Tag: Impeachment

When Desperation Demands a Plan “E” – What a Coup Can Do for You

I am a detail guy, so sometimes I get lost in the rabbit trails just 50 foot above the tree line doing my CSI work, but then there is something that demands that I soar to 10,000 foot or more to get a handle on the big picture. I wonder is that is what is behind the saying ‘can’t see the forest for the trees’?

Retired USAF lieutenant colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D. has an article on Lew Rockwell today that helped me see the big picture. While I want to be aware of the details of life (micro and macro, local/state/national and global) I also do not want to be caught off guard by the trends.

Karen offers that there have been four major efforts so far in the coup that has split DC in two and a fifth effort that is already underway:

  • If the predictable election of 2016 fails to deliver the controllable neoconservative president,
  • if a pseudo-McCarthyite campaign against an economically recovering and energy-independent Russia fails again,
  • if putting your own guys in the National Security Council also fails, and
  • if an impeachment seems likewise doomed to peter out, what do you have left?

If you are a war-whoring, petrodollar-preserving, rapture-ready, neoconservative globalist…. well, you’re in luck!

  • President Pence is ready to step in.

Yes, the war party, the CIA/FBI/Deep State, a majority of Republicans and Democrats, the MIC , many evangelical Christians and all those that hate peace are aligned as never before. Their collective effort is focused to:

… stop Trump’s early promises to put America first, bring our troops home, secure borders, and spend the American taxpayer bounty on American production and infrastructure – have paved the way for a wholesale public acceptance of the neoconservative agenda.

If you doubt that these state-centric actors just happen to be able to align the stars and have MSM mimic its very words .. consider just one element of the apparatus that is a parasite to this country:

The CIA, now nearly 80 years old, has become a global power, with global influence. It should surprise no one that the CIA is also a major influence over US territory, the US Government, and the very opinions and perspectives of the average US citizen.  Media and entertainment, technology and communications, access to cash, total information awareness of our money, movements, thoughts and speech, with the complete opacity of its own budget and actions – all of this this is part of the CIA’s mission today.  If you thought it was just other country’s riots, assassinations and regime changes, you are behind the times.

Talk about power and influence .. and a whole lot of sociopaths all rolled into one, these people and this collective will not be going away any time soon, and they are not susceptible to the results of elections either (like anything is) .. but I digress.

Now about VP Mike Pence as a hedge to keep things status-quo back home in the old USA:

Mike Pence was a predictable vice-presidential choice.  A nondescript statist, evangelical “good” man, he served his role as a non-threatening, mildly competent second.  He would also be a fourth or fifth tier hedge against the uncontrollable populist and hearty sinner Donald Trump, a man who had never won an election in his life before 2016.  The CIA has decades of experience in choosing presidents, and vice presidents, manipulating both campaigns and popular opinion, creating crises on demand, and surveilling citizens and parties and candidates – in other countries.  The unexpected spontaneous and massive patriotic crowds convening for Trump throughout the 2016 campaign alone must have told the CIA what was written on the wall.  Even with then CIA Director Brennan’s assistance, and that of the FBI, Hillary couldn’t catch the imagination of voters, or bring them out to see her preach, even when she spoke in our native accents.

While Trump has been elusive enough combating the first four efforts listed above, there has been damage to what he can actually impact that would bring him anywhere close to what he promised on the election path:

In these four failures to bring down Trump, the deep state/CIA alliance has indeed achieved much, and won much. Trump has been constrained in his efforts to fulfill his most popular domestic initiatives, while the continued direct and indirect attacks on him in the mainstream, left-leaning “independent” and government media have worn down his popular support. Independents and libertarians who may have leaned Trumpward have all but peeled away and are looking at other parties and candidates. NeverTrumpers already favored Pence, and that was a major reason for his inclusion on the 2016 ticket. Troop deployments, Pentagon funding and interventionist wars have all been reignited.  The Federal Reserve, once a Trump target, is enthusiastically burning up the printing presses, with very little mainstream discussion and with Trump applauding, not auditing.  The upcoming nuclear destruction of Iran and the unleashing of a long wave of war and terror is just around the corner.

So if you are the CIA, you can’t just duplicate what you did in the 1950s (assassinate Iran’s elected president) or in the 1960s (rub out JFK who threatened to splinter the CIA into the wind) you have to get innovative:

Who will best serve the deep state/CIA/petrodollar empire in November 2020 and beyond? Trump, if he lives long enough will be re-elected by actual voters, and as a lame duck he may prove difficult. The Democratic field is split between reliable lackeys and unreliable ones, and while wars may be ensured, there’s nothing the CIA hates more than unpredictability. What to do with the gift of four failed domestic operations against Trump?

The answer is, devise a health event (mental or physical or both) that results in a sitting President Pence just in time for a reasonably short campaign, in a time of war, against an uninspiring array of old white man from a divided opposition party.

Plan E. This is the last resort the CIA has available up its sleeve. The common person on the street sees Trump and Pence as one in the same. Nothing could be further from the truth. I really hope we do not see the day when Pence is president, like Hillary, their view is the more war around the world, the better.

So how does this play into the incredible events of the last week when the US executive branch can just go drone a military leader of another country that we are not even “legally” at war with? You have to know the back story that MSM fails in their journalism to provide the American public:

… career operational CIA Gina “Chemical” Haspel and her sidekick, former 30-year CIA man, evidence destroyer, fellow torturer, and current CIA contractor Jose Rodriguez are already spending more time briefing and conspiring with Mike Pence than Donald Trump ..

There you go. When your VP starts to be involved in things without you, you have to know that something is up. In my mind, Trump has his hands full and has enemies at every turn. The only things that holds him back is:

  1. self-preservation (he knows the story of JFK)
  2. brainwashing (with neo-cons 360, he readily comes under their influence in time)

We have seen this full on with the decision to drone murder an Iranian general on a peace mission in Iraq and the Iraqi general host:

His manipulation into the assassination of Kassem Soleimani, who after defeating the stated US enemy ISIS in the region, was a messenger and architect of a detente in his last visit to Baghdad, but also representing another step away from the petrodollar, was pure CIA textbook.  Tell him what you want (true or not), nurture a sense of urgency, and know your target in order to psychologically manipulate him.

So like a tragic play, here we are on 11JAN2020 where Trump’s week ahead involves impeachment proceedings. I am sure that there is plenty of stress .. so …

… if Trump takes a break or sees a doctor now, our public suspicions of mental and physical incompetence are 100% confirmed, and we “expect” his imminent decline from the stage. The “surprise” strike on Soleimani has given the Senate a new “Constitutional” reason to be angry with Trump, so it improves the chances of a serious trial, and even removal from office. It’s a win-win because even if not removed, the Senate trial, and Trump’s predictable reaction to it, will serve to explain away a stroke, embolism, heart attack, or mental breakdown, all leading to a welcome peacefulness and stability of an ascendant Mike Pence.

Just know that Karen’s last line was pure sarcasm. I guess all us veterans have this baked into our character as a result of our experiences.

I am not a fan of Pence as you probably can tell. A dangerous man because he fully buys into the zeal, passion and noble cause to usher in the “End Times” on an express lane.

Pence, an evangelical neoconservative who deserves to be President as it is surely God’s Will, will also need support from his deep state friends Gina Haspel and Mike Pompeo. He will have it in spades. The warfare-welfare empire is saved for another day.

The anticipated fallout of a Pence presidency:

Property values will continue to rise in the five counties surrounding D.C., Americans will continue to get poorer and angrier, and in their frustration and fear, many will even demand more state assistance, and probably a draft. A new kind of draft, whereby soldiers can “earn” student loan debt relief, and the like. Socialism, American-style, who can oppose that? What fun we can expect under a Pence presidency, and I give him a second and maybe even a third term.

This is not said to scare anyone, just a reality check on what kind of America to expect in the 2020s with someone like Pence (or Hillary) driving.

It is my grand-kids who I would weep for, another generation of cannon fodder for the war party elite to use and abuse.

When will this cycle ever stop?

-SF1

Washington DC: The Capital of Hypocrisy – When BS is Called Truth

It would be entertaining if it were not so sad and dangerous. Our political class, enables by the elites, scurry around pointing fingers at people assuming that no one can remember the past few years, let alone the past few decades.

Remember Democrats, the “peace” party? Well, they identify as the “war” party now. That transition was amazingly fast and all the sheep that identify with their blue sticker stayed true to blue.

Apparently, Moon of Alabama (MoA) has been following the impeachment hearings, something that I would not waste my own time on, and noted some points of hypocrisy that only comes out when politicians open their mouths.

“It is clearly in our national interest to deter further Russian aggression,” Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and a decorated Vietnam War veteran, said in explaining why Trump’s decision to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to the most immediate target of Russian expansionism didn’t align with U.S. policy.

But at a time when Democrats are simultaneously eager to influence public opinion in favor of ousting the president and quietly apprehensive that their hearings could stall or backfire, the first round felt more like the dress rehearsal for a serious one-act play than the opening night of a hit Broadway musical.

“In direct contravention of U.S. interests” says the NBC and quotes a member of the permanent state who declares “it is clearly in our national interest” to give weapons to Ukraine.

But is that really in the national U.S. interest? Who defined it as such?

President Obama was against giving weapons to Ukraine and never transferred any to Ukraine despite pressure from certain circles. Was Obama’s decision against U.S. national interest? Where are the Democrats or deep state members accusing him of that?

Russian aggression can be summed up in the following map:

Oh crap … wrong map? No, correct map, just a member of the permanent state talking BS .. “Russian aggression” .. pleeeeaaaasssseee.

MoA also points out who gets to set national foreign policy:

The U.S. constitution “empowers the President of the United States to propose and chiefly negotiate agreements between the United States and other countries.”

The constitution does not empower the “U.S. government policy community”, nor “the administration”, nor the “consensus view of the interagency” and certainly not one Lt.Col. Vindman to define the strategic interests of the United States and its foreign policy. It is the duly elected president who does that

The president does not like how the ‘American policy’ on Russia was built. He rightly believes that he was elected to change it. He had stated his opinion on Russia during his campaign and won the election. It is not ‘malign influence’ that makes him try to have good relations with Russia. It is his own conviction and legitimized by the voters.
…
[I]t is the president who sets the policies. The drones around him who serve “at his pleasure” are there to implement them.

Just as Thomas Jefferson changed course when he came into office after John Adams, so too can Trump after Obama, BUT WAIT .. is what Trump doing so different than Obama?:

President Obama was against giving weapons to Ukraine and never transferred any to Ukraine despite pressure from certain circles.

Oh really now. But something changed that got the Democrat’s dander up .. I am thinking they are courting the Military Industrial Complex more and more because all that lobbying money talks!

Finally, there seems to be some people in this world (much less than 5% for sure) that have thought things through .. and this Ukrainian businessman has been doing some thinkin’:

It is not in the interest of Ukraine to be a proxy for U.S. deep state antagonism towards Russia. Robber baron Igor Kolomoisky, who after the Maidan coup had financed the west-Ukrainian fascists who fought against east-Ukraine, says so directly in his recent NYT interview:

Mr. Kolomoisky, widely seen as Ukraine’s most powerful figure outside government, given his role as the patron of the recently elected President Volodymyr Zelensky, has experienced a remarkable change of heart: It is time, he said, for Ukraine to give up on the West and turn back toward Russia.“They’re stronger anyway. We have to improve our relations,” he said, comparing Russia’s power to that of Ukraine. “People want peace, a good life, they don’t want to be at war. And you” — America — “are forcing us to be at war, and not even giving us the money for it.”
…
Mr. Kolomoisky [..] told The Times in a profanity-laced discussion, the West has failed Ukraine, not providing enough money or sufficiently opening its markets.

Instead, he said, the United States is simply using Ukraine to try to weaken its geopolitical rival. “War against Russia,” he said, “to the last Ukrainian.” Rebuilding ties with Russia has become necessary for Ukraine’s economic survival, Mr. Kolomoisky argued. He predicted that the trauma of war will pass.
…
Mr. Kolomoisky said he was feverishly working out how to end the war, but he refused to divulge details because the Americans “will mess it up and get in the way.”

Yes, the US was just USING the Ukraine, that is why the color revolution under the Obama administration, just to undermine Russia.

Unfortunately, Trump has gone along with the economic war with Russia, but as it turns out, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, so Russia of 2019 is a lot stronger than Russia of 2014. Maybe this is the 3D/4D/8D chess that Trump has been playing all along?

The bottom line? Well I agree with Bionic Mosquito on this one:

… he [Trump] was voted in based on his most basic attacks against the system: war and empire, central banking, Hillary is a crook and should be in prison, fix immigration.

On at least one of these – war and empire – I offer two thoughts: first he hasn’t started a meaningful new war; second, he is doing a great job of accelerating the rest of the world’s movement away from the American empire. Both are tremendous libertarian victories as far as I am concerned.

On the others, Trump has been pretty useless.

Now that is something to think about.

Signing out for now .. stay tuned.

-SF1

1868: When You Think You Have Been Taught All You Need to Know: Andrew Johnson – Impeached But Not Convicted

Impeachment proceedings in the US Senate 1868

Back in the day, when the newspaper would list all those convicted in the local courts, you (and I) probably developed a bias towards that person. Especially if you knew of the crime and all what was written in the paper you (and I) felt we knew the whole story and if we ever met that person on the street, there probably would have been no meeting of the eyes.

However, if you knew that person, the person’s character and past history and things did not seem to line up, you might have had doubts, but in the end if the courts (i.e. State) did their job, they must have been guilty as charged.

But, if you had been “there”, witnessed the “crime”, maybe that is when the court’s performance might have been suspect. We hear all the time these days, quietly, how convictions from decades ago are overturned due to DNA testing or false positives on hair samples, etc.

Also, if one has just been accused of a “crime” and has to go through the very public fight for justice, there is a blemish on their record in our eyes that their character is flawed and that they can’t be trusted.

All this to say, when you compare the reputation of Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson in the State’s textbooks, it is the comparison of “good” and “bad” respectively.  Right there is a hint that something might not be right, because if the State’s narrative suggests Andrew Johnson is indeed bad, and that the State is known to lie, well then, why don’t we research Andrew Johnson himself and determine who he really might be, since we weren’t there and we don’t personally know him.

From the Abbeville Institute comes a sort but informative overview of Andrew’s life, from humble beginnings to his days as the president of the United States right as the War of Northern Aggression (Civil War) concluded and how the general government should treat the states that left (according to them) or wanted to leave (according to Lincoln and his supporters).

Andrew Johnson was born into poverty in rural North Carolina. His father died after saving some town locals from drowning and left the family to fend for themselves in a two-room shack. A young Andrew began working as a tailor’s apprentice and developed an appreciation for the laboring class early on. Johnson was poorly educated and learned how to write from his wife, while he was still working as a tailor.

Michael Martin – Abbeville Institute “Lessons in Conservatism from Andrew Johnson”

OK, so he was not like Lincoln, born in a log cabin, but he did have very humble beginnings. A self-made man whose passions led him into politics, but NOT as a politician, oh no, his idols were statesmen!

Johnson admired true statesmen, hated politicians, and was most conservative when it came to government spending. He would debate anything that required the expenditure of public funds, having introduced bills to reduce Congressional salaries and even opposed proposals like the Smithsonian Institute because he thought it would be an unjust burden on the treasury.

Michael Martin – Abbeville Institute “Lessons in Conservatism from Andrew Johnson”

Johnson also had “ownership” in how the country’s revenue was spent. Undoubtedly, his time as a politician especially during the war years showed him how easily that money could be squandered by all those bureaucrats that had no “skin in the game”.

When Johnson faced Reconstruction, he was initially welcomed by Radical Republicans that wanted to punish the South. However, Johnson’s plan differed from Lincoln’s only slightly, favored leniency, and virtually ignored the freed slaves. This put him at odds with the radical plan for the South to be run by a bayonet, carpetbag government. Most narratives portray Johnson as a Southern racist who wanted to deny equality to newly freed slaves. Johnson, however, had stated years before that he supported emancipation and was mostly opposed to the outrageous spending habits of Congress.

Michael Martin – Abbeville Institute “Lessons in Conservatism from Andrew Johnson”

We see here that in summary, Johnson’s philosophical views differed from his political opponents in the House and Senate of the US Government. That was all it took for impeachment to take place. When Johnson tried to follow the letter of the law, the Constitution, and keep from squandering the people’s money, he was brought up on trumped (no pun intended) charges.

On the issue of the Freedmen’s Bureau, for example, Johnson vetoed a bill to make it permanent and then three days later gave a speech where he charged Congress with seeking to destroy the fundamental principles of the Constitution. His exact words were that “There is an attempt to concentrate the power of the Government in the hands of a few, and thereby bring about a consolidation, which is equally dangerous and objectionable with separation.”

Michael Martin – Abbeville Institute “Lessons in Conservatism from Andrew Johnson”

In my mind, the previous president (Lincoln) paid so little attention to the US Constitution that the Congress felt that it was to be a free for all! The former president in fact, never validated the fact that the 11 states that left the union actually did so, because as a lawyer he knew he could use post-Constitution laws to justify “putting down a general rebellion / insurrection” for all his war efforts in the south. The spouse (in his mind, actually 11 spouses) that left needed to be beat back into the home. Now that the spouse was back in the home, the Congress wanted to abuse her even more and Johnson said NO!

In his veto of the Freedmen’s Bureau bill, Johnson explained that opposed it because he was against a military government of the South, against the unlimited distribution of funds to former slaves and their families, and against taking land away from Southerners. In Johnson’s mind, the defeated Southern states were part of the Union and did not need further punishing, and he broke down how virtually every part of the Freedmen’s Bureau bill was incompatible with the Constitution. His main focus was on government spending and the fact that the Constitution was not designed to guarantee any type of special privileges, just basic rights.

Michael Martin – Abbeville Institute “Lessons in Conservatism from Andrew Johnson”

The Radical Republicans indeed wanted a dependency class in the south and the newly freed blacks was to be that class and it remained that way until 1877 in the military districts that were formed to further suck the life out of this abused spouse yet again.

This is effectively what the Northern Union / US Government did to the south. Recovery in this region would take a century economically however, psychologically, it’s culture has never been the same.

Andrew Johnson can be shown as about the only Unionist who cared, and so he was targeted and marginalized in all the US History books published these days.

Four million slaves were emancipated and given an equal chance and fair start to make their own support-to work and produce; and having worked and produced, to have their own property and apply it to their own support. But the Freedmen’s Bureau comes and says we must take charge of these 4,000,000 slaves. The bureau comes along and proposes, at an expense of a fraction less than $12,000,000 a year, to take charge of these slaves. You had already expended $3,000,000,000 to set them free and give them a fair opportunity to take care of themselves -then these gentlemen, who are such great friends of the people, tell us they must be taxed $12,000,000 to sustain the Freedmen’s Bureau.

Andrew Johnson 1866 in Cleveland, OH

So the slavery of 4 million souls in 1865 transferred into the tax slavery of 350 souls in 2018 as the cancer of centralized government continues to suck the life out of all who remain, and there are no Andrew Johnsons allowed to enter politics and gain any political power again.

“Johnson, in fact, continually upheld his oath of office, making him one of the best presidents in American history.”

Brion McClanahan

-SF1