#TrumpRussia: The Mother of All Crises As Trump Provokes Sociopath Leaders

The other day Donald Trump gave a press conference to speak about the mother of all bombs dropped in Nangahar Province in Eastern Afghanistan, 'targeting' a tunnel complex used by ISIS.

As usual, Trump didn't tell the truth, which is that the Obama administration set up the preparations for using the bomb there, against ISIS. All Trump, or somebody at the Pentagon, had to do was give the order. Who actually did is still unclear, notwithstanding Trump's boast that he told his military, the best military in the world, to use the bomb, making it sound as if the whole idea was his from the first, and was the result of well-thought out strategy.

He made no mention that the Intelligence regarding the tunnels was gathered in the Obama Administration, or that he has widened the powers of the Pentagon, so they didn't actually need his permission, and glaringly, he did not directly say that he personally approved of the mission, giving himself an out. He can blame the generals if the mission is proved a failure, as he did of the strike in Yemen, which killed too many civilians.

Trump did say, however, that the Obama Administration could have used the MOAB—Massive Ordinance Air Blast, aka Mother of All Bombs—but failed to do so, implying weakness on their part.

No mention that all the preparation had been done by them, or that the bomb has never been used before because it cannot be targeted and the possibility of massive collateral damage was too enormous to just drop it without thought. As has been proved time and time again, thoughtful planning is not a requisite in this Administration.

In an email to motherjones.com, Ian Overton, Executive Director of Action on Armed Violence, explained that the MOAB sucks all the oxygen out of the air for a mile in all directions and sets it alight, so the collateral damage is extensive. In an unpopulated area such as Nangahar, 25% of those killed or injured will be civilians. And extensive damage will have been done to infrastructure, making the harmful impact a great deal more extensive than injuries and deaths.

All of these facts contribute to the reason the Obama—and even the Bush—Administration had been hesitant to use the MOAB. Not so Donald Trump. In full-flight bragging mood, he said that the strike was another tremendous success.

For "success" read "failure", not least of which are that National Security Advisor Mike Flynn, caught lying with his pants on fire, was forced to resign; AG Jeff Sessions, also caught lying, had to recuse himself from the Russian intervention investigation; two Muslim bans masquerading as Travel bans have been blocked; Trumpcare was a disaster; the utterly unfounded accusation that Obama wiretapped Trump and that GCHQ knew about it made Trump a laughing stock of the world.

Devin Nunes, leading the House Investigation into #TrumpRussia, is now in the crosshairs of Washington ethics watchdogs for attempting to divert the Russia probe, mishandling classified information, and—you got it—lying. Like Jeff Sessions he had to recuse himself. The only success in 83 days has been Neil Gorsuch's confirmation as Supreme Court Justice. And that had nothing to do with Donald Trump.

Militarily, there have been no successes either. The strike in Yemen, which killed 30 innocent civilians, including 10 women and children, was such a failure that Trump distanced himself from it and blamed the failure on the generals. Then there was the Syrian airstrike which has turned into a total fiasco. Everybody was talking about Syria and how Trump's strategy has centered on a turnaround on Russia, and supporting the UN.

Then MOAB, and now Trump is provoking Kim Jong-un. Strategy has nothing to do with it. Trump is fumbling in the dark. He's never had any coherent plan; you have to understand your subject to be able to formulate one. Trump has no knowledge of anything. He's just a mean spirited, extremely unintelligent, compulsive liar with impulses he can't control. He instinctively knows how to rabble-rouse, how to con people, and how to create chaos.

He's followed that instinct since he started campaigning. By instinct he's wagging the dog. It's not intelligent strategy. Trump doesn't have the smarts for that.

For heaven's sake, he reads speeches and signs executive orders (or forgets to) without understanding the content, or having any knowledge of the subject. When he was reading his speech on Syria after the strike, he couldn't afford to take his eyes off the sheet of paper for more than a couple of words. Somebody could have written gobbledygook and, none the wiser, he would have read it out with his ludicrous attempt at a Churchill imitation which fools nobody and only succeeds in making Trump look like a very dull-witted praying mantis.

He's never had to deal with consequences. Suddenly he had to. He was told what to do regarding the fall-out with Putin and Assad after the airstrike, but again, it wasn't his strategy, or anybody else's. They were all just frantically trying to put out fires, amid infighting and back-stabbing. The idea that a strike that didn't take out the runway and was never going to be followed up could possibly be effective in scaring either Putin or Assad is laughable.

Putin is way, way ahead of Trump, Nikki Haley, and of Rex Tillerson too. He knows more about American politics than any of them. So this whole affair will settle down with absolutely nothing achieved for America and with some wretch having to wipe the egg off Donald Trump's face.

It would have gradually faded from the news, as the #TrumpRussia investigation, which is still in full sway, hit the headlines again. But then there was MOAB, the largest non-nuclear bomb in the world, to suck up everybody's attention. The shock wave could be heard for miles and miles, And the headlines made shock waves around the world. International news broadcasters had a field day.

In the meantime, whether it's in the news or not, Putin has come out of the Syrian episode having entrenched his bully position and confirmed his understanding that the Trump administration is putty in his hands, the UN is utterly toothless in the matter of Syria, and Assad is free to continue doing whatever he wants, perpetrating crimes against humanity.

And the military industrial complex is off and running again. Donald Trump's Pentagon is free to drop bombs, cause collateral damage, waste lives. Somebody's making a lot of money out of this. One MOAB costs the US taxpayer $16 million to manufacture.

This reckless president, who doesn't have a clue what he's doing, who is influenced by the Machiavellian agenda of whoever talks the sweetest at any given moment, shoots his mouth off whenever he feels like it. People found his antics laughable when he was campaigning. Not so laughable now is the mess he has already made of domestic policy and the chaos that has descended on international relations.

Least laughable is the reality that Trump, in the Syrian airstrike, in taking out ISIS tunnels the way he did, and in his previous rabid anti-Muslim rhetoric, has no doubt enraged ISIS leadership and members, securing a target on his own back and that of his family and Administration, but worse than that, on the entire US. Add to that the dick-waving, childish and dangerous threats he is leveling at Kim Yong-un, a sociopath megalomaniac who is fast developing the capacity to nuke the US, and who has a large stockpile of chemical weapons, weapons that could be attached to modified long-range missiles.

Vladimir Putin recently accused the US of destroying world order. Ironically, although his reasoning is spurious, there's truth in what he says. Ultimately, this is a game of wag the dog, its sole purpose being to distract Americans from Trump's involvement in Russia. That he's going about it so clumsily doesn't diminish the lethal effects of the game.

Cool Reception to Mike Flynn's Request for Immunity

Embed from Getty Images

“When you are given immunity, that means that you probably have committed a crime.” So said Mike Flynn on September 25 last year, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press". Then-Republican candidate Donald Trump said "if you haven't committed a crime why would you ask for immunity, right?"

Flynn, conspiracy theorist, arbiter of fake news prior to the election, was also a "lock her up" cheerleader at the Republican National Convention. He and Trump were, of course, speaking about then Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and the alleged crime for which she was endlessly investigated and publicly hung, drawn and quartered despite having been found to have committed no crime. 

In the week prior to the 2016 election, Flynn tweeted "U decide - NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes w Children, etc… MUST READ!" The allegations were of course baseless. This was the man Donald Trump chose for White House National Security Adviser. 

In the previous year, Flynn spoke at a Russian state-owned media RT Television gala in Moscow. Jill Stein also attended the gala. Flynn, however, was paid $45,000 plus  expenses. RT is well known to be a propaganda outlet controlled by Vladimir Putin. It has been used successfully to propagate fake news and influence both the ultra right and the ultra left in the US and countries in Europe.

Flynn was forced to resign his post within a month when it was revealed, in an ironic twist, by  Intelligence, that he had lied in his confirmation hearing about meeting any Russian officials. In fact he met with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Speculation about deeper involvement has been rife.

Now Flynn has offered his testimony to the FBI and the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, in exchange for immunity. So far the reception has been cool.  Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Rep Adam Schiff, D-Calif, released a statement, saying, "We should first acknowledge what a grave and momentous step it is for a former National Security Advisor to the President of the United States to ask for immunity from prosecution." 

It is unclear what Mike Flynn's motivation is, but he has the support of Donald Trump, as expressed, naturally, in a tweet, which undermines the idea that Flynn has any real information to offer, especially considering his past obsession with conspiracy theories, and his predilection for alternative facts. 

The White House has recently made significant efforts to distract attention from the investigations into possible collusion between Russian officials and members of the Trump campaign—and indeed Donald Trump himself. But Democrats on the hill are not fooled, and nor will they be taken in by any games if Flynn is playing them, with or without the president's endorsement. As Adam Schiff added in his statement,

"Additionally, as with any investigation—and particularly one that grows in severity and magnitude by the day—there is still much work and many more witnesses and documents to obtain before any immunity request from any witness can be considered. 

As but one example, during our open hearing I made a formal request of the agencies to provide Mr. Flynn's background check document, SF-86, so we can determine whether he properly reported any work he may have conducted on behalf of a foreign entity. We have yet to receive those documents. 

Moreover, when the times comes to consider requests for immunity from any witness, we will of course require a detailed proffer of any intended testimony." 

Can the Democratic Party be Blamed for Trump's Success?

"Those values upon which our success depends -- honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism -- these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history.  

What is demanded, then, is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility -- a recognition on the part of every American that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world; duties that we do not grudgingly accept, but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task.  

This is the price and the promise of citizenship." Barack Obama 2009

I'm hearing a lot, from liberals, that the primary reason for Trump winning the election was the failure of the left to deliver. It's good that Democratic politicians are questioning themselves and self-evaluating, but were they really the problem? I don't believe so.

Firstly, the electoral college win was due to a lot of factors that were in place before the election. Past gerrymandering gave red, rural areas disproportional over-representation; laws and policies were put in place made it harder for (Democratic leaning) minorities to vote.

Then there's the blurring between truth and fiction, and the appetite for it. Apart from the fake news fiasco, the GOP and Fox news promoted a narrative that Obama was the epitome of every worst thing in a human being, let alone a leader, and they targeted Hillary Clinton very successfully. Also, RT, Russian state-owned media, has targeted populists for a while, left and right, creating a narrative that the 'establishment' is all evil. Bernie Sanders die-hards bought into it, believing that Hillary Clinton was a rapist and a murderer, and Obama a monster. And now many of them are saying "what's wrong with Russia and Vladimir Putin?"

It's impossible to tell the difference between the far left and the far right sometimes, for the mindlessness and the hatred that's spewed out, all in the name of democracy. So the problem in this aspect has nothing to do with Democratic politicians not delivering. It's got everything to do with far left liberals believing and promoting the same myths that the far right got riled up by. Try to point it out and you'll be told you're stupid.

Then there's the underlying racism in the US that reared its ugly head again during the Obama Administration, and the not so underlying sexism that also surfaced with a vengeance during Hillary Clinton's campaign which, together with the GOP culture of discrimination, bigotry, exclusion, inequality etc, created fertile soil on which to sow the seeds of untruth.

Also, conservatives who fear losing status quo are very motivated to fight for it. They band together, are tremendously loyal, and they make no effort to try and understand liberals. They fight to kill and they play dirty. But Democrats are a different animal. They often feel morally obligated to see all sides, so they're not as blindly loyal to their own as conservatives, and can even be quite easily disillusioned. It takes a lot to make them fight, and historically, they don't turn out in the mid-terms. If they had, and Democrats had held onto Congress, Obama would have been able to achieve more, and more people would have felt the effect.

Bernie Sanders' inability throughout his whole political career to generate a huge following would have continued. The myths generated by the GOP, Fox News and RT, wouldn't have landed on any liberals. They would have appreciated Hillary Clinton and been inspired to vote for her, and not simply because she wasn't Trump. It would have been a landslide.

In reality, Barack Obama and Democratic politicians, including Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, worked themselves to the bone, during the Obama Administration. What more could they have done?

The voters didn't do the same. If all the blame is placed on the Democratic Party for inadequate delivery nothing will change. But if voters ask, "How did we fail ourselves? How did we fail Obama and Hillary Clinton? What more can we do to protect our values?" then things will change and the change will be sustainable. Even those of us who aren't American citizens but who are devastated at the results of this election could ask ourselves that question, because Trump's win will affect us directly.

We all take power into our own hands only after disaster has struck. If only we could all somehow learn to be awake and aware enough to do it as prophylactic… After all, Obama was only echoing what John F. Kennedy said in 1961 at his inauguration.

"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

#HistoryMade? Will Electoral College Electors Tell Trump "You're Fired"?

Embed from Getty Images

“Everyone during the election perceived accurately—that in fact what the Russian hack had done was create more problems for the Clinton campaign than it had for the Trump campaign. There’s no doubt that it contributed to an atmosphere in which the only focus for weeks at a time, months at a time were Hillary's emails, the Clinton Foundation, political gossip surrounding the DNC...  

I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections … we need to take action, and we will—at a time and place of our own choosing. Some of it may be explicit and publicized; some of it may not be.” - President Barack Obama

The Electoral College votes on America's next president on Monday. Anti-Trump voters have been at work since Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the election in circumstances that are highly suspect. Apart from the country-wide protests, a petition was started by Daniel Brezenoff, asking the electors to elect Hillary Clinton. It now has close to 5 million signatures. People in every state have signed it.

There has also been a storm of protest from President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and other Democrat and Republican senators and representatives, and some electors, triggered by 17 intelligence agencies unanimously reporting that Russians intervened in the election through hacking and that “only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities”  

Vladimir Putin, of course, laughed the Intelligence report off. But he did that when the scandal first broke of Russian State sponsored Olympic doping. And now it's undeniable fact. Trump also laughed it off, as did his vacuous mouthpiece Rep Chris Collins. Speaking to CNN's Wolf Blitzer he said it was time to "put this nonsense aside." Blitzer shot him down, as he did when Collins said that President Obama had never acknowledged Trump's win.

A bipartisan group of electors, calling themselves the Hamilton Electors, published an open letter to the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, requesting that he release all the facts on Russian interference before they vote.

“...We intend to discharge our duties as Electors by ensuring that we select a candidate for president who, as our Founding Fathers envisioned, would be “endowed with the requisite qualifications.” As Electors, we also believe that deliberation is at the heart of democracy itself, not an empty or formalistic task…

The Constitution envisions the Electoral College as a deliberative body that plays a critical role in our system of government — ensuring that the American people elect a president who is constitutionally qualified and fit to serve. Accordingly, to fulfill our role as Electors, we seek an informed and unrestrained opportunity to fulfill our constitutional role leading up to December 19th — that is, the ability to investigate, discuss, and deliberate with our colleagues about whom to vote for in the Electoral College.

We further emphasize Alexander Hamilton’s assertion in Federalist Paper #68 that a core purpose of the Electoral College was to prevent a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”

To date eighty Presidential electors have signed the letter. Those wishing to add their names can contact ElectoralCollege16@gmail.com

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid told Buzzfeed News that he supports that call for an Intelligence briefing on the Russian interference before they vote. Reid said he believed this was as "big a deal as Watergate, as 9/11 and he believes, along with US Senators Dianne Feinstein and Ben Cardin, that a 9/11 type commission should be set up to investigate.

Reid also blamed FBI Director James Comey for his role in Hillary Clinton's surprise loss. A view shared by many, including Hillary Clinton and her supporters. The FBI agents received Weiner's computer from the NYPD and held onto it for two weeks before sending it up the chain of command to Comey. Their later excuse was that they needed time to better assess the emails. But they were prohibited by law from reading any of them without a warrant, for which they needed Comey's OK. 

If they had sent it immediately, Comey's 2nd letter acknowledging that there was nothing to investigate, would have been released before early voting began, instead of 48 hours before the election, and probably wouldn't have changed the outcome of the election.

On Thursday, Hillary Clinton spoke to donors about how Comey's letter to Congress swung the election in Trump's favor, and added that Putin had a longstanding grudge against her for her 2011 accusation that Russian parliamentary elections had been rigged.

But, she said, “Make no mistake as the press is finally catching up to the facts, which we desperately tried to present to them during the last months of the campaign. This is not just an attack on me and my campaign, although that may have added fuel to it. This is an attack against our country. We are well beyond normal political concerns here. This is about the integrity of our democracy and the security of our nation.”

California attorney Michael Hawley said to The Hollywood Reporter that electors have received thousands of emails, and some have received death threats. Hawley, Mark Lemley and Larry Lessig co-founded the Electors Trust, an organization that provides free and confidential legal counsel and defence to electors who "wish to vote their conscience." 

An Elector, speaking to Salon on condition of anonymity, said “We have gotten reports from multiple people that the Donald Trump campaign is putting [career] pressure on Republican electors to vote for him based on…future political outcomes based on whether they vote for Donald Trump or not.”

Legally and constitutionally Trump isn't president yet. The number of electors who have voted their conscience is rare throughout American history, but as everybody has been pointing out for a year, this is no ordinary American election. Never has there been a candidate who has:

And that's the short list.

This degree of protest from electors, politicians and the general public is unprecedented, and the highest number of electors to ever break from a presidential candidate was in 1808, when six Democratic-Republican electors voted against James Madison. But, as everybody keeps reiterating, it's been an unusual American presidential election, so one final unusual event will fit right in.

History has already been made, for better or for worse. Why not go for broke and eliminate the worse? All it needs is for 37 electors to vote their conscience and Donald Trump is history. I'm going to let myself hope for two more days that Hillary Clinton can still be America's next president.

She won the popular vote by 2.8 million, which means a clear majority of Americans want her. The world wants her. #ImStillWithHer.