aside THE LIES POLITICIANS TELL

77e8b44dfa450815f223a995abe3f988 disallusioned americans

Most people believe government doesn’t work for the average American anymore. They no longer trust the talking points and false promises from politicians on both sides of the aisle. We, voters are tired of being lied to by our elected officials. This is a true statement from the viewpoint of the far right, tea party folks to the liberal progressive voter. Disillusionment would be the operative word for these strange times. According to a February 2014 Pew poll, 24% said they trust the government in Washington always or most of the time. According to a 4/21/15 Harvard poll of millennials, whether Democrat or Republican, most of them (83%) show no faith in Congress. This explains why in the summer and Fall of 2015, outsiders are leading in the polls for the nomination for their respective parties’ presidential nominations.

The list of of the lies and major missteps by President Barack Obama and  President George W. Bush and those working under their direction will require several blogs, but the following is a start:

1.) Trevor Timm of the Guardian wrote about the NSA LIE on 5/17/14 and the following are some excerpts:

“If you blinked this week, you might have missed the news: two Senators accused the Justice Department of lying about NSA warrantless surveillance to the US supreme court last year, and those falsehoods all but ensured that mass spying on Americans would continue. But hardly anyone seems to care – least of all those who lied and who should have already come forward with the truth.”

85 UNHAPPY VOTERS GOOD

“Here’s what happened: just before Edward Snowden became a household name, the ACLU argued before the supreme court that the Fisa Amendments Act – one of the two main laws used by the NSA to conduct mass surveillance – was unconstitutional.”

“In a sharply divided opinion, the supreme court ruled, 5-4, that the case should be dismissed because the plaintiffs didn’t have “standing” – in other words, that the ACLU couldn’t prove with near-certainty that their clients, which included journalists and human rights advocates, were targets of surveillance, so they couldn’t challenge the Law.”

2010-midterms msg too complicated

2.) I have had serious problems with the way Edward Snowden and other whistle blowers have been too harshly handled by the current administration. It is not as if  I am saying that Edward Snowden shouldn’t accept the consequences of a fair trial and any penalties imposed by a jury of his peers. I believe that this option of a fair trial was not possible and this is why Edward Snowden fled to Russia where all U.S. secrets under his domain would be compromised I am not happy with this result.

109856-American-Pipe-Dream-by-Mike-Keefe-Cagle-Cartoons-515x321A 1/21/14 Wall Street Journal Commentary by Jesselyn Radack addresses this subject: “Why Edward Snowden Wouldn’t Get a Fair Trial.” Below are some excerpts:

“Mr. Snowden has already been charged under an arcane World War I law called the Espionage Act of 1917, just as Mr. Drake, Kiriakou and Manning were for revealing information about surveillance, torture and war crimes, respectively. Daniel Ellsberg (who is free), the Pentagon Papers whistleblower, was the first American charged under the law for “leaking” national-defense information in 1971. The Obama administration has charged more whistleblowers with mishandling secret information under the Espionage Act—a total of seven, so far—than all previous presidents combined.”

85 CONGRESS INACTION“Under the Espionage Act, no prosecution of a non-spy can be fair or just. The 1917 law, enacted shortly after the U.S. entered World War I, was intended to apply to spies, not modern-day whistleblowers accused of mishandling allegedly classified information. The law was written 35 years before the word “classification” entered the government’s lexicon.”

3.) Remember how we were sold the 2003 War on Iraq by the Bush administration. They used the horror of 9/11 and the “WMD,” Iraqi’s ownership of weapons of mass destruction, as a pretext for the U.S. pentagon’s real intent to implement their 2001 plan to attack seven countries in the middle east. Iraq was one of the seven. Around 2003, I recall being upset with Vice President Dick Cheney and his neocon surrogates who frequently sold the American public on the war against Iraq, by associating Iraq with al-Qaeda and the al-Qaeda’s terrorist 9/11 attack on U.S. land. This was the typical bait and switch sales pitch. Iraq was Ba’athist, with a government which was secular. Iraqi’s leaders despised al-Qaeda and had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. The neocons were well aware of these facts as they continued to cynically use the Americans’ painful memory and fear of the 9/11 tragedy by disseminating the falsehood of a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda to gain the public’s approval, for the 2003 U.S. war on Iraq. We all know the rest of the story! Information confirming the above allegations can be found in General Wesley Clark’s 2003 book, Winning Modern Wars. He is the former Supreme NATO Allied Commander and Joint Chiefs of Staff Director of Strategy and Policy.

090325_wuerker_cartoon distrust cartoon

4.) The current Obama administration has promised transparency in all their dealings with the American public which should include the TPP trade agreement. The current administration has not lived up to this commitment of being an open book to their constituents to the point that WikiLeaks’ editor, Julian Assange, has said: “The TPP erects a ‘one size fits all’ economic system designed to advantage the largest transnational corporations. In this leak we see the radical effects the TPP will have, not only on developing countries, but on states very close to the centre of the Western system. If we are to restructure our societies into an ultra-neoliberal legal and economic bloc that will last for the next 50 years then this should be said openly and debated.”   Mr. Assange has advertised a reward for any leaks regarding the TPP. President Obama has been saying that this TPP trade agreement currently being negotiated among Pacific countries will benefit all Americans, which should include those earning an average annual salary of $80,000 or less.

With the current administration’s lack of transparency on this trade agreement  I am not taking their word on the largest trade agreement in our U.S. history, that TPP will lift up all Americans. After the fact, I do not want to be surprised by a leaked text proving that TPP is slanted to allow for extreme foreign investor privileges that help corporations offshore more U.S. jobs to low wage countries. We do not want to discover that the U.S. is eliminating any incentives to maintain jobs here in the USA or any of the usual risks that make firms think twice about moving to low wage countries, including Viet Nam.

This means that we, Americans should have full access to the text of the TPP agreement before final passage.

2013-06-17-brief-cartoon nsa spying

The best reporting that I have read regarding TPP is from “About News, by Kimberly Amadeo, titled, “What Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership?” The following are some excerpts from her article:

“The TPP is between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the U.S. and Vietnam. The countries involved are responsible for 40% of the world’s total GDP of $88 trillion, 26% of its trade, and 793 million of its consumers.”

80% of Americans tell pollsters they distrust the government.
80% of Americans tell pollsters they distrust the government.

Cons

“Most of the gains in income would go to workers making more than $88,000 a year. Free trade agreements contribute to income inequality in high-wage countries by promoting cheaper goods from low-wage countries. This would be particularly true for the TPP, because it protects patents and copyrights. Therefore, the higher-paid owners of the intellectual property would receive more of the income gains.”

Dear republican establishment, when you start bombarding the media outlets with anti Trump ads and then, anti Bernie Sanders ads, the peoples won’t care. Save your monies! The majority of folks have figured out that you’ve been condoning the hate speech of the far right of your party for years  to win elections. Now your credibility is lacking. This is a form of the average American workers’ revolution. After all, you see, the people do have power in their votes and this time, they do have options which will send a clear message. You will not neglect the middle class and those, less fortunate when creating profits for yourselves in the one percent segment, your corporations and your stockholders. We are tired of the crumbs, your version of the “trickle down economy.”

Advertisements

16 comments

    • GRAZIE MILLE!!! As, always, I am very appreciative of your support and the reblog.Last night, I was very impressed with Senator Bernie Sanders speech at Liberty University.

    • AMEN!! GRAZIE MILLE!! I am so grateful for your support and the reblog. Recently, my number of followers surpassed 100. This is the reason I don’t reblog. I can’t compete with JB and your numbers. Unfortunately, I don’t use Twitter and Facebook. I am going to try to connect my blog with Facebook in the near future. To date, I have been unsuccessful. Whatever numbers that I currently have are solely due to you and JB. So, thanks, again!!!

      • So very welcome!! Are you on Facebook? You can connect to FB, Twitter, Tumblr … create account & connect through dashboard.
        If you are on Facebook, we need to connect there! 🙂

        • I think you can delete the connection you already have. Then start again with a “new” one and drop the URL of your timeline there. Try that ….. Just saw this.

        • NO, I WILL CONTINUE UNLESS YOU WISH TO WRITE ABOUT THIS AREA. Currently, I am researching Syria. Remember Obama’s red line and how republicans have been questioning why he didn’t have the guts to act when it was obvious that Syrians experienced chemical warfare as per U.S. INTELLIGENCE. The U.S. was blaming Assad. What happened is that Germany also had their intelligence resources which indicated that chemical warfare did occur but that there was absolutely no evidence that Assad had anything to do with it. This is why Obama did not act on the red line breach. I am kind of sick of writing about the middle east as I find it so depressing.

        • I totally get it. It’s a quagmire. I don’t seen an easy way to get out of it. Too many hornets’ nests stirred … and not enough smart people to fix this!!

        • The red line issue would be one of those MAJOR lies. We almost went into Syria because of it. It was not just Germany who challenged US intelligence but the Brits, as well.

          I found some interesting info on the 4/1714, LONDON REVIEW OF BOOKS; The Red Line and the Rat Line

          Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdoğan and the Syrian rebels:

          Here is the story as per British intelligence:In 2011 Barack Obama led an allied military intervention in Libya without consulting the US Congress. Last August, after the sarin attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, he was ready to launch an allied air strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing the ‘red line’ he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons.​* Then with less than two days to go before the planned strike, he announced that he would seek congressional approval for the intervention. The strike was postponed as Congress prepared for hearings, and subsequently cancelled when Obama accepted Assad’s offer to relinquish his chemical arsenal in a deal brokered by Russia. Why did Obama delay and then relent on Syria when he was not shy about rushing into Libya? The answer lies in a clash between those in the administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and potentially disastrous.

          Obama’s change of mind had its origins at Porton Down, the defence laboratory in Wiltshire. British intelligence had obtained a sample of the sarin used in the 21 August attack and analysis demonstrated that the gas used didn’t match the batches known to exist in the Syrian army’s chemical weapons arsenal. The message that the case against Syria wouldn’t hold up was quickly relayed to the US joint chiefs of staff. The British report heightened doubts inside the Pentagon; the joint chiefs were already preparing to warn Obama that his plans for a far-reaching bomb and missile attack on Syria’s infrastructure could lead to a wider war in the Middle East. As a consequence the American officers delivered a last-minute caution to the president, which, in their view, eventually led to his cancelling the attack.

          The American and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of 2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons. On 20 June analysts for the US Defense Intelligence Agency issued a highly classified five-page ‘talking points’ briefing for the DIA’s deputy director, David Shedd, which stated that al-Nusra maintained a sarin production cell: its programme, the paper said, was ‘the most advanced sarin plot since al-Qaida’s pre-9/11 effort’. (According to a Defense Department consultant, US intelligence has long known that al-Qaida experimented with chemical weapons, and has a video of one of its gas experiments with dogs.) The DIA paper went on: ‘Previous IC [intelligence community] focus had been almost entirely on Syrian CW [chemical weapons] stockpiles; now we see ANF attempting to make its own CW … Al-Nusrah Front’s relative freedom of operation within Syria leads us to assess the group’s CW aspirations will be difficult to disrupt in the future.’ The paper drew on classified intelligence from numerous agencies: ‘Turkey and Saudi-based chemical facilitators,’ it said, ‘were attempting to obtain sarin precursors in bulk, tens of kilograms, likely for the anticipated large scale production effort in Syria.’ (Asked about the DIA paper, a spokesperson for the director of national intelligence said: ‘No such paper was ever requested or produced by intelligence community analysts.’)

        • I think that anyone involved in these matters have to be very intelligent and extremely well versed in the region.
          I think America went in without any knowledge of the nuances, thinking the only way is the American way … now they don’t know how to fix it and complain when the locals react … SMH!!

Comments are closed.