Thursday, October 13, 2016
Putin Ally: Vote for Donald Trump Or Die
As we know Donald Trump has a cozy relationship with the Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.
So cozy in fact that the Obama administration has accused the Russians of trying to influence the result of the American election.
The Obama administration on Friday formally accused the Russian government of stealing and disclosing emails from the Democratic National Committee and a range of other institutions and prominent individuals, immediately raising the issue of whether President Obama would seek sanctions or other retaliation.
But this is the absolute limit.
Now one of Putin's allies is demanding that Americans vote for Trump or face nuclear war.
Americans should vote for Donald Trump as president next month or risk being dragged into a nuclear war, according to a Russian ultra-nationalist ally of President Vladimir Putin who likes to compare himself to the U.S. Republican candidate.
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a flamboyant veteran lawmaker known for his fiery rhetoric, told Reuters in an interview that Trump was the only person able to de-escalate dangerous tensions between Moscow and Washington.
"Americans voting for a president on Nov. 8 must realize that they are voting for peace on Planet Earth if they vote for Trump. But if they vote for Hillary it's war. It will be a short movie. There will be Hiroshimas and Nagasakis everywhere."
Which is another grotesque attempt to interfere in the U.S. election, and must surely raise more questions about Donald Trump's weird world.
For most of this campaign, Donald Trump’s admiration for Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, and his willingness to act as a Kremlin apologist on issues ranging from Syria to the computer hacking of individuals and political parties have been sources of bafflement and dismay.
The American people need to know whether he can be trusted to uphold their country's interests.
Mr. Trump has no foreign policy experience. He has, however, received two briefings from American intelligence agencies that should have alerted him to the challenges facing the next president but apparently have not. All of which raises unsettling questions about whether the Republican nominee for the most powerful job in the world is Mr. Putin’s poodle, stubbornly naïve, totally clueless or, as some have ominously suggested, protecting undisclosed business interests in Russia.
Or is just Putin's little furry stooge.
Because when Trump recites false information from a Russian government source.
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump repeated during a campaign rally a false story claiming that Hillary Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal privately admitted in hacked emails that Clinton was to blame for the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
The only problem: Blumenthal didn’t actually say any of that. In the email in question, Blumenthal was sharing a piece by Newsweek columnist Kurt Eichenwald in which Eichenwald made that argument.
You really have to wonder what on earth is going on.
And needless to say Kurt Eichenwald isn't amused...
And yes, this is the bottom line: Trump must release his taxes so American can see whether he is just hopelessly incompetent, in hock to a Russian oligarch, or a Russian agent.
And either way he is unfit to be President.
In the end, it may not matter whether Mr. Trump is being manipulated by Mr. Putin or naïvely accepting Mr. Putin’s twisted views. What does matter is that with each new bizarre utterance he provides further proof of his inability to evaluate credible information and, more broadly, his lack of fitness to further his country’s best interests.
We already knew Trump like to force himself on women without their consent.
And it is destroying his campaign.
But this is the treasonous kiss that could finally finish him off...
Labels: Donald Trump, The Death of the Republican Party, The Madness of Trump, Vladimir Putin, Vladimir Zhirinovsky
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
My biggest concern about a Hillary presidency,the aggressive attitude being taken against Russia. Russia has a right to protect it's borders, which is what it is supposedly doing strengthening the government of Assad, the annexation of Crimea and deployment of missiles against American missiles in Eastern Europe. When you push a bear you can get hurt, and in this case it could be deadly for all.
In my opinion we have a choice between a businessman that will trash financial markets through not understanding economic theory, or a shill for the military industrial complex that seems to believe humans can survive a nuclear war. I truly hope I am wrong, but the US has been instrumental in causing instability and creating unease in the Kremlin.
There is a rumor that Bernie Sanders will be on the ballots also, which is cause for concern as I think Hillary is a "hold your nose and vote" candidate, but far more experienced, and capable of avoiding war despite continuing to inflame tensions. ~GS
News cycle on Trump is so rapid, in a few hours we may be swamped by more incredulous information. Preying on a 10 year old girl in a mall? If I were the mother, that would have been the creepiest day of my life.
Jill Stein has just come out saying that Clinton would be more dangerous than Trump. Amazing how desperate these candidates are for attention. Then there's Clinton, calm as can be at the debate with Trump hulking around her.
Love fitst illustration Simon;)
I can't wait for this election to be over and for you to snap back to reality.
Because if the level of your political analysis only goes so far as "Trump bad. Hillary good!" then there's no point reading you any more.
Serious people (who are quite capable or seeing that Trump is a monster) worry about Hillary Clinton's provocations towards Russia.
I read a long time ago allegations of Putin using cocaine. What a team they'd make, "Mr. Sniffles" and "Vlad the Inhaler".
I am a lifelong liberal and her plan for a no fly zone in Syria terrifies me. I would genuinely like someone to put my mind at ease but it seems to be a topic that none of her supporters would like to address.
Clinton is one of the worst candidates the Democrats have ever ran. Unfortunately, because the GOP decided to elect a Nazi as their nominee, there is no real choice for decent people. They have to hold their noses and vote Clinton in hopes that calmer, more rational voices on the international stage can talk her out of a no fly zone in Syria.
Hillary is reviving the Cold War with Russia as a campaign strategy to target neocons. Amazing how some people believe the "progressive position" is to bomb Muslims and bring back the specter of nuclear Armageddon. IT IS NOT.
Jill Stein is right: Hillary is much more dangerous than Trump. Trump is wrong about a lot of things. But keeping the peace with Russia is not one of them. Neither is unwinding US "interventionism" and globalization outsourcing.
Hillary is a neocon in Democrat's clothing who is channeling Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Her real reason for being a war hawk: kickbacks from the military industrial complex.
Trump is not Hitler. He is Archie Bunker. He wouldn't be the first imbecile president. He would be the third with Reagan and Bush Jr. preceding him. The US president is 1/3rd the government. The president DOES NOT have absolute power.
As we know Donald Trump has a cozy relationship with the Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.
Well no we don't. All we know, really that a pathological liar has said a few good things about Putin followed by a two mobs of American screaming. We have the normal common-or-garden variety of American loon screaming that it is all a Communist plot (most have not gotten the memo about the collapse of communism and the USSR).
And we have a mob of hysterical Democrats who see this as a handy rock with which to bludgeon Trump.
Putin did make one or two throw-away comments about Trump, probably as much as a joke as anything. Americans often do not understand subtle put-downs or ironic statements.
The Obama administration on Friday formally accused the Russian government of stealing and disclosing emails from the Democratic National Committee
Did you see that low-flying pig? Just why would I, or any other sensible person, believe this?
Oh, right, the US government were so correct about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. And the CIA never hacked Congressional computers and so on. US government intelligence sources are completely reliable.
It took Russian intelligence to hack the DNC computer system? Yah, right. Well, very likely, they, have hacked it, as has NSA, the Chinese, the North Koreans, Anonymous, the guy in the basement of his parents' house in Burlington and Uncle Tom Cobley.
Trump Repeats False Story About Sidney Blumenthal Originating From Russian Propaganda
Russian Propaganda? Oh they mean Sputnik News, a perfectly respectable on-line news source which points out that it is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Russian Gov't. Yep, that's a really well disguised propaganda source to affect a US presidential campaign.
While Sputnik News is definitely biased in Russia's direction, it often has some very interesting articles and commentaries. thank God, the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times is never a source of US propaganda.
As as I understand it, Sputnik published something, apparently realized it was wrong, and pulled the article roughly an hour after it was posted. I am not sure if it was reported in corrected form.
Presumably one of Trumps highly competent and well-trained staff members did a cut and paste on the erroneous first post and passed it on, after exercising the standard QC checks.
My real problem with the fairy tale of Putin supporting Trump is that I just cannot see any upside for Russia (or Putin, personally) in supporting a mad, loose cannon like Trump.
Can you really see Russia in favour of a US Congress and Senate in the grip of a bunch of rabid tea-bagger Republicans who think this is still 1948 without the slightly sane and moderating effect of a president other than Trump?
I suspect that Putin and his Cabinet are sitting around the cabinet table shaking their heads in disbelief and despair at the US presidential election. They are looking at a major world power with whom they need to deal, lead by a raving idiot or a recycled Cold War warrior.
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a flamboyant veteran lawmaker known for his fiery rhetoric
Paraphrase: Someone as mad as Boris Johnson or, perhaps, Rob Ford is making noises.
this is the treasonous kiss that could finally finish him off. Indeed, Very cunning these Russians.
What is the best way for Russia to support Hilary among the xenophobic American population? Why to seem to support Trump. And the idiot MSM and mad right-wing rags, etc., have fallen for it. Clearly the US education system is in crisis; it is not even teaching the Brer Rabbit story!
I had suspected that Putin and Co. would prefer Hilary. She is a dangerous unreconstructed Cold-War warrior but Russia and the Soviet Union before, have dealt with Cold-War warriors in the past.
The last time they encountered a mad/delusional, lying, irrational, racist leader of a major nation the USSR lost roughly 30 million citizens.
@ anon 2:45 AM
Russia has a right to protect it's borders, which is what it is supposedly doing strengthening the government of Assad, the annexation of Crimea and deployment of missiles against American missiles in Eastern Europe.
That's my reading of Russia's actions. The Crimea has Russia's main warm-water ports and it's main navel base. Plus, Crimea as part of Ukraine is a bit of a joke. Khrushchev signed it over to the Ukraine as some minor administrative thingy when the USSR existed and it did not make much difference.
Strengthening Assad, vile as his gov't is, makes sense. The USA seemed to be merrily trying to turn Syria into another failed state, Russia is not a long walk for refugees fleeing chaos in the Middle East and I really don't think Putin wants to see a few mad jihadist mini-states almost on Russia's border.
American missiles in Eastern Europe. The Americans went ape-shit at missiles in Cuba but don't seem to think Russia should mind NATO forces based about 150km from St Petersburg or having a few hundred misses creeping towards the Russian border.
Gee, why would Russia mind this, the Americans are the good guys.
I'd go with Clinton for your reason. She's dangerous but not totally unhinged.
Agree with your assessment. In spite of previous assurances the US has been dancing all over Russia's borders installing missile systems and sponsoring "regime changes". Russia is fighting back which is escalating instability in the region.If roles were reversed the US would go absolutely berserk if Russia was installing defense systems in Cuba or Mexico. Been there done that in the 60's.Why reinvent them?
Hillary stated in the last debate that a show of strength will bring Russia to the negotiation table. The problem is it only takes one uncontrolled event to escalate this type of conflict into a mutually destructive war. Its significant that Turkey (a major military power)is the latest pawn to come into play on the chessboard. Trump is absolutely right when he portrays Hillary as a bad decision maker but unfortunately he is no alternative. Give the options all we have is hope that humanity survives the next 4 years and leaders of a saner mind emerge.
Simon seems willing to accept big corruption and warmongering to stop the vile and bigoted Trump.
WikiLeaks has now shown that FOBs (friends of Bill) and WJC(William J Clinton) VIPs through their pay to play relationships with the Clinton Foundation apparently profited immensely from the last Haitian disaster. The WikiLeaks revelations were consistent with what Schwiezer had documented in his book: Clinton Cash about the Clinton corruption. Clinton Cash mentioned many others. What could be more disgusting than profiting from others' misery and pains? It appears the Clinton family and friends made millions doing this.
Hillary is also more likely than Trump to start a nuclear war with Russia and then we will see how she is supposedly the lesser of 2 evils when hundreds of thousands of people die, as they did in Libya when she was SoS. Trump, lewd and vile that he is, has not (not yet) destroyed an entire country that used to have the highest standard of living in Africa, as Hillary and Obama did. And caused millions of refugees to flee for their lives and overwhelm the social fabric of EU countries. Bush/Obama/Hillary also likely helped to create the rise of ISIL (Obama at least publicly admitted his colossal mistake in destabilizing Libya by deposing Gaddafi yet Hillary has steadfastly refused to admit she was wrong). In fact she has proudly boasted about not losing a single American live in Libya (she obviously forgot about the murdered Ambassadorial staff).
Thanks to WikiLeaks also, we now know that Hillary privately acknowledged that a no fly zone in Syria will cost the loss of thousands of Syrian lives. And yet she is publicly advocating for a no fly zone. Syrian lives apparently are not as important as American ones to her.
The U.S. just sent 3 cruise missiles into Yemen, apparently in support of their close ally, the misogynistic Saudi Arabia. Thanks to WikiLeaks, we now know that Hillary had privately said Saudi Arabia was responsible for exporting Islamic extremism globally. And yet she supports them publicly, and has been selling them weapons and arms, again consistent with the WikiLeaks revelation that she believes a politician can have a different public and private policy. Did we all, including Simon, not criticize Harper for his warmongering and his hypocrisy?
Meanwhile, Iran has sent its navy in response to the U.S. military action in Yemen. And China has now sent its army into Syria openly in support of Russia against Obama and Hillary. If we want nuclear war with Russia, perhaps China too, my bet would be on Hillary, not Trump. Hillary the lesser of 2 evils? Many of us don't think so.
And, no, she will not allow the Sander's revolution if she wins. Again, the WikiLeaks revelations have shown how her supporters had conspired against Sanders and urged her to mislead the Sander's supporters in exchange for their votes.
hi GS...I don't know where people get the idea that Trump is less militaristic than Clinton. I don't disagree that the situation is Syria needs to be handled with kid gloves, but that is what Obama is doing. And there is no reason to believe that Clinton will change that policy. And while Trump claims to want to mend fences with the Russians, which would be a good thing, I don't trust him to do that. Because if you check out what he's saying about the need for a strong America, and take his unstable personality into account, and his threats to attack Iranian ships, I think he could get into a deadly confrontation with the Russians without even knowing what he is doing. It is a bad choice I admit, but I think that we're safer with Clinton...
hi anon 7:40...look I don't disagree with you that imposing a unilateral no-fly zone over Syria would be a recipe for catastrophe. But from what I've read of the Wiki papers they show her to be a somewhat cold but cautious figure. So what she said during the election campaign can be seen as mere posturing, and I still think she would be a steadier hand on the tiller....
hi RT...look you're also right, NATO which I see as an organization looking for a reason to exist, is a real problem. But while Clinton said that a show of strength is necessary to bring the Russians to the negotiating table, I can't see her being less cautious than Obama. And I simply can't see Trump as being a less dangerous alternative. He may sound soft on Russia but there are all kinds of ways he could trigger a confrontation without challenging the Russians directly. It's a complex world where a cautious diplomat is needed, and Clinton as flawed as he may be, is more qualified in my opinion to be that person....
hi TS...I can barely watch the American networks, the posturing, the confusion, the screaming surrogates. But I think Clinton has been demonstrating considerable strength under fire, and as I said above, we need a calm and experienced person in the White House , for if Trump should become President we would live in fear from one day to the other. And that's without even mentioning the chaos he could cause fro his own people, and for Canadians...
hi thwap....I'm sorry you feel that way, and I would be sorry to lose you as a reader after all these years. But I'm only being consistent with the principles that have always guided the way I approach politics. I'm not saying Trump bad Clinton good. I've made it abundantly clear that I consider Clinton a flawed candidate. But it is a binary choice, and I could never support a bigot, a misogynist, a xenophobe, a man who would eliminate the minimum wage, give billionaires like him even bigger tax breaks, and pander as he is pandering to the religious fanatics in the U.S. who want him to appoint reactionary Supreme Court justices who would destroy the advances made by the women's and gay movements. And lastly but not leastly is a rabid climate change denier who would kill any chances we have of saving our planet. If I sound a bit propagandistic these days it's only because I am fully engaged in the struggle to defeat the greater evil, at least as much as a Canadian can. I have always marched to the beat of my own drum and I intend to keep on doing so...
hi jrkrideau...look as I have said before I am no Cold War warrior, and I would like to see a new detente between the U.S. and Russia. But there is evidence that the Russians have been hacking American computers, and having the U.S. thrown into chaos could serve the geopolitical interests of Putin, who let's not forget is ruthless enough to bomb hospitals in Syria, and might think, with justification, that Trump is so ignorant and can be flattered so easily, he could wrap him around his little finger. And when I try to imagine a Trump or a Clinton presidency, I think that stability is best served by electing Hillary...
hi anon.. I disagree with everything you say, and you need to get your facts right. The U.S. fired three cruise missiles at a radar tracking station the other day only after the rebels or whoever fired missiles at a U.S. destroyer. They have also warned the Saudis that their support for then in the Yemen theatre is not unconditional. And since Trump had said he would blow Iranian ships out of the water for merely taunting the Americans, I hardly consider him less dangerous. And since he is so obviously mentally unstable he is far more likely to trigger a dangerous conflict, lead us all into the third world war, while bringing down the world economy, and setting his own country on fire. Finally, I don't think Clinton will be able to stop Sander's revolution, since the millennials who support Sanders will be an overwhelming force in the next election, and they will determine where the Democratic party goes...
hi JD...I hadn't heard of that, and if it's true then we're in real trouble. For although Putin is a sinister figure, he is a model of stability compared to Trump, and if Trump did become President and they were both on drugs we wouldn't stand chance. And I would have to resume building my bomb shelter deep in the Scottish highlands...
hi anon...I'm sorry I disagree with you, Trump is not just an imbecile, he is bigoted and evil. He is supported by neo-nazis, and should he take power him and his deplorables would turn that country into a living nightmare...
Post a Comment