[Majorityrights News] KP interview with James Gilmore, former diplomat and insider from first Trump administration Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, 05 January 2025 00:35.
[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
Posted by DanielS on Monday, 14 November 2016 11:12.
Former Democratic US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton listens as rival and US Senator Bernie Sanders speaks at a presidential primary debate in Flint, Michigan, March 6, 2016. (Photo by Reuters)
That such a lame and Red Leftist candidate as (((Bernie Sanders))) could have been a viable candidate - viz., the issue being raised through one credible poll that he would have beaten Trump handily - goes to show that there could be popular support for a White Left platform. It further indicates that there was a game being played with Hillary-Sanders-Trump to preclude the emergence of the White Left.
“US Senator Bernie Sanders could have defeated Trump: Poll”, 13 Nov 2016:
Bernie Sanders would have defeated Donald Trump in the presidential election by a large margin if he had been the Democratic presidential nominee instead of Hillary Clinton, according to a pre-election poll.
Sanders, one of the 2016 Democratic presidential candidates, would have received 56 percent of the vote for the White House, while Trump would have won 44 percent, according to a national survey conducted by Gravis Marketing two days before the November 8 presidential election.
Moreover, independent voters, who made up about 30 percent of American voters this year, favored Sanders over Trump, 55 percent to 45 percent, the poll found.
Clinton, by contrast, lost independent voters to Trump by six percentage points, according to exit polls.
According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls from May 6 to June 5, Sanders was supported by 50 percent of voters, compared to Trump’s 39 percent, an 11-point advantage.
During an interview in May, Sanders acknowledged his advantage over Trump: “Right now, in every major poll, national poll and statewide poll done in the last month, six weeks, we are defeating Trump often by big numbers, and always at a larger margin than secretary Clinton is.”
Those polls were of course based on a hypothetical scenario, five months from Election Day. However, Sanders’ popularity among young and working-class voters might have led to an election victory; voters that Trump ultimately won.
Emails released by Wikileaks have revealed that officials from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) sought to undermine Sanders’ bid to win the party’s 2016 presidential nomination.
Sanders’ supporters argue that Clinton’s loss could be attributed to her reluctance to fully focus on America’s vast economic inequality and tougher regulations on US financial markets.
Sanders, 75, has not ruled out the possibility of another presidential bid.
Numerous polls taken before the presidential election showed that Clinton and Trump were deeply unpopular politicians, while Sanders enjoyed very high popularity.
Clinton, a former first lady, US senator and secretary of state, was viewed by many voters as a corrupt member of the elite Washington establishment
Jerusalem, Israel
The agenda included current bilateral issues, including ways to strengthen trade, economic, investment, research, technical, innovation and cultural cooperation.
Protocol between the Federal Customs Service of Russia and the Customs Directorate of the Israeli Tax Authority on organising the exchange of preliminary information about movement of goods and vehicles between the Russian Federation and the State of Israel
Signed by: Head of the Federal Customs Service of Russia Vladimir Bulavin and Head of the Customs Directorate of the Israeli Tax Authority Avraham Ben Arditi
Joint Declaration of Intent to develop cooperation in construction and housing services between the Ministry of Construction, Housing and Utilities of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Construction and Housing of the State of Israel
Signed by: Minister of Construction, Housing and Utilities of Russia Mikhail Men and Minister of Construction and Housing of Israel Yoav Galant
Roadmap on technical cooperation in agriculture between the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of the State of Israel.
Signed by: Deputy Ministry of Agriculture of Russia Sergei Levin and Director General of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Israel Shlomo Ben Eliyahu
Twinning agreement between the Skolkovo Innovation Centre and the City of Yokneam Illit
Signed by: Board Chairman of the Skolkovo Foundation Igor Drozdov and Yokneam Illit Mayor Simon Alfasi
Press statements by Dmitry Medvedev and Benjamin Netanyahu following talks
Excerpt from the transcript:
Benjamin Netanyahu (via interpreter): Your visit symbolises the consolidation of our relations, all the more so as it comes during the 25th anniversary of restoring diplomatic relations between Russia and Israel.
We have signed several agreements that will enhance our cooperation in various areas, for instance, agriculture and construction. We have a common task – to promote a free trade agreement.
Dmitry Medvedev: The 25th anniversary of restoring relations is a decent amount of time, but we should look ahead.
Our countries are linked by common values. We have a shared understanding of the outcome of World War II, of the critical importance of the victory over Nazism, and of anti-Semitism and all xenophobia as unacceptable.
However, we also face common challenges, primarily terrorism. Today it is threatening the whole planet but is particularly pronounced in this region. The Russian Federation also suffers from terror. This terror has the same roots, which is why we must counter it together. I’m referring to the coordination of our efforts to build up security and defence, which has been raised to a completely new level in recent time. The Russian Federation also opposes the proliferation of nuclear weapons. We must work together (and we are ready to cooperate with all interested states) to destroy the core of terrorism, which is currently represented by Daesh or ISIS.
Israel is our major trade partner in the region but we have done little so far to promote trade, economic and investment cooperation. Today we have signed documents to this end. We are interested not simply in increasing our trade, which went down recently, but in qualitatively changing the character of our relations.
Russia has unique conditions for the agriculture business, while Israel has excellent technology. Combining these can produce outstanding results. We will be able not only to supply quality food to each other but also to sell it on third markets.
The second area is innovations. We would like to continue such cooperation, in particular, on the basis of the signed documents. We should share commercially viable ideas that would allow us to make money.
We have made progress in tourism. More and more Israelis are coming to Russia. Over 300,000 people from Russia made trips to Israel last year.
The US president is not directly chosen by voters, but by ‘electors’ that people in a state vote for.
The more people in a state, the more electors an area has. For example, Texas has a population of 25 million and is afforded 38 Electoral College votes, while Delaware has a population of 936,000 and has only three votes.
There are 538 electors in total, corresponding to 435 members of Congress, 100 Senators and three additional electors for the District of Columbia. They will meet in their respective states on 19 December to ultimately elect the President.
Why is the Electoral College in place?
The system was established to ensure regional balance — it makes it mathematically impossible for a candidate with large amounts of support in just one region to overwhelm the vote.
What are the criticisms of the Electoral College?
It renders safe states almost irrelevant to the result of the election: for example it does not matter if Ms Clinton wins a state by five or 40 per cent, she will still get the same number of Electoral College votes.
Five states can vote to legalize marijuana on Election Day
Instead, the result hinges on a handful of states that are politically divided, which some say is undemocratic.
The swing states have a lot of power because most of them choose to elect whoever is the state-wide winner, regardless of the margin they won by.
If Mr Trump wins or loses by a tiny fraction in Florida, for example, all 29 votes flip depending on it.
Analysts also say the system favours smaller and more rural states, since the minimum number of electors a state can have is three — so states with very small populations are over-represented.
And the system technically allows the electors to hijack the result, since it is not certain the electors will vote the way their state does.
Although around 30 of the 50 states have passed laws – meaning their electors must vote according to the popular vote in their state – the punishment for not doing so can merely be a fine. This means they could potentially defy the electorate’s choice.
Almost every state chooses to allocate all its Electoral College votes to whoever comes in first place statewide, regardless of their margin of victory.
Whoever gets to 270 electoral votes first – the majority of the 578 total votes – will win the election.
Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, 08 November 2016 08:13.
“They are both essentially neo-liberal candidates, who will do nothing to impede imperial expansion” - Hedges, 7 Nov 2016:
“Trump is a Public Relations disaster for The Unites States” - and that’s part of why the establishment is against him - “but the establishment is so hated that when they trotted out Mitt Romney to attack him, people just laughed: it’s the Romney’s, the Clinton’s, the Obama’s - it’s the establishment that people are turning against which is why Hillary Clinton is having such a difficult time competing against such an imbecilic and indisciplined and impulsive and frankly ignorant candidate.”
Hillary’s camp has been able to manipulate the electoral process all the while. With that, she’s had the press on her side, including to the point of pressuring the FBI to shut down the belated email investigations.
Posted by DanielS on Monday, 07 November 2016 05:37.
The New Observer had previously run stories (such as this and this) more critical of Trump’s candidacy.
Such critical distance from support of (((Trump’s candidacy))) would be more in line with the position here. However, the truth is that both candidates suck from an ethno-nationalist perspective - that means that Hillary sucks too.
While it is likely that TNO is being maneuvered into a position of controlled opposition regarding the election, they have reason to believe that they are bucking the trend of other “newspaper” endorsements -
Whether it is bucking the system or being co-opted successfully as controlled opposition in regard to the election 2016, let’s give a hearing to TNO’s argument now, having drifted toward endorsement of Trump though it has.
- I present the article in full with the compensation of including their fund raising pitch at the end -
TNO, “Crooked Hillary’s Crimes: A Partial List”, 6 Nov 2016:
Hillary Clinton has now committed far more legal misdemeanors than even impeached President Richard Nixon, and would, under normal circumstances, be barred from running for office.
The controlled media, however, continues to protect and promote Clinton because they hate Donald Trump so much, and because they are as corrupt as she is.
The recent announcement by the FBI that emails linked to Clinton’s illegal email server had been found on disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner’s laptop computer, showed once again that Clinton had clearly breached the law in this regard.
At the same time, the string of WikiLeaks revelations from the Clinton Foundation have shown without question that the Clinton-controlled State Department engaged in blatant “pay-for-play profiteering” and arms deals with all manner of states and companies.
The WikiLeaks-Podesta email revelations show that Clinton and her team are utterly ruthless and prepared to engage in the most corrupt, underhanded, and nasty manner.
Apart from smearing Latinos as “needy,” the emails reveal that the Clinton team think that Catholics are “stuck in medieval times” and show that Clinton aides bartered with plutocrats for Secretary of State Clinton’s face time on the basis of cash donations.
As revealed in the anti-corruption website’s video tapes, Clinton’s staff have bragged on film of provoking violence at Trump rallies and bringing in voters by bus to cast illegal ballots.
In addition, a Project Veritas Action investigator caught Molly Barker, the Director of Marketing for Hillary Clinton’s national campaign, knowingly breaking campaign finance law by accepting a straw donation from a foreign national. Contributions from foreign nationals are illegal under federal election law, and straw donations (contributions made in the name of another person) are also illegal.
The team began with the “unbreakable bond between the United States and Israel,” which it said is “based upon shared values of democracy, freedom of speech, respect for minorities, cherishing life, and the opportunity for all citizens to pursue their dreams.”
Point two, said the team, is that “Israel is the state of the Jewish people, who have lived in that land for 3,500 years. The State of Israel was founded with courage and determination by great men and women against enormous odds and is an inspiration to people everywhere who value freedom and human dignity.”
Remember, these are campaign points of the GOP presidential candidate for the United States. The election is next Tuesday.
Point three: “Israel is a staunch ally of the U.S. and a key partner in the global war against Islamic jihadism. Military cooperation and coordination between Israel and the U.S. must continue to grow.
It goes on. And on. Frankly, it sounds a lot like a real ally is supposed to sound.
Another promise included in the platform is the pledge by Trump to “ensure that Israel receives maximum military, strategic and tactical cooperation from the United States, and the MOU will not limit the support that we give. Further, Congress will not be limited to give support greater than that provided by the MOU if it chooses to do so…”
Of special interest was the was the pledge to oppose efforts to delegitimize Israel, impose discriminatory double standards against Israel, or to impose special labeling requirements on Israeli products or boycotts on Israeli goods.”
In addition, Trump pledged that if he is elected, his administration “will ask the Justice Department to investigate coordinated attempts on college campuses to intimidate students who support Israel.”
But the real kicker came in the following related list of points:
“A two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians appears impossible as long as the Palestinians are unwilling to renounce violence against Israel or recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. Additionally, the Palestinians are divided between PA rule in the West Bank and Hamas rule in Gaza so there is not a united Palestinian people who could control a second state. Hamas is a US-designated terrorist organization that actively seeks Israel’s destruction. We will seek to assist the Israelis and the Palestinians in reaching a comprehensive and lasting peace, to be freely and fairly negotiated between those living in the region.
“The Palestinian leadership, including the PA, has undermined any chance for peace with Israel by raising generations of Palestinian children on an educational program of hatred of Israel and Jews. The larger Palestinian society is regularly taught such hatred on Palestinian television, in the Palestinian press, in entertainment media, and in political and religious communications. The two major Palestinian political parties — Hamas and Fatah — regularly promote anti-Semitism and jihad.
“The U.S. cannot support the creation of a new state where terrorism is financially incentivized, terrorists are celebrated by political parties and government institutions, and the corrupt diversion of foreign aid is rampant. The U.S. should not support the creation of a state that forbids the presence of Christian or Jewish citizens, or that discriminates against people on the basis of religion.
“The U.S. should support direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians without preconditions, and will oppose all Palestinian, European and other efforts to bypass direct negotiations between parties in favor of an imposed settlement. Any solutions imposed on Israel by outside parties including by the United Nations Security Council, should be opposed. We support Israel’s right and obligation to defend itself against terror attacks upon its people and against alternative forms of warfare being waged upon it legally, economically, culturally, and otherwise.
“Israel’s maintenance of defensible borders that preserve peace and promote stability in the region is a necessity. Pressure should not be put on Israel to withdraw to borders that make attacks and conflict more likely.
“The U.S. will recognize Jerusalem as the eternal and indivisible capital of the Jewish state and Mr. Trump’s Administration will move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.
One week ago, Trump told American voters in Israel at a video rally outside the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem, “My administration will stand side by side with the Jewish people and Israel’s leaders to continue strengthening the bridges that connect not only Jewish Americans and Israelis but also all Americans and Israelis. Together, we will stand up to enemies like Iran bent on destroying Israel and her people. Together, we will make America and Israel safe again.”
Hana Levi Julian
About the Author: Hana Levi Julian is a Middle East news analyst with a degree in Mass Communication and Journalism from Southern Connecticut State University. A past columnist with The Jewish Press and senior editor at Arutz 7, Ms. Julian has written for Babble.com, Chabad.org and other media outlets, in addition to her years working in broadcast journalism.
Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, 02 November 2016 07:39.
Jeffrey Goldberg: lobbyist for operation clean break
TNO, “New Editor of Atlantic Exposed”, 1 Nov 2016:
Jeffrey Goldberg, the new editor of the Atlantic magazine—which endorsed Hilary Clinton—has been exposed as a fanatic Jewish Supremacist who was one of the driving forces behind the fake news stories leading up to the invasion of Iraq.
Despite demanding Americans adopt liberal policies, Goldberg served as an Israeli Defense Force prison guard who admitted to beating Palestinian prisoners.
According to a report in South America’s Telesur news service, Goldberhg “is so far on the fringe that even other staunch Zionists criticize his overzealousness.”
One of Goldberg’s most famous quotes was his comment on the eve of the invasion of Iraq that “in five years, I believe that the coming invasion of Iraq will be remembered as an act of profound morality.”
Goldberg was appointed chief editor of the 159-year-old Atlantic Magazine, one of the most famous journalistic institutions in U.S. history.
The openly-Zionist Goldberg moved to Israel nearly 25 years ago and served in the Israeli Defense Forces. Since then, he has been the opening speaker for numerous Zionist functions, including the American Jewish Committee conference and Zionism 3.0, Telesur reported.
“Most garishly, he worked as a prison guard at Ktzi’ot, Israel’s largest detention camp for Palestinian political prisoners, where he boasted of helping beat Palestinian political prisoners.
I have worked in national security my entire life. Most of that has been in the intelligence community surrounded by classified information. For twenty years, I worked undercover in the Central Intelligence Agency, recruiting sources, producing intelligence and running operations. I have a pretty concrete understanding of how classified information is handled and how government communications systems work.
Nobody uses a private email server for official business. Period.
Full stop.
The entire notion is, to borrow a phrase from a Clinton campaign official, “insane.” That anyone would presume to be allowed to do so is mind-boggling. That government officials allowed Hillary Clinton to do so is nauseating.
Classified and unclassified information do not mix. They don’t travel in the same streams through the same pipes. They move in clearly well defined channels so that never the twain shall meet. Mixing them together is unheard of and a major criminal offense.
If you end up with classified information in an unclassified channel, you have done something very wrong and very serious.
Accidentally removing a single classified message from controlled spaces, without any evidence of intent or exposure to hostile forces, can get you fired and cost you your clearance. Repeated instances will land you in prison.
Every hostile intelligence agency on the planet targets senior American officials for collection. The Secretary of State tops the list. Almost anything the Secretary of State had to say about her official duties, her schedule, her mood, her plans for the weekend, would be prized information to adversaries.
It is very difficult, in fact, to think of much of anything that the Secretary of State could be saying in email that we would want hostile forces to know.
As we wait for more information on the latest revelations, let’s quickly note what we already know Hillary Clinton did.
While Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton exclusively used a private email address for official business. Instead of using a State Department account, she used a personal email account, housed on a private server located in her home in Chappaqua, New York. The Department of State exercised zero control or oversight in this process. No government security personnel were involved in protecting them.
When the House Select Committee on Benghazi asked to see these emails, the Department of State said they did not have them. Clinton’s lawyers then went through all the emails on her server. They turned over 30,000 emails they decided were work related and deleted all of the rest.
Former Democratic US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton listens as rival and US Senator Bernie Sanders speaks at a presidential primary debate in Flint, Michigan, March 6, 2016. (Photo by Reuters)
Dmitry Medvedev’s and Benjamin Netanyahu’s issue press statements regarding their agreements
Jeffrey Goldberg: lobbyist for operation clean break