First, Jimmy Dore.
Joe Biden is a hideous candidate who stands for nothing and inspires no one. It should have been Bernie. That's the reality that will never go away. If Joe wins, it will still never go away. If Joe loses? You better believe people will be pointing out that it should have been Bernie.
You better believe people will point out that the party big shots stole the nomination from Bernie in 2016 and then ran Hillary and lost only to turn around and steal the nomination for Joe four years later -- and Joe's just Hillary out of her pantsuit. He's a copy of her.
Or, as Jess pointed out "A Green view (Jess)," a less inspiring version of Hillary.
I'm tired of being taken for granted by the party that's supposed to represent me.
I will not be voting for Joe Biden. His opposition to Medicare For All was offensive last year. In the midst of a pandemic? It's criminal.
Speaking of criminal, the election itself. With unexciting Joe as the candidate, the DNC appears to be planning other ways to 'win.' Mike Whitney (ICH) explains:
As we can see from the many articles that have recently popped up in the media, the American people are being prepared for a contested election that will fuel public anxiety and revolt. This all fits with the overall strategy of the TIP. Selected journalists will be used to provide bits of information that serve the interests of the group while the people will be told to expect a long and drawn-out constitutional crisis. Meanwhile, the media, the Democrat leadership, trusted elites and elements in the Intelligence Community will put pressure on Trump to step down while firing up their political base to take to the streets. TIP’s 22-page manifesto makes it clear that mass mobilization will be key to any electoral victory. Here’s an excerpt from the text:
“A show of numbers in the streets-and actions in the streets-may be decisive factors in determining what the public perceives as a just and legitimate outcome.” (“Preventing a Disrupted Presidential Election and Transition” The Transition Integrity Project)
In other words, the authors fully support demonstrations and political upheaval to achieve their goal of removing Trump. Clearly, this scorched earth approach did not originate with Joe Biden, but with the cynical and bloodthirsty puppetmasters who operate behind the curtain and who will do anything to advance their agenda.
This is a full-blown color revolution authored and supported by the same oligarchs and deep-state honchoes that have opposed Trump from the very beginning. They’re not going to back down or call off the dogs until the job is done and Trump is gone. And when the dust settles, Trump will likely be charged, tried, sentenced and imprisoned. His fortune will be seized, his family will be financially ruined, and his closest advisors and allies will be prosecuted on fabricated charges. There’s not going to be a “graceful transition” of power if Trump loses. He will face the full wrath of the scheming mandarins he has frustrated for the last 4 years. These are the men who applauded when Saddam and Ghaddafi were savagely butchered. Will Trump face the same fate as them?
Trump has less than two months to rally his supporters, draw attention to the conspiracy that has is presently underway, and figure out a way to defend himself against the coup plotters. If he is unable to derail the impending junta, his goose is cooked.
It’s worth noting, that the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) has no legal authority to meddle in the upcoming election. They were not appointed by any congressional committee nor did any government entity approve their intrusive activities. This is entirely a “lone wolf” operation designed to exploit loopholes in campaign laws in order to undermine public confidence in our elections and to express their unbridled hostility towards Donald Trump. That said, there analysis will probably influence those who share their views. In the first page of their “Executive Summary” they say:
“We assess with a high degree of likelihood that November’s elections will be marked by a chaotic legal and political landscape. We also assess that the President Trump is likely to contest the result by both legal and extra-legal means, in an attempt to hold onto power.” (Ibid)
This short statement provides the basic justification for the group’s existence. It presents the participants as impartial observers performing their civic duty by objectively analyzing exercises (war games?) that indicate that Trump will challenge the election results in a desperate attempt to hold on to power. Not surprisingly, the group provides no evidence that the president would react the way they think he would. In fact, their hypothesis seems extremely far-fetched given the fact that Trump has no militia, no private army, and very few allies among the political class, the Intelligence Community, the FBI, the military or the deep state. Who exactly does the group think would help Trump hold on to power: Bill Barr, Larry Kudlow, Melania??
There is nothing “impartial” about this analysis. It is partisan gibberish aimed at discrediting Trump while creating a pretext for launching a coup against him.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Thursday, September 17, 2020. Do #OTHERLIVESMATTER! or only the lives of Americans? Interesting question considering a new story in the news.
Starting in the US, Savannah Bermann (USA TODAY) reports:
Federal police asked the National Guard whether they had a “heat ray” officers could use against protesters gathered near the White House earlier this summer,according to a letter sent to Congress from a senior officer involved with responding to the protest.
The inquiry for these tools came just hours before demonstrators protesting on the evening of June 1, following the death of George Floyd, were forcibly removed from the Lafayette Square in Washington D.C. by authorities, some on horseback, using chemical irritants, rubber bullets and shields.
President Donald Trump then walked with members of his administration to historic St. John's Church, and posed with a Bible, drawing wide condemnation.
In written responses to the House Committee on Natural Resources, which were obtained and shared by NPR, D.C. National Guard Maj. Adam DeMarco said he was copied on an email from the Provost Marshal of Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region who was seeking two things: A device called the Active Denial System, or ADS and a Long-Range Acoustic Device, also known as the LRAD.
ADS is a weapon designed by the military that uses short radio waves that "provides a sensation of intense heat on the surface of the skin,” according to the written statements. This causes an intense burning feeling, leading to the tool also being called a "heat ray" or the "Pain Ray."
“The technology, also called a ‘heat ray,’ was developed to disperse large crowds in the early 2000s but was shelved amid concerns about its effectiveness, safety and the ethics of using it on human beings,” the Washington Post reports. “Pentagon officials were reluctant to use the device in Iraq. In late 2018, the New York Times reported, the Trump administration had weighed using the device on migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border—an idea shot down by Kirstjen Nielsen, then the Homeland Security secretary, citing humanitarian concerns.”
The technology should not be used. If you're a pompous drama queen prone to hiding behind what you did in Iraq, you might want to check yourself -- especially if you're screaming your head off in a video calling for people to be killed. Just sit your ass down, princess, you've got nothing to proud of if you're video and your Tweet is all about how this should never be used on Americans.
#OTHERLIVESMATTER. There were many reports in the early stages of the Iraq War of this very weapon being used in Iraq. So don't hide behind your "I was in Iraq and I wasn't in Iraq so these weapons could be used on Americans! You don't look brave, you look like a thug. Because really bad weapons were used on Iraqis. Depleted Uranium was used on the Iraqi people. It's why birth defects skyrocketed in the country.
There is no justification for that. And fourteen-year-old boys -- or twelve-year-olds who look fourteen -- are not terrorists and should not be hunted as if they were or not allowed to leave Falluja, kept there to be killed and executed by the US military.
That's what happened and I'm not in the mood for your sudden concern over weapons now that they might be used on Americans.
I'm also not interested in, Princess Vet, your use of this for partisan b.s. At this point, the issue appears to be it having been raised, the use of it having been raised. It does not appear to have been used.
It should not have been raised and there should be a loud rebuke -- but not threats of shooting people over this, Princess Vet, calm down -- so that the message is clear that we do not use this technology on humans (I'm not painting an X on the backs of all animals, I'm just focusing on humans). And that's here, that's in Iraq, that's anywhere.
We need to be very clear on this.
We also need a few details. That would include who was in on the discussion. Was the White House party to it? Was Donald Trump aware?
It's really easy to scream and yell into a video like a lunatic with the hopes that you're going to turn out the votes for Joe Biden. But that's not reality. And Joe's Barack's roll dog so some of this outrage on his behalf is a bit much -- Barack remains King of the Drone War. And he did use them on US citizens.
The notion of using weapons -- of any kind -- on peaceful protesters is disgusting.
And yet, Princess Vet, that has happened for almost a full year now in Iraq and you're so quick to manly man your service in Iraq but you're not very quick to defend the Iraqi people.
Oh, right, the illegal war was never about defending the Iraqi people or making their lives better.
Your hypocrisy and much more is showing.
What appears to be not in dispute at this time: Early in the Trump presidency, these weapons were tossed out for possible use on immigrants crossing the border and then-Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen shot down the idea. This summer, the use of the weapons were again raised. Judging by the written document submitted, they were not used. That needs further examination and Congress should pursue the matter in public hearings.
Efforts to attach this to a person without evidence is not a good idea. And it doesn't help the situation. No matter how much a man like Princess Vet screams in a selfie video, it doesn't help anyone.
We actually had an editorial on this ready to go at THIRD -- on Princess Vet -- and the ones who wrote it didn't know about the above. They just tried to stream his video and they noted in the editorial (we didn't publish it) that whatever Princess Vet's message was, he wasn't going to persuade anyone because his presentation was so off putting and because his 'answer' was to call for the deaths of people. It is a grotesque and embarrassing video and a sign that maybe Princess Vet needs some mental help and maybe there needs to be courses before you return to civilian life encouraging to grasp that shoot-and-kill may work in the military but it is not the answer to every political issue.
I'm being nice and not naming Princess Vet. I won't be nice about Keith Boykin who Tweeted:
Trump tried to deploy military heat ray weapon on protesters in Lafayette Square that the Pentagon didn't want to use in Iraq War. Army National Guard major also confirms protesters were never given clear, audible warning to disperse before the attack.
Donald Trump did that, did he? Because that's a fact not in THE WASHINGTON POST article you link to. I'd think whoring would get old. I'd think people would say, "Wait, let me deal with what we know. This is a very serious issue and I want to deal with the facts." Not Keith. It's not about what was 'tried,' it's just about partisan bulls**t.
I'd also be very careful about claiming it wasn't used in Falluja. I remember when Scott Shane got nasty about what weapons were used in Iraq at THE NEW YORK TIMES and then, woops, he had to follow up with an article admitting White Phosphorus was used. I'd be very careful about claims from the Pentagon about what they used in Iraq and what they didn't use because they have been repeatedly caught denying this or that use only for it to be exposed that this or that was used.
In other news, NBC NEWS Tweets about Jon Stewart:
"The only difference between the 9/11 responders at Ground Zero...is that that was caused by a terrorist attack," Stewart said. "Veterans in Iraq and Afghanistan are suffering the same illnesses and the same toxic exposure."
Here's THE NEWSHOUR (PBS) reporting on Jon:
The burnpits issue is one we've long covered. And Congress has done damn little. It's amazing that we set through a hearing -- and reported on it -- where a US Senator had the nerve to insult Vietnam veterans -- he was one himself -- and state his opposition to the Agent Orange registry.
Centrist Dems are liars and whores. That's why Jim Webb did not seek re-election. He was the US senator at that hearing. And you damn well better believe veterans groups knew what he did and knew what he said. That's why he didn't seek re-election. Yet when he tried to throw his hat in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2016, centrist Dems were gushing over him like he was someone to look up to. No.
BURNPIT360 remains the strongest resource for the burnpit issue.
That's Alicia Keys' "Brand New Me" (the live version from the live album VH1 STORYTELLERS). As Betty noted in "Alicia Keys" earlier this week, Alicia's latest album (ALICIA) drops tomorrow. It's her follow up to 2016's HERE. On Tuesday, community members noted their favorite Alicia songs: Betty went with "Try Sleeping With A Broken Heart," Kat went with "In Common," Mike went with "Another Way To Die," Marcia went with "If I Ain't Got You," Elaine went with "Holy War," Ruth picked "A Woman's Worth," Rebecca chose "fallin'," Ann offered two choices "Girl On Fire and . . .," Stan selected "Queen of the Field" and Trina went with "Underdog." Betty picked my personal favorite but I do really love "Brand New Me." (Just realized no one chose "No One." I would've thought that would have been someone's pick.) So, tomorrow, new album from Alicia Keys.
New content at THIRD:
- Truest statement of the week
- Truest statement of the week II
- A note to our readers
- Editorial: The targeting of Iraqi activists gets s...
- TV: Media notes
- A Green view (Jess)
- The Covid 15 (Dona)
- John Bolton faces charges
- Jim's World
- Tweet of the week
- #TheJimmyDoreShow New York Times' Paul Krugman is ...
- This edition's playlist
- Dr. Jo Jorgensen (Libertarian Candidate) in Meridi...
- Ask Howie & Angela #24
The following sites updated: