept and the White House: _http://freebeacon.com/national-security/state-dept-open-war-white-house/
 
So apparently Trump is now forbidding the transgendered from serving in the US military.

_http://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article163665388.html

<blockquote>After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow......
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017</blockquote> <blockquote>....Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming.....
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017</blockquote> <blockquote>....victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you</blockquote>

Since this seems like the sort of thing liberal circles are going to raise a tremendous stink about, I wonder if there's something else in the media that this trans military debacle is meant to distract from? :huh:

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article163665388.html#storylink=cpy
 
whitecoast said:
Since this seems like the sort of thing liberal circles are going to raise a tremendous stink about, I wonder if there's something else in the media that this trans military debacle is meant to distract from? :huh:


Yeah, I was surprised to hear this in this crazy time of attacks. Why would he give ammunition to the groups that are trying to oust him? I don't see him as acting stupid here, it takes work to change policy. My feeling of Trump is that he is a fake outsider keeps coming back with these things, while the real things are being ignored- or PTB agenda continued/furthered.
 
The US based their foreign policy decision making on poorly-stitched evidence, disinformation and lies yet again. I'm waiting for that glorious day to arrive when this strategy is going to fail them but I may in fact grow a very long beard before that happens. And since I'm a girl that won't be anytime soon.

The attempts to discredit Trump are stop him from improving the US with Russia are both vicious and chaotic. As pointed out in the second article, they kind of "smell" of panic to stop Trump at all costs. This time they found an "expert" on Russia who was convicted for failing to pay millions in taxes there (among other things that discredit his objectivity) and who delivered an emotionally charged speech that supports their agenda.

I'm curious to see how this will unfold.

"Trump Jr.'s Russian meeting was about lifting sanctions, key witness Browder tells Senate"

https://www.rt.com/usa/397762-browder-testifies-russia-probe/

The controversial meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya was about lifting the US sanctions against Moscow, key witness and Magnitsky Act lobbyist William Browder told the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Browder appeared before the committee, which is looking into alleged Russian meddling into the US election, on Thursday.

Browder, CEO of Hermitage Capital, who was sentenced in absentia to nine years in prison for his financial crimes in Russia in the 2000s, was summoned as a key witness and an expert on Putin’s Russia.

He has given senators his version of the meeting between Veselnitskaya and the Trump team, comprised of US president Donald Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and then-campaign chairman Paul J. Manafort, during the race for the White House in June 2016.

“Nobody was talking about adoptions. They were talking about the repeal of sanctions so that Russian torturers and murderers could freely travel and keep their money in America,” Browder said.

His emotional speech was welcomed by senators as they left little doubt that the witness was saying what they wanted to hear.

Browder told the committee that the Russians are all “liars,” who have “no empathy and no morals.”

“The Russians will do anything they can get away with and even stuff they can’t get away with,” he said.

The businessman said that his experience of working in the country taught him that “in Putin’s Russia, there are no good guys,” adding that he was threatened with kidnapping and death.

In a phone interview with RT on Wednesday, Veselnitskaya warned that Browder was preparing to tell lies to senators.


The attorney said that she “carefully” studied Browder’s written testimony to the committee, which was published by The Atlantic online earlier this week.

There is nothing new there, he has already said all these things before. And I can tell you with certainty that… Browder will give false testimony,” Veselnitskaya said, adding that she was “ready to testify and prove to anyone in the US or any other country that Mr. Browder is telling lies.”

Earlier, the lawyer said that Browder launched a disinformation campaign over her meeting with Donald Trump Jr. to get back at the Kremlin and retaliate against her personally for a recent defeat in court.

Veselnitskaya was one of the legal experts who represented Cyprus-based holding company Prevezon, owned by Russian businessman Denis Katsyv, in its defense against allegations of money laundering. The case, which was launched in 2013, ended in a settlement in May with no admission of guilt by Prevezon.

Browder got his nine-year sentence in abstention in Russia for failing to pay 552 million rubles in taxes (about $16 million) together with his lawyer Sergey Magnitsky.

The American was also found guilty of illegally buying shares in the country’s gas giant, Gazprom, costing Russia at least 3 billion rubles (US$100 million).

Following the death of Magnitsky in a Moscow detention center in 2009, Browder actively lobbied for the so-called Magnitsky Act, a 2012 law that allowed the US government to seize assets from a number of alleged Russian human rights abusers as well as barring them from entering the United States.

Moscow responded to the American move by prohibiting the US families from adopting Russian children, among other measures.

Meanwhile in Washington:

Senate sends new Russia sanctions bill to Trump’s desk

https://www.rt.com/usa/397767-senate-sanctions-russia-korea-iran-trump/

The US Senate has approved further sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea, and now the bipartisan bill goes to President Donald Trump’s desk, where it may be vetoed or signed into law. The vote was 98 to 2.

The sanctions target Russian gas and pipeline developments by codifying six of former President Barack Obama’s executive orders implementing sanctions on Russia.

Senator Ben Cardin (D-Maryland), ranking member of the foreign relations committee, opened floor discussion Thursday evening.

The committee’s chairman, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tennessee), then yielded to Senator John McCain (R), who lauded the bipartisan process that supported the bill.

“We will not tolerate attacks on our democracy!” McCain, who chairs the armed services committee, insisted from the Senate floor. “That's what this bill is all about.”

All three countries were accused of violating “the international order” by Senator Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey), a former chairman of the foreign relations committee.

Opposition to the bill was bipartisan as well, but scarce, with only Senators Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) voting against.

Leadership in the House and Senate agreed on the details of the sanctions bill late Wednesday, following the near unanimous vote in the House on Tuesday, 419 to 3. Senate passage sends the sanctions bill directly to Trump's desk, and lawmakers expressed mixed expectations on whether the president would sign it into law.

The new sanctions are a clear attempt by Congress to tie the hands of President Trump, who publicly said he wanted to improve relations with Russia, but as a foreign policy measure they are short-sighted and ineffective, retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski told RT.

“It is intended to damage that relationship [with Russia]. I think it’s important to see that this is a Congressional act intended to damage Mr. Trump and his ability to conduct foreign policy,” Kwiatkowski said.

They’re certainly attempting to limit [Trump’s] powers, and I think anybody who has watched American politics for the past six or seven months understands the panic that is present in our Congress amongst the opposition party and certain members of his own party. They’re very frightened at his ability and desire to execute power, to use the power of that office,” Kwiatkowski said.

“Clearly, the Congress, the House and the Senate have overstepped their abilities to understand and influence foreign policy. They don’t understand the impact of sanctions by extending these sanctions to other, allied companies… That is the height of arrogance and, mostly, ignorance,” Kwiatkowski argued, saying that the voting revealed that only a handful of “independent thinkers” are present in the Congress.

Kwiatkowski believes Trump himself is against the new measures as he is aware that sanctions are “largely ineffective” and “not a smart way to run foreign policy.”

She added: “Historically, they have not worked. Historically, they have hurt the very people they’re intended to help.”
 
It seems like this time they've really painted Trump into a corner, and put him in a loose-loose situation. It will be interesting to see if he'll veto the bill or not. At the same time, some pretty smart writers, like Paul Craig Roberts are naively saying how Russia should finally retaliate, and stop "understanding" the US. So far, as I see it, Putin et co have acted "smart as serpents, but gentle as doves", and this castanedian stalking tactic has worked pretty well for them. A symmetrical tit for tat retaliation by Russia is probably just what the Washington psychos are hoping for, like "see, we told you they are evil". I think Putin is smarter than that, and knows better and more asymmetrical ways to answer these sanctions. However, as he pointed out, "we can't tolerate arrogance forever", so it will be interesting to see if some stronger actions will be carried out by Russia this time.
 
I wasn't sure if this deserves its own thread but just to be on the safe side I'll post it here where US sanctions have been discussed.

I guess enough is enough and Russia has decided to respond: "Russia Suspends US Embassy Use of Diplomatic Properties in Moscow"

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201707281055953840-russia-suspends-us-diplomatic-property-use/

Russia is suspending the use of all warehouses in Moscow by the US embassy starting from August 1, the Russian Foreign Ministry said on Friday.

"The Russian side is suspending as of August 1 the use by the US embassy in Russia of all warehouses on the Dorozhnaya Street in Moscow and the dacha compound in Serebryanyy Bor," the ministry said in a statement.

The move comes following the US Senate's approval of a new set of sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea, which is yet to be signed by President Donald Trump. The bill limits Trump's ability to lift the restrictions on Moscow.

Moscow also offered to Washington to cut the number of its diplomatic staff by September 1 commensurate to the number of Russian diplomats. The Russian Foreign Ministry offered to the United States to limit the number of its diplomats in Russia to 455 people.

"We are offering to the US side to bring the numbers of US diplomatic and technical staff working in the US embassy in Moscow, in general consulates in St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg and Vladivostok to reflect the exact number of Russian diplomats and technical staff who are in the United States. This means that the total number of employees in US diplomatic and consular agencies in Russia will be cut to 455," the ministry said in a statement.

Russia will give a "mirror response" should the United States introduce new unilateral measures to cut the numbers of Russian diplomats in the country.

Russia reserves the reciprocal right to respond to the latest sanctions bill passed in the US Senate by hitting US interests, the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

"We reserve the right in a manner of reciprocity to other measures that may affect the interests of the United States," the ministry said in a statement.

In late 2016, the Obama administration slapped a new batch of sanctions on Russia and expelled 35 Russian diplomats on the pretext of Moscow's alleged meddling in the US presidential election.
Trump now has 10 days, excluding Sundays, to decide whether to sign the bill into law or veto the legislation, at which point the Congress could override his veto by a two-thirds majority.

The bill passed the House of Representatives on Tuesday by a vote of 419 to three.

"The new bill seeks to create unfair competitive advantages for the US in the global economy via political tools," the ministry said.

The bill has already prompted criticism within the European Union. France and Germany have so far spoken out against the bill that the US House passed overwhelmingly on Tuesday as one that adversely affects European industries while advancing US commercial interests.

Despite that, Moscow is doing everything in its power to normalize bilateral ties with the United States.

"It is well known that Russia did and continues doing everything possible to normalize bilateral relations, to develop ties and cooperation with the United States on crucial issues of the international agenda, including before all the fight against terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, illegal drug trafficking, illegal migration, cybercrime, etc. We believed and we continue to believe that global issues could only be resolved jointly. We are sure that most people on the planet share this approach," the statement read.

The statement noted that the idea of Russophobia and confrontation has taken root within "certain circles" in the United States.

"Despite Washington’s constant attacks, we acted and continue acting responsibly and reservedly and have not responded to certain provocations until now. However, the latest events evidence that Russophobia and policy of open confrontation with our country have established themselves in certain circles in the United States," the statement read.
 
angelburst29 said:
To add to the (above) Military Contracts:

Trillions of Dollars in U.S. Military Spending Is Unaccounted-For. Tax Payers’ Money is Missing July 22, 2017
http://www.globalresearch.ca/trillions-of-dollars-in-u-s-military-spending-is-unaccounted-for-tax-payers-money-is-missing/5600525

Now, and for many decades past, the American public has displayed far higher confidence and trust in “The Military” than in any other “Institution” (including than churches, schools, the Presidency, the police, courts — any).

And yet — according to the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Defense — many billions, and sometimes even trillions, of dollars, in the Department’s periodic financial reports, are not documented. What has happened to the taxpayers’ money is unknown — it’s missing (alleged to have been spent, but to payees unidentified).

According to the DOD’s IG, this goes on year-after-year (yet without at all reducing Americans’ trust in “The Military”). Apparently, Americans, as a lot, are gluttons for punishment — or else our ’news’media haven’t sufficiently reported the “waste, fraud, and abuse” that “The Military” are doing to the American public. Either way, there is this extraordinarily high public confidence in the military ongoing year-after-year though the U.S. DOD continues to be the only unauditable federal Department, and expenditures amounting (over the years) into trillions of dollars remain unaccounted-for. But here will now be the American ‘news’media’s chance to call to the public’s attention this discrepancy between the military’s reality and the public’s perceptions of that reality, by publishing this documentation:
<snip>
...if the money isn’t going to [the usual recipients of military contracts], then where is it going? And why? And for what? Why is there no congressional investigation to answer these questions? [/b] And why are U.S. ‘news’ media not publicizing this matter so as to force such investigations? Are payoffs involved — payoffs for silence? Why are none of the ‘news’ media that have the resources to explore these questions, publishing their own investigations into it, since Congress won’t investigate? And, since the Inspector General’s reports into these matters have had no impact, why isn’t the focus finally shifting away from studying to find how much is missing, toward instead prosecuting the people who — at the very least — failed to do what they were being paid to do: keep track of every cent of taxpayers’ money? If doing that job is too dangerous, then shouldn’t the people who are tasked to do it be paid more, so as to cover their exceptionally high personal risk? Is all of this secrecy really necessary in order to keep “The Military” way on top as the most respected of all institutions in the United States — even after all of the harms that the U.S. military has actually caused in Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc., destroying those countries and others? How much would the public’s respect for the military — the mass-killing institution — be brought down, if the truth about it were known? Would the mass-killing institution deserve to be the most respected institution even if it weren’t so corrupt?
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT! I think this concept should be drilled into the minds of Americans:
Any person or organization which "resists", obstructs or is derelict in their duty publicizing and investigating such schemes, should be considered a traitorous, financial beneficiary of such schemes, and deserving of public contempt, loss of position and legal prosecution.
 
[quote author=Ant22 ]I wasn't sure if this deserves its own thread but just to be on the safe side I'll post it here where US sanctions have been discussed.

I guess enough is enough and Russia has decided to respond: "Russia Suspends US Embassy Use of Diplomatic Properties in Moscow"

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201707281055953840-russia-suspends-us-diplomatic-property-use/[/quote]


It might sound odd, but the more sanctions the better. Remember, the true loser here is the EU. And all because of the geopolitical imperial ambitions of the US.


‘America 1st doesn't mean Europe last’ – EU lashes out at US sanctions against Russia
https://www.rt.com/news/397566-europe-oppose-us-russia-sanctions/

Brussels has fired back at the new US sanctions against Russia, saying an “America first” approach does not mean EU interests can come last. Germany and France have also voiced their opposition to the new set of sanctions.

In a harshly-worded statement, Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, lashed out at Washington saying “America first cannot mean that Europe's interests come last.”

He added the commission “concluded today that if our concerns are not taken into account sufficiently, we stand ready to act appropriately within a matter of days.”

The EU’s legislative body also argued the sanctions “could affect infrastructure transporting energy resources to Europe, for instance the maintenance and upgrade of pipelines in Russia that feed the Ukraine gas transit system,” according to a press release.

The sanctions bill has also caused a stir in Berlin. "This concerns not only German industry … Sanctions against Russia should not become a tool of industrial policy [pursued] in the US interests," German Foreign Ministry spokesman Martin Schaefer told a news conference on Wednesday, as cited by Sputnik.

“In our opinion, it is not in the Americans’ right to judge or stipulate which way European companies may engage in cooperation with any third parties – particularly, with Russian energy companies,” Schaefer said.

Speaking at the same briefing, government spokeswoman Ulrike Demmer added Berlin believes “the European industry should not become the target of US sanctions.” She noted it was crucial “to continue close coordination between the US and the EU in the sanctions policy toward Russia.”

France has said the sanctions “contradict international law” due to their “extraterritorial reach,” according to a statement by the French Foreign Ministry.

“This bill, if it comes into force, would allow measures against European natural or juridical persons for situations that have no connection with the United States,” the statement read.

French and EU laws would need to be adjusted in response to the sanctions, she said, adding that discussions should be held at European Union level.

“To protect ourselves against the extraterritorial effects of US legislation [or any other legislation], we need to work to amend national legislation and perfect EU measures,” according to the statement.

The officials were commenting on the latest package of anti-Russian sanctions voted into law on Tuesday by the US House of Representatives. The restrictions, which come as part of a bill imposing sweeping sanctions also on Iran and North Korea, target Russia’s major defense, mining, shipping and railway industries.

They also include penalties on European companies engaged in joint EU-Russia energy projects, with the Gazprom-run Nord Stream 2 flagship pipeline being the most probable target of renewed sanctions.

Some media reports suggested Brussels was preparing countermeasures in the event that the sanctions enter into force after being signed by the US president. Should that happen, the EU will stand ready to act immediately, according to the Financial Times.

On Monday, the newspaper wrote that the European Commission had drafted an internal memo outlining possible options on the US sanctions, including invoking a ‘Blocking Statute,’ an EU regulation that limits extraterritorial US jurisdiction in Europe, as well as triggering a number of “WTO-compliant retaliatory measures.”

Moscow maintains the US sanctions are being imposed at the expense of European businesses. “There is very serious pressure from the US on European companies,” Russian Economy Minister Maxim Oreshkin was quoted as saying by RIA Novosti on Wednesday.

He asserted the restrictions cannot inflict substantial damage on Russia. “Our macroeconomic policy is shaped in such a way so that sanctions-related shockwaves coming from outside do not have significant impact on the Russian economy,” he said.

Some experts, however, doubted the EU's readiness to go against its transatlantic ally. “I’m not sure if the European Union has courage to take actions against this,” Dan Kovalik, an American labor rights lawyer, told RT. “I’m worried that the US is able to impose the sanctions notwithstanding the EU opposition to it.”

"I’m sure this is not about protecting democracy, either the US democracy or someone else’s. This is more about the US wanting more of a share of markets in Europe for its natural gas,” Kovalik added. “These sanctions, which would be made permanent … are really tantamount to a declaration of war against these countries, particularly Russia.”

He said the measure is likely to diminish any progress made by Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin at the G20 summit in Hamburg, as the US may be “forced into a more adversarial relationship with Russia.”


Some serious cracks within the Empire right here. If only in words, the EU is finally learning to look after it's own interest thanks to the sanctions. Now, one might wonder what the US will do in response to get their vassals back in line, that's the scary part. Or like the C's remarked upon: A: US wishes to destabilize EU similar to Syria so that they can come in and "fix" things.


So what do we have. On one side we have the EU, who are reaching their limits at what it is willing to do to be a loyal US vassal. On the other side we have Russia, showing the world that one can be soeveneign in the face of US hostility.

From the looks of it and if this trend continuous. The US will be forced to act trying to get their vassals back in line, and the EU will be forced to make a decision when that happens. Either put up a fight, clean house, same way Turkey is doing. Or bow and sit idly by while the US covertly tries to turn the EU into another Syria.
 
bjorn said:
Ant22 ]I wasn't sure if this deserves its own thread but just to be on the safe side I'll post it here where US sanctions have been discussed. I guess enough is enough and Russia has decided to respond: "Russia Suspends US Embassy Use of Diplomatic Properties in Moscow" https://sputniknews.com/politics/201707281055953840-russia-suspends-us-diplomatic-property-use/[/quote] It might sound odd said:
(...) Some serious cracks within the Empire right here. If only in words, the EU is finally learning to look after it's own interest thanks to the sanctions. Now, one might wonder what the US will do in response to get their vassals back in line, that's the scary part. Or like the C's remarked upon: A: US wishes to destabilize EU similar to Syria so that they can come in and "fix" things.


So what do we have. On one side we have the EU, who are reaching their limits at what it is willing to do to be a loyal US vassal. On the other side we have Russia, showing the world that one can be soeveneign in the face of US hostility.

From the looks of it and if this trend continuous. The US will be forced to act trying to get their vassals back in line, and the EU will be forced to make a decision when that happens. Either put up a fight, clean house, same way Turkey is doing. Or bow and sit idly by while the US covertly tries to turn the EU into another Syria.

As for the C's comment you quoted, maybe the sanctions were in fact a part of the destabilisation plan?

Although somehow I'm not too sure this is the case: the PTB have recently been displaying really chaotic behaviour, like a child throwing toys out of the pram and shouting "Russia!!" So I'm not sure how much thorough and strategic planning is in fact involved. To me their behaviour is similar to firefighting because a large part of the recent events came unexpectedly and they weren't a part of the original agenda. It's almost like with a ball of spaghetti: they're pulling a spaghetti string on one side and as a result there's a meatball falling of their plate on the other side. Well, wishful thinking and echo chambers will do it to ya.

I'm curious to see how this will unfold. It's one thing for the EU to support America when the EU is also benefitting from it. But it's an entirely different thing to suffer the consequences with no benefits.

From Sputnik: "US Sanctions to Bring Russia, EU Closer as Brussels Hit by Strategic Ally's Move"

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201707281055968054-us-sanctions-russia-eu-closer/
The Russian-EU relations will become more constructive amid the US decision to introduce new sanctions against Moscow, the Russian State Duma’s International Affairs Committee Chairman Leonid Slutsky told the Rossiya 24 broadcaster.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – On Thursday, US Senate approved a bill that would impose sweeping sanctions on Russia and seeks, in particular, to target companies that invest in Russian energy projects. The bill now has to be either signed or vetoed by US President Donald Trump.
France and Germany have so far spoken out against the bill as it affects European industries while advancing US commercial interests.

"I am sure that Europe will think more and more seriously and the Russian-EU relations… will be slowly but surely becoming more constructive," Slutsky said.

He pointed out that the European Union is not ready to copy the possible new US sanctions automatically.

"In terms of the common sense, this brings Russia closer to Brussels affected by its strategic friends from Washington, which [the US and the EU] unfortunately had serious differences on key issues within the last 12-18 months," Slutsky added.

The Russian Foreign Ministry suspended the use of all US Embassy warehouses and its compound in Moscow and also offered the US to cut down the number of its diplomatic staff in Russia to 455 people by September 1. Moreover, the ministry said that it reserves the reciprocal right to hit US interests in response to the US sanctions bill.
The decision was welcomed by chairman of the Russian upper chamber of parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee Konstantin Kosachev.

"Russia behaves like a responsible global power. Given that the notorious bill has not entered into force yet and the situation is developing, that [Russian response to foreign sanctions] must also take place in the future," Kosachev wrote on his Facebook page.

The lawmaker pointed out that Russia made everything possible to save its relations with the United States but the US inappropriate behavior resulted in the current state of bilateral ties.

On Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Russia is behaving patiently amid sanctions, but time will come when Moscow will be forced to respond to arrogance, adding that if adopted, the US anti-Russia sanctions bill would be an "extra-cynical move."
In December 2016, the administration of former US President Barack Obama imposed a set of punitive measures against Russia, including the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats and the closure of the two Russian diplomatic compounds. The actions were taken in response to Moscow's alleged interference in the US presidential election, which Russia has repeatedly denied.

Back in December, Putin decided not to respond to sanctions imposed by the outgoing US administration and act in accordance with the ties built with the new US leadership. However, since then, the diplomatic property hasn't been returned. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said earlier that Moscow would take retaliatory measures against Washington if the situation with Russia's diplomatic property in the United States was not resolved.
 
Back
Top Bottom