Tag: us presidents

The Hidden Alliance: U.S. Presidents and Israel’s Nuclear Power

In his 2006 Senate confirmation hearings for the position of Secretary of Defense, former CIA Director Robert Gates remarked, while he was serving as a university president, that Iran is encircled by “nuclear-armed powers,” specifically mentioning “the Israelis to the west.” Additionally, former President Jimmy Carter has reiterated this point in both 2008 and 2014 during various interviews and speeches, where he estimated Israel’s nuclear arsenal to be between 150 and 300 warheads. According to its own policy, Israel neither officially confirms nor denies that it has nuclear weapons. The Israeli strategy of ambiguity, known as ‘Amimut’, is understood as a means to safeguard both Israel and its nuclear program. According to Israeli sources, Amimut comprises two key components:

“(1) maintaining the confidentiality of its nuclear operations, which involves refraining from testing or publicly declaring the possession of nuclear weapons, and (2) enhancing its nuclear profile through strategic leaks, public statements, and speculation, alongside the dissemination of indirect evidence regarding its nuclear capabilities.”

Declassified US State Department documents show that by the end of the 1960s, Israel was nearing the achievement of its nuclear objectives, prompting the involvement of Kissinger and Nixon. A memorandum from the State Department to Kissinger in 1969 stated:

“Intelligence suggests that Israel is swiftly advancing its ability to manufacture and deploy nuclear weapons, with delivery methods including surface-to-surface missiles or aircraft.”

Keep reading

William McKinley: Prostitute of Protectionism

In his inaugural address President Trump called President William McKinley (1897-1901) “great” and proudly announced that he had changed the name of Mount Denali in Alaska back to Mount McKinley. The reason the president picked McKinley of all past presidents to heap praise upon is that McKinley was a lifelong political tool of big business, primarily Northern state manufacturers who championed protectionist tariff taxes so rabidly that he was called “the apostle of protectionism” and “the Napoleon of protectionism.”

President Trump’s election is said to be a “populist” victory against the deep state establishment, but there is nothing more anti-populist than protectionist tariff taxes. Protectionist tariff taxes are nothing more than a price-fixing conspiracy orchestrated by the state that enriches a relatively small group of politically connected corporations (and their unions) by plundering their consumers with higher prices. After all, if it is possible to use tariffs to force foreigners to pay a county’s taxes, every government on earth would be doing it. Yet President Trump apparently believes that he has discovered some kind of holy grail of economics that proves you can get something for nothing after all.Brion McClanahan

Keep reading

Supreme Court Ruling: Accepting a Pardon is an “Admission of Guilt!”

A Presidential Pardon does not take effect unless the suspect accepts it. That according to a little known, 1915 ruling from the Supreme Court, once accepted, the pardon serves as an “imputation of guilt,” or what’s more commonly known as an admission. Because accepting the pardon is “essential to it’s validity,” I am demanding the Biden family, Dr. Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, the members of the J6 Committee and everyone else Biden unsurprisingly pardoned declare their acceptance of the pardon publicly. Because, according to the Supreme Court, it would also serve as a declaration of guilt.

Keep reading

The Plain Truth About “The Man from Plains” and Jimmy Carter’s BIG Lie

Once again Americans have been inundated by a tsunami of one-sided “news” coverage and an officially sanctioned mourning period and state funeral were exploited (at taxpayers’ expense) for political purposes, as we were subjected to a hagiographies of former President Jimmy Carter.

We endured hours of propagandistic MSM radio and TV reportage (or what passes for it), whether we liked it or not, often preempting regularly scheduled programming, that has totally failed to provide a full, comprehensive view of the Carter presidency, completely missing its very dark side, in particular Carter’s Big Lie.

This includes outlets that purport themselves to be “Left,” such as The Nation. Consider the obituary penned by that outlet’s editorial director and publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel, which never so much as mentions Carter’s unforgivable sins. The Nation may flatter itself as being “America’s leading source of progressive politics and culture,” but the fact that it ignores Carter’s crimes makes it, at least in this case, no better than MSM. (This could account for why The Nation drastically cut back its print publications in 2023, declining from a weekly to a monthly. If an “alternative press” outlet fails, like the corporate media, to do probing analysis and investigative journalism, why should someone bother to read and subscribe to it?)[1]

Instead, the rosy picture flooding the airwaves et al. is of the simple “Man from Plains,” a Georgia peanut farmer who rose to the White House during the post-Vietnam War, post-Watergate period by promising the world-weary American people that he would never lie to them. On December 29, 2024, an Atlanta Journal-Constitution headline ballyhooed: “Jimmy Carter was nation’s Sunday School teacher.”

A chyron on the reputedly left-leaning MSNBC dutifully instructed us that Carter was a “humanitarian and peacemaker.” As flags fly at half-staff, the 39th president is being lionized and lauded for brokering a peace deal in the Middle East, and for subsequently being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, championing human rights, pioneering alternative energy, building Habitat for Humanity houses, the Carter Center’s election monitoring abroad and eradicating of diseases, and so on.

Commentator after commentator extols the Georgian as our most exemplary ex-president, while some do mention (in passing) some problems that took place when this one-term president was in the White House, such as an oil crisis and his failure to bring U.S. hostages home from Tehran while he was still in office. But I have not heard a single talking head dare delve into the dirty deeds and tricks of the Carter presidency, the reverberations from which we are still living with today.

Keep reading

Medieval ‘Social Justice’ With a Contemporary Twist

Can one impeach a witch, a sorcerer or a dead person? In the Middle Ages, such “impeachments” were a fact of the “social justice” mindset of the time. When one considers “the level to which alchemy and pagan superstition (climate change, DEI, etc.) have become predominant” in today’s cultural and political milieu, writes panoptic scholar Robert Orr (personal communication), it might be appropriate to revive the tradition, this time with just cause. There are a myriad of candidates on the political stage ripe for impeachment and arraignment, including those at the very top of the hierarchy. As Orr puts it, “maybe impeaching the corpse fronting for the Demsheviks isn’t that strange an idea.” 

One thinks of the famous, or infamous, Cadaver Synod held in 897 in which the corpse of Pope Formosus, who had been dead for over half a year, was exhumed from its sarcophagus and brought to the Basilica of St John Lateran in Rome to be put on trial. According to Joseph Dispenza’s fascinating The Death and Trial of Pope Formosus, the cadaver was clad in papal vestments, seated on a throne,  provided with a church officer to speak on his behalf, and forced to answer the charges—as best he could—of perjury, defilement of church doctrine, and illegal accession to the pontifical throne. This latter was a crucial accusation, the assumption by apostolic fraud of a position to which he was not entitled. Formosus was declared guilty on all counts, all his judgments, appointments and decretals annulled, the papal vestments stripped from the body, and the corpse flung into the Tiber. 

Of course, the accused in the current hypothetical case is in a condition of terminal decrepitude and is regarded as “dead” only metaphorically. He may be depicted as evil, malevolent, nasty, corrupt, a practitioner of the black arts and a master of necromantic ritual, a champion of the pishogue, and thus morally “dead.”  In any event, many believe he should be lashed to the Constitutional stake. 

Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states that “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion,” a phrase known as the “Guarantee Clause.” As Orr explains, the meaning is clear: the federal government must intervene if a state is attacked by another country. The federal government is legally and constitutionally bound to keep invaders out, not allow—and certainly not invite—them in. Ten to twenty million illegal migrants overwhelming a nation’s borders is clearly an invasion, a cataclysm such as was foretold in Jean Raspail’s harrowing 1987 The Camp of the Saints, which should have alerted us to what was coming. Those who have permitted such an onslaught to happen have surely committed an impeachable offense—no less than General Mark Milley confabulating against Trump with his Chinese counterpart General Li Zuocheng, according to Bob Woodward and Robert Costa’s blockbuster Peril. If true, such an act would constitute treason and its perpetrator would have to be indicted.

Orr also points to the Third Amendment, which states: “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” The settling of vast numbers of migrants, which Trump has called a “crisis,” a “war,” and an “invasion,” in places like Springfield, Ohio, critically burdening and often terrifying the local population, may qualify as impeachable as well. These interlopers may be viewed as “soldiers” in terms of their gradually spreading and severely destabilizing effect on the nation, precisely as Jean Raspail recognized. (One must be skeptical of the usual run of suborned media “fact-checkers” who deny or downplay the urgency of the situation.) One thinks, too, of the immense surge of illegals crossing the Canadian border into small towns like Swanton, Vermont and Champlain, New York—an invasion in everything but name. Orr compellingly argues that If Americans took their Constitution seriously, several recent presidents—Bush fils, Obama and Biden—would all have been impeached and cashiered.

Keep reading

Israel, Blackmail and the Presidents

Just days before Election Day, Wikileaks reported: “Author of book about the Trump White House, Michael Wolff, claims to have 100 hours of Epstein talking about Trump but releases only a one minute fragment.” More along these lines is now atop pages like The Daily Beast with journalistic scoops like “Epstein claiming Trump liked to ‘f—’ his friends’ wives”.

I didn’t realize until recently that Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s stepfather, Samuel Pisar — who Blinken has invoked at high profile events — was not only lawyer and confidant to media mogul and Mossad “super spy” Robert Maxwell but apparently to Jeffrey Epstein himself. (Updated meme of flowchart making these connections.)

Robert Maxwell was of course father of Ghislaine Maxwell who was Epstein’s partner in crime.

It has been largely kept from public view and understanding in numerous ways, but there is substantial evidence that the Epstein network was involved in gathering information on political figures from both parties which could be used for blackmail. The molesting of the girls was often apparently the insidious means, not the ultimate goal. The above referenced Daily Beast piece, to take the most recent example, does not contain the word “blackmail”.

Keep reading

The Next President Needs a Foreign Policy Reality Check 

On top of ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East and rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific, the next administration will inherit structural domestic and international obstacles that have been mounting for decades. Addressing these challenges while keeping our current U.S. foreign policy strategy on autopilot simply won’t cut it—it is time for a new approach. 

Since America’s victory in the Cold War, our national security elites in both parties have avoided asking fundamental questions about what missions the United States should be engaged in. These experts insist that maintaining a heavy military footprint across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia simultaneously is necessary for American security. 

Focusing on how to resource these missions without reflecting on their wisdom or sustainability misses the forest for the trees. Twenty years of open-ended nation-building efforts in the Middle East cost thousands of service members’ lives. These conflicts also came at the price of $6 trillion, damaged American military readiness, and aided our great power rivals by diverting our focus and energy.  

After decades of deficit spending, our national debt is approaching $36 trillion, a ten-fold increase from the end of the Cold War. After the COVID pandemic, our nation’s debt hadn’t been so large in relation to our economy since the Second World War. At this point, our interest payments alone are exceeding U.S. defense spending from this year. 

On top of these challenges, the trust funds for our biggest domestic programs—Social Security and Medicare—are on track to be insolvent in a decade and impose benefits cuts unless the next administration makes difficult domestic choices to secure their future.  

Taken together, the United States now experiences a strategic scarcity that our national security class has not had to deal with for generations.  

We cannot buy our way out of these constraints, as the Commission on the National Defense Strategy recently called for. Voters, especially in swing states, are already disillusioned with America’s level of involvement in conflicts abroad. Americans are not going to make the painful fiscal sacrifices needed to secure our financial future only to see trillions more squandered on flawed defense strategies.  

In the face of these challenges, Concerned Veterans for America’s new report, “Realism in Practice,” offers a fresh, disciplined path forward for U.S. foreign policy, rooted in assessing our strategic situation as it is, not as we might wish it to be. 

American strategic goals need to align with America’s available resources. Policymakers also need to use the right tools to achieve these goals, avoiding overreliance on an already overstretched, undermanned military. Our allies can and should take greater responsibility for their own defense. The United States needs to concentrate its military resources on regions most vital to its core interests, while relying more on diplomatic and economic engagement elsewhere.

Keep reading

“Fight! Fight! Fight!” 160 years of Assassinations of Presidents and Candidates

He didn’t take a salary when he was president. He took a bullet as a presidential candidate. What more can this man do to prove that he wants to Make America Great Again?

The failed assassination attempt on President Donald Trump this weekend marks the second attempt on his life. This latest attempt is reminiscent of one of President Trump’s heroes, Theodore Roosevelt, who, while running for reelection in 1912, was shot in the chest. Roosevelt famously finished his speech before going to the hospital. Another Trump hero is Andrew Jackson, who, at the age of 67, was attacked by an assassin. Jackson beat the attacker to the ground and subdued him until law enforcement could take him into custody.

Theodore Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson left us with a powerful picture of what manhood should be. Trump gave us an incredible meme, with blood dripping down his face, the American flag in the background, and the defiant motto “Fight! Fight! Fight.”

Over the past 160 years, four sitting U.S. presidents have been assassinated. There have been attempted assassinations on six U.S. presidents, one successful assassination of a presidential candidate, and four failed assassination attempts on presidential candidates.

Keep reading

Bill Clinton Announces He’s Written A Memoir And The Responses Are Hilarious

Bill Clinton has announced that he is to release a memoir, prompting many to ponder what exactly will be contained within the pages.

The Hill reports that the book will be called “Citizen: My Life After the White House” and will be released after the election in November.

Clinton released a statement that describes the book as “the story of my 23-plus years since leaving the White House, told largely through the stories of other people who changed my life as I tried to help change theirs, of those who supported me, including those I loved and lost, and of the mistakes I made along the way.”

The publisher claims that the memoir is a “rare and unflinching look at life after presidency,” saying it gives “fascinating insight into Clinton’s life — both personal and political.”

Keep reading

SPY AGENCIES SKEWED INTEL TO PLEASE TRUMP, AND OBAMA TOO

U.S. INTELLIGENCE SKEWS its findings to find favor with both Republican and Democratic policymakers, including former presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama, a sweeping new study by the Pentagon-backed RAND Corporation finds. The study draws on interviews, some anonymous, with nearly a dozen current and former U.S. intelligence officials and policymakers.

Despite the popular “deep state” characterization of the intelligence community as a rogue army running roughshod over elected leaders, the study concludes the exact opposite. It portrays an intelligence community that naturally tilts its reports and forecasts to curry favor with presidents and their high-level policymakers in Washington, regardless of party or issue. 

“Policymakers most frequently introduce bias in intelligence assessments from a desire to minimize the appearance of dissent, while the IC” — intelligence community — “tends to introduce bias through self-censorship,” the report says.

The study, “Has Trust in the U.S. Intelligence Community Eroded? Examining the Relationship Between Policymakers and Intelligence Providers,” was sponsored by the Pentagon.

Keep reading