Today Marks the First Broadcast of the American System, a Daily Internet Radio Program Airing Weekdays at 9pm. You Are All Cordially Invited to Join Us Starting Tonight. Please Go to AmericanSystem.TV and Subscribe Now!
The Morning Briefing has appeared in print form since early March 2015 and now will be making the transition to a one hour daily internet radio broadcast live at 9pm. This shift comes in response to widespread requests from our readers, many of whom find audio more accessible and convenient. This program will be called THE AMERICAN SYSTEM. Launching this program is our reply to the acute crisis of leadership and ideas in the United States especially, and also around the world.
Our show name harkens back to Alexander Hamilton and Henry Clay, with clear implications of pro-development dirigism and protectionism. We intend to show the way to an economic recovery, full employment, a rising standard of living, and the full array of modern cultural, scientific, technical, and industrial progress. Our initial target is the creation of 40 million jobs at union wages. On the basis of shared economic prosperity, we propose to build a permanent international peace order.
We are optimistic that our new daily audio broadcast format will increase the impact of our ideas and make your political activism much more effective.
With thanks for your continuing support,
Webster G. Tarpley Ph.D. and the Tax Wall Street Party/United Front Against Austerity
Real Founders of ISIS Were Bush, Cheney, and Gen. Petraeus Through Surge and “Anbar Awakening”; Trump Great Admirer of Disgraced Neocon Petraeus; Secret Service Director Joseph Clancy Must Enforce Law on Violent Threats Against Trump or Face Ouster; Tax Wall Street Party Call for Special Session of Congress to Fund Fight Against Zika Reported on NPR; Seventy GOP Operatives Demand That Priebus Implement Plan to Dump Trump, Use Funds to Save Congress; 22 Current and Former Republicans from Senate and House Reject Fascist Billionaire; Green Party Ideologist Chris Hedges Projects Calvinist “Absolute Depravity” on American People, Denies Possibility for Human Progress; Social Media Needed to Expose August 17 CNN Green Town Hall; Bill Maher Right That There Is No Place for Boutique Issues in an Armageddon Election
World Crisis Radio
August 13, 2016
THE FIRST BROADCAST OF THE AMERICAN SYSTEM WILL BE AVAILABLE 9PM ET MONDAY AUGUST 15. PLEASE CHECK YOUR EMAIL INBOX ON MONDAY EVENING FOR A SPECIAL INVITATION TO SUBSCRIBE. THIS INFORMATION WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE ON TARPLEY.NET, TWSP.US AND ALL OF OUR CORRESPONDING SOCIAL MEDIA NETWORKS.
➨ Starting on Monday, August 15, 2016 this Morning Briefing, which has appeared in print form since early March 2015, will be making the transition to a one hour daily internet radio broadcast. This shift comes in response to widespread requests from our readers, many of whom find audio more accessible and convenient. This program will be called THE AMERICAN SYSTEM. Launching this program is our reply to the acute crisis of leadership and ideas in the United States especially, and also around the world.
Our new name harkens back to Alexander Hamilton and Henry Clay, with clear implications of pro-development dirigism and protectionism. We intend to show the way to an economic recovery, full employment, a rising standard of living, and the full array of modern cultural, scientific, technical, and industrial progress. Our initial target is the creation of 40 million jobs at union wages. On the basis of shared economic prosperity, we propose to build a permanent international peace order.
We are optimistic that our new daily audio broadcast format will increase our audience and the impact of our ideas.
With thanks for your continuing support,
—Webster G. Tarpley Ph.D. and the Tax Wall Street Party/United Front Against Austerity
Hillary or Trump? Advice for the Undecided
By Jeffrey Jackson, Legal Advisor to the Tax Wall Street Party
This presidential election cycle pits the two most unpopular candidates in American history against each other. Hillary Clinton is a notorious warmonger and conniver, and Donald Trump, a relative newcomer to the political scene this election cycle, has exposed himself as a vehement and psychotic Nazi-fascist. Since Hillary and the fascist Trump were nominated in July, many independent voters have faced a dilemma: do I support the devil I don’t know (Trump), or the devil I do know (Hillary)? The answer is obviously to do everything to see that the fascist Trump is defeated, using whatever political tools are at hand. When faced with a choice between a fascist and a non-fascist, the answer must be to smash fascism every time.
Domestically, Hillary is a proven servant of the money center Wall Street banks and hedge funds. She has collected hundreds of thousands in speaking fees and tens of millions in campaign contributions from Wall Street. It has also recently become apparent that Hillary probably engaged in graft involving conflicts with her role at the Clinton Foundation and her duties as Secretary of State. Force her to adopt the Wall Street Sales Tax which Bernie campaigned for as a means of separating her from Wall Street. Make her pledge to nationalize the Federal Reserve to create $6.5 trillion in 0% Long-term federal credit for 30 million infrastructure jobs and removing the student loan debt burden. The Bernie Sanders campaign has made considerable progress on these issues, and only a fool would throw all this work away to follow a lying demagogue like Trump. In some ways this should be a time of optimism for the Left’s recent progress and definitely NOT the time to duck and run and become a defector for Trump. The newly energized Left mass movement should begin organizing to defeat Trump and box in Hillary.
In foreign policy, Hillary is a notorious warmonger and hawk. Bernie Sanders would have been well advised to use his political capital and support base to extract a pledge from Hillary to get a congressional declaration of war before opening any new fighting fronts. In fact, Bernie should do this right now. He should also bash Trump by challenging him to make this same commitment, which he does not want to do. The Tax Wall Street Party was sometimes reticent about Bernie specifically because of the issue of war and peace and his faulty foreign policy. http://twsp.us/search/node/bernie%20sanders%20saudi%20arabia
TWSP alluded to these and many of Hillary’s other negative qualities in the May 5, 2016 Morning Briefing wherein Chairwoman Daniela Walls made the case for Bernie Sanders over Hillary. But despite all that is upsetting about Hillary, is she a fascist? The answer is objectively ‘no,’ Hillary is not a fascist. Of the two candidates for President, Donald Trump is the fascist. It is important during this election for every voter to become educated about what fascism is and what it is not. The definition is not subjective. A basic Wikipedia search is a fine place to start https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
While studying we must conscientiously ask ourselves, how much of this resembles Trump?
Fascism is a mass movement of irrationality around a single charismatic and demagogic leader who is often considered infallible. Trump has proven to be as irrational as one can imagine. Trump’s followers throw all reason out the window to support his outrageous proclamations. One need only look to Trump’s litany of campaign promises that have no basis in reality and the implementation of which rely solely on the magnetism of Trump’s will. A few examples that will suffice include Trump’s promise to make Mexico build a border wall, Trump’s statement that he will unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from NATO, Trump’s blanket assertion that he will re-write all of our trade deals so we can be ‘winners’ again, and Trump’s threat to default on the national debt. There are countless more examples of Trump’s psychotic irrationality and magical thinking in his campaign. If darkness descends and Trump is elected, the only winner will be Trump as he privatizes our public services and national landmarks. Who let Trump have the Washington DC post office? How did Trump get Mar-a-Lago which was willed to the US Government by Marjorie Merriweather Post to serve as a Southern White House? Who will let Trump get his hands on our American assets? What else will he confiscate in office for himself and his billionaire friends?
Hillary’s campaign on the other hand, does not meet the fascist minimum and she is not technically a psychotic. Say what you will about her lack of a soul, but she does not make campaign promises that have absolutely no basis in logic or fact. Hillary does not make promises that she claims she can deliver on by the sheer force of her will alone. Hillary resembles and possesses most of the negative qualities of a late-imperial, corrupt bourgeois politician. Her irrationality resides in her belief that she must always be the biggest war hawk in the room to avoid disparagement as a weak woman, but that does not make her psychotic. No matter how much you hate Hillary, fascist and psychotic have definitions that must be scrutinized immediately by every voter.
The only reasonable bet is to defeat Trump and then box Hillary in between Congress and an aroused citizenry not willing to tolerate any more suicidal wars. If Hillary starts new conflicts, she will soon be swept away. Better a revived anti-war movement against Hillary than Trump’s jackboots at YOUR door, every hard-won economic right stripped, laws changed to suit Trump’s ego, the further deregulation of Wall Street and so on. When these things are taken away it doesn’t necessarily take generations for them to be won back; many times, they never come back.
Fascism creates a cult of violence. When Trump was campaigning in the primary, people were shocked that, at event after event, he would incite violence against protesters. He even offered to pay the legal bills of those who may face charges for beating up anti-Trump protesters. Trump’s latest incitement to violence occurred when he implied “2nd Amendment people” could assassinate Hillary and the Supreme Court Justices she may later appoint if she wins the election. Trump has also expressed a fascination with using nuclear weapons, which has raised the specter of Trump’s obsession with violence to civilization-ending levels. There has been dangerous myth perpetuated in this election that Trump is a non-interventionist. Trump is more menacing, wild and hawkish than Hillary when it comes to war and we should not want to wait and find out how true this statement is.
Hillary is warmonger – but she is a conventional warmonger – Hillary and Bill ran the White House for eight years, and there was no thermonuclear exchange. with Trump, war could break out any time he gets up on the wrong side of bed. Obsession with nuclear weapons and his bellicose rhetoric make him utterly disqualified from possessing the nuclear launch codes. Trump heads a violent fascist mass movement including neo-Nazis, the KKK, and his new voter intimidation squads. Hillary has no mass movement, as she found out during the primaries. Just because Trump is politically incorrect does not make him the antidote to the existing corruption of the ruling political class to which Hillary belongs. Such an analysis is painfully lacking in depth and wisdom. Political correctness is bad, but fascism a la Trump is far worse.
Fascism is infested with racism and scapegoating. Trump has produced countless examples of his racist mindset, the most-cited being when he said Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers, when he called the Indiana-born federal judge overseeing the Trump University lawsuit unfit due to his Mexican heritage, and when he called for blanket ban on all Muslims entering the U.S. Trump diverts attention from the misdeeds coming from the real centers of power on Wall Street by scapegoating immigrants and foreign countries for our internal economic and social problems. This has always been a classic fascist technique and was utilized heavily by Hitler in particular during his rise to power in the early 1930s.
Hillary, on the other hand, does not offer scapegoats based on arbitrary characteristics like race and religion. Not scapegoating based on race and religion is not a scourge of political correctness; rather it is a sign of common decency in a civilized society. Trump’s rhetoric about race and religion (which his mostly uneducated followers seize upon with angry fervor) can only deepen societal rifts in our diverse nation. Trump preaches racism both overtly and covertly and divisiveness on a scale never seen before in a Presidential election.
In conclusion, as an active participant in this democracy, the onus cannot be placed wholly on Webster Tarpley and the TWSP/UFAA to prove to YOU that Trump is a fascist and Hillary is not, YOU must start doing your own due diligence.
Former CIA/NSA Boss Hayden Says Average Person Would Have Been Severely Interrogated After Inciting Violence Against Presidential Candidate and Supremes, but the Fascist Billionaire Still Walks Free; Trump Seen Worldwide as “Assassination Dog Whistle,” “Instigating Violence,” and “A Bloody Train Wreck,” “Galvanizing Far-Right Militias”; Secret Service Admonishes Trump Staffers, but He Denies Everything; In Unusual Move, German Foreign Ministry Formally Warns Against a Trump Presidency; Disgraced GOP Pedophile Ex-Congressman Special Guest at Trump Rally
Starting on Monday, August 15, 2016 this Morning Briefing, which has appeared in print form since early March 2015, will be making the transition to a one hour daily internet radio broadcast. This shift comes in response to widespread requests from our readers, many of whom find audio more accessible and convenient. This program will be called THE AMERICAN SYSTEM. Launching this program is our reply to the acute crisis of leadership and ideas in the United States especially, and also around the world.
Our new name harkens back to Alexander Hamilton and Henry Clay, with clear implications of pro-development dirigism and protectionism. We intend to show the way to an economic recovery, full employment, a rising standard of living, and the full array of modern cultural, scientific, technical, and industrial progress. Our initial target is the creation of 40 million jobs at union wages. On the basis of shared economic prosperity, we propose to build a permanent international peace order.
We are optimistic that our new daily audio broadcast format will increase our audience and the impact of our ideas.
We will announce the full details of how to subscribe during the evening of Saturday, August 11.
With thanks for your continuing support,
—Webster G. Tarpley Ph.D. and the Tax Wall Street Party/United Front Against Austerity
New York Daily News and the Washington Post have called on him to drop out of contention in the presidential race. But Trump, as usual, refuses to be accountable or even to live in the real world; he is attributing the backlash against him to a carefully orchestrated media campaign, and nothing more. Trump is a radical subjectivist who systematically denies reality, in large part because of his megalomaniac personality needs. There has never been a more dangerous candidate.
Various veterans of the US Secret Service have stressed in cable interviews over the last 24 hours that death threats have to be considered from the point of view of their explicit content, but also taking into account the authority and persuasive power of the person who is issuing the threats. This means that someone like Trump, who has many times successfully ordered his followers to beat up protesters at his rallies, has a greater responsibility because of the tremendous publicity given by the corrupt media to his every psychotic outburst.
General Michael Hayden, a four-star general who has also been the boss of the CIA and the NSA, was asked on CNN whether a threat like Trump’s would be taken seriously. His answer was to note that if an average person had made this remark within the earshot of the Secret Service at the entrance to a presidential event, that person would have been held for questioning in the back of a police van. As the CNN website stated:
‘Former CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden says if anyone else had made a similar comment that Donald Trump did about the “Second Amendment people” stopping Hillary Clinton, they would be questioned by the Secret Service.’
So has Trump been formally interrogated, since he is obviously the perpetrator? The answer seems to be no. Jim Sciutto of CNN reported during the afternoon that an unimpeachable source of his at the Secret Service had confirmed that the Secret Service, which had yesterday tweeted that it was “aware” of Trump’s statements, had indeed contacted the Trump campaign for conversations of an unspecified nature. As Sciutto wrote:
‘A US Secret Service official confirms to CNN that the USSS has spoken to the Trump campaign regarding his Second Amendment comments. “There has been more than one conversation” on the topic, the official told CNN. But it’s unclear at what level in the campaign structure the conversations occurred. The campaign told the USSS that Donald Trump did not intend to incite violence, according to the official. “No such meeting or conversation ever happened,” Trump tweeted in response to CNN’s report.’
Trump, as we see, has simply denied everything, dismissing it as a hallucination of the corrupt mass media. Trump especially denies that the Secret Service has contacted his campaign, since to acknowledge this would force him to admit that something untoward had come out of his incontinent mouth. Either that, or start attacking the Secret Service, an eventuality which cannot be excluded.
Around the world, rejection of Trump is escalating. The German Foreign Ministry in Berlin has formally warned against the election of Trump, thus giving up their previous neutrality – a highly unusual move and a very big deal.1Le Monde of Paris concluded that Trump’s recent outrages add up to “One provocation too many.”2Corriere della Sera of Milan writes that Trump’s comment has “unleashed many polemics because it is being interpreted as instigation of violence.”3
In the meantime, a deranged rock climber spent several hours suspended from suction cups on the facade of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue. This person, who must surely be considered mentally disturbed, left a bizarre video statement and is currently undergoing a psychological examination. This entire affair looks very much like a sympathy gag deliberately manufactured by the intelligence community forces above, behind, and beyond Trump to gin up some good will, by showing that Trump’s life is in danger too.
The New Yorker correctly dismisses the Trump smokescreen that he was talking about political action by Second Amendment activists before the election. Trump’s obvious assumption in his infamous remark was that the presidential election was already lost, and President Hillary Clinton was appointing her supposedly anti-gun Supreme Court justices. That was when the shooting would start:
‘It was clear that Trump had been talking about what “Second Amendment people” could do after losing the vote. For anyone who cares about the future of American politics, the comment represents a dwindling commitment to politics itself, to the notion that, through rhetoric and competition, we might find a common way as a people. Instead, the Republican candidate made a casual nod to the final force of arms. At this stage, so little that Trump says shocks us, but, now and then, it is worth stepping back and regarding the full damage of it all: the wounds to our fading global image of openness and generosity; the stomping on our admiration for intelligence, eloquence, or honesty; and now the blithe contempt for safe and civil government. For some, the spirit of violence that has crept into the campaign has been difficult to watch without offering a warning. Last month, the Republican National Convention framed the Democratic nominee as a criminal, a traitor, and a cold-blooded schemer, who, in the words of one speaker, is “personally responsible” for the deaths of Americans in Benghazi. After watching the Convention, Chemi Shalev, a veteran Israeli reporter for Haaretz, wrote that “many Republicans conveniently ignore the fact that words can kill.” He continued:
There are enough people with a tendency for violence that cannot distinguish between political stagecraft and practical exhortations to rescue the country by any available means. If anyone has doubts, they could use a short session with Yigal Amir, Yitzhak Rabin’s assassin, who was inspired by the rabid rhetoric hurled at the Israeli prime minister in the wake of the Oslo Accords. After Rabin was gone, the inciters washed their hands and denied responsibility.
As Trump’s words spread [yesterday], Senator Chris Murphy, of Connecticut, where a troubled young man massacred twenty-six people at Sandy Hook Elementary School, took to Twitter. “This isn’t play,” he wrote. “Unstable people with powerful guns and an unhinged hatred for Hillary are listening to you, @realDonaldTrump.”’4
From Rolling Stone to the London Guardian, intelligence reporters had no trouble in figuring out that Trump was inciting his followers to assassinate Hillary Clinton, along with one or more Supreme Court Justices. Here is the take from the New York Times:
‘Three months from the presidential election, and one day after his running mate promised “specific policy proposals for how we rebuild this country at home and abroad,” Americans find themselves asking whether Donald Trump has called for the assassination of Hillary Clinton.
Trump’s incitement to violence and terrorism lives above all in the here and now, in the context of the strategy of tension and August-September-October Surprise events designed to stampede voters into his column and give him the seizure of power he demands.
In the London Guardian, columnist Lucia Graves’ piece was entitled: “This is Donald Trump at his lowest yet: a man hinting at murder.” Here we read:
‘Donald Trump has long held that Hillary Clinton is stealing the election. But on Tuesday he suggested something even darker and more sinister: that his supporters resolve the issue with guns…. I’ve no doubt that it’s an unequivocal call for the use of gun violence to upend democracy and one for which Trump should not be given the benefit of the doubt. This is a new low even for Trump, who’s been accused of inciting general violence and has verbally attacked individuals from Khizr Khan to Rosie O’Donnell. But he’s never seemed to incite it against individuals – until now. Gabby Giffords drove home that point and the pernicious effect those words could have on the unstable, in a statement released Tuesday. “We must draw a bright red line between political speech and suggestions of violence,” she said. “Responsible, stable individuals won’t take Trump’s rhetoric to its literal end, but his words may provide a magnet for those seeking infamy. They may provide inspiration or permission for those bent on bloodshed.”5
Giffords is widely considered a victim of the pervasive climate of hatred and violence aroused by the 2010 GOP Tea Party candidates, especially Sharron Angle of Nevada and her demagogy of “second amendment remedies” like Shooting Senator Harry Reed. Who could doubt that there are enough weak minded and suggestible people at a Trump rally to make his incitements into a clear and present danger for the individuals targeted, and for society in general?
Former Congressman Joe Scarborough of Florida, the co-host and namesake of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, is looking a like Doctor Frankenstein, since he and his sidekick Mika Brzezinski did so much to build up the fortunes and credibility of the fascist billionaire, before becoming increasingly critical of him over recent months. Still, better late than never. Scarborough now writes in the Washington Post that the GOP needs to dump its current candidate before “something terrible happens”:
‘We are in uncharted waters but that does not mean that the way forward is not clear. It is. The Secret Service should interview Donald Trump and ask him to explain his threatening comments. Paul Ryan and every Republican leader should denounce in the strongest terms their GOP nominee, suggesting conservatives could find the Supreme Court more favorable to their desires if his political rival was assassinated. Paul Ryan and every Republican leader should revoke their endorsement of Donald Trump. At this point, what else could Trump do that would be worse than implying the positive impact of a political assassination? The Republican Party needs to start examining quickly their options for removing the Republican nominee. A bloody line has been crossed that cannot be ignored. At long last, Donald Trump has left the Republican Party few options but to act decisively and get this political train wreck off the tracks before something terrible happens.’6
The Tax Wall Street Party repeats its call for Trump to be arrested and held “until we can figure out what’s going on.” Trump has attempted to call in cyber strikes by foreign powers to facilitate his election victory. Cyber attacks can kill thousands, so Trump calling in attacks from hackers can be the leading edge of something much bigger, including the disruption of electrical grids, transportation systems, and nuclear power plants. Trump must also be investigated for issuing his invitation to the hackers of the world to attack the United States. Trump is also being asked why he endorsed one of his campaign officials who had previously called for Hillary Clinton to be executed for high treason. Above all, Trump must be required to explain why he has incited the assassination of his opponent, and members of the US federal judiciary. No more coddling of fascism. The US Constitution and Trump cannot coexist.
Today, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump crossed into the terrain of illegality by inciting his followers to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and unspecified members of the United States Supreme Court to stop what Trump claimed was a plan to seize firearms by rescinding the Second Amendment in a coming Clinton administration. This was unmistakably a death threat, a fact which no amount of prevarication and spin can be allowed to hide. It was more than a death threat, because it constituted a direct invitation to Trump’s crazed followers to exercise the “Second Amendment remedies” which had been a centerpiece of the losing Senate campaign of Tea Party fanatic Sharron Angle in 2010.
At that time, everyone knew very well what “Second Amendment remedies” meant. It was a call for the assassination of Democratic Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, and of other Democratic elected officials. According to Congressman John Lewis, Angle’s call for “Second Amendment remedies” in the fall of 2010 was a contributing cause to the Tucson massacre of January 2011, in which Jared Lee Loughner killed six people and wounded 14, among them Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who is maimed for life. John M. Roll, the chief judge for the United States District Court for Arizona, was also slain. (Note that on that occasion, the victims included both an elected official and a federal judge, just as Trump seems to be anticipating.)
It is time for the Secret Service to interrogate Trump and take him into custody if the evidence warrants. Any Republican and any other person who continues to endorse Trump after this despicable event will be forever counted among the accomplices of the fascist billionaire’s present and future crimes.
Maximum vigilance is now needed to ward off what is likely coming next: Trump has openly attempted to call in cyber strikes by foreign powers or networks to help create an October Surprise against his adversary. This briefing has been warning for several months about the acute danger of a Strategy of Tension coordinated series of destabilizing events, including international terrorism, domestic terrorism, cyber attacks, financial panics, and breakdowns of public services like today’s computer outage asked Delta Airlines. These destabilizing events would then culminate in an October Surprise, which may well be anticipated into August or September because of the widespread phenomenon of early voting.
Trump’s goal is to seize power by any means, and the Constitution be damned. The Republican Party has given a psychotic fascist a straight shot at the White House. The GOP is collapsing, and richly deserves to keep on collapsing. Individual Republicans can save their personal honor and integrity if they openly denounce Trump now.
The Brazil Olympics are a likely target for terrorism, but the recent Sochi Winter Olympics show that terrorism during the Olympics can occur anywhere. The only thing certain is that Trump will be the beneficiary of further chaos, and that the perpetrators or their controllers will be consciously acting in order to keep the Trump campaign in contention.
Here are the basic facts of the Trump call for assassinations, as reported by the New York Times:
‘Donald J. Trump on Tuesday appeared to raise the possibility that gun rights supporters could take matters into their own hands if Hillary Clinton is elected president and appoints judges who favor stricter gun control measures to the bench. At a rally here, Mr. Trump warned that it would be “a horrible day” if Mrs. Clinton were elected and got to appoint a tiebreaking Supreme Court justice.“If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks,” Mr. Trump said, as the crowd began to boo.
He quickly added: “Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.”
The Trump campaign released a statement insisting opaquely that Mr. Trump had been referring to the “power of unification.”’1
The Trump campaign contends that the reference here is to legal political action by gun advocates, but this is evasion. The Chicago Tribune this evening offered a more rigorous construction of Trump’s remarks which makes it clear that Trump is calling for violence theoretically occurring after an election victory by Hillary Clinton and after the appointment of supposedly anti-gun Supreme Court justices:
‘Donald Trump ignited a fresh political firestorm Tuesday by declaring gun rights supporters might still find a way to stop Hillary Clinton, even if she should defeat him, and then name anti-gun Supreme Court justices.’
The obvious implication is that Hillary and her judicial appointees need to be stopped by violence. Trump’s crazed followers won’t wait to parse the technicalities; they are likely to strike sooner rather than later.
Again, these remarks need to be read within the well-established context of the Sharron Angle “Second Amendment remedies,” more background on which is provided below. Trump’s remarks must also be read in the context of the recent Republican National Convention and related Trump campaign events, where the threat of violence against the Democratic candidate has been especially prominent.
The Republican National Convention was marked by repeated chants of “Lock her up! Lock her up!” There were numerous threats of violence on the floor, as when Mrs. Heidi Cruz had to be escorted off the convention floor by security guards after her husband had refused to endorse the fascist billionaire.
And during the Republican National Convention, a New Hampshire state representative and Trump delegate at the RNC issued his own death threat against Hillary Clinton: he wanted her summarily executed for high treason. This might imply that the killing would be carried out not by the usual lone assassin, but by a fascist militia of storm troopers.
‘New Hampshire state Representative Al Baldasaro, who is also a Trump delegate from the state and has appeared with Trump at campaign events, made the comments on the Jeff Kuhner Show. “I’m a veteran that went to Desert Shield, Desert Storm. I’m also a father who sent a son to war, to Iraq, as a Marine Corps helicopter avionics technician. Hillary Clinton to me is the Jane Fonda of the Vietnam,” he said. “She is a disgrace for the lies that she told those mothers about their children that got killed over there in Benghazi. She dropped the ball on over 400 emails requesting back up security. Something’s wrong there.” “This whole thing disgusts me, Hillary Clinton should be put in the firing line and shot for treason,” he added.’2
We repeat that Trump is very much on the rhetorical terrain of Sharron Angle, a Tea Party extremist deployed in the November 2010 Senate race in Nevada against Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Angle, an abject guttersnipe, issued her death threat to Harry Reid at least twice. Here is the first example:
‘On Bill Manders’ radio show, she stated that the Second Amendment is “to defend ourselves. And you know, I’m hoping that we’re not getting to Second Amendment remedies. I hope the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems.”
On another occasion, she escalated the threat by being more specific that Harry Reid was to be taken out, an obvious euphemism for assassinated:
On Lars Larson’s radio show, she stated “You know, our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. In fact Thomas Jefferson said it’s good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that’s not where we’re going, but, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying, ‘My goodness, what can we do to turn this country around?’ I’ll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out.”
Congressman John Lewis saw Sharron Angle’s raving as a contributing cause of the January 2011 Tucson massacre already referred to above:
Congressman Jim Clyburn said in January 2011 that “Sharron Angle’s endorsement of ‘Second Amendment remedies’ in her losing Nevada campaign against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid contributed to the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.”3
Former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah “Don’t retreat, reload!” Palin, a certifiable moron, rushed to defend Sharron Angle. Palin’s PAC was also under fire for a website that showed Democratic officials in the cross hairs of telescopic sights:
‘…Liberal media pundits assigned blame by citing Palin’s political action committee’s website, which showed crosshairs on districts that it was targeting in the November midterm, including the district of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the believed target of the gunman who was wounded in the shooting.’4
In conclusion, we can only hope – this outrageous new crime by Trump will quickly accelerate the collapse of his wretched campaign far beyond the point of no return.
Copies Ryan Tax Cuts for the Rich; Top Rate Sinks from 40% to 33%; Corporate Rate Down from 35% to 15%; No Job Creation Program; No Student Loan Debt Relief; No Plan to Mobilize 0% Fed Credit for Jobs and Production; No National Infrastructure Plan; No Increase in Minimum Wage; No Protective Tariff; No Role for Unions; No Universal Pre-K; No Marshall Plan for Cities and Rural America; No Pledge to Maintain Jobless Benefits, Medicaid and Food Stamp Benefits for Poorest; Total Deregulation; No Wall Street Reform or Wall Street Sales Tax; 20 Million Thrown Off Obamacare; Trump Excels as Ventriloquist’s Dummy for Financier Speechwriters; Fascist Billionaire’s Economic Panel Full of Hedge Fund Hyenas, Zombie Bankers, Bottom Fishers, and His Creditors
Trump recited today’s speech from a Teleprompter, and was just as much the puppet of his Wall Street handlers as Charlie McCarthy used to be with Edgar Bergen, the famous ventriloquist of the 40s and 50s.
Today, Donald Trump went to Detroit to deliver what was billed as a major economic address. In reality, this unfortunate performance represented yet another step in Trump’s capitulation to the reigning supply side and trickle-down economics orthodoxy embraced by establishment reactionaries from the US Chamber of Commerce to the House Republican leadership to the gaggle of think tankers who actually wrote Trump’s text.
Last week, Trump was not sure whether he would endorse the well-known austerity ghoul Paul Ryan for reelection. Today, Trump threw more of his own Hobbesian-capitalist radical program overboard, taking on more and more of Ryan’s standard Republican Tax Cuts for the Rich approach.
For many Americans, the most striking thing about Trump’s is the many urgently needed programs which it does not contain. In his Detroit speech, Trump has no job creation program, no student loan debt relief, no plan to mobilize Federal Reserve credit to provide 0% financing for infrastructure, jobs, and production. In fact, Trump has no national infrastructure plan at all. Trump does not propose an increase in the federal minimum wage, and makes no mention of the minimum wage at all. There is no role for trade unions, not even in an advisory capacity. Despite some more blather about trade, there is no protective tariff, only the pledge to renegotiate existing free trade sellouts, and make them “great.” Trump says not a word about the urgently needed universal pre-K. , He says nothing about Social Security and Medicare, and has never promised to maintain food stamps (which alarm him) or Medicaid. He is however pledged to throw more than 20 million Americans off Obamacare as it is destroyed. There is no Marshall plan for the inner cities and for rural America to contribute to social pacification by facilitating the entry of young unemployed persons into the labor force. There is total deregulation of the US economy, and not an inkling of Wall Street reform or taxing Wall Street; Trump thinks that even the weak Dodd-Frank law is too draconian. Trumptown is the Pottersville of Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life.
In Trump’s original tax plan presented some months ago, the fascist billionaire was more radical than the House reactionaries in his commitment to savage tax cuts for the super-rich. Trump wanted to reduce the top rate for individuals from almost 40% down to 25%. By doing this, and abolishing the estate tax at the same time, Trump would have cost the US government about $1 trillion per year over the next 10 years, for a total of $10 trillion. This would have blunted the austerity demagogy of the Republicans today, and might have created problems with the traditional reactionary ideologues who support Ryan. So Trump has increased his proposed top rate up to 33%, meaning about a 7% cut from the current situation. But this means that Trump can no longer present himself with messianic overtones, and risks leaving him as just another boring, greedy Babbitt.
Apparently on orders from Ryan, Trump is now stressing his view that the US corporate income tax, currently at 35%, is way too high. Of course, it is an open secret that almost nobody pays the full 35% rate. Companies generally use various loopholes to get around paying. When that is factored in, the US corporate income tax is no longer one of the highest in the world, since the effective rate which companies pay in the real world approximates the international average. Nevertheless, this whopping 20% cut in the starting points for the various corporate loopholes will gratify the US Chamber of Commerce and other reactionary business interests no end. Will Trump’s crazed following of dupes and fanatics realize they are being used by GOP cynics?
Supply-side economics was developed during the pre-Reagan years by a group of publicists who were incompetent in economics, but were eagerly seeking ways to rationalize and justify revamping the tax code so as to engineer a massive redistribution of wealth from working people and the middle class into the pockets of the superrich, or top 1%, who represented the darlings of the Reagan Administration. Individuals like Art Laffer of the infamous and discredited Laffer curve, utopian Congressman Jack Kemp, and ideologue Jude Wanniski were associates in the team, which manufactured this tremendous obfuscation, which still lives on after almost 40 years.
Supply-side doctrine asserts that tax cuts for the rich would spur wealthy individuals to make productive investments and thus generate new economic activity. The benefits of these new investments would then gradually trickle down to the middle class and even to workers and the poor. But the benefits never arrived, in large part because rich people with cash on hand were tempted by the much higher rates of return in the stock market bubble of the 80s and the growing derivatives markets in Chicago and elsewhere. They did not invest in new plant, equipment and jobs in the rapidly de-industrializing US economy of the Reagan years.
But the tax cuts for the rich cut revenue drastically. And unsustainable deficit loomed. The infamous Alan Greenspan came forward with a plan to increase the Social Security Payroll Tax under the cover story that he was saving the pensions of future generations, and then steal the money to mask the deficit. Tax cuts for the rich thus went hand-in-hand with brutal tax increases for wage earners. But the looting of Social Security to mask the deficit was still not enough to prevent Reagan from literally tripling the public debt of the United States over his nightmarish four years in office.
Stephen Moore, now one of Trump’s key economic advisers, and his sidekick Larry Kudlow, are both radical devotees of the supply-side and trickle-down methods left over from the Reagan years. Get set for these two and a number of others to come on television and argue that history proves that tax cuts for the rich lead to increased revenue and economic growth. It did not happen in Reagan’s time, and it will not happen ever.
Supply-side is still the standard economic false consciousness of the Republican Party, and it is to this which Trump has now capitulated.
Trump is now widely regarded as the pawn of foreign powers who seem bent on intervening on his behalf. Trump started his Detroit speech with a lengthy rant about how the Democrats’ economic policies serve foreign powers. These days, the fascist billionaire is projecting his own characteristics more and more on his critics.
The great beneficiaries of Trump’s tax plan are the super rich. This is true whenever tax cuts are done through percentages applied across the board. The top brackets end up collecting millions, while a wretched pittance is left for working people. Tax cuts should be offered in equal dollar amounts, not equal percentages. The best way is to increase the value of the standard deduction and the personal exemptions, with tax reform from the bottom up.
Trump today claimed to be the Savior of New York City, because of his timely real estate investments. In reality, he was buying up distressed properties at bargain basement prices with a view to realizing immense profits in the future for his own greed. The disturbing implication is that the fascist billionaire is making a transition from mere garden-variety megalomania to actual messianic delusions, in which, for example, he might see himself as the second coming of Jesus Christ. Stay tuned. Trump had very little to say about Wall Street today, mentioning the New York money center only in passing, while boasting about his intention to roll back the carried interest deduction, which benefits mainly hedge fund hyenas. But even if Trump ever removes the carried interest loophole, he is more than compensating Wall Street firms by lowering the corporate income tax from 35% to a miniscule 15%, which will more than make up for any minor losses they might suffer. Bernie supporters must note: your man always talked about Wall Street, and Trump never does.
Trump remains committed to his idea of rewarding corporate tax evaders by setting up a special 10% sweetheart corporate rate for tax cheats bringing back some of the $3 trillion, which are now being held in overseas cash stashes. A real populist, needless to say, would use a confiscatory 50% tax next year to make these lampreys bring their money back this year at the standard 35% rate or face the consequences.
Trump wants to totally deregulate the US economy, especially Wall Street. He would wipe out all of Obama’s executive orders, both good and bad. He would give a tremendous reward to the parasites and speculators who created the 2008 derivatives bubble and Lehman Brothers panic. By completely abolishing the estate tax, a progressive and beneficial tax, which hits about 0.2% of the wealthiest families, the speculators who made out like bandits in the Reagan stock market bubble of the 80s, the predators who stoked the .com bubble around the turn-of-the-century, and the derivatives parasites who destroyed the US economy with the Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, bankruptcies in 2008 will all be able to bequeath their ill-gotten gains to their dimwitted progeny.
Through a judicious combination of outright lying and clinical hysteria, Trump was able to offer a short history of Detroit over recent decades without mentioning the Obama rescue operation which kept General Motors and Chrysler in existence, and thus able to survive. Trump is a massive hypocrite.
Without going into too many details, Trump made clear that he wants to privatize the entire US school system and wipe out the bedrock American commitment to free, universal, compulsory, quality public education, which goes back to the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 under the Articles of Confederation, and even earlier to the New England colonies in the 17th century. He also wants to destroy the teachers’ unions.
One of the most absurd aspects of this oration was Trump’s attempt to promote his predatory daughter Ivanka to the status of an Evita Peron for the well-heeled crowd at the Detroit Economic Club. Trump claimed that Ivanka had convinced him to make childcare expenses fully deductible. This notion may eventually rank with Marie Antoinette’s “Let them eat cake” outburst of the French Revolution, since it reveals how out of touch Trump’s sweatshop entrepreneur daughter actually is. Ivanka’s proposal suits the rich. In order for a childcare deduction to mean anything to a middle-class family, the benefit would have to be offered in the form of a refundable tax credit — refundable because many lower income earners do not pay enough taxes to be able to use such a deduction. They do not have enough income to offset. This is quite apart from how the deduction is offered. If this is to become simply one deduction among many itemized deductions, for many taxpayers, it would become meaningless, and the cruel hoax. So make it a refundable tax credit that can be paid out to people who don’t have enough income, and we might be back in reality. But Trump is not likely to be thinking along these lines.
Late last week, Trump announced the members of his council of economic advisors for the presidential campaign. These were all white men – incredibly stupid, really a provocation, for a candidate with a well-earned reputation for dissing women and minorities. Almost all were connected to finance and speculation. Many represented hedge funds. There were no trade unionists, or other representatives of working people. Quite a few were business associates of Trump. They are a financier faction. Here are some samples from press accounts:
Once a liberal donor who made his fortune at Goldman Sachs, Mnuchin began running Trump’s national fundraising operation in May. Mnuchin has donated to Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Barack Obama and John Kerry. Mnuchin has been heavily involved in gearing up Trump’s fundraising from nearly nonexistent to at pace with Clinton. [He also worked for the Soros interests.]
The founder of Club for Growth is now a visiting fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Club for Growth is known for pushing small-government, free-market ideology — a position somewhat at odds with Trump’s stated goals of limiting international trade. Moore has also been a public policy and economics writer at the Wall Street Journal. In May, he began helping Trump rewrite his tax plan. [Moore is thought to be at least a co-author of Trump’s Detroit speech.]
An advisor to Harvard Business School and a member of New York University’s Board of Trustees, Paulson is an investment fund manager with more than two decades of experience. Paulson’s firm manages more than $19 billion in investments and he is worth nearly $10 billion. The investment manager famously bet against subprime mortgage loans that failed and led the financial crisis in 2008.’1
‘The panel also includes former steel executive Dan DiMicco; oil magnate Harold Hamm; Howard Lorber, the CEO of tobacco company Vector Group Ltd; Trump campaign finance chairman Steven Mnuchin, a former partner at Goldman Sachs who is now chairman and CEO of private investment firm Dune Capital Management LP; and David Malpass, a former official of the U.S. Treasury and State departments.’2
What kind of a moron do you have to be to consider Trump a populist outsider when he appoints this bunch of wealthy parasites to his council of economic advisors? A Trump regime would be a new edition of the Predators’ Ball.
Trump Is Psychotic and Has a Fascist Mass Movement Behind Him; Greens Repeat Insane Policy of Komintern in 1932-33 by Setting a Trap For Trump in the Form of State Power
Today, the national convention of the Green Party began meeting in Houston, Texas. This strange political formation, devoted to historical pessimism, Malthusianism and zero growth ideology, usually poses a threat to the future of the United States primarily in the medium to longer term, because of its obvious tendency to stifle the progress of science, technology, and industry in the name of obscurantism and irrationality.
But these days, the Green party also poses a threat to our country in the short term. This is because the party’s likely candidate for president, Jill Stein, has decided to mobilize her efforts to target and defeat Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton instead of the fascist, bigoted, warmonger Donald Trump. Stein could have rendered a public service as a third party candidate by attacking Trump as a psychotic and fascist. But Stein has decided to become the left wing of the Trump campaign, which is already the most dangerous fascist mass movement in this country since the heyday of the Ku Klux Klan back in the 1920s. (Note that fascism expert Robert Paxton has developed the case that the European fascism of the twentieth century was actually derived from the KKK.) Stein has done this by her own choice, doubtless motivated by a crass desire to increase her organizational gate receipts (maximizing the matching funds which she will now receive thanks to the US taxpayers by way of the Federal Election Commission), but also because of what looks like an ideological affinity for the abominable pessimism of Trump.
Jill Stein, who is often challenged about her role as the left flank of the Trump fascist machine, has concocted an excuse or cover story, which can only be described as deranged:
‘Trump says very scary things— immigrants, massive militarism and ignoring the climate. Hillary, unfortunately, has a track record for doing all of those things…We see these draconian things that Donald Trump is talking about, we actually see Hillary Clinton doing1
While admittedly difficult to interpret, this cryptic statement seems to assert that Hillary has carried out to the high crimes against humanity and related atrocities which Trump has only conjured up in words.
Before we go any further, we must point out that Jill Stein’s remarks are a form of self-righteous posturing and are easily proven to be mere demagogy, with no facts. The biggest one is that Trump is always babbling about his desires for nuclear war, while Bill and Hillary held the White House for 8 years and, despite their many crimes, never unleashed a nuclear attack.
Stein is also suggesting that Trump can dupe people today and get votes because he has no voting record or track record as governor or some such. But, once Trump takes power, he will start accumulating a very bad track record very quickly, and that should make him much easier to defeat. Think of it: Trump will discredit himself once he takes power! The problem is that the leap into fascist domination is like jumping off a cliff. Forms of dictatorial control combining traditional police and secret police with fascist street fighters, hooligans, scabs, and goons are instituted quite rapidly, and the poor victims are left wondering what hit them. A Trump presidency would usher in an unprecedented era of fascist rule in America.
Trump has referred on at least 10 separate occasions to his willingness or even eagerness to use nuclear weapons in the context of international disputes.2 In the course of these, he has threatened to use nuclear weapons against targets in the Middle East or in Europe. He has argued repeatedly in favor of nuclear proliferation. He has also called for the mass deportations of some 12 million persons – already a war crime in itself, and likely to generate thousands of deaths. Trump’s proposal to kill the relatives of terrorists by destroying their villages would duplicate some of the most heinous crimes of the Nazi SS in World War II massacres with names like Lidice, Czechoslovakia, or the Fosse Ardeatine, near Rome.
So, while recognizing that Hillary has a very bad record on immigrants, militarism, pollution, and much else,3 she was very close to power for eight years in the 1990s, and never launched a nuclear missile and never proposed a mass deportation in cattle cars and boxcars as Trump has done.
But what Ms. Stein is proposing, by the fact that she demonizes Clinton and whitewashes Trump, is to let Trump take power and then see if he is worse than Hillary Clinton, or not. Hillary has a record, while he has primarily genocidal talk. Will he deliver or not? Let’s give him the White House and see what happens, Stein seems to be recommending.
When the TWSP intervened to demystify the Green Party mindset at the Left Forum in New York City last May 21, the Calvinist divine Chris Hedges railed in response to that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were identical.
But this ignores the two most important questions that need to be asked, when we are dealing with the life and death issue of this election. The first involves Fascism. We have already shown that a significant number of trumps ideological positions and campaign promises qualify as fascist. The billionaire himself meets what scholars have defined as the fascist minimum.
But for our purposes here we can leave these ideological-political issues aside and focus on one thing only: in order to be a full-fledged fascist political leader, you must enjoy the active support of a fascist mass movement, or some reasonable equivalent thereof. In the case of Hillary, it ought to be clear that she does not enjoy the support of a fascist mass movement, nor of a mass movement of any kind. Think of Hillary’s embarrassment when Bernie Sanders was able to fill football stadiums and basketball arenas, while she struggled to get people to come to her small-scale events. In some areas, the Hillary supporters were able to meet in a phone booth. No fascist mass movement for her.
Video includes vulgarities and racial and ethinic slurs
But in the case of Trump, it has been clear since the time of the Iowa caucuses that so many active Ku Klux Klansmen, white supremacists, neo-Nazis, racist agitators, xenophobic fanatics, alt-right fascists, Elmer Gantrys, and survivalist paranoids are on the march for Trump. White supremacists provided robo-calls for Trump in Iowa. Hooligan types populate his Bikers for Trump. There is also the Lions’ Guard, a kind of proto-SA brownshirts. Protesters at Trump rallies have been routinely expelled with violent means. Trump is in a class by himself with this, and no amount of obfuscation will hide the basic facts. Trump is at the head of a violent movement of racists and fascists. The KKK Neo-Nazi David Duke has been inspired to come out of his retirement and run for office because Trump has inspired him.
The second question is whether Hillary Clinton is clinically insane. Is she a psychotic? Does she have Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, which Trump has admitted to having, no doubt, as part of a crude limited hangout? Alzheimer’s disease? Narcissistic personality disorder?
We would submit that the answer to this question is no, so far as we can tell Hillary Clinton is not psychotic. She is of course a corrupt, dishonest, opportunistic, manipulative bourgeois politician, like so many pols worldwide. But there is no serious evidence that she is insane.
Trump, by contrast, qualifies as mentally ill, a disordered personality, a psychopath, a sufferer from multiple personality disorders, a possible victim of the Alzheimer’s disease which killed his father, and much more. This problem becomes especially acute if we contemplate the eventuality in which Trump seizes the White House, gets his hands on the nuclear launch codes, and proceeds to drag humanity into the abyss of the thermonuclear war. Cynical and jaded followers of Stein and Hedges would of course dismiss this as fear mongering designed by the Clinton campaign, but that is a copout. Tony Schwartz, the ghostwriter who actually composed Trump’s Mein Kampf in the form of the Art of the Deal, is a person who studied Trump closely for 18 months and has continued his observations since then. Schwartz is convinced that putting the nuclear button under Trump’s control would likely signify the destruction of world civilization as we have known it. One would have to be a fool to ignore a warning of this kind.
But Jill Stein tells us to capitulate to Trump, despite the fact that he promises to do things that are far beyond the Hillary Clinton repertoire. Set a trap for Trump in the form of state power in the Oval Office, says the Malthusian pasionaria. She is morally insane.
Some interesting comments on the Jill Stein ideology come from essayist Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine. Chait’s short article is entitled “Jill Stein Explains Her Plan to Stop Trump by Electing Him President.” This captures the basic idea of setting a trap for the fascist billionaire in the form of state power. Chait reports an interview by Jill Stein with a Boston radio station in which she was challenged to account for her strange role of vilifying Hillary while sparing Trump:
‘Given the current closeness of the race, and the dire consequences of a Donald Trump victory, the interviewer naturally wanted to know how she feels about potentially throwing the election to Trump. Her answer is the sort of jargon-laced evasion that, if previous Green Party nominee Ralph Nader is any example, we can expect to hear between now and the election…’ 4
Garbled though her words may be, Jill Stein’s basic orientation is to assert that globalism, neoliberalism, and bank bailouts are the driving force behind fascism, and that the only way to deal with the fascist threat is not to confront it head-on or any other way, but rather to ignore it and focus on removing the causes of the current ideological climate.
We ourselves are second to none in wishing to treat the root causes through measures like seizing control of the Federal Reserve to provide abundant and cheap, long-term credit for 30 million jobs, and the new national infrastructure, plus taxing Wall Street turnover at a full 1%. We are also in favor of a 15% protective tariff to prevent dumping. We are also seeking ways to bind Hillary Clinton, so that she will not use presidential powers to start anymore useless wars. But in addition to all this, it is certainly necessary to fight Trump fascism, while also denouncing the terrorist August, September, and October Surprises which are being deployed by Trump’s backers in the intelligence community to try to stampede the American electorate in his direction.
But Jill Stein’s answer to the question of why she is so avidly serving as a left auxiliary to the Trump fascist machine is a true masterpiece of doubletalk and prevarication. Whatever Stein may say about herself, she is an expert manipulative politician in her own right, or is at least trying to be one. Here is what Stein had to say:
‘What we know from history, and what we know from the current situation, we are seeing a rise in right-wing extremism, not just in the United States, and it’s not just Donald Trump, it’s also throughout countries in Europe. What is driving this? It is policies like NAFTA, like globalization, like the dominance of the banks, like the Wall Street bailouts, like the Wall Street meltdown thanks to deregulation. Who gave us those policies? The Clintons were leading the way on those policies! The answer to neofascism is stopping neoliberalism. Putting another Clinton in the White House will fan the flames of this right-wing extremism. We have known that for a long time ever since Nazi Germany. We are going to stand up to Donald Trump and to stand up to Hillary Clinton!
One comment on twitter dismisses Stein’s answer as “completely crazy.” If so, it still has quite a pedigree. Chait reminds readers of Ralph Nader’s infamous role in giving the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush by helping to defeat Al Gore in Florida:
‘In fact, the one time in American history a Clinton held the White House, it did not lead to fascism. True, it did lead to a Republican administration, but it wouldn’t have if it weren’t for, among many factors, a Green Party candidate who siphoned off enough votes in Florida to tilt the outcome. The “history of bad things that happen after Clinton presidencies” argument is not a strong justification for Stein’s candidacy. The crisis in Weimar Germany had many causes, but one of them was the Communist Party’s insistence on destroying the Social Democrats. Because the Communists would not support any center-left government coalition, it was impossible to form a parliamentary majority without the Nazis. So whatever lessons about left-wing political strategy we should draw from the Nazi era, “withhold votes from the mainstream party that is the only viable alternative to the far right” is definitely not one of them. What’s most fascinating is that Stein does not try to downplay the danger of a Trump presidency. Instead, she likens it to fascism and Nazism …. And yet, proceeding from her premise that Clintonism will lead to fascism, she concludes that she must “stand up to” both Donald Trump and the only candidate who can prevent Donald Trump from winning the presidency, in equal measure. “Neoliberalism”… leads to fascism, so we might as well skip the neoliberalism step and go straight to the fascism.
Of course, Stein is also lying to herself about her equidistance from Trump and Clinton, since she spends more time and venom attacking Clinton, and is also more damaging to the Democratic candidate by virtue of the Green Party position on the ideological spectrum.
We should attempt to make these references to the late German Weimar Republic more understandable with the help of some crude parallels between then and now. Chait is writing here about the time between the Wall Street stock market crash of 1929 and Hitler’s seizure of power in January 1933, which also corresponded to the international low point of the great depression.
Chait is recalling that the German Communists or KPD, who were controlled by Stalin, insisted on branding the trade-union based, opportunistic, and cowardly Social Democrats or SPD, and not Hitler, as the main enemy. The argument was rather like Stein’s today, with the KPD arguing that the SPD’s lack of militancy, insufficient commitment to class struggle, and track record of betrayals made them, and not Hitler, the most dangerous foes, since they were accused of being the root causes of Hitlerism. So the KPD collaborated both objectively and subjectively with the Nazis, always focusing their attacks on the “social fascists” of the SPD. The result was first ungovernability, and then Hitler’s seizure of power .
Today, the US Democrats are in a position similar to that of the Social Democrats in Weimar. The ultra-left greens have some similarities to the ultra-left KPD, which was a party of the unemployed and the city mob. Trump, of course, corresponds to the Nazis. If the SPD and KPD could have formed a united front with an adequate program against Hitler, Nazism could have been defeated. The insistence of the KPD on attempting to destroy the SPD became a leading cause of the German catastrophe of 1933-1945. We should also point out that Stalin was mainly focused on destroying Germany as part of his plan for exporting revolution through the Red Army. The SPD accepted the democratic Weimar constitution, while the KPD and the Nazis did not. Trump certainly does not accept the US Constitution.
How could so many German voters then, and too many American voters now, except the strategy of “withhold votes from [or actually attack] the mainstream party that is the only viable alternative to the far right.” The recurring depression-era fallacy of setting a trap for Nazism and fascism (or Trump) in the form of state power is so irrational that its causes must be sought less in the area of ideology than among the compulsive mass neuroses of a society in deep crisis, like our own today.5
In the last years before Hitler terminated of the Weimar Republic, and the deposed and exiled Russian revolutionary leader Leon Trotsky wrote a series of pamphlets about the evolution of the German political situation. Trotsky concentrated especially on the destructive effects of Stalin’s “Social Fascism” theory. The KPD leaders were more afraid of the Nazis than they were of the SPD, since the Nazi storm troopers were far more formidable than the middle-aged trade unionists of the SPD self-defense squads. The Nazis exercised a horrible fascination over the KPD, since the former were accustomed to practice more blatant forms of antisocial behavior than the latter could. As for Stalin, he wanted a maximum of destruction in German society of the kind he obtained through the “social fascism” policy, rather than the kind of positive solution which a united front of SPD and KPD could have offered. Stalin, who took total power about a decade earlier than Hitler, regarded the Nazi dictator as his useful tool. Stalin called Hitler “ledokol,” the ice breaker of the revolution, who could bust up central and western Europe and make them ripe for conquest.
In any case, Trotsky had the following to say about the Jill Steins of the KPD and their plan to stop Hitler/Trump by getting him elected president:
‘In one of my previous pamphlets I wrote that the Stalinist bureaucracy was baiting a trap for Hitler – in the guise of state power! The sense of the theory is the following: fascism is growing unrestrainedly; its victory is inevitable in any case; instead of “blindly” throwing ourselves into the struggle and permitting ourselves to be crushed, it is better to retreat cautiously and to allow fascism to seize power and to compromise itself. Then—oh! Then—we will show ourselves!
Adventurism and light-mindedness give way, according to the laws of political psychology, to prostration and capitulation. The victory of the fascists, considered unthinkable the year before, is looked upon as certain today. Some Kuusinen or other [Komintern official], inspired behind the scenes by some Radek or other [Communist operative], is already preparing for Stalin the brilliant strategic formula: retreat in good time, lead the revolutionary troops out of the line of fire, and lay a trap for fascism in the form of … state power…. The leadership of the Comintern is driving the German proletariat toward an enormous catastrophe, the essence of which is panicky capitulation before fascism!’6
Panicky capitulation to Trump fascism is what the Green Party seems to be offering for 2016. As for Jill Stein’s vice presidential running mate Ajamu Baraka, his mass line is that he remains “committed to fighting this corrupt, degenerate, white supremacist monstrosity called the United States”.’7 Donald Trump, the theoretician of national pessimism and “crippled America,” could hardly have said it better.
At the Left Forum on May 21, one of Jill Stein’s supporters boasted that “we’re not afraid of any fascist boogey-man.” This recalls the speech to the German Parliament made on October 14, 1931 by Herman Remmele, one of the trio of bureaucrats who at that point were running the KPD. Remmele was fond of saying that Hitler was the best recipe for uniting German workers together – something he and his organization had failed to do. Remmele announced: “We are not afraid of the Fascist gentlemen. They [like Trump] will shoot their bolt quicker than any other government.’ As Trotsky writes, ‘…this programmatic speech is based part and parcel upon capitulation to Fascism. “We are not afraid” of Hitler’s assuming power. What is this, if not the formula of cowardice turned inside out? “We” don’t consider ourselves capable of keeping Hitler from assuming power; worse yet: we bureaucrats have so degenerated as not to dare think seriously of fighting Hitler. Therefore, “we are not afraid”. What don’t you fear: fighting against Hitler? Oh no! they are not afraid of … Hitler’s victory. They are not afraid of refusing to fight. They are not afraid to confess their own cowardice.’ These parallels are uncanny. https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/01/whatnext8.htm
On today’s Morning Joe program on MSNBC, host and former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough reported on Donald Trump’s reactions to a military and strategic briefing which the candidate had received several months ago. The gist was that Trump was focused above all on the use of nuclear weapons, and constantly inquired why there should be any reluctance about using these deadly weapons. Here is an account of Scarborough’s report:
‘According to a report from MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump asked a foreign policy advisor three times during a briefing why he couldn’t just use nuclear weapons to solve the nation’s problems. Scarborough shared the anecdote on Morning Joe Wednesday, speaking deliberately to avoid naming his source. “I’ll be very careful here. Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on international level went to advise Donald Trump.” “Three times he asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked, at one point, ‘If we have them, why can’t we use them?’” “That’s one of the reasons why he just doesn’t have foreign policy experts around him,” Scarborough concluded. “Three times, in an hour briefing, ‘Why can’t we use nuclear weapons?’”’1
One wonders why Scarborough, who had spent months using his influential program to hype the Trump candidacy, did not see fit to share this life-and-death information with the American people at the time Trump made these remarks, which represent warmongering of the most infamous kind. We hope that these comments by Trump will be taken with the utmost seriousness in the corridors of power all around the world, and most especially in the Kremlin, where important officials seem to have decided on a whitewash of the psychotic Republican candidate combined with the demonization of his principal opponent, thereby exposing themselves at minimum to a series of problems with American and world public opinion. We would also recommend that Kremlinologist and Professor Stephen Cohen study these remarks by Trump. Over this past weekend, Cohen had attempted to lecturer Michael Smerconish on Trump’s allegedly sincere desire to avoid the descent into a new Cold War. But Trump’s comments are always vague and generic when he talks about peace, and precise and brutal when he outlines his plans for retaliation or aggression.
Trump’s assurances about his peaceful intentions are about as credible as Hitler’s lying pledge that the Nazis wanted “nothing but peace” delivered in the course of an election speech in the Siemens factory in Berlin in November, 1933. Here is an important excerpt:
At about the same time on ABC, correspondent Jonathan Karl revealed that top Republican officials were studying scenarios and options to be implemented in the eventuality that Trump were to drop out of the race and resign from the GOP ticket. Karl reported that:
‘Republican officials are exploring how to handle a scenario that would be unthinkable in a normal election year: What would happen if the party’s presidential nominee dropped out? ABC News has learned that senior party officials are so frustrated — and confused — by Donald Trump’s erratic behavior that they are exploring how to replace him on the ballot if he drops out.
The Trump campaign offered a number of halfhearted denials, but the Trump exit story continued to dominate the cable news all day and into the night. It became clear and that a considerable number of Republican leaders were exhibiting a lively interest in what could be done to dump Trump. The Daily Beast helpfully provided a compendium of the relevant regulations and laws that would govern the possible Trexit. Their overview dealt with the rules and regulations of the Republican Party, the legislation of the various state governments, and finally the rules governing the Electoral College, many of which come from the U.S. Constitution. According to the Daily Beast:
‘The Republican Party rules state that “the Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States.” They could do this by calling a new convention, or, more likely, casting votes remotely. So in case of a Trump withdrawal, [election expert] Persily said, “you can either redo the convention or, more likely, the RNC itself would just re-nominate a candidate.” …But because of that word “otherwise,” it’s likely within the RNC’s power to dump Trump even without his consent. Then they would be able to fill the “vacancy” by majority vote.’
In other words, the “otherwise” would make it legitimate inside the Republican Party for the National Committee to simply deprive Trump of the nomination. As far as the individual states are concerned:
‘Right now, Donald Trump’s name is set to appear on the ballots of 50 states. “So you have questions about ballot access,” Persily said. “There are deadlines in the state laws and that’s a state-by-state finding.” For example, Arkansas and Oklahoma require names to be certified by Aug. 10, for example, North Carolina by Aug. 5. Delaware’s ship has already sailed; they require certification the week after the national convention takes place. So in those states, even if the RNC duly voted for his replacement, it would simply be too late to take his name off the ballot…. Presidential elections are different, however, because, as you may recall from the 2000 election, we don’t elect our presidents directly. Actually, voters in each state choose electors who formally vote for president in the Electoral College. And so we have to look to a third set of rules….The question, Persily explains, is whether state electors are pledged to the individual candidate, or to the party that nominated him or her. “Would Donald Trump’s electors be able to vote for someone else in the Electoral College? Most states say yes—you vote for whoever the party has nominated.” In sum, right up until Nov. 7, the Republican Party could dump Trump by declaring him unfit for office, reconvening, and nominating someone else. But it would get messier depending on how long they wait. If Trump withdraws, there’s really no problem, legally speaking, even at the last minute. While his name would be on the ballot, electors would vote for the party’s actual nominee, or courts would declare Trump no longer the “candidate.”2
In reality, the Electoral College would probably offer the least serious obstacles to replacing the name of Trump with that of some other person. State laws may try to bind the Electors to the candidate or party which has obtained a plurality in that state, but this binding would probably be unenforceable in the face of the U.S. Constitution and federal law, which have never explicitly demanded that the Electors vote for anybody in particular. According to some theories, the Electors have always been able to vote for the candidate they deemed best for the country, and they might start doing this at any time.
In 1968, Alabama football coach Bear Bryant received 1 ½ electoral votes in the presidential tally, despite the fact that his name had not appeared on the ballot of any state. An elector had simply decided to honor the famous coach. This kind of a procedure would therefore be formally possible today, but might also produce a constitutional crisis.
Recent cases of presidential and vice presidential candidates who have dropped out of their respective races boil down essentially to two.
The first is that of Missouri Senator Thomas Eagleton, who was forced to withdraw as the Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate on the ticket with Senator George McGovern in 1968. McGovern and Eagleton were nominated by the Democratic convention, which met between July 10 and July 13 in Miami, Florida. It was then discovered that Eagleton had received electroshock treatment, supposedly to deal with severe depression. According to some mental health professionals, Eagleton’s condition disqualified him from ever being president. Eagleton resigned from the ticket on August 1, just short of three weeks after the Democratic convention had ended. If Trump were to decide to follow Eagleton in the next few days, the time elapsed since the close of their respective conventions could be broadly comparable. Eagleton was replaced as Democratic vice presidential candidate by Sargent Shriver of the Kennedy family on August 5, 1972. According to Wikipedia:
‘Sargent Shriver, brother-in-law to John, Robert, and Ted Kennedy, former Ambassador to France and former Director of the Peace Corps, later accepted. He was officially nominated by a special session of the Democratic National Committee. By this time, McGovern’s poll ratings had plunged from 41 to 24 percent.’
Eccentric Texas billionaire Ross Perot in 1992 was another candidate who dropped out of his race (only to relaunch his candidacy in the last five or six weeks before the final vote). Here the formalities were different, since Perot was running as the candidate of a third party, calling itself the Reform Party. But here, the most interesting parallels are psychological, since key aspects of Donald Trump’s personality and mismanagement style closely resemble the blunders and false economies exhibited by his fellow bombastic, tight-fisted businessman Perot.
All the same, Perot was able to do what Trump has never done — to assume the position of front runner in the public opinion polls which included George H. W. Bush, the incumbent president, and Democratic challenger Bill Clinton. Perot, like Trump, reached his apex in late spring:
‘In the final round of Democratic and Republican primaries, most notably in California, exit polls revealed that 42% of Republicans and 33% of Democrats favored Perot. A Time Magazine poll found that Perot had 37% support of all the electorate, ahead of both Bush and Clinton, who tied for second at 24%. Around this time, Hal Riney, who had worked on Ronald Reagan’s 1984 campaign and was known for the “Morning in America” ad, was hired as advertising consultant. When Riney revealed the cost of advertisements during a meeting, Perot reportedly “flipped out”, and asked “Why would I spend that when I could go on the ‘Today’ show for free?” [The similarity here to tightwad Trump is uncanny.] Riney produced several ads during the campaign that never aired.
Perot, just like Trump today, viewed the world from a markedly egocentric perspective. He was stingy with resources, vague on specific issues, obsessed with his own image, and sensitive to the point of paranoia when it came to criticism. He often reduced his own professional staff to despair by his ill-advised improvisations. As Wikipedia writes:
‘In July , some of Perot’s past actions, including a private investigation of the Bush family in the late 1980s, circulated in the media, causing frustration for the campaign. Perot blamed the reports on a “Republican research team” and claimed that he was warned that since he had such a “clean record they have got to try to redefine you and destroy you”. Campaign officials tried to come up with a new strategy to combat the negative press, and to end Perot’s use of generalizations on the issues. Perot sought National Institutes of Health head Dr. Bernadine Healy as his running mate, but she declined. Meanwhile, Perot faced obstacles on the campaign trail. During an Olympia rally, he was approached by a gay rights group, demanding that he address AIDS and gay rights; he soon flipped on the issue and stated that he would allow gays to serve in the military and in his cabinet. During an address to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Perot faced his toughest demographic, and made the gaffe of referring to African Americans as “you people”. It was later revealed that Perot did not want to appear at the meeting or any other forum without his supporters. Press consultant Squires had written a speech for Perot for the occasion, but he instead used his own. After the speech, Perot was concerned that members of the New Black Panther Party were plotting his assassination.
By mid-summer Perot was quarreling with his advisers and declining sharply in the polls:
‘By mid-July, the Washington Post reported that Perot’s campaign managers were becoming increasingly disillusioned by his unwillingness to follow their advice to be more specific on issues, and his need to be in full control of operations with such tactics as forcing volunteers to sign loyalty oaths. Perot’s poll numbers began to slip to 25%, and his advisers warned that if he continued to ignore them, he would fall into single digits. Co-manager Hamilton Jordan threatened to quit, and on July 15, Ed Rollins resigned after Perot fired advertisement specialist Hal Riney, who worked with Rollins on the Reagan campaign. Rollins later claimed that a member of the campaign accused him of being a Bush plant with ties to the CIA. Amidst the chaos, Perot’s support fell to 20%. The next day [which was also the last day of the Democratic convention in New York which nominated Bill Clinton], Perot announced on Larry King Live that he would not seek the presidency. He explained that he did not want the House of Representatives to decide the election if the result caused the Electoral College to be split. [He also proclaimed that the Democratic Party had re-generated itself.] He asked his supporters to look for other candidates to nominate for the race, and formed United We Stand to “influence the debate.” At this point, Perot had spent $12 million of his own money on the race. Bill Hillsman, who produced a few unaired advertisements for the campaign, wrote that Perot’s withdrawal was a tactic to find temporary relief from the press. Former advisors commented that Perot, who had achieved ballot access in 24 states, was unwilling “to spend money on things that mattered” including Rollins’ and Jordan’s proposed $150 million advertising campaign, was “obsessed” with his image, and lost interest in running after receiving negative press. Supporters were angry and distraught at Perot’s decision, and his popularity dropped among the American public. One woman called Perot and commented that “the tears have not stopped.” A class action lawsuit was filed in Florida to force him to remain in the race, but it was dropped.’
Trump can doubtless consult the hodge-podge of craven absurdities offered by Perot as excuses for dropping out to get plenty of bizarre ideas for use today. One of the classic ones was that Bush agents wanted to humiliate his daughter at her wedding with pornographic leaflets:
‘Reports circulated that a security official from the [Perot] campaign had contacted the Dallas Police in August to urge them to perform a sting operation targeting Bush campaign adviser James Oberwetter, in response to allegations that Republicans planned to wiretap Perot’s office. Perot claimed during an interview with 60 Minutes that “Republican operatives” also threatened to disrupt his daughter’s wedding, which forced him to withdraw in July. He reported the story to the FBI, but no evidence of any wrongdoing was found. The New York Times argued that the story could help Perot with voters and his overall image by presenting him as a man “who was willing to give up his goal to protect his family”; nevertheless, his lack of evidence drew criticism.’3
In summary, we are witnessing not just the implosion of the mentally troubled and cognitively impaired Donald J. Trump, whom the sick dynamics of a warped system have elevated to the status of a glamorous celebrity. We are also witnessing the self-destruction of the Republican Party. These two events, if accomplished with a modicum of success, offer nothing short of the hope for a new world, with the axis of world politics pulled several degrees away from savagery and barbarism, and pushed several degrees towards humanity, prosperity, and dignity.
Obama Labels Billionaire as “Unfit,” Challenges GOP to Dump Him; Widespread Discussion of Trump Mental Disintegration by Press and TV Commentators Across the Ideological Spectrum; Krugman Sees “Derp Spiral” for Trump as He Falls Further Behind in Polls; Will Trump’s Spook Backers Arrange Olympic Terror to Steady Trump’s Faltering Campaign?
Today President Obama restated his view that Donald Trump is unfit for the office of the presidency. Obama also challenged the leaders of the Republican Party to repudiate their nominee instead of limiting themselves to denouncing Trump’s erratic statements from day-to-day. Of course, if Obama demands something, the Republicans are sure to want to disobey. So maybe this intervention by Obama may be designed to make it harder for the Republicans to dump the fascist billionaire, thus increasing the long-term damage to the moribund GOP.
Hillary Clinton is now riding a convention bounce, which is giving her a nationwide lead in the high single digits. In the individual battleground states, her position is also getting stronger. The general election campaign started last Friday, and Trump took the weekend off. These first few days have been catastrophic for the fascist billionaire, and rumors are now circulating about widespread dissatisfaction in the Trump campaign staff. According to CNBC’s John Harwood on Twitter, a long-time ally of campaign boss Paul Manafort says: “Manafort not challenging Trump any more. Mailing it in. Staff suicidal.” Another source confirms this, saying: “It’s all true” and “Way worse than people realize.”
Will vice presidential candidate Mike Pence resign from this trail of tears before Labor Day? Will the Trump campaign implode through mass resignations, especially if the stingy billionaire refuses to pay the troops? Or will the polls be enough to make the rats leave the ship?
Trump is in deep trouble and seems to lack awareness of his own situation.
Paul Krugman of the New York Times is already speculating about how the mentally unstable Trump will behave when it becomes obvious to him that the election is irretrievably lost. For this Krugman has invented a new term to apply to Trump – the “derp spiral”:
‘“Nobel Prize-winning New York Times columnist Paul Krugman coined the phrase “derp spiral” on Tuesday in preparation for Donald Trump’s behavior once he decides he will likely lose the election in November. “Aha!” Krugman exclaimed on Twitter. “I think I have the term for what happens to Trump if (when) he finds himself ever more likely to lose: he will go into a derp spiral.” KnowYourMeme defines derp as “an expression associated with stupidity.” While trying to change the subject from his attacks on a Muslim family whose son died fighting for the U.S. Army in Iraq, Trump called Hillary Clinton “the devil” on Monday. And he warned that the election could be “rigged” to prevent him from winning. On Tuesday, he continued to suggest that Hillary Clinton was the devil at a rally in Virginia, where he also ordered a baby removed from the event and pocketed a Purple Heart from a wounded veteran.’1
The growing awareness of Trump’s mental illness comes a little bit more than two months after the landmark presentations by the Tax Wall Street Party at the New York Left Forum on May 21 in Manhattan. At that time, the TWSP catalogued 10 mental and other disorders which had been attributed to Trump in an effort to explain his behavior. These included:
Narcissist Personality Disorder-megalomania
Manic-Depressive syndrome with bipolar disorder
Sadistic Personality Disorder
Histrionic Personality Disorder with infantile regression
Multiple Personality Disorder
As of this writing, all of these hypotheses remain very much on the table. An informed electorate would require an international conference of mental health professionals to develop a competent diagnosis of the mentally disturbed Trump.
Trump is already complaining that the election is fixed against him, and it is clear to many observers that the presidential transition of next January 20 will not be in the traditional form if Trump does not win. This would establish Trump as the biggest crybaby and sore loser in American history, and will definitely do permanent damage to our system of government. That is why it would be better if Trump were to back out now.
More evidence of Trump’s mental instability arrived today in the late afternoon with reports of Trump’s attacks on leading Republicans, including Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, Arizona Senator John McCain, and New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte. All are facing seriously contested primary elections.
Ryan had stalled for more than a month in giving Trump his endorsement after the conclusion of the primaries, but had then announced his support for the billionaire and had presided over Trump’s Cleveland convention. McCain had also given Trump, his grudging endorsement. Kelly Ayotte is the third member of the Three Amigos clique in the Senate, along with McCain and Lindsey Graham. According to a report which appeared on the Washington Post website this afternoon:
‘Trump praised Ryan’s underdog opponent, Paul Nehlen, for running “a very good campaign” and said of Ryan: “I like Paul, but these are horrible times for our country. We need very strong leadership. We need very, very strong leadership. And I’m just not quite there yet. I’m not quite there yet.”
“I’ve never been there with John McCain because I’ve always felt that he should have done a much better job for the vets,” Trump continued. “He has not done a good job for the vets and I’ve always felt that he should have done a much better job for the vets. So I’ve always had a difficult time with John for that reason, because our vets are not being treated properly. They’re not being treated fairly.” McCain is locked in a three-way Republican primary — the election is Aug. 30 and early voting begins this week — against former state senator Kelli Ward and tea party activist Clair Van Steenwyk. A third challenger, Alex Meluskey, suspended his campaign this week.
“New Hampshire is one of my favorite places,” Trump said. “You have a Kelly Ayotte who doesn’t want to talk about Trump, but I’m beating her in the polls by a lot. You tell me. Are these people that should be representing us, okay? You tell me.”
Trump continued, “I don’t know Kelly Ayotte. I know she’s given me no support — zero support — and yet I’m leading her in the polls. I’m doing very well in New Hampshire. We need loyal people in this country. We need fighters in this country. We don’t need weak people. We have enough of them. We need fighters in this country. But Kelly Ayotte has given me zero support, and I’m doing great in New Hampshire.”
Ayotte, whose aides said she still plans to vote for Trump, responded with a statement: “I call it like I see it, and I’m always going to stand up for our military families and what’s best for the people of New Hampshire.” [Ayotte is reported to have been relieved by Trump’s attack, since she has been denounced as a tool of Trump by the local Democrats.]
Trump went on to say that if he loses the election, he would start two or three “anti-certain candidate” super PACs, which he vowed to fund with $10 million apiece, to savage Republicans or Democrats of his choosing in future elections.’2
On the same day, retiring Congressman Rep. Richard Hanna of New York declared he would support the Democratic ticket. A top Bush family operative departed from the GOP, following several other operatives who have jumped ship.
With this latest round of psychotic antics, Trump is actively antagonizing the Koch brothers’ wing of the Republican Party. The multi-billionaire Koch brothers have stated that they will not deliver financial support for Trump, but will rather focus their money on preserving reactionary Republican control of the Senate and the House. Now, Trump is making that maneuver much more difficult, because he is undermining key Republican candidates in the legislative branch. What will the Koch brothers do to shut him down?
This evening MSNBC and especially CNN have been focused on supporting Obama’s statement that Trump is unfit for the presidency, with lengthy discussions of various mental disorders associated with the fascist billionaire, particularly his narcissism, which was raised as a campaign issue by GOP rival Bobby Jindal as early as last September.
Yahoo! News has provided a compendium of editorial writers who are deeply concerned about Trump’s insanity:
Is Donald Trump insane? That’s the question being asked in recent days by prominent columnists, both liberal and conservative, about the Republican presidential nominee.’3
Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post has reluctantly come to the conclusion that Trump is “just plain crazy”:
‘“During the primary season, as Donald Trump’s bizarre outbursts helped him crush the competition, I thought he was being crazy like a fox,” Eugene Robinson wrote in an op-ed (“Is Donald Trump just plain crazy?”) published Tuesday in the Washington Post. “Now I am increasingly convinced that he’s just plain crazy,” Robinson continued. “I’m serious about that. Leave aside for the moment Trump’s policies, which in my opinion range from the unconstitutional to the un-American to the potentially catastrophic. At this point, it would be irresponsible to ignore the fact that Trump’s grasp on reality appears to be tenuous at best.”’
Neocon Robert Kagan of Brookings sees Trump as “not rational” and “a man with a disordered personality””
“One wonders if Republican leaders have begun to realize that they may have hitched their fate and the fate of their party to a man with a disordered personality,” Robert Kagan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, wrote in a separate Washington Post editorial on Monday. “We can leave it to the professionals to determine exactly what to call it. Suffice to say that Donald Trump’s response to the assorted speakers at the Democratic National Convention has not been rational.”’
Liberal Republican David Brooks writes about Trump as an individual who is non compos mentis and really ought to become the ward of a conservator who would take responsibility before his safety:
“I almost don’t blame Trump,” David Brooks wrote in the New York Times on July 29. “He is a morally untethered, spiritually vacuous man who appears haunted by multiple personality disorders. It is the ‘sane’ and ‘reasonable’ Republicans who deserve the shame.”
Trump is known to be extraordinarily sensitive to criticism coming from his fellow billionaires, especially those of greater magnitude. Sports mogul Mark Cuban has expressed his problems with Trump in graphic language:
‘Another billionaire, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, also questioned Trump’s sanity. “Donald initially — I really hoped he would be something different, that as a businessperson, I thought there was an opportunity there,” Cuban told CNN while campaigning with Clinton in his hometown of Pittsburgh on Saturday. “But then he went off the reservation and went bats**t crazy.”’
Veteran GOP operative Stuart Stevens also suspects that Donald is mentally disturbed @stuartpstevens
We can gloss over it, laugh about it, analyze it but @realDonaldTrump is not a well man. He has serious problems.4