Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: August 2016

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY PETER STONE IN THE GUARDIAN

 

It has been reported, although I don’t know how reliably, that Sheldon Adelson privately offered $100 million to Trump’s campaign, but Trump has not accepted.

Adelson always gets something for his donations. He gave Newt Gingrich about $18 million in his tries to get a nomination.

The price for Adelson’s support?

Poor, silly Newt had to go around giving stump speeches saying, “There is really no such thing as a Palestinian.”

I am glad that either Trump has turned him down – the truth I suspect – or he is ignoring Trump.

Either way it speaks to Trump’s integrity.

And that’s exactly why a lot of people will cast a ballot for him instead of Hillary.

Advertisements

 John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY DAN ROBERTS IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“Donald Trump’s legacy threatens to be return of race politics to the mainstream”

That is simply a cheap falsehood.

I do not accept it for a moment.

Any observant person will know to a certainty that Trump is no racist.

Any suggestion that he is one comes only from a uniformly biased, establishment press, acting more the role of propagandists than journalists.

Indeed, there is considerable reason in Hillary’s record, going back for years, to believe there are genuine overtones of racism there.

But nothing, absolutely nothing, negative about Hillary ever appears in this or any other establishment paper, and, as informed people well know, this woman genuinely has what British police call “form.”

I sincerely believe The Guardian is descending into the gutter again, too, as it very much did with Corbyn and its inexcusable witch hunt against him and his associates.

In another story at the top of the page, you have the following “man denies beating his wife” story: “Trump campaign CEO Stephen Bannon denies antisemitic remarks,” and you do not permit comment on this non-news smear.

And just why is The Guardian so immersed in the American election? The occasional story of real substance would be fitting, but that is not what we see.

Today’s page has two top-half stories plus a third suggestive item – “From Trump to Brexit rhetoric: how today’s politicians have got away with words” – near the bottom. Three in one morning, and that is not unusual. And not one of them is genuine news or analysis.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY CELINE GOUNDER IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“I’m a doctor. The real issue isn’t Hillary Clinton’s health – it’s that she might win’

Doctor or not, this has to be one of the least informative piece I’ve seen in a while in The Guardian.

Is it even right for a doctor to say” Hey, I’m a doctor, and I’m telling you a person I’ve never met is just fine”?

And the term “conspiracy theory” has been so overused, it is annoying even to see it. It functions only as a red flag for readers to be be cautious about what follows.

Actually it is reputed to have been dreamed up years ago by a CIA media manipulator to discredit people who have legitimate questions about serious matters.

If you think there are no conspiracies, I can only ask where you have been living?

Tony Blair and Iraq? The phony Syrian civil war that is actually America trying to topple an elected government it does not like by proxy? Israel’s nuclear arsenal? The massive fraud in the Democratic primary races, over which there are now numerous lawsuits? TWA Flight 800?

If you claim to be a scientist, it is not a very scientific language to use.

The amount of evidence we see absolutely means Hillary has a health problem. I don’t know just what it is, but the evidence is indisputable.

It has nothing to do with sexism or any other “ism” to say so

She wouldn’t be the first a candidate to hide a physical or health problem.

Again, just one set of videos:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-08/something-wrong-hillary-bizarre-behavior-seizure-allegations-raise-doubts-about-her-

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“Donald Trump’s views on nukes may be the scariest thing about his candidacy.”

 

I’m sorry, Stuart Jeffries, but this piece is simply not well-informed and is replete with glib, media-inspired generalizations.

First, that case has the ability to fire nothing.

There are all kinds of fail-safe and back-ups before any nuclear weapon can be fired.

Remember Nixon’s last days in the White House when he was stumbling around, mumbling and drinking heavily?

The entire military was already on alert, and no deliberate or accidental use of a nuclear code would have done anything.

Second, there is nothing unusual about Trump’s views on nuclear weapons.

Remember, this is a country that actually used them, twice, and on civilians, a use which was not required for Japan’s surrender.

It is also a country where in the early 1960s the Pentagon brass presented Jack Kennedy with a complete plan to obliterate the USSR in a surprise attack. It was more than a presentation. It was a plea for the President’s approval. He left the presentation literally sick at his stomach.

It is a country where Kissinger and Nixon seriously contemplated using nuclear weapons on the Ho Chi Min Trail in Vietnam.

Hillary Clinton is on record, not that long ago, with threatening to obliterate Iran, a country which has done nothing against the United States. It may just have been being used as a lure for campaign contributions from special interests, but that is sure one scary lure.

There are other instances, too.

And yours is a county where the new Prime Minister promised she would readily launch an attack to kill a hundred thousand people.

If you take the trouble to examine the total range of Donald Trump’s statements on war, you will find a sound and reasonable set of views, not the scare stuff hyped by a press which hates him.

And why does the establishment press hate Trump? Because he opposes the bloody Neocon Wars which have killed around two million in the 15 years and created floods of refugees, all in the god-like arrogant objective of creating a new Middle East.

You know the total death and destruction of those wars is the equivalent of having used several thermonuclear weapons.

And Hillary is the establishment’s chosen one to carry on with this magnificent “legacy.”

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Donald Trump justifies shooting of black man in Milwaukee”

Your headline is misleading and inflammatory.

Color has nothing to do with this event.

The cop who shot him is black.

The man was carrying a loaded automatic pistol.

I’m sorry, I am a serious critic of police shootings in America, but when a young man (of any color) with a gun confronts a cop, he’s going to be shot. That’s how it works and how it will always work.

Race does not enter the equation until afterward for those who want to inflame

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY NICK COHEN IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“The internet has helped polarise politics but the zealots need to look to themselves”

Sorry, I can’t agree that is a valid observation.

What we are seeing now, perhaps for the first time in human history, is the expression of virtually everyone, not a select few.

Everything you see has always been there, but it has not been quite so easily observable as it is now.

I cannot judge whether it is a good phenomenon or not, but it just is, and I always support basic human freedoms such as freedom of speech.

Many, working for or defending the establishment, do not like this reality, and we see a clear appeal to new forms of authoritarianism to tamp it down or repress it.

Establishments always behave this way towards the new realities which accompany changes in technology.

After all, they want their privileged position left untouched.

And part of what is happening on the Internet is a kind of democratization.

Those, such as columnists in major newspapers, once enjoyed an ability to speak their minds with little regard for what others might think.

The Internet equalizes things a little better.

And, truth be told, just as newspapers have fallen on hard times with the Internet – for example, in losing an important revenue stream from classified advertising – newspaper editors and columnists have begun to lose the weight of influence they once enjoyed. That’s not a bad thing at all, unless you happen to be one of them.

They face a more competitive world of ideas and expression out there. I can’t blame them for being grumpy about their loss of privilege, but that’s how it always is when competition enters any field.

And the unpleasant truth is many of them years ago abused their privileged positions, as people always tend to abuse privilege.

I don’t believe there is an ounce of evidence that the Internet polarizes politics. It does represent a brave new world in which many may say what they think instead of a privileged few. And competitive markets are always messier than monopolies or duopolies or oligopolies.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Jeremy Corbyn attends same event with speaker who called for Jewish journalist’s throat to be cut”

Oh, please, not more of the anti-Semitism lunacy disseminated by The Independent and The Guardian months ago.

This is beneath contempt.

Really, Owen Smith only proves with this, once and for all, what a complete jerk of a politician he is.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE GUARDIAN

 

It used to be called manic-depression, a superior description of the condition.

I do believe “therapies” are virtually useless for these conditions, one of the class of conditions Freud called “psychoses” as opposed to the more ordinary “neuroses” for which he claimed some success.

I am sure virtually all these conditions will be proved before long to be faults in brain construction, no different than construction faults some people have in hearts or lungs or backbones except these involve the most complex of organs.

No one would pretend to be able to seriously help a person with a faulty heart by talking to him or her, but we do this with people enduring unimaginable agonies in their mal-functioning brains.

That immense complexity in the very tool with which we think has misled us in understanding these things. In the 16th century, almost certainly, it was schizophrenics and manic-depressives who were either burned as witches or regarded with awe as saints.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Putin-style extremist”?

The world should have more such “extremists” as Putin.

It would unquestionably be a better, saner, more reasonable place.

Hillary’s own judgment here, as in so many instances, borders on lunacy.

I am not a supporter of Nigel Farage either, but I recognize in him someone who respects and works within the boundaries of democracy, something no one sane can claim for this woman who stole the very nomination she has.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY SIMON JENKINS IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“Outside meddling has unleashed horror in Syria.’

No kidding.

America and its willing helpers have made a nightmare of a beautiful land.

It is unforgivable.

Just because they dislike an independent-minded leader and wish in effect tell the Syrians who should rule them.

Just as in Libya. Just as in Iraq. Just as in Yemen.

Disasters all.

None having anything to do with democracy or human rights.

The only differences being the degree of direct American, or British, involvement in each case and the use of hired cutthroats and lunatics rather than national forces.

Oh, and by the way, these are all representative of the values embraced by Hillary Clinton.

The impulse is entirely American exceptionalism, America’s belief in its right to decide what is right for others, with the irony being America is a country which cannot even govern itself.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Sarkozy is looking for support from a large mass of people who have literally been indoctrinated for years with Islamphobia by the press.

He is also looking to France’s equivalent of America’s Israel Lobby, in effect fishing for generous campaign contributions.

To achieve these goals, he is willing to treat decent, modest Muslim women who harm no one as some kind of infected aliens, to raise the level of Islamophobia in the country, and to further validate it.

What can you say of the character of a man who seeks leadership with such behavior?

He is a bully, a man of low character.

But we actually already knew this. Sarkozy’s last efforts at election involved a highly questionable secret massive donation from France’s richest woman whose age and condition at the time suggested senility.

He also is understood to have sought and received a large bundle of money from Libya’s late Colonel Qaddafi.

This is a man with no ethical or moral compass, trying to gain power by any means possible.

_________________________________

Response to another reader’s comment:

Rather idiotic effort at humor.

Choice is choice.

It is not up to you or Mr. Sarkozy to belittle what some choose.

Once we go down that path, we enter a very dark world.

The garb of Sikhs? of Mennonites? of ultra-Orthodox Jews? etc, etc.

In my own humanist eye, all these modes of behavior are ridiculous, but I will always defend the right of people to choose them.

It is the essence of a free society you attack.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY ZOE WILLIAMS IN THE GUARDIAN

 

‘Is Trump a psychopath?”

A truly lame academic study.

This kind of silliness with psychology is something only to ignore, but because The Guardian has a non-stop hate campaign against Trump, it is not ignored.

The fact is, all natural leaders are along the spectrum: narcissists to psychopaths.

The important point is that there are degrees of the conditions in all of them.

It is well known, for example, that people working in high finance are often psychopathic, but they are not the psychopaths who kill, just manipulate.

Trump hasn’t killed anyone.

Hillary has, lots of them, and she has joked about it. What on earth do you call her video statement about the just murdered Gadhafi: “We came, we saw, he died. Ha ha ha.”

Obama has, lots of them, and he has also joked about it, saying in a meeting, “I’m pretty good at this killing.”

George Bush has, lots of them.

Bill Clinton has, quite a few.

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“US military commander warns Russia and Syria: We will defend ourselves”

Translation:

If you harm the special forces we have illicitly placed in Syria with no permission from the government, special forces working covertly to support “our” terrorists, we will attack your planes, even though they happen to be there at the request of the government to fight “our” terrorists.

George Orwell would understand.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY SUZANNE MOORE IN THE GUARDIAN

 

Embracing nationalism is one of the dumbest things a people can do.

It is the root of so many genuine evils.

Indeed, the really sad thing about the modern Olympics is its great noise over nationalism. Flags, anthems, uniforms, blah blah blah.

And we should always remember that it was Mr Joseph Goebbels’s work in the German Olympics of 1936 that created many of the “traditions” still embraced, such as the torch business.

H.G. Wells said it best: “Our true nationality is mankind.”

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY JANINE DI GIOVANNI IN THE GUARDIAN

 

This is very sorry propaganda, and I am sorry to have to say so.

No one is coming to your rescue?

The Syrian Army and Russia are for sure, but they can’t work miracles.

And who is responsible for this horror – absolute horror – in the beautiful country of Syria? The same country which exploited the recent cease-fire to re-supply terrorists and add to their ranks. Russian intelligence has given us hard numbers for what America was busy doing during the recent “cease fire.” It includes about 7,000 new terrorists inserted and tons of weapons supplied.

The United States and Israel and Saudi Arabia and Turkey, plus other “willing helpers” in the filthy work such as Oman (money for terrorists and weapons), Britain (weapons and other assistance), and France (weapons and other assistance).

I should also mention an important country like Germany which has never raised its voice against the atrocious American policy, thinking only it is doing some good accepting large numbers of refugees America and its assistants have created, in the process hurting its own people. It has been an absolute abdication of responsibility by a major country.

And week-in and week-out for years, newspapers like The Guardian’s only response has been articles like this. That’s not progressive, that’s not liberal, it’s a sham concern for what was a completely preventable set of events.

America’s rampage through the Middle East – in Syria using proxies rather than sending in “the boyz” – is the greatest moral and ethical shame of our time.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY PETER PRESTON IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“Fairness and balance falters before Trump in the US media”

You have that much right.

But look to the publication you’re running in as well as other British papers such as The Independent.

Bias, bias, bias, everywhere in the press about Trump. So overwhelming, it’s almost beyond endurance for a fair-minded person.

I am one of those people who regard fairness and facts as the mother’s milk of civilization. And I see and hear them nowhere.

It would be fine if there were genuinely negative things about Trump to report, but it is not fine to literally manufacture stuff daily, some of it close to lunacy as one writer in The Guardian writing that Trump was “too un-American.”

At the same time, Hillary Clinton’s acts before our eyes are appalling, such as vote fraud and voter suppression against Bernie Sanders or groveling for money from the most terrible special interests, and the establishment press doesn’t even mention them.

Her history is even more appalling, but you would only know about it if you read independent-minded people and publications on the Internet, judging as the great I.F. Stone advocated by comparing critically, effectively cross-examining resources, and approaching something resembling the truth.

And then we have the outright prejudiced attacks, as in the witch hunt over non-existant anti-Semitism and Jeremy Corbyn – likely qualifying, in my view, as the most disgraceful “yellow journalism” I’ve ever seen outside the old USSR or America’s old Hearst papers.

Maybe, it all derives from the press treatment of, and involvement with, the Neocon Wars, a terrible trail of blood which has not once been honestly reported on by the mainline press, cozying up to ugly American government policy and working to give it a benign face.

Well, there is nothing benign about killing maybe two million people, destroying several societies, and sending millions running for their lives as refugees, and in the end threatening the very stability of Europe.

I suspect the common thread in the treatment of Corbyn and Trump is to be found there. Whether left or right, they are not people to just carry on with the slaughter, smiling as Obama does.

And the other side of the coin is that Hillary exactly and precisely the person to carry on with the slaughter. The insiders and establishment love her, so the press doggedly embraces and defends her.

Well, in the end, you are either a journalist or a propagandist, a legitimate news publication or an insider’s house organ.

You cannot have it both ways.

The press, both in Britain and America, is absolutely squandering any reserves of goodwill and trust with the public, just as our political establishment has already done.

_____________________________

Response to another reader’s comment:

But we do not have a true democracy, either in Britain or in America.

It’s been clear for years, but recent events are branding it into our brains.

____________________________

Response to another reader’s comment:

 BBC was torn apart by Tony Blair for even daring to suggest some truths about events around the invasion of Iraq.

It has never recovered, and I believe government will not allow it to do so.

_________________________________

Response to another reader’s comment:

In a democracy, there are no bad decisions, so long as they are arrived at democratically.

Your very way of putting things points to an underlying belief in authority and deciding right and wrong.

That’s religion, not politics, and certainly not democratic politics.

And sadly, it is the prevailing view of the establishment and its press.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY BRE PAYTON IN THE FEDERALIST

 

“Anti-Semitism At The 2016 Olympics Is Completely Out Of Control”

 

That is a completely misleading headline.

Anti-Semitism is a form of prejudice, actually a form of superstition, not unlike fear of black cats.

Objecting to a country’s atrocious and law-breaking behavior is not prejudice.

Objecting to murder, theft, and abuse has nothing to do with superstition.

Objecting to such behavior is about disturbing facts and one’s ethical response to them.

It is quite tiresome to see this false equality perpetuated yet again.

Of course, it is always indicative of an extreme and thoughtless bias towards Israel in the media using it, and that prejudice is the only one involved in all cases of labeling critics of Israel as anti-Semitic.

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY JONATHAN FREEDLAND IN THE GUARDIAN

 

“Donald Trump’s Achilles heel is that he is truly un-American”

 

Well, you would have a very hard time coming up with a more ridiculous accusation than that, Jonathan Freedland.

This suggests that you really have scraped the bottom of the barrel in coming up with new accusations to hurl at him.

Truly, this is pure cloud-cuckoo-land, or as they’d more likely say in America, crap.

Trump is as American as it gets, and you may take that from someone who grew up there and lived there a significant portion of his life.

The man made a huge fortune with hard-nosed deals and determination.

He puts his names on buildings in many cities, the kind of brash self-advertising Americans know and appreciate.

He is loud-mouthed and opinionated, as are so very many of his countrymen.

He displays a rather intense degree of patriotism, which in America is the official civic religion.

Whether you agree with him or not, he communicates deep sincerity in what he says, again a not-uncommon American trait.

And he really is concerned about what America has been doing in the world, as are so many Americans.

Going by recent academic analysis and my own sense of all the vote fraud and suppression and National Committee favoritism, Bernie Sanders actually won the Democratic primaries.

So I do think the American voter has already spoken, as it were.

Hillary is the most corrupt person I can recall ever running, and Americans don’t like corruption when it is so obvious that there’s a smell in the room.

Attendance at her rallies is small and polls of trust always show her ranking low, despite the immense efforts of the establishment press to sell her brand, just as you are doing here.

And there is every reason to suspect recent published polls by news organizations have been tweaked, a very easy thing to do, polling being as much art as science.

Further, Trump’s economic policies will appeal strongly to many working-class Americans. In some ways, they very much resemble what you’d see from a Democrat in the 1960s.

Together with the Bernie supporters, furious at being cheated, plus his own special constituency, he is going to win and win big.

________________________

Response to another reader’s comment:

Foolish comment. You select the trivial on which to comment, and then you are wrong in fact.

It IS Trump’s hair.

He had a hair transplant years ago as his hair went thin.

However, hair transplants only give you a new hairline, most recipients choosing to fill in behind with a special toupee. Trump prefers to grow his long and comb it back.

A hairpiece behind is what Joe Biden does, who, by the way, also had a transplant decades ago.

John Chuckman

COMMENT MADE TO AN ARTICLE IN SPUTNIK

 

Anyone familiar with American “think tanks” knows how to regard this assessment.

Think tanks in America, virtually all funded by billionaires or with covert CIA funds, serve a couple of purposes.

They are places to give positions to individuals who have served the establishment’s cause well, kind of pseudo-university campuses where such people can be appointed as “Senior Fellow” or “Distinguished Something or Other,” in an effort to boost the credibility of what they continue to write.

Virtually all American think tanks are glorified propaganda mills intended to be treated as serious, independent intellectual institutions, ones turning out academic-quality papers and analysis.

It is a good gimmick or a number of American billionaires and the CIA (undoubtedly through covert channels, not directly) would stop funding them.

Newspapers and magazines often quote from their publications since its free seemingly-high quality material obtained for free. So too television commentators.

Thus think tanks are, and I think this applies to virtually all of them, a portion of what a former CIA propaganda expert described years ago his “mighty Wurlitzer Organ,” at which, he explained, he would sit and bang on the keys “to get a story out there” – that is, out there in the legitimate press where it passed for real information.

The Turkey-Russia rapprochement is one of the more consequential events of recent times, having the potential to be what Americans call “a game changer.”

So, of course, Stratfor’s assignment is to minimize the public impact of these events. It is also to magically alter the perception of American intelligence in this case from the blunderers they surely are to ultra-clever heroes – all absolute rubbish.

 

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Hillary Clinton ‘made a mistake’ over email server – her husband says”

What a creep Bill Clinton is, trying to seem he’s making an honest confession while just boldly lying.

A years-long mistake?

At the highest level?

And a mistake made and stubbornly maintained in the face of inside expert advice against it?

That brings a whole new meaning to the word “mistake’ surely.

This pair so suit one another. There isn’t an honest bone in either of their creepy bodies.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY ANDREW BUNCOMBE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Clearly, he was being sarcastic in using the word “founder.”

One shouldn’t even have to remind the presumably intelligent people creating a newspaper.

But sarcasm is only effective when it revolves around a truth.

And what is very much the truth here is that Hillary and Obama were up to their armpits with ISIS.

And so, to a lesser extent, was David Cameron, always the slavishly loyal supporter of America’s dark and murderous policies.

It always struck me as bitterly funny when someone like Cameron would rise to express his horror at the publicity stunts of this scum whose entire purpose was: one, to drive out the previous leader of Iraq, someone the US (and Israel) hated; and, two, to topple Assad, someone the US (and Israel) also hate.

They succeeded in their first objective, their bloody public excesses so scaring the leader of Iraq he fled office. Up to that point, ISIS could easily have been stopped and crushed by Iraqi tanks versus ISIS’s Japanese pick-up trucks, but no one ever tried, and there’s a good reason for that.

Iraq’s Army running from ISIS, as it did, leaving behind tanks and artillery, was a planned stunt to equip ISIS, the Iraqi forces being secretly paid off with cash from Saudi Arabia and Oman (both ISIS supporters).

So, after making Iraq’s unwanted leader run, ISIS could re-turn to Syria with a serious challenge, not just Japanese pick-up trucks and AK-47s, plus the psychological force of having toppled a government.

But the huge adverse publicity their stage play of beheadings and other atrocities generated caused folks like Cameron and Obama to state their distaste, and they started token, phony air wars against ISIS, much of which actually supported them vis-a-vis Syria, as by destroying infrastructure.

ISIS simply grew beyond control, as tends to happen when you employ mercenary scum and insane fanatics and supply them with serious weapons.

Now, the US really is engaged in a limited fight against them, at least in Iraq and perhaps parts of Syria.

But they have no interest in eliminating ISIS and its scum allies like al-Nusra because they continue to work towards the objective of eliminating Assad’s legitimate government.

Otherwise, the U.S. would fully cooperate with the Russians in Syria by giving them intelligence for their genuine and effective bombing campaign, something which Obama’s government steadfastly has refused to do behind the scenes.

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO A COLUMN IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“How did the Labour Party get to its worst state in 85 years?”

 The answer is simple.

Tony Blair and his acolytes.

And the press, especially The Guardian and The Independent, with full-time campaigns against Corbyn from his first day as leader.

Labour – with all the great stupidities and errors of David Cameron – was going to be in a strong position either to win or at least finish strongly.

But the establishment was having none of that, and it has now reduced the Labour Party to a shambles.

The press played an important part in the whole dirty business, especially with that hideous witch hunt for non-existent anti-Semitism that was relentlessly carried on for a long time.

Now, it has been giving plenty of publicity to Corbyn’s several mediocre opponents, building them up as something they are not. And it never misses a trivial story that can make a negative headline with Corbyn’s name in it.

And now, daily, they play the same nasty, calculated game with Trump, another anti-establishment figure of considerable popularity.

Does any naive person still believe we have a free and fair press or that impartial journalism is alive and well?

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Wow, what a big deal, Trump forgot the day of the week on this grueling effort of rallies and appearances across a 3000-mile wide country.

Sure deserves international coverage.

You never cover the many embarrassing behaviors of Hillary, perhaps revealing of serious health problems.

Readers may enjoy:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-08/something-wrong-hillary-bizarre-behavior-seizure-allegations-raise-doubts-about-her-

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/08/08/media-lie-about-hillarys-severe-health-condition/

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT

 

The press keeps running a complete non-story about Trump talking about assassination. He never did, but here are some charmers who did just that or offered equally graceless words. Well, what do you know, they are all Democrats.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XcyLeOm6yGc

https://www.rt.com/usa/355391-clinton-assassination-obama-2008/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-10/democratic-strategist-calls-assassination-julian-assange

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ted-strickland-scalia_us_57ab459de4b0ba7ed23e6060?section=&

Incidentally, many also ran a totally fabricated follow-up story, fabricated by that icon of quality journalism, CNN, that the Secret Service talked to the Trump people. They never did.

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE GUARDIAN

 

Gee, I guess that’s fifty votes Trump won’t get.

Meanwhile, I guarantee that many Independents and disillusioned Democrats are going to vote Trump.

All you are conforming is that this election is not one where left and right or Republican and Democrat matter anymore.

The new division is pro-and anti-establishment. Indeed, the old parties may well be in the process of dying. Certainly the Republicans are.

These signatories are a collection of some of the establishment’s best old loyal servants.

Hillary is who they like because she is the candidate of war and death.