The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Trump vs. Clinton

This is the problem that Democrats are ignoring:

It is simply not clear that Trump will harm more brown people than Clinton, because she has a record of being good with killing brown people in large numbers.

Now Trump has said all sorts of things at this point. Who knows what he’ll do? I get that, but here’s what I also get: We all know what Clinton will do.

If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.


Identity Politics and Interest


Reaping as One Sows: Brexit Edition


  1. Andre

    Maybe it might be good to get a gauge of how responsive they are to the more savvy members of each of their political parties. If either goes “off the reservation”, how would each respond to members of either’s political party trying to pull them back in. Trump has already shown this sensitivity (if you’ll allow me using that word with him!) with his screw up on that Mexican American judge. However, the Democrats may be less likely to publicly criticize Clinton, maybe privately, but I think she would be less likely to be responsive. It’s a conundrum.

  2. NLK

    Bill Clinton killed over a million Iraqis, including 500k children through collective punishment (sanctions), during his administration. His SoS, Madeline Albright went on 60 Minutes and said that killing 500k children was “worth it”. Hillary voted for the Iraq War, which has killed upwards of 1 million Iraqis. There is no doubt that Hillary is worse than Trump- that is not even in dispute if you follow logic. 2 million dead Iraqis is an obscenity- a major crime against humanity ranking up there with Pol Pot and in the top 10 worst atrocities of all time. Progressives, liberals, democrats, whatever you want to call them, are in complete denial about this, which makes them complicit.

    Hillary Clinton is worse than Trump. Period. If you disagree, you are delusional and/or in denial, and you are complicit.

  3. Ghostwheel

    Scott Adams (Dilbert) deconstructs the rise of Trump.

    Transcript and video:

  4. Bill Hicks

    Best political cartoon of the entire campaign.

  5. Ron Showalter

    Why is that seemingly rational people on the fake-left jettison any semblance or rationality once a little butthurt sets in – i.e., they don’t get their way?

    If you really honestly believe that the movements/trajectories of the fascist neoliberal war criminal Empire are determined by the election of a single person to the office of POTUS then it does sincerely call into question why anyone should read/listen to anything else that might come out of your mouth/pen.

    Come on, fake left!

    At least w/ once the betrayal of Obama seemed to set in, it appeared that MAYBE you guys were finally starting to see the larger picture and the futility of waging Quixotic battles against chimeras. But no….

    Here’s 2016 and the the windmills of “electoral choice”, “horse race”, “less evilism” and the rest of the attendant horseshit are once again spinning off their rotors.

    Too even in passing entertain ANY notion that ANY one person is going to seriously mitigate the US Empire’s bloody footprint on this planet is – given decades and decades of historical proof – the single most naive/embarrassing element of the Bernie mania/butt-hurt.

    It’s like talking to a conscientious person who tells you one minute that they’re not going to watch NFL games anymore b/c they don’t like the brain damaging aspects of the sport etc and the next minute they’re cramming a Patriots foam #1 finger down your throat. BRADY!!!!

    Oh well. I guess we’ll try again in 2020.

  6. markfromireland

    Since when has the American electorate ever given a shit about mass murder of brown people? And don’t even THINK of saying “Vietnam” support for that particular war dropped amongst Americans once it was clear the USA was losing it.

  7. cripes

    Yeah, although I can’t see myself voting for Trump, I’d rather overdose on fentanyl than vote for Clinton, for all the reasons noted above.

    Living most of my life in NYC, it’s no secret that he is a greedy, rapacious narcissist, that is to say, a New York real estate developer. A loudmouth, ignorant, racist turd and conman cut from the same cloth as his racist father, who Woody Guthrie wrote verses to expiate his hatred of the man, who was Woody’s landlord.

    But none of this compares to the genocidal psychopathy of Hillary Clinton and her entourage.

    The woman ran the state department like she was Secretary of War. In the Wehrmacht.

  8. markfromireland

    @ Ron Showalter: You and the resident gadfly are made for one another.

  9. V. Arnold

    Ron Showalter:
    Too even in passing entertain ANY notion that ANY one person is going to seriously mitigate the US Empire’s bloody footprint on this planet is – given decades and decades of historical proof – the single most naive/embarrassing element of the Bernie mania/butt-hurt.

    Well said:
    Pin the Tail on the Donkey anyone?
    The clown car show every 4 years is past its expire date and the proletariate refuses to wake up.
    This too will have no surprises with the barbarism continuing ad infinitum…

  10. Ché Pasa

    A-List Democrats aren’t ignoring that problem at all. Simplify the choice to “ban or bomb” and promote “bomb” for the hell of it (literally) and there you are. Victory!

    But the idea that Trump is less horrid and indeed more acceptable than Madame because he hasn’t bombed anybody that we know of — yet — is absurd. This is simply wrong on every level and needs to be stamped out. You’re just as dead in the end whether blown up by a Hillary-or-(whomever) Drone or having all your vitals extracted by a Hillary-or-TrumpMoneyFunnel, or whatever else he’s got or they’ve got in mind for exploiting the masses. I don’t accept the premise that it’s better to die a slave. You’re just as dead.

    Trump will not be allowed to wield the levers of governance even if he is elected — which he won’t be. Hillary has already jiggled those level to a limited degree, but even she will be constrained by the interests of her funders and the institutional inertia of government and its layers and layers of protective cloaking.

    She isn’t going to change that — because she’s part of it.

    In other words, she will carry out what her funders and the inertial weight of the government itself want and will permit her to do. It won’t be pretty. But when has any president in our lifetime done otherwise?

  11. Steeleweed

      Trump is a 4-door, brass-plated, air-conditioned, turbo-charged, 12-cylinder, 5-speed assholel Don’t kid yourself – his instincts are as just as barbaric as Clinton’s. The only reason he hasn’t killed as many brown people as Clinton is that he hasn’t had access to the levers of military power. You want to give him that access?
      My thinking is that the Sanders phenomenon, even as it came up short, indicates a growing discontent and might serve to rein in some of Hillary’s worst actions, faced with in-party criticism. To Trump, criticism would just be adding fuel to the fire of his egomania and provoke him more.
    &nbsp  And I’m not at all sure Sanders would have been a better choice. IMHO he’s out of his weight class in reaching for the Presidency. I supported him simply because I feel he cares about people, not because I thought he could win or make any difference if he did. My own take is we’re too far down the rabbit hole for anyone to get us out.
      Empires die when there are no longer any good choices. Unfortunately, there’s no place safe to run to. Sooner or later the bombers and/or the money-vacuum will find you. Being elderly, I can probably duck and dodge though my remaining years but I pity my grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

  12. reslez

    There go the liberals, confusing their prejudice against Trump with Clinton’s facts on the ground. I would never vote for Trump, I will once again vote for Stein, but I understand the impulse. Everyone knows Trump was a Democrat for years and regularly ridicules and calls out other Republicans. Meanwhile Clinton never fails to tell us how bizarre and childish and beyond the pale and unrealistic Bernie Sanders is. A vote for Clinton is like a vote for Obama in 2012. The triumph of brand marketing over experience. The Democrats have never called Obama to account in the 7 years of his presidency. They will never call Clinton to account. They ache for any excuse to fall in line behind their campaign donors, rubbing Americans’ face in the fact of their own defeat. Obama nominated a Republican for the Supreme Court, one who affirmed Citizens United. This is what establishment Democrats truly are. Facts on the ground.

    Sanders supporters will be put back in their box to collect dust until the next election when they are pulled out, pilloried, and harangued once again to cast their votes for evil. Unless they stand for their principles here and now.

  13. reslez

    Adding: As far as racism is concerned Trump has said ugly things. This is why I don’t support him. But once again we have Trump’s words vs Clinton’s actions. She and Obama have never done anything for the Black community that didn’t result in more people of color thrown in prison and out of their homes. People of color lost far more economic ground than whites over the last 7 years, meanwhile the prison complex is unprecedented in human history.

  14. bruce wilder

    the electorate are not given a lot of capacity to discriminate, in any sense. The only consequence is the giving or taking away of office (and that assumes heroically that the vote is honestly counted and allowed to decide — which as we know, conspicuously doesn’t always happen).

    the voters always have only two effective buttons: keep our guy(s) and throw the bums out with one useless forlorn hope button, third-party who is never going to win

    Hillary Clinton’s campaign has aligned itself with the keep our guy button and Trump has promised himself as a super-duper version of throw the bums out that will result in breaking the system. The semiotics of this could not be clearer. “I’m with Hillary” and the close alignment with the incumbent, who, with roughly 50-50 approval – disapproval ratings, is regarded as curiously popular in his twilight year. Trump campaigns noisily against the Media, against the Establishment and, now, against the Establishment’s candidate.

    They are both reactionary conservative candidates — just different flavors. One is a complacent reactionary; the other is a radical reactionary.

    Do people want to keep a system that doesn’t work or do they want to trade it in for what is behind Door Number 2?

  15. Build a wall across the southern border, or deport Central Americans almost as fast as they enter the country?

    (I know that’s Obama, not Hillary, but still)

  16. Hugh

    “Feeling the Bern” might have felt good for many progressives, or whatever you want to call yourself, for a while, but with Clinton the presumptive nominee, with her coronation delayed but not derailed, reality is beginning to set back in. Even if Sanders had won the nomination and the election, his ability to effect real change would have been small and thwarted at every turn because the problem is not who is or is not the President. The problem is the system. It is the rich, the elites, the corporations, Wall Street, the banks, and all that they own and control: the Congress, the courts, the media, the two political parties, the bureaucrats, academia, and of course, the economy.

    Sanders was never going to win the nomination. A corrupt, supremely cynical Democratic party machine was never going to let a little thing like democracy get in its way or choose its nominee. As Emma Goldman said so long ago, “If voting changed anything, they would make it illegal.” The Democratic selection process was all kayfabe and kabuki. To say that it was rigged is like saying the financial meltdown of 2008 was a hiccup. Let us call it what it was, a masterpiece of corruption: the superdelegates, the early small, unrepresentative states followed by Southern states Clinton would win in the primary but lose in the general, the lack of debates and the timing of the few which were held, the mess and manipulation of the caucases, simply throwing out the rules as in Nevada when all else fails, the failure to report the actual tallies from the caucases, the superdelegates, the closed primaries, the voter suppression, reducing the number of polling places, changing their location, purging voter rolls, provisional balloting, restrictive registration rules, the superdelegates, the corrupt backdoor funnelling of money to Clinton’s campaign through the Hillary Victory fund, and having a Clinton operative Debbie Wasserman Schultz heading the DNC. Add to these either the lack of coverage or negative coverage of Sanders by the media (even when he won) and contrast this with the positive coverage of Clinton (even when she lost), the lack of real investigative reporting of or even curiosity about the scandals swirling around her, principally the Clinton Global Initiative, her private email server, her ties to Wall Street, and her speaking “fees”, or her much vaunted record and experience which mainly involved being Bill Clinton’s wife, a mediocre Senator, and a bad Secretary of State (Libya, support for dictators around the world, more war, bad trade agreements like the TPP, and projects like the Keystone pipeline).

    The Republican primary, on the other hand, was far more democratic and resulted in (to the feigned horror of the Republican Establishment) Trump. But Trump as President would be under the same constraints as a Sanders’ Presidency. Of course, first he has to be elected, and that takes money, a lot of money, and despite the hurricane of bluster, he is not going to sacrifice any significant portion of his own wealth to do it. We can already see this money dynamic reining him in in the current Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde back and forth of the off the cuff Trump versus the teleprompter Trump.

    In the end, the powers that be will not be brooked, the status quo will not be challenged. Though more of the same is what is killing us, nothing will change outside of a few atmospherics. Tump will be leashed and muzzled although he might be let out from time to time. The appearance that he is sane only needs to be maintained until the election. After that, the system will smother him. As for Clinton, she is the system. She will write off the white working, and especially male, vote, wrap herself up in Obama to get the African-American vote, coast with the kneejerk support of the Democratic tribalists and the older voters she currently enjoys, talk about glass ceilings for the older women’s vote, expect Trump’s racism to deliver her the Latino vote, think that TINA and using Warren as an attack dog will bypass Sanders and be enough of a bone to progressives, and name someone like Sherrod Brown VP to clinch one of the swing states.

    And Sanders? There is already a lot of progressive rationalizing out there. I have seen the argument that he feels bound to endorse Clinton (although some hope tepidly) because “he is a man of his word”. What utter hogwash. Sanders has no obligation to support a process or a nominee that stuck it to him at every turn. On the other hand, he does have a very real obligation to his supporters who believed in him, contributed to him, and voted for him. I have seen too that Sanders’ candidacy was all about movement building. This too is horse hockey. Sanders’ campaign exposed the complete corruption of the Democratic primary process and of the party’s leaders, but it has yet to morph into a movement. And if Sanders endorses Clinton, he will effectively be putting a nail in the coffin of that movement, not to mention his credibility. Movement building is hard work. First, you need a compelling and unifying vision. Sanders never had this. Wanting the system to be less unfair, however much it upset the powers that be, did not fundamentally challenge their power. Second, movement first, party second. A party comes from a movement. Its program and candidates come from the movement, not the other way around. Although alternately ignored and mocked by the Establishment, Sanders’ run did raise some important issues and appealed to many people. It could serve as a way to jumpstart a movement, but not unless and until Sanders breaks with the Democrats and establishes both his own and the movement’s independence. If he does not, this movement will be just another stillborn, might-have-been. And we will be left to pick up the pieces and start again. As for this election and choice between the Democratic or the Republican horror? Who really cares?

  17. Stormcrow

    Now Trump has said all sorts of things at this point. Who knows what he’ll do?

    If there is one single thing the 20’th century should have taught us, it is this:

    When an authoritarian tells people what he intends to do once in power, particularly when it sounds like crazy hyperbole, believe it.

  18. markfromireland

    @ Stormcrow June 12, 2016

    So on the basis of what they’ve said and in Clinton’s case not only said but done done repeatedly which crazed authoritarian would you be more worried about. The crazed authoritarian without the intimate close working relationship with the military and security establishments or the one with that intimate close working relationship with the military and security establishments and who publicly glories in her intimate close working relationship with the military and security establishments?

    The USA in 2016 is not the Weimar Republic and there’s no Hindenburg analogue eager to hand over the chancellorship either.

    Yes those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. What about those who draw ahistorical parallels? What error will they make? How about the error they’re most likely to make is to be looking the wrong way as their country’s own homegrown tyranny arises?

    A Clinton or a Cruz is far more worrying than a Trump.

  19. I can’t vote for a neoliberal warmonger again.

    But I will vote. Jill Stein or write in Sanders.

  20. Ché Pasa

    Hugh’s analysis is correct.

    Both Big Party candidates are horrid, the system is irredeemably corrupt, and Sanders is no Saviour.

    So what must we the Rabble do?

  21. Josh

    Re: Stormcrow & MFI. If we’re on the subject of ahistorical parallels, I remember being told as a teenager that Saddam Hussein was the next Hitler. That didn’t lead anywhere productive, either.

  22. Ian Welsh

    The problem with Trump is that he has contradicted himself numerous times. So… who knows. He’s been consistent on his wall, he’s been fairly consistent on trade, otherwise, all over the damn place.

  23. markfromireland

    @ Ian

    Oh indeed, but he’s also been fairly positive about Putin, and far less of a warmonger than Clinton. Clinton at present is in full Putin is HITLER! (only worse) mode. I can see Clinton deliberately provoking a war with Russia. I can’t see Trump doing it, not deliberately anyway.

    I don’t care what they do domestically their people deserve them. Actually they deserve worse but Clinton or Trump is what they’ve got.

  24. Ian Welsh

    Yes, Clinton appears deranged on Putin.

  25. different clue


    Your argument appears internally contradictory between your first paragraph and the rest of your paragraphs.

    In your first paragraph you say that between a President Clinton or a President Sanders there would be no difference anyway because the Established Powers would not let Sanders do a single Sanders thing, so no difference would be made anyway.

    But in your second paragraph you note that the Established Powers did everything they could to prevent Sanders from getting the nomination. That would indicate that they thought Sanders actually would use the Presidency to do things the Established Powers would not like.
    And that would say that a who-is-the-President difference actually WOULD make a difference. And since the Established Powers agree with that, they worked to prevent Sanders from any chance of being nominated.

    So which do you actually believe . . . woulda made no difference anyway? Or woulda made a difference?

  26. NLK

    These Orlando shootings would never have happened if Hillary Clinton and her rabid right wing ilk didn’t vote for the Iraq War. Hillary supporters are scum.

  27. markfromireland

    @ NLK – Not that I disagree with you about Clinton and her supporters but Omar Mateen’s background is Afghan not Iraki.

  28. Ron Showalter

    You think the Orlando “shootings” – like Paris, San Bernadino, Sandy Hook, etc etc – was a bona fide/real “terrorist” event?

    How adorable.

    And then I wonder why/how TPTB are able to keep pulling off the same stunts.

    Seriously go do some homework.

  29. hvd

    @Ron Showalter

    Here’s where you go off the tracks. There is little doubt that events like Orlando are part of the splatter pattern consequence of TPTB policies. Given this there is little need for the arch-conspiratorial view that you insist on in which every act is the direct result of TPTB planning and direct action. The difficulty of proving these latter interferes with the persuasiveness of the first premise which is enough to condemn TPTB.

  30. wendy davis

    @ Hugh: the Sanders ‘revolution’ seems to be in the Bern Bag already, and I reckon it was after he met with the Commander-in-Chief.

    “Bernie Sanders will meet with his rival Hillary Clinton on Tuesday to discuss whether her campaign will include progressive ideas like his, he said Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press.

    “I simply want to get a sense of what kind of platform she will be supporting, whether she will be vigorous in standing up for working families and the middle class, moving aggressively in climate change, healthcare for all, making public colleges and universities tuition-free,” said Sanders.

    Sanders said that after the meeting he will decide if he will quit the presidential race or not. ”

    Because platform planks are soooo important. Of course demanding free college tuition will provide him w/ a little wiggle room, as the Queen is a’gin it.

    @ Ché Pasa: Yes, what are we the Rabble to do? Stop believing in the quadrennial electoral circus, for one thing, and try to make alternative living arrangements outside the system. I used to seriously believe the Maya’s prediction that the world is on the cusp of a revolution of higher consciousness. That belief often waivers, of course. But if there’s a revolution, it’ll be global, and if lazy-ass willfully self-deluded Amerikans get on board, it’ll be on the caboose car.

  31. Ron Showalter


    Yup,be it the sham that is US electoral politics or the sham that is all things the GWOT/terrorism, one can always count on the smug fake-left commentariat to tell us all what is and what isn’t real, huh?

    You guys are like batting 1.000 or something, right?

    Again, do some homework. Srsly.

  32. hvd

    @Ron Showalter

    Not sure what you are raving about. I am not arguing with your assertions that US electoral politics or the GWOT/GWOD are shams. Not disagreeing with your assertions re their consequences. I am disagreeing with your apparent belief that each and every act is the direct consequence of particularized planning and control. That puts us in a difficult proof situation and opens us to the usual blather regarding conspiracy nuts. The consequences of the policy failures of our “leaders” are all too obvious without having to assert that anything untoward that takes place is a TPTB “stunt”. By insisting that these particular events are bought and paid for directly by the TPTB you distract from their obvious use of these events for their own propaganda purposes.

    I don’t need to believe that the TPTB bought and paid for Omar Marteen’s actions to understand that they both created a universe in which this is a likely event and one which they can take advantage of. I am already convinced of that. Not sure that you can prove direct involvement. Even if you could it would scarcely change their culpability.

    Please stop calling names and pointing fingers at people who agree with you in the main. I am merely dubious about specific conspiracies while in agreement with you about the arc and consequences of the TPTB’s actions and as certain as you of their culpability.

  33. Ron Showalterf


    If then you agree w/ me in the main, the why don’t you give me a modicum of respect when I tell you that given the track record of TPTB from Gladio, 9/11 and forward to Orlando, all astute individuals should understand that a consequence living in the evil Empire is that any and all stories should be immediately greeted with outright hostility and contempt until there is reason/proof to think otherwise especially when said stories support the agendas of TPTB and are trumpeted by their minions in the media.

    So, the thousands of hours that I spent researching topics and that brought me to conclusions you share was time well spent but the thousands of hours coming to conclusions that you don’t agree with is “going off the rails”, huh? Easily dismissed because to YOU and many others those conclusions are a bridge just too far?

    Again, I am being provocative in hopes that you maybe will dig a little deeper and not settle for what you hear the official story is because the lies start from the very creation of reality itself. That’s what Rove told us, that this is the world we are living in now and if you indeed look deeper you will see that they meant it.

  34. hvd

    Again, there was absolutely no disrespect with regard to the functioning of the system in place and with regard to looking askance at the information provided by it.

    My only objection is with your aggression directed at anyone who is not wholly committed to the notion that this system is directly implicated in planning, directing and carrying out any of the multiple incidents that it takes advantage of.

    That Hitler was directly involved in setting the Reichstag fire is interesting but unnecessary for understanding his culpability for everything that led to it and flowed from it. You don’t have to prove that GWB directly planned and carried out the destruction of the WTC for me to understand his culpability in the days events and everything that flowed from it. In fact I think that engaging in an argument as to these specific facts undermines the far more important general argument as to culpability. This is not to say that I don’t believe that this system engages in false flag operations etc., just that I don’t need that to understand the evils of this system.

  35. Hugh

    different clue, it’s not that hard. Those who comprise the system are inherently anti-populist. They didn’t want either Trump or Sanders. But it’s not like they don’t have a Plan B and C and so on. They would prefer to stop people like these early, but if not early, later works for them too. They stopped Sanders from being the nominee and they are already reining in Trump, and all this before the conventions have even taken place, and months before the election. But say that somehow Sanders was elected as a Democrat. His agenda would be scuttled by the usual partisan infighting, and by Congressional Democrats quietly, or maybe not so quietly, stabbing him in the back.

    In general, a President has about a year to get their “big ideas” enacted with a little wiggle room. For example, the great healthcare debate began in March 2009 and the first version of Obamacare passed the House in November. Wrangling between the House and Senate and between Democrats and Republicans pushed final passage to March 2010. Indeed this window of opportunity is often further telescoped to the first 100 days for the initial roll out. When you consider that it takes a month or two for a President to settle into the White House and set up operation, the effective time is much shorter. Consider too that each initiative dilutes the President’s influence and splits the public’s attention, and support. Sometimes under conditions of national emergency, more can be done (FDR and the Great Depression) or not (Obama and the meltdown).

    The Congress, of course, also has to act, and it has a variety of ways not to. Some or all of a Sanders agenda could simply be rejected by the Republicans. This would be easy if they controlled one of the chambers. But even if they didn’t, Congressional Democrats with no great loyalty to Sanders might not fight too hard to overcome the procedural obstacles the Republicans raised. Or they might choose to run out the clock: hold some hearings and suggest eventually a commission to study the issue and report back in a year. It would take a while to select members for the commission. The members would likely be at odds. The scope and funding of the commission would make its task difficult. If there was a final report, the commission might be unable to agree on it. The result: a year gone, the public’s attention moved on, and the initiative dead.

    To Wendy Davis, Sanders has always caved in the past. That was why some of us were so sceptical of his run. I think the narrative is forming before our eyes. Trump must be defeated. In exchange for a few vague promises and a few meaningless sentences in the party platform, he will declare that he did the best he could, the fight goes on, blah, blah, blah, and he will quietly pull the plug on his campaign and his followers. The only alternative to this is that he break with Clinton and the Democrats and makes an independent run for the Presidency. I see no evidence for this. And it would take a major effort and with very little time to get on the ballot in all 50 states even if he ran as a Green.

  36. Peter*


    I often wonder when reading comments such as Ron posts if this is a real tinfoil hatter or a minion of TPTB who keep this diversion alive and useful for denial of the actual crimes they commit.

    If 9/11 was an inside job as some people continue to believe then it had to be instigated during the Clinton regime yet few people want to do more than project the crime onto GWB.

  37. “Who is saying, ‘You know what we need to do is pick up the people who got us into the Iraq War! I mean, they’re geniuses!’”

    Everyone who voted for Hillary is saying that!

  38. Both people support Iraq.

    Both parties in the UK support staying in EU.

    The is a pattern emerging here. They are not bright, but they do know what causes them pain.

  39. Ron Showalter

    So, now that the smoke/bullshit has cleared re: Orlando a little bit, I’m just gonna put this here – this, being a nice round-up of all the utter horseshit concerning this latest “terror attack”, there are others- and then hang up and wait for the apologies from Peter*, hvd and others who proved once again that fake-left is just a susceptible to propaganda as their right-wing counterparts.


  40. Ron Showalter

    Oh, yeah, and it’s been confirmed that just as in nearly EVERY single “terrorist attack” the “terrorist” was approached by the FBI and introduced to informants who posed as terrorists.

    Funny, how this ISIS dude also supported Hezbollah, huh? Especially since ISIS and Hezbollah are at war with one another? Nah, no biggie.

    Similarly, I’m sure all of you were aware that the Tsarnev brothers’ uncle was Graham Fuller, y’know, the CIA Station Chief in Kabul during the rise of all things “radical Islam”, right? Gee, doesn’t Omar have a sketchy father, too?

    But I’m sure it’s all just really scary, scary ISIS that is really behind all of this evil that I’m so scared of, right? Just the normal blowback that we would expect, huh?

  41. Lisa

    I’ll stand by my original prediction, it is Trump’s election to lose against Clinton. If he has half a brain then he will win.

    Samders would have easily won against Trump but Clinton and her campaign strategy are disasters in the making for the Democrats.
    She is repeating the standard Clinton strategy, throw the left of the Dems to the wall and appeal to the ‘moderate Republicans’, reasoning that the left has nowhere else to go.

    But that left has had enough of endless betrayals by the establishment Dems and many simply wont vote for her (or will vote for a third candidate) and I expect a surprising number will actually vote for Trump

    If Trump then gets the vast majority of the ‘usual’ GOP votes and gets the majority of the poor/working class white vote that traditionally voted Dem (or nothing) and at least some of the rest of the working class vote then he will win.

    His biggest single weakness is the women’s vote, bit if he is canny then he could get a fair proportion of that provided he is prepared to lose some of the extreme right votes (a simple calc shows that is an easy choice to make), reversing the logic of ‘nowhere else for them to go’.

    If he was very smart he could win by a large majority, but he will screw up enough to make it fairly close.

  42. Peter*


    I know your people at the Company want the rubes to believe you are omnipotent and can create Manchurian Candidates at will and some rubes swallow this BS and think they are informed. The six degrees of separation that shows up in these cases is interesting but meaningless but that won’t stop the speculation and jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions it produces.

  43. Ron Showalter

    Hah! I couldn’t have crafted a better, more exemplary response from the smug fake-left if I tried. Bravo!

    Here’s the problem you and the fake-left have: you’re so brainwashed by the media that you think your’re SMARTER than TPTB and, therefore, once you and your band of merry do-gooders gain enough access to the microphones of the media – all bow to the INTERNET – well-meaning serfs will OBVIOUSLY just come over to your side. Look at the Bernie movement, right? You guys were soooooo close. If it wasn’t for those rotten kids, huh? Chortle.

    Unlike the fake-left – and I use the term b/c there exists no real left movement in the West – the libertarian right at least has the perspicacity to always remember that they are dealing with an entity – the bloodthirsty, war criminal US Empire – that harbors no misgivings about murdering every last one of us/foreigners if that is what stands between them and their plans. Although it can take on exaggerated paranoid manifestations at times, at the very least they correctly fear the power that these insane PTB have over them and harbor no illusions as to their willingness to use said power.

    So, there’s that. After years of conditioning, the blind spots of the Western fake-left are baked-in at this point in time as you guys as a group continue to believe that you will change things given the sham vehicle of electoral politics that TPTB give you to make you feel effective and smart. Throw in a smattering of allowed peaceful protest and you guys actually believe you’re making a difference.

    Sing it David Van Cortlandt Crosby – yes, those Van Cortlandts – “We Can Change the World”!!

    As to omnipotence, if I had a weapon that I was effectively using against you that you did not even admit/know that I was using against you, wouldn’t that approach levels of being omnipotent? Bullshit “event” after bullshit “event” from 9/11 on down today keeps occurring each with their own gaping holes of documentary evidence and lack of common-sense investigations yet the seemingly most “savvy” people on the fake-left buy into TPTB’s version of what went down hook, line and sinker.Every single time.

    So, if being able to continuous stage/manage “events” – in broad daylight at times – that never are truly investigated by anyone, that advance the agendas of TPTB and that are accepted via the MSM even by those people who are skeptical of the MSM – is not being omnipotent then it’s pretty effing close, brother. Again, they are defining YOUR reality and you don’t even know it.

    How does that feel?

    Seriously, do your homework and quit looking like a bunchy of dufuses, fake-lefties. Go read up on each of the events – 9/11, Boston, Sandy Hook, Paris (btw, my fave there is the CCT V video of an operative clearly throwing a firecracker through the window of the Cafe Nostra before she enters and pretends to be a victim), etc etc – that have defined life under in the evil empire and go down the rabbit hole of investigation. You’re going to find that way more often than not that there are indeed legitimate vital and difficult questions that need be asked/answered about each event before we can safely say we understand what is going on and how it’s happening. Certainly there are crazies and things too far at times but being discerning information consumers you all should be able to put on your judgement hats and make a go of it.

    For example: why look it now appears that an eye-witness is saying that there were 5 people involved in the Orlando attack. Weird, huh?

    Again, there’s too much homework for each of you to do on your own for me to point out everything but for Christ’s sake put aside your arrogance/know-it-all-ism and do it.

    Yeah, I work for the Company, Peter, and I’m paid to steer you all here at Ian’s blog AWAY from the official stories that support TPTB’s agenda especially since you’re all so cosy and smart being spoonfed facts by the MSM that you all just hate – forgot Bernie already? Nice logic, there.

  44. Peter*


    This is interesting, not, and as I see you are paid by the word I won’t continue to contribute to your delusions or manipulations whichever it may be.

  45. DMC

    Looks like a job for Scully and Mulder! But seriously Ron, if you’re trolling for dupes to “go get the dynamite”, there are are other places on the net where your much more likely to get some traction.

  46. Ronald Showalter

    I know it’s all really funny to some – about as funny as me watching fake-lefties simultaneously bitch about how the MSM and the Establishment are rigging the system against them all the while they rabidly lick every last ounce of vomit that is spewed in their direction by said MSM and the Establishment when it’s “terrorism” or an attack on Killery – boo hiss -, right?

    Yup, I’m the embarrassing nutter while the serious commentators are the Bernie fanbois such as those over at NC – and Yves herself – who are literally creaming in their pants right now over the hilariously farcical, totally unprovable/nonsensical hearsay rumor that Vladimir Putin is personally going to destroy Killery or something something by releasing her emails which he hacked or something because some guy said something and something else, huh?

    Serious, fake-lefties, if you think I’m unhinged go read the story and comments over at NC – especially Yves’ – regarding the above and really ask yourself if you all haven’t completely lost any sense of perspective and the ability to discern reality. Embarrassing.

  47. Ivory Bill Woodpecker

    When are Peter and Ron going to quit pretending and just get a room already?

    Seriously, it’s adorable.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén