Former Reagan Secretary Paul Craig Roberts: Oligarchs Are True Purveyors Of Fake News

‘That’s not a democracy, when three two-bit punk judges who don’t amount to anything overrule the majority vote of the British people! … There are not any democracies in the West,’ Roberts tells Michael Nevradakis in this wide-ranging interview.
By @dialogosmedia |
Be Sociable, Share!
    • Google+

    ATHENS, Greece — The post-election climate in the United States has been nothing short of bizarre. Recount efforts in several states are being championed by Green Party candidate Jill Stein, accusations have repeatedly been made that the “Russian menace” influenced the presidential elections and the victory of Donald Trump, and that Russia is also behind an online disinformation campaign which the mainstream media describes as “fake news.”

    One of the websites accused of delivering “fake news” is that of former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan, Paul Craig Roberts. An author and analyst and former Wall Street Journal editor, Roberts has become a vocal critic of neoliberalism, austerity, and those who seek confrontation with Russia and China.

    In this interview, originally aired on Dec. 8 on Dialogos Radio, Roberts discusses Trump’s electoral victory and Hillary Clinton’s defeat, what interests may be behind the electoral recount efforts, the “Brexit” vote and recent Italian referendum result, and the conflict in Syria. He also shares his reaction to the accusations of delivering “fake news.”

     

    MintPress News (MPN): Why did Donald Trump win the election, and what does a Trump presidency mean for the United States and for the world?

    Paul Craig Roberts (PCR): We don’t know yet what it will mean. We know what we hope it will mean. Trump won because he spoke directly to the people in a way that they haven’t experienced in my lifetime. He told them that the ruling oligarchy did not and would not have their interests in mind, that they had been sold out with the oligarchy moving their jobs offshore to where labor is cheaper while still expecting from the unemployed American workforce to buy the products that are brought in from China and Indonesia and India and elsewhere. This resonated with people, as they have been experiencing this now for roughly a quarter of a century. There’s been no growth in real median family income in decades. Young people can’t find jobs to support an independent existence. The value of a university education is collapsing because there is no employment for that type of an education, and people realize that the economic policy of the country has been captured by the oligarchs and serves only a very few interests. The consequence has been a massive change in the distribution of income inside the United States. The United States now has one of the worst income distributions in the world. In fact, it’s worse than income distributions in many Third World gangster states.

    [Trump] spoke directly to these things. He also said that he would not see the point of conflict with Russia, which no one sees in an era of thermonuclear weapons, and he also said that he didn’t understand the function of NATO, 25 years after the Soviet collapse. This also resonated with the public, because they understand that all of these supposed threats are bleeding them in order to put hundreds of billions of dollars into armaments industries. That’s the reason why he won the election, and the reason we are hopeful is that we assume he is sincere about this. We assume he’s sincere because of the fierce opposition he has from the ruling oligarchy and from their media “presstitutes,” who did anything they could to demonize Trump, to turn him into a “Putin agent,” and so forth. But the public ignored them, or at least enough of the public ignored them for Trump to carry almost all of the states except for a few really large cities on the coast.

     

    MPN: Do you believe President-elect Trump will keep his campaign promises, and what do you make of his Cabinet selections thus far?

    PCR: We don’t know if he will be able to. The oligarchy’s candidate, Hillary Clinton, lost, so the oligarchy lost the election, but they did not lose it by such a great margin that they’ve given up. They’re still in the fight, they’re still there. Trump has a billion dollars but they have trillions. They’re well-established. They have many, many servants and think tanks and university faculty and the media [on their side], and of course, the neoconservatives, who have dominated American foreign policy since the Clinton regime. So they’re still there, and Trump is in combat with these people.

    Trump’s appointments, we don’t know whether they will support what he wants to do or not. If they support him, they are the type of people he needs. They are well-to-do, they’re self-confident, they don’t need money from the oligarchs, they don’t have to worry about their careers when they leave government. So he does have the kind of person you’ve got to have if you’re president, to bring about any change. So the real question is, will they support him or will they go with the oligarchs? We don’t know. We’ll have to wait and see what happens. We can’t judge them based on their past associations. I don’t think any of them are actual representatives of an oligarch’s agenda. So there’s a chance they will support him and that they will be strong enough people that he’ll have the government that will actually do something. But you can’t take it for granted, because as I said, the oligarchs lost but they weren’t routed. They’re still there.

     

    MPN: What would a Hillary Clinton victory have meant for the United States and the world, particularly in terms of foreign policy?

    PCR: It would have meant war with Russia and China and the end of life on Earth. She’s an insane warmonger, she demonizes Russia and the president of Russia, calling him the “new Hitler.” She said that the South China Sea is an area of the United States’ national interest. You can’t be more provocative than this, and if you have a president who convinces Russia and China that they’re going to be attacked, they’re not going to sit there and wait. So we really have escaped Armageddon by the defeat of Hillary Clinton. This would have been the worst possible outcome imaginable. Of course, it would have been bad on the other score — jobs, I mean, she’s the agent of the big banks, they made her rich! She and her husband have a personal fortune of $120 million, given to them by the oligarchs, and their foundation has $1.6 billion, also given to them but not just by domestic oligarchs, but by oligarchs abroad. [The Clintons] sold influence for money.

     

    MPN: What is your reaction to the recount effort being led by Jill Stein? Who do you believe is behind all of these efforts?

    PCR: The oligarchs, obviously. I mean, Jill Stein couldn’t get any funding for her presidential campaign, but she instantly got something like five or six or seven times the amount of funding she got for her entire campaign, for the recount! Where did that money come from? Not her supporters. And what this is about … the oligarchs were positioned to steal the election for Hillary. But they got deceived by their own propaganda, that she was the shoo-in winner, The New York Times telling them that it was 94 percent certain that she would be elected. They didn’t bother to steal the election, because they didn’t think they needed to. And they were shocked, everyone was shocked — that is, not the people voting for him, but the media, the oligarchs, the established interests. They were shocked by the election results, and so they’ve used Jill Stein, who really has no standing in this issue, since it doesn’t involve her campaign, she has no chance of benefiting from a vote recount. So they’re using this corrupt woman, who sold out the Green Party, to try and throw a monkey wrench into the Electoral College. The only states being recounted are the three that he won which he wasn’t expected to win [Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin], and his margin in these three states is not very great. They’re not recounting votes in states that he lost by small margins, only where he won by small margins. This is an effort to steal the election from the working class who elected him, and Jill Stein is part of it.

     

    MPN: One of the reactions of the mainstream media has been to attack online news outlets which they claim are delivering so-called “fake news.” Your website was included on this list of alleged “fake news sites.” What’s your response to these claims, and who do you believe are the true purveyors of fake news?

    PCR: We know the true purveyors are the media, the press prostitutes. We call them “presstitutes.” The mainstream media throughout the West is totally corrupt and has no integrity. What you see happening is that the independent internet media is taking away the oligarchy’s control over the explanations that people receive. So everywhere you see the subscription rates of newspapers falling dramatically, the viewers of TV programs falling dramatically, and internet readership rising. And so this is an effort to try to discredit the people who actually tell the truth by identifying them with Russia. They are hoping that all the demonization of Russia during Obama’s second term has aroused fears that the “Russian menace” is back, and they’re hoping this fear is substantial and that by associating those of us who challenge their lies, with Russia, they will discredit us.

    Who’s funding it? We don’t know, because the people who prepared this list, no one knows who they are. When the Washington Post gave it [the group PropOrNot] all that publicity, they very carefully did not say who these people are. It is a new internet site that didn’t exist before a couple of months ago. Who is funding it? I would say the National Endowment for Democracy, which is a U.S. State Department-funded [organization]. It could be the CIA. It could be George Soros. But it is an oligarch operation, which, of course, involves the military-security complex, because they are the greatest beneficiaries, in terms of money and power, of all the threats, all the wars. They want a Russian threat, for their budgets and for their police state powers. Those are the people who are most likely funding it, but it hasn’t worked! All it did was to provide people with 200 sites they could go to, to find out what the truth is!

    I think it’s failed, but it shows the desperation of the oligarchs, and what they will do now is, they will use the people they still control, in the House and the Senate — the oligarchs will get some type of legislation passed that will put pressure on people who dissent from official lines of the oligarchy, that dissent from stories they plant in the “presstitute” media. And so it’s going to be perhaps harder to express dissent or tell the truth in the United States, but we’ll just have to see what they do to Trump. Some people say that he was always a fake, but that doesn’t make sense to me because the oligarchs didn’t need him when they had Hillary. And they clearly didn’t want Trump in the election. They tried to deny him the Republican nomination, and then they used the media against him in very vicious ways during the presidential campaign. Trump said once that he believes in revenge, and I hope he does. I hope he exacts revenge on the oligarchs.

     

    MPN: What has been the aftermath of the Brexit vote for Britain, and have the doom-and-gloom scenarios regarding the impact on the British economy come to fruition?

    PCR: No, of course not. The opposite! What’s happened with Brexit is, I think it’s been overturned. The United States is not going to permit Brexit, Washington won’t permit it. Now, this may change with Trump, but under Obama, you may remember he traveled to London to tell the British prime minister to forget all about leaving the EU. The EU is a creation of the CIA. It was created so that the United States could more easily maintain control of Europe. It’s easier to control the EU Commission than to control 20-something different governments. What has happened is, the United States government used three corrupt British judges that decided, “Well, the people may have voted, but you did not really have to pay attention to them, it’s all up to Parliament and Parliament can decide that we’re not [leaving].” And, of course, Washington is now lobbying the Parliament very hard, with promises and money and, no doubt, threats.

    So I don’t think Brexit will happen, it’s being overturned. The notion that it would take two years to get out — when that came out, instantly I said, “They’ll never get out.” Two years is all Washington needs to overturn it. I think it’s already overturned with that court ruling. So we had three two-bit punk judges overruling the majority vote of the British people, and they call it democracy! What kind of democracy is it? That’s not a democracy, when three two-bit punk judges who don’t amount to anything overrule the majority vote of the British people! And they call it democracy, oh boy! What a joke! There are not any democracies in the West. Europe is a collection of American vassals. It’s been that way since World War II.

     

    MPN: Italian voters recently voted no in a referendum on amendments to the nation’s constitution. What does this vote, in your estimation, mean for Italy and for Europe?

    PCR: It’ll end up being overturned, like the Brexit vote. Just like they are trying to overturn Trump’s election! I mean, that’s what this vote recount is about. It’s the oligarchy trying to overturn the people’s will, just like the three judges in Britain, like what happened in Greece [in the July 2015 referendum]. The vote, in itself, doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. Brexit hasn’t happened, I don’t think it ever will. We don’t even know if Trump is going to be president. But that’s the whole purpose of the vote recount, to block it. They wouldn’t be doing it otherwise. They’ve got all kinds of agents to use, all kinds of things to do.

    One of our best journalists, Chris Hedges, who has had to go independent because the prostitute media no longer will publish his work … he’s concluded that elections can’t change anything, only revolution can change things. I think that’s what the oligarchy is proving. They are proving that you can’t change things with elections, because it’s really not a democracy, it’s a facade, and when the people vote, in come the oligarchs and they overturn it one way or the other. How will they overturn the vote in Italy? I don’t know, but they’ll overturn it, or they’ll ignore it, or some judge will rule that Italian law is subject to EU law, that EU law is supreme. They can do all kinds of things.

     

    MPN: Do you believe that we are heading toward that revolution that Chris Hedges spoke of?

    PCR: I don’t know. It depends on the people. They don’t seem to be nearly as feisty as they used to be. In previous times in the United States, when we reached this kind of situation, the government was scared of the people and had to make concessions. I don’t see the government afraid of the people today. They’ve got a police state established, they’ve got internment camps built, they’ve militarized the police, the police are as well armed as the military, the police routinely shoot people down the streets. I just don’t know how hard the people have to be pressed. Maybe they just simply will cease to have any gain in their living standards and some slight declines over time but won’t actually be facing starvation and homelessness, as they have in the past. So who knows? I don’t know. But I don’t think they will succeed in changing anything with elections. Possibly, Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined, ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody. You can’t get change out of that.

    It could well be that Trump is already rich, he doesn’t need any more money, he has a big ego, and he wants to go down in history as the man who saved America, “Trump the Great.” So if he has that kind of a goal, then the oligarchs are up against a real formidable president. If he can find other people to back him, we can get some change. But it remains to be seen. We can’t know that in advance. That’s the hope. What the result is, we don’t know, but that’s the hope. The hope is … Trump has a huge ego, wants to be “Trump the Great,” wants to save America, and that that’s more important than having a few more billion dollars, that he doesn’t care about all these people, these oligarchs, they haven’t supported him. So maybe something will happen, we’ll just have to see. Maybe they’ll prove Chris Hedges wrong. But it’s hard to bet one way or another.

     

    MPN: What’s your take on recent developments in Syria, including the attempted invasion of Syria by Turkish troops, and what do you believe we’ll see in Syria going forward in light of a Trump presidency?

    PCR: As far as I can tell, the Russians and Syrians have won that war. They’ve defeated the Washington-supported ISIS. The Obama regime sent ISIS to Syria to overthrow [Syrian President Bashar] Assad when the Russians prevented our involvement. So that way we can pretend we don’t have anything to do with it. But I think the Russians, as I said, defeated ISIS. I think it could have happened much sooner, but [Russian President Vladimir] Putin kept pulling out, kept trying to appease the Europeans, hoping they would see they didn’t need to be American puppet states, but he seems now to have finished the job, more or less. I don’t think the Turks would be permitted to invade Syria, the Russians would just tell them no. And, I don’t think the Turks think they are a match for Russia or that the Turks are stupid enough to think Europe and the United States are going to come to their aid if they get in a war with Russia.

    These nuclear weapons are very, very powerful. Russia can wipe out all of Europe in a few minutes. For these itty-bitty European politicians to be running around fomenting trouble with Russia, they’ve got to be insane. There’s no way Europe can come out of this. The same with the United States. Here we are demonizing Russia and China. These are powerful nuclear powers. We can’t possibly survive a conflict with them, no one can. It’s all insanity, it’s nonsense. Europe is unable to produce leadership that’s intelligent. Putin, he’s intelligent. For some reason the Chinese can produce intelligent leadership. Who in Europe has intelligent leadership? Nobody. Maybe we finally have it with Trump, we don’t know yet. But there’s not any intelligent leadership, none in Europe.

    Be Sociable, Share!

     

    Print This Story Print This Story
    You Might Also Like  
    ___________________________________________
    This entry was posted in Front Page: Inside Stories, Inside Stories, Investigations, National, Top Stories and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
    • Pingback: Former Reagan Secretary: Oligarchs Purveyors of Fake News – Brutal Proof()

    • Pingback: 2016 US Presidential Election - Page 330 - MensTennisForums.com()

    • Jon_Schultz

      “There are not any democracies in the West”

      Are there any democracies anywhere? Democracy requires the use of a voting system which allows there to be a broad selection of candidates and efficiently selects the one(s) who best represent the electorate. Not much press is given to the subject and most people don’t realize it, but despite the incredible scientific technology of modern civilization our society still hasn’t figured out the best way to hold the most fundamental type of election, where voters choose one candidate out of three. The “two-party system” is a direct result of the method we use for holding elections.

      Jill Stein recognizes the problem but has endorsed a less-than-optimal solution (the “instant runoff” method). I have a draft article on the subject at MEVoting.com.

    • Pingback: Paul Craig Roberts: Oligarchs Are True Purveyors Of Fake News | The All American Blog()

    • Arthur Fern
    • Pingback: PCR Interview: Oligarchs Are True Purveyors Of Fake News | | Investing Matters()

    • Pingback: Former Reagan Secretary Paul Craig Roberts: Oligarchs Are True Purveyors Of Fake News | actualitserlande()

    • tapatio
      • Mike Rights

        You are in a room of mirrors. Your avatar picture is a racist pos commie that was sold out in a thousand ways and btw the commies were created by the “zionist fake jewish elite”. Trump is Americana. Its a mixed bag. He’s not going to pander to any one group.He actually believes in the NATION of America as #1. The world is way more complex and controlled than you think, and the true elite WANT you to hate the tribe of Ashkenazi jews who aren’t truly Israel in any way. Be an individual, ditch the commie cult!

    • GALT

      So, Paul, you continue to tell half truths, and there is no reason
      to expect Trump to challenge the “oligarchs”, since his primary
      goal would seem to me to gain more “acceptance”…..he has played
      the clown so long, that his “reputation” has suffered…..and because
      the lesson of history is that “words don’t matter”, his words didn’t matter
      either. Besides he is no more capable of “changing” anything than Bernie
      would have been….you have to understand the “problem” to solve it,
      he only cited the “symptoms”, he remains clueless as to the disease.
      ( he IS the disease, along with the oligarchs. )

      As for the american people, they will receive another lesson about
      “words” but whether it will be enough for them to start questioning
      “all the words” in the american historical mythology, is anyone’s
      guess. You certainly aren’t going to educate them with your half
      truths, even though your daring proclamation that we are neither
      a democracy, nor a “representative republic” is accurate.

      Whether “government” and it’s “owners” ever feared the people
      is a dubious claim, since the status quo can merely wait…..it took
      12 years to undo the Wagner Act with Taft Hartley which required
      a veto override to pass, and this was before the “american dream delusion”
      had begun to pick up speed…….

      And for all the hype of the war on poverty, the great society and the civil
      rights movement….things are worse than ever and the US engages in
      military conflict at will……despite what the people think.

      Trump will not unite them….he is a clueless dominant monkey, doing
      what dominant monkey’s do…..he just doesn’t bother to hide it, because
      unlike the rest, he really doesn’t know any better….and he is NOT
      a fast learner.

      So again, thank you for the half truths…..someday you will figure
      out what the “problem” is and/or have the courage to write about
      it. Until then, I’m sure you will have a market somewhere, even if
      it’s not a big a choir as you would like.

      • Jackbooted

        Many words, little to say even less to know. Please don’t bother next time.

        • GALT

          My thoughts precisely regarding Roberts, but thank you
          for your carefully thought out critical comparisons, eloquent
          defense, thorough analysis, poignant questions and
          cogent conclusions. I stand in AWE!

          • Jackbooted

            Proving exactly what I said.

            • GALT

              Again, my thoughts exactly…..you shouldn’t have bothered, but it was interesting that you don’t know where you are, and were compelled to
              read and respond to something which you “claim” has no value.

              And like the “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate” you are,
              you keep doing so.

    • Anpanman

      No one but Trump talked directly to the peoples problems? Why is the writer “forgetting” about Bernie?

      • orwell11

        Bernie wasn’t a candidate in the presidential election. Look up older PCR interviews where he addresses both Trump and Bernie as “change” candidates (at least in terms of their rhetoric). Try again.

      • siddham

        Bernie was never a genuine candidate

        • tapatio

          Sanders lost the nomination to HELLary ONLY because of Debbie Schitz and corruption in the Democratic party.

          Clinton represented same-old. NOBODY wanted same-old.

          • siddham

            Sanders never intended to win; that was clear from the first debate
            Both Sanders and the DNC were surprised by the response to his campaign

          • richardwicks

            Sanders did NOT lose the nomination.

            But he allowed it to be stolen from him.

            Consider this: If Sanders couldn’t stand up to one (admittedly very corrupt) woman, do you really think he would stand up to our corrupt banking system? How about our corrupt media system? Our corrupt defense complex?

            Trump is the first person I have seen in the executive office with some actual courage to speak truth to power. He is FAR from perfect, but compared to the last 2 administrations we’ve had, he’s well beyond perfect.

      • Mike Rights

        Bernie sold out and rolled over to one woman, his opponent Hillary, explain to me how he could have taken on the elite, the banks, the world, the media lies, and the market forces that ALWAYS fight socialism. His solution was tax the rich….won’t work, the rich control the money system and will just print more. We could take ALL the money from Americas rich and it wouldn’t get us through his 4 year term. Socialism and communism are systems of slavery. Bernie is weak and he lost because of that.

    • Douglas Jack

      Paul-Craig Roberts’ articles are invaluable for the insight which he brings from his research & experience. I’m impressed how he draws upon both left & right wing sources easily for the partial truths each hold. PCR has left a back door open in his statements about Trump’s presidency, considering Trump’s lack of public-service record.
      ORDER OF ‘OLIGARCH’ SIGNIFICANCE
      However PCR, given his decades of involvement & previously published research & opinions could help the public further understand that; there are various levels of the term “oligarch”, which is so loosely bantered about here. Bernie Sanders as well could barely muster revealing ‘billionaire’ (# seconds in 32 years) oligarchs as a general concept. We know that the Windsor royal family, Rothschild & Vatican royalty each represent holdings of over a ‘trillion’ (# sec. in 32,000 years) dollars. PCR in this interview points out the trillionaire level, but still only vaguely. Trillionaires own controlling shares of the privately held US-Federal-Reserve, Bank-of-England & Bank-of-International-Settlements. These are the master corporations which print-western-money for their own nefarious extractive linear 2-dimensional war & war-industry, GMO, pesticide etc purposes, own all other levels of banks, stock-markets, insurance, pharmaceuticals etc.
      ELECTION?
      Donald Trump’s so-called ‘election’ in a totally unverifiable hackable invisibly-computer-programmed, massive-coloured-delisting, Gerrymandered & other shenanigans is by no means an expression of the ‘will-of-the-people’ nor an accident. Donald is the choice of oligarchs. Yet, I’m so relieved war-monger Hillary did not receive the final nod & like PCR consider ourselves only blessed by factors of uncertainty.
      OLIGARCH-NETWORK
      Below each of these mostly invisible trillionaires are some visible billionaires out of ~1000 billionaires who in-turn have ~1000 multi-millionaire submissives. In our extractive, exploitive, ‘exogenous’ (Latin ‘other-generated’) economic system, “It takes money networked, to make money”. PCR from what I have read is not aware or revealing of the dependency mechanisms between these various ‘oligarch’ levels. Revealing oligarch levels, makes one susceptible to assassination. In the final analysis command & control starts at a very small top level, which all other decisions are submissive to. There is a Finance-Media-Education-Military-Industrial-Legislative-Complex, which is in control of western media but as well all other institutional & corporate aspects of western economy & society.
      Humanity’s response, considering the descent we have been plunging towards annihilation for 7000 colonial years, is to recover our millions of years ‘indigenous’ (Latin ‘self-generating’) ‘economic’ (Greek ‘oikos’ = ‘home’ + ‘namein’ = ‘care-&-nurture’) heritage of peace & prosperity in harmony with natural-science. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy

      • Mike Rights

        Yes I think he knows, and a few others know too. but, the people are a massive number and the elites at a super level are few. They HAVE to take the slow approach, which means that one election doesn’t matter to them in the long run. they just ,adjust, and move forward. We need a constant movement toward “republic” and freedom that starts with Trump but MUST keep going. Trump isn’t their choice but they aren’t broken because of him. They obviously wanted Hillary, you cannot argue against that. Is Trump fully aware, I doubt it but this is a small victory that we haven’t seen in 100 years of CFR chosen presidents.

        • Douglas Jack

          1) The ‘free’ media which Donald received throughout the election shows a preference by media owners. Who are these 6 owners & what is their agenda? I don’t buy into Donald’s supposed magnetic ‘personality’ as being the reason media gave him so many billions of free publicity.
          2) The Trump real-estate empire was as all others built on relationships in a descending order with other billionaires dependent upon trillionaire acceptance networked. What do these ‘higher-up’ investors in the ‘Trump’ brand expect?
          3) RE: “Republic”. Trump is a linear, extractive thinker & taker as is much ‘institutional’ republican institutional colonial thinking. Ever notice how none of these extractive industries make the ecology or even their communities stronger? Its been nothing but industrial degradation over 1000s of years as the air, water, soil & biosphere are extractively exhausted. Since the beginning of violent colonialism 7000 years ago, people out-of-repression-&-fear have lost their understanding of cultural ‘fractal’ (‘part-contains-the-whole’) organization of livelihood. With the violent colonization of ‘indigenous’ (Latin ‘self-generating’) Celtic Europe, cutting down of Celtic Polyculture Orchards & the imposition of violent hierarchy, Europe became so degraded that all our ancestors fled here as refugees. With failure of colonial governors to supply the needs, settlers inter-married & adopted 1st Nation law & economy. Before 1700 the majority of transactions & labour was performed using the String-shell accounting tools within 1st Nation Production-Societies as Economic Democracies. European mega-oligarchs panicked & ordered the burning of 1st Nation libraries, record-keeping town administrations right across Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, English & French Americas. Trump fits right in. He is their kind of guy. I’m still thankful not to be facing armaggedon with Hillary. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy/8-economic-democracy

          • richardwicks

            Simple, Trump was the “joke candidate” that could never, ever, possibly be elected – therefore the media promoted him, assuming he was the weakest candidate against…

            Clinton who has accepted billions in bribes through their fraudulent charity, and has proven herself to be a reliable asset when it comes to taking orders and following them blindly – so she was chosen to win.

            So the choice came down between the joke and the agent for the oligarchy.

            • Douglas Jack

              RichardWicks, Agreed RE: “between the joke for the oligarchy & the agent for the oligarchy”. Its important to understand the theatrical connection between world ‘trillionaire’ (# seconds in 32,000 years) oligarchs, 1000s of subservient billionaires, millions of subservient multi-millionaires, national-‘franchise’-governments, orchestrating of political campaigns, Hollywood, shows like ‘The-Apprentice’, comedy-the-Joke & indoctrination of popular will. Theatre such as 100s of foreign False-Flag events, Bad-guy-wars, Crocodile-tears, Presidential characters, villain-hero dramas real & fiction are part of careful planned oligarch orchestration of national mood.

              What people might do about this dead-end 7000 year-old colonial legacy is to learn about humanity’s 100s of 1000s of years old worldwide ‘indigenous’ (Latin ‘self-generating’) systematic heritage of distributed ‘fractal’ (‘part-contains-the-whole’) empowerment. http://www.indigenecommunity.info

              • richardwicks

                If Trump proves to be simply another pawn of the establishment, then at the very worst, Trump is no worse than Clinton.

                The important victory of this election cycle was exposing the corporate media for what it truly is – utter propaganda. That is a significant victory.

                • Douglas Jack

                  richardwicks, RE: “Trump is no worse than Clinton” only means damage in completely unexpected sectors of the living planet. Both are destroying. I agree with PCR that; from all indications Clinton is headed for thermo-nuclear war, but then as a puppet character, Hillary is a character trained-programmed to express only some aspects of oligarch antipathy.

                  Exposing corporate media propaganda is not new. Indigenous animists & colonial activists have been exposing, commenting-on, writing about colonial oligarch ‘split-tongue’ for many many generations actually 1000s of years.

                  To re-nourish the life-fibre, animists today must re-integrate media back into the collective multihome-dwelling-complexes & neighbourhoods where 70% of us live. Alternative media are stuck in the diminishing race for ‘funding’ their mini-institutions, when oligarchs are at the place of printing the very money we are after. Developing ‘community’ (Latin ‘com’ = ‘together’ + ‘munus’ = ‘gift-or-service’) involves recognizing & accounting for our complementary gifts, contributions & knowledge.

                  ‘Do-we-know-who-we-are-?’ is developing software for neighbourhoods to create websites with online Human Resource Catalogues HRC, mapping & accounting in Community Investment & Exchange Systems CIES. Media must be considered as an integrated / reciprocal part of a whole community economy. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/structure/9-do-we-know-who-we-are

                  • richardwicks

                    RE: “Trump is no worse than Clinton” only means damage in completely
                    unexpected sectors of the living planet. Both are destroying.

                    Clinton was threatening war with Russia which would inevitably have led to nuclear war. Putin has been very direct in stating that setting up a no fly zone in Syria would have lead to a direct conflict with Russia.

                    Clinton promised to setup a no fly zone in Syria. Repeatedly.

                    So the choice was between Clinton which produced a very real risk of a nuclear conflict, and Donald Trump who is a complete unknown. Nobody could be worse than Clinton. How can you possibly be worse than somebody that is threatening to end all life on earth?

                    Beyond that: Clinton is a war criminal, just as Obama is, just as Bush Jr is. These people are nothing more than genocidal murderers. Every war the US has been in, every bomb it’s dropped since 2001, was done based on lies. All these people belong in prison for life, at minimum.

                    • Douglas Jack

                      Totally agreed. Hillary breaks all the present rules & guidelines of nuclear detente by constantly encroaching upon, spending many 100s of billions of dollars to provoke Russia, China, Iran, Brazil & other spheres of influence. Its a miracle that we are even alive to be commenting upon this issue, much better than dead. Any reasonable nation such as Russia or China would have already blown us to smitherines based upon the aggressive murder of 10s of millions of innocent people which the west has propagated during the last decade alone.

                      But then again all indications from Trump, by the way he ‘acts’ (not just what he says) personally & in business, calls all humanity to reject the very system of hierarchal command & control by which both Trump & Clinton parasite. During Mohandas Gandhi’s time, animists from across India went beyond political activism (complain, lobbying, protesting against) to ‘Swadeshi’ (Hindi ‘indigenous’ aka ‘self-sufficiency’) implementing, developing Pro-cott, investment, sanctifying local business, collaborating, patronizing. Just 5% of the Indian market from British empire (Britain, US, Canada, Australia, NZ etc.) goods & services being affected with associated bankruptcies, was enough to bring independence.

                      This forgotten (institutionally alienated) ‘indigenous’ (Latin ‘self-generating’) economic is very powerful. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy

                      • richardwicks

                        But then again all indications from Trump, by the way he ‘acts’ (not
                        just what he says) personally & in business, calls all humanity to
                        reject the very system of hierarchal command & control by which both
                        Trump & Clinton parasite. During Mohandas Gandhi’s time, animists
                        from across India went beyond political activism (complain, lobbying,
                        protesting against) to ‘Swadeshi’ (Hindi ‘indigenous’ aka
                        ‘self-sufficiency’) implementing, developing Pro-cott, investment,
                        sanctifying local business, collaborating, patronizing.

                        You know what, brevity is the soul of wit, and one should eschew obfuscation.

                        If you have a coherent idea of what you want to say, please, go ahead and say it, but I have a feeling that you are just feeding me BS and I am calling you out on it, now. It’s annoying.

                        I mean come on, “sanctifying local business”? What does that even mean? Not much, because unless you are talking about having some religious institution either bless or give legal authority to a business, it doesn’t mean anything.

                      • Douglas Jack

                        richardwicks, RE: “sanctifying local business”. ‘Procott, Invest & Sanctify’ is a positive alternative to ‘Boycott, Divest & Sanction’. Boycott is ineffective by itself, such as the program for Palestinian rights needs to also include the positive. Rothschild, Windsor & Vatican-aristocrat shareholder control of the US-Federal-Reserve, Bank-of-England & Bank-of-International-Settlements is the foundation of Israeli financial subsidy & violent control complemented by BDS for the past 100 years against Palestinians. Palestinian divestment is just an example of trillionaire oligarch control worldwide. From my own Jewish roots, I witness that; Israel is being established as a ‘world-head-office’ for the Finance-Media-Education-Military-Industrial-Legislative-Complex.

                        ‘Sanctify’ comes from India’s ‘Swadeshi’ (‘indigenous’) program, which involves honouring local production & eschewing foreign imposition of goods & services until we have re-established Economic-Democracy. No artificial “blessings” just honouring the complementary talents, goods, services or economic relationships we have as communities. Swadeshi is an international program found within every ‘indigenous’ people on every continent & island. In North-east Turtle-island (N. America) Haudenosaunee call this the ‘Kaianerekowa’ (‘Great-Law-of-Peace’ aka ‘Great-good-way-of-kindness’). In southern Africa the same is called ‘Ubuntu’ (Nguni ‘Human-kindness’).
                        https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy/8-economic-democracy

                        Go-figure. Why weren’t any of us taught this in our colonial indoctrination at schools, religion, media, institutions & government)? You seem to be happy with your colonial mind-set, but if you ever want to ‘go-down-the-rabbit-hole’ & discover what lies beneath the indoctrination westerners perceive the world through, then follow any one of the Indigene Community web-links.

                      • richardwicks

                        I said, you’re speaking on gobbeldegook, and you can’t stop it even though I told you I was fed up with it.

                        You know why I went into this “new” field of Internet development when I got my degree in ECE in 1993? Because it was doing to destroy every bit of propaganda, and demonstrate that governments do nothing but divide us, when it became possible for anybody to talk to anybody else.

                        You are not conducive to discussion. Nobody needs to know anything other than government is a mafia, and media is propaganda. Ideologies are for ideologues, and movements are for toilets.

                      • GALT

                        “I mean come on, “sanctifying local business”? What does that even mean? ”

                        You really are a “willfully ignorant, functional illiterate”. Just as you attempted
                        your semantical judo below while ignoring all the added contextual explanations,
                        you once again expose your idiocy, by ignoring the added material, which would
                        have educated you as to the meaning you seek, were you capable of a minimal
                        level of comprehension.

                        Again, a simple dictionary would have helped you….here are some synonyms
                        for sanctify:approve, sanction, condone, vindicate, endorse, support, back, permit, allow, authorize, legitimize

                        You will note ( or maybe not ) that none of them carry a religious connotation,
                        although you are no doubt still confused regarding the larger context of
                        its intent or motivation. ( self sufficiency was a BIG CLUE but that could
                        just be me.)*

                        Whatever you particular area of insect specialization is: please restrict
                        yourself to it…..if we ever have a need that requires it, we may get
                        back to you……but don’t hold your breath.

                        *sarcasm

    • James Wherry
      • tapatio

        THE JEWS CERTAINLY MANIPULATE THE AMERICAN ELECTIONS BY DUMPING HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS INTO THE POCKETS OF THEIR PET CANDIDATES AND BY HAVING THEIR REICHSKANZLER BIBI CAMPAIGN FOR A CANDIDATE WHO STATED THAT HE WOULD TURN AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY OVER TO THE OUTLAW REGIME IN JERUSALEM.

    • dale ruff

      PCR has become Trump’s Goebbels, ignoring his vicious lies and stating we need an authoritarian to take on the oligarchs, as Trump, a globalist oligarch with an insatiable appetite for more wealth and power, appoints Wall St. billionaires to run the economy and far right propagandists and science deniers and generals to destroy the econoimy with the exact same program as Bush II and to start a war with Russia and China by bombing Iran.

      PCR ignores all this and promotes the fantasy that Trump’s only interest is in dismantling the oligarchy: he begins by cutting taxes for the rich and appointing bilionaire oligarchs. PCR is the intellectual defender of Trumpian neo-fascism, wearing a plastic cross and wrapped in a flag Trump, like Bush, was too cowardly to defend in Vietnam.

      Those who justify evil are more guilty than those who carry it out, wrote Jean Paul Sartre. PCR is guilty of justifying authoritarian rule of the man he calls Trump the Great and of accepting that the neo con war hawks Trump has chosen as advisors will change their spots because…………………………………………………..Trump the Great.

      Make Germany (oops! Amerika) Great Again. PCR is Trump’s Goebbels, providing intellectual cover for brutal policies, Big Lies, and authoritarian rule. He has no decency.

      • red letter

        Tell us exactly which of Trumps policy’s you disagree with and why? Any? Yet you are willing to overlook Hillary”s demented rantings which there are many. But you criticize PCR by using platitudes that are worthy of a liberal Professor or a gullible snowflake that refuses to accept the reality that the people voted, and trump won. I’m sure whatever the future holds you will hate it. Because that’s what haters do.

        • dale ruff

          If you don’t know yet about his lies about immigration, Muslim refugees, etc, any effort I put in will be dismissed because you are a blind sheeple.

          People voted and Trump got 3 million fewer votes. Wake up, sheeple.

          I hate only hatred. I love democracy, equality, justice and truth. You have voted for fascism, inequality, injustice, and Big Lies. I

          • red letter

            If you voted for Hillary you voted for someone that personified everything you hate..

            • dale ruff

              If you voted for Hillary you voted for someone that personified everything you hate..
              likewise if you voted for Trump who calls those who are not rich”morons” and brags about the sheeple who would vote for him even if he shot someone in broad daylight.

              If you voted for Trump, you vote for a fascist liar.

              • 45clive

                It depends upon WHO he shot in broad daylight;) I am an anti-violence peace-nik, but I do believe in self-defense and retribution. Since the US will not submit to the International Criminal Court, when most of the world’s major criminals are American, leaves only one option for justice.

                • dale ruff

                  He meant just if he shot someone…the meaning was clear. He was bragging that his followers were so “sold” (ie sheep) that even if he just murdered someone, they would still support him. His intent was clear. I too am a non-violent resister for over 55 years, and his comment was meant to indicate how blind his followers were. You probably knew that.

                  He was bragging about the blind loyalty of his followers: “”I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” Trump said.

                  • richardwicks

                    He was bragging about the blind loyalty of his followers: “”I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” Trump said.

                    I would like to see a source for this, given how many lies have been made up with regard to Trump. Remember this, “quote”:

                    “If I were to run, I’d run as a Republican. They’re the dumbest group
                    of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could
                    lie and they’d still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific.”

                    We actually know the source of that. Amy Schumer made it up.

                    • dale ruff

                      “Sioux Center, Iowa (CNN)Donald Trump boasted Saturday that support for his presidential campaign would not decline even if he shot someone in the middle of a crowded street.

                      “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” Trump said at a campaign rally here.”

                      One unconfirmed quote (which was not made up by Amy Schumer) does not refute the two you have denied but which I have proven are authentic. It’s time to show some integrity and admit you were wrong.

                      It is not the lies about Trump but the Big Lies of Trump that are a danger to the nation and world. You can see documentation of his lies at factcheck, politifact, and my articles at opednews.com.

                      • richardwicks

                        And not a camera to be seen in this world to record the event, much less a link.

                        Please show me actual evidence, like, a record of what he supposedly said, as in a video.

          • Average Joe American

            People voted and two Dem recounts went the wrong way for Hillary Clinton. Detroit was a travesty. Cheating was discovered in the primaries, on the Democrat side. If every district everywhere was recounted and all reports of electronic “anomalies” investigated, that “win” margin might not look so great, Dale. You don’t lose the States 30 to 20 against your party and cry foul without looking petulant, if not downright ridiculous.

            Dems want to dump the Scrabble board on the floor and start over? New election rules? How about going for two out of three? Would this make you happy?

            The Two Party System isn’t “broken.” It was rigged to start with. The rigging broke, is all.

            • dale ruff

              The vote was Clinton by 2.8 million. The Electoral College is overturning the result.. Bush took power when by one vote, the recount in Florida was halted. NOw Trump will take power having been defeated by nearly 3 million.

              700 attempts have been made to change or repeal the slave era Electoral College, by both sides.

              The 2 party system, for the 2nd time in 3 Presidents, has given us the least approved candidate. That’s not democracy; that’s fascism.

              • John

                You apparently didn’t get the memo: Amerika has only one party, with two faces. It’s always been this way, at least in modern times, and will always be this way until the dumbed down Amerikan sheeple awaken and find the balls to actually do something about it!

                • dale ruff

                  The memo is a lie: I support progressives taking over the Democratic Party.

                  Here are significant differences, even with the old party:

                  Vote on war on Iraq:
                  Repubs: 97% for
                  Dems: 40% for

                  Minimum wage:
                  Repubs: do not raise, eliminate
                  Dems: raise to $15.

                  Climate Change:
                  Repubs: it’s a hoax by the world’s climate scientists
                  Dems: address this grave threat

                  Taxes on rich”
                  Repubs: lower
                  Dems: raise

                  Gun reform
                  Repubs: don’t allow a vote on universal background checks (supported by 90% of public)
                  Dems: pass universal background checks

                  Immigration reform:
                  Repubs: demonize, deport, deny legal status
                  Dems: legalize law abiding immigrants

                  Healthcare:
                  Repubs: repeal and replace with ?????
                  Dems: move to single payer

                  Fact: polls show everyone one of the issues the Dems support are supported by most Americans. Even the old Democratic Party represented to some degree the will of the people, while the Republicans use minority control and obstructionism to block even voting on issues Americans want.

                  If I were a Republican (I am an Independent who disapproves of both Clinton and Trump), I would argue that the parties are the same, which decreases voter participation, which benefits….the Republicans.

                  Wake up!

                  • John

                    Keep taking that blue pill…pathetic!

                    • dale ruff

                      Keep trash talking = you lose.

                • richardwicks

                  Yeah, isn’t it great that Trump got elected? He’s neither a Republican NOR a Democrat. Will be an interesting 4 years, indeed.

                  • John

                    Hope springs eternal but, I highly doubt anything will change. Trump may have surprised the populace but he got elected (selected) for good reasons. No one makes it far much less to become a Presidential candidate without being approved by the powers that shouldn’t be. I hope I’m wrong but….

                    • richardwicks

                      Hope springs eternal but, I highly doubt anything will change.

                      There already has been changed.

                      Remember – when Trump said he wouldn’t necessarily be willing to accept the election results how the corporate media claimed that was crapping on Democracy? Now the very same media claims Russia hacked our elections.

                      How many people do you think didn’t notice this? Everybody that voted for Trump sure did, and so did a fair number of people who sat out, or even voted against Trump.

                      Corporate media committed suicide.

            • John

              The Democrats would love going for two out of three! They figured out how to go 6 for 6, remember? Anyone who would believe Hitlerry could win 6 consecutive coin flips deserves the government we have!

      • spartacus

        just your opinion mr . ruff , lets wait and see .

        • dale ruff

          Trump’s choosing advisor who are urging us to bomb Iran is not an opinion, nor is selection of fascist leader Bannon, nor Wall St billionaires, who will oversee huge tax cuts to themselves and deregulation, to run the economy is not opinion but decisions he has made.

          Would you have advised Germans to wait and see if Hitler was really a populist and socialist and would bring Germany pride and prosperity? His first act was to round up socialists, liberals, and dissenter and send to death camp at Dachau.

          You can wait; I will act to retrain fascism Amerika style. Those who waited for Hitler or Mussolini found themselves unable to change things. Bush II was also a leader without majority consent…and how did that go?

          • richardwicks

            You cannot know ANYTHING about what ANYBODY in the Trump administration is doing or intending to do, unless you hear it directly from their mouths.

            A common strategy of the corporate media is just to outright lie about what a leader is going to do, and as a result either provide cover or make a false commitment.

            • dale ruff

              If you had the guts to read my opednews articles, you would know that all my analysis is based on his words and actions. His words today: “Let there be an arms race.”

              Historically, arms races lead to war. That explains why he has chosen a team of neo con war hawks to guide us foreign policy.

              This is not about the corporate media, but about the words and decisions of Trump himself.

              • richardwicks

                If you had the guts to read my opednews articles, you would know that
                all my analysis is based on his words and actions. His words today:
                “Let there be an arms race.”

                I’ve already concluded you’re an idiot. You come to a BS conclusion, then you grasp fro straws to support your idiot opinion. In short, you’re looking to be a propagandist, not a reporter. You’re not a journalist, you’re an anti-journalist – and a bad one, which is why nobody pays you for your BS.

                • dale ruff

                  On the contrary, I am the rare independent who seeks out information, then forms conclusions. Your nasty criticism is because you don’t like the conclusions so you invent a fake reason to take me down, Fail.

                  You are just full of hatred because you don’t like my ideas but can’t formulate a rational (and civil) refutation. I dare you to find one quote or act by Trump that I presented which is not accurate. Put up or shut up. Nasty attacks are a sign of weakness and feeling threatened. I await examples of words and actions I present which are not rooted in fact.

                  “In a time of universal deceit, speaking the truth is a revolutionary act. G Orwell.

                  Those who oppose herd thinking rarely are paid; those who repeat it are handsomely rewarded. At 75, with enough money to live as I wish, I have no desire to conform or seek money. My mission, as Orwell wrote in Why I write is not to make money but to expose lies.

                  In reality, quite by accident and without effort, I have many readers. My article on debt at Quora has over 26,000 readers and I wrote it spontaneously as a response to a question, nothing more. The fact is, after 55 years of deep study and reflection, my knowledge, my work ethic (I do research about 8 hrs a day), and my composed thoughts flow out. Those who don’t like them snipe from the gutter.

                  Your descent into the gutter is part of my goal: to see the heads of conventional thinkers explode into a confession of impotence and blind rage, cursing and fuming. Thank you.

                  • richardwicks

                    On the contrary, I am the rare independent who seeks out information, then forms conclusions. Your nasty criticism is because you don’t like the conclusions so you invent a fake reason to take me down, Fail.

                    You claimed Paul Craig Roberts was calling for an authoritarian to be in power in the United States.

                    This is an outright lie, and your supporting, pathetic “evidence” either means you’re entirely insincere, or your sanity is questionable. I think you’re nothing more than a narcissistic lunatic that is irritated nobody cares about what you say, but they enjoy the spectacle that you are.

                    What you write is all about you, and I don’t care about you, and I don’t care about what you speculate about me. I’ve pointed to a single specific thing, over and over again, that is your false claim the Roberts ever called for an authoritarian to have power in the United States. Your response was pathetic and shows either you have very weak reasoning abilities, or you will use the weakest justifications to promote a lie, rather than admit error.

                    • dale ruff

                      Richard, I am telling the truth. If you promise to apologize for trashing me for telling the truth, I will give you the quotation. Deal?

                      If you admit that what you are calling is an “outright lie) is the truth and that your accusation is “an outright lie,” I will provide the documentation. Ok? As soon as you agree, I will show you where I got the quote. Deal?

                      • richardwicks

                        Richard, I am telling the truth

                        No, you’re not.

                        You falsely claimed that Paul Craig Roberts has called for an authoritarian to run the United States. Your support for this argument was laughable to the point of either you’re completely insane, or you’re completely full of crap.

                        If you promise to apologize for trashing me for telling the truth, I will give you the quotation. Deal?

                        No, I’m trashing you for lying. You’ve already given me the quote. This is why I’m questioning your reasoning ability at this point. Do you really think anybody can misread Robert’s quote to to point they can distort it into to meaning he is calling for an authoritarian to take power in the United States?

                        If so – you’re insane or you think other people are really stupid, which again means you’re insane.

                      • dale ruff

                        You are afraid to admit you are wrong and so you refuse my deal: if I prove I was telling the truth about PCR praisiing authoritarianism, you admit you were wrong. If I cannot, I admit I was lying. Deal? One of us is wrong: let’s find out….or will you dodge this fair deal out of cowardice. I can give you the quote in a minute. if you don’t take the deal and I prove you the liar, you will have lost all credibility. If I cannot provide the quote I lose all credibility. Ok. Deal?

                      • richardwicks

                        You are afraid to admit you are wrong and so you refuse my deal

                        I’m not wrong, and there’s no reason that I can see to bargain with a insane loser.

                        I was telling the truth about PCR praisiing authoritarianism, you admit you were wrong

                        No you weren’t, and no I didn’t. You’re a compulsive delusional liar, no making things up about me. Simple stated, I think you’re insane.

                        I’m saying outright, you’re a liar. There’s no “negotiation” necessary. You’re a liar. You’re not just a liar, but a malicious one. You lie about people you dislike, you defame, them, you slander them, you libel them. You’re moral garbage to me. I don’t make deals with garbage.

                      • dale ruff

                        That’s exactly what he said: only an authoritarian can stand up to the ‘oligarchs.” I knew you woud deny the clear meaning of his supporting Trump for being authoritarian and calling him Trump the Great. Your cowardice and dishonesty know no bounds.

                        I think most people are smart, which is why they voted against Trump and 60% disapprove, and only the facist right wants a Strongman.

                        See my article at opednews on Trumpocracy: the sadistic roots of the authoritarian personality, which describes not only Trump but his masochistic followers like yourself, who even when shown a quote praising authoritarian rule as
                        “a virtue” deny that it means what it says. PCR says we need an authoritarian ruler, and that is Trump the Great. No sane person would deny that his meaning is clear. So when you call me insane for believing his words mean what they say, you are looking the mirror with denial/projection, the very mechanism of coping for those unable to recognize in themselves a craving for authoritarian rule to subsume their freedom. I find this tragic, as have all nations that have tolerated authoritarian rulers, who always lead to disaster since they lack “consent of the governed” and must therefore rule with force, intimidation, and lies, relying on useful idiots like yourself to attack those who expose their lies and subterfuge.

                      • richardwicks

                        That’s exactly what he said: only an authoritarian can stand up to the ‘oligarchs.” I knew you woud deny the clear meaning of his supporting Trump for being authoritarian and calling him Trump the Great.

                        Dale, you’re misinformationist. I know precisely what Roberts has said. This is what he said:

                        “Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined, ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody”

                        It’s an insult to me, and anybody reading your absolute lies, that you think anybody would believe that describes an authoritarian. If you think that genuinely describes an authoritarian, you’re a moron. I don’t believe you do, nobody has thinking that broken without having to be on some sort of supervision.

                        Dr. Roberts has discussed “Trump the Great” as a possibility. Trump isn’t beholden to any party, any special interest groups, anybody. He wasn’t supported by his party, he was vilified by this joke we have as a “media”, and owes nobody nothing.

                        He can do whatever he wants, and it might just be, that Trump is such a narcissist, that he wants to go down in history as one of the greatest, most loved, presidents this nation has ever seen. He might do all the right things, for all the wrong reasons, but I’m willing to settle for the right things.

                        Here’s something we might stop doing, we might stop killing people in the 3rd world nations in the Middle East for the benefit of say… Genie Energy, which has the oil mining rights of the Golan Heights. Israel illegally signed away these rights in August 2013, in the same month Assad supposed gassed his own people. What a coincidence…

                        Oh, and it’s our “liberal” president pulling this BS with idiot lapdog clueless vermin like you defending it. We just went through 16 years of utter fascist scum controlling this nation. Almost 20, if Clinton has one, that psycho that helped destroy Libya and tried to do the same with Syria. With luck, all the people in the cabinet of both Bush Jr, and Obama, will be up for trial, as war criminals, because that’s what they are.

                        It’s funny morons still think that there’s a dimes worth of difference between the two parties. Amazing how brainwashed some people are. You’re brainwashed, and there’s no reason for me to argue with you, because you can’t look at this current situation objectively, you don’t have the knowledge, and you don’t have the reasoning capacity and beyond that, you’re fundamentally dishonest in my opinion.

                      • dale ruff

                        “. Nothing less than an authoritarian style and personality is a match for the well-entrenched ruling oligarchy and willful neoconservatives. ” PCR

        • dale ruff

          Sparticus didn’t “wait and see.” He took on the rulers. You shame his name, while using it to hide under.

      • Lillian Smith

        I agree completely with you. PCR is great on many things but on this one, I think he is wrong to put so much hope on Trump’s election. Contrary to most people, I actually believe that the Oligarchs intended for Trump to win in the first place and that Hillary was only the decoy.

        • dale ruff

          Why else would Trump appoint Woolsey as a chief advisor (CIA/Wall St) and then two Wall St. billionaire cronies to head Commerce and Treasury. This is like hiring arsons to put out a fire on which they have taken out fire insurance.

          • Lillian Smith

            Plus I think the whole election campaign was a farce. It was like watching a “Whack a Mole” game in reverse. All the GOP contenders came out with lame attacks on Trump and retreated back into the darkness, never to be heard from again! And the opposition, never rebutted anything Trump said, even the most egregious lies! LOL!!!

        • Anpanman

          Both Trump and Clinton are bought and paid for. Both awful for the 99%. Either one is a fine puppet with the oligarchs.

          • richardwicks

            It’s enough of a victory to discredit the corporate media.

            It’s true, Trump may not be any better than Clinton, but he could hardly be worse, but by electing him, it just put the final nail in the coffin of the corporate media. It was worth electing him just for that.

          • Lillian Smith

            You bet!

        • Average Joe American

          This may well be, Lillian. A lot of people legitimately fear that no matter what kabuki theater we are being shown, the PTB (whoever they actually are) will still get the results they want. Certainly, historically, those in control of central banks at the highest levels seem never to lose out, whatever may happen either politically or militarily. Was Hillary a decoy? PCR doesn’t think so, too much effort went into selling her victory to the American (and world) public before the final count.

          I don’t agree with Dale (I rarely do, too much ad hominem argument and irrelevant cut & paste factoids littering his debate style, too much misdirection leading the discussion off topic), that PCR is a modern-day Goebbels. Roberts states the evident truth: We need someone strong enough (or crazy enough) to take on the oligarchs (clearly not a Bernie Sanders or a Ron Paul, unfortunately). Is ego-driven Trump that someone? Roberts admits he doesn’t know, that time will have to tell.

          Personally I agree with him. When the stakes are planetary survival, I’d rather see the football in the hands of an unknown than controlled by someone who seems so clearly bent on restarting the Cold War, possibly even escalating it into a zero sum game with nuclear super powers, for the continued enrichment of the Military Industrial, Chemical, and Security Complex.

          This may all be another “reality TV” show for the Donald. He, and many of those who voted for him, may be in for a rude awakening. But a great many of them were also voting against an unthinkable alternative: Another four years of the same old status quo (which consists of gradual frog boiling).

          We could play Russian roulette with six bullets, or with some indeterminate number less than six. Just these two choices, given the warped US voting system. Which choice would a rational person make?

          • Lillian Smith

            I do not think that Trump will take down the Oligarchs, for the simple reason that he was selected by the Oligarchs. When the Mainstream Media gives you that much exposure, you know that you are anointed. As for the theatrics, well let us say they give Oscars for best performance. Sorry to be so cynical, but when I see certain things, my alarm bells go off. Besides, I seen a similar set-up in other country got an Eureka moment. To be sure, I first thought that the plan was to elect Hillary because no one would actually believe that Trump with the outrageous things he said and did would be elected but in hindsight, they must have know their audience better than I did and Trump it was from the start.

        • richardwicks

          I actually believe that the Oligarchs intended for Trump to win in the first place and that Hillary was only the decoy.

          If this is the case, they destroyed the credibility of Corporate media which has been their mouthpiece for at least 20 years, with nobody to replace them.

          • Lillian Smith

            No they have not. Americans still turn to the Mainstream media no matter what. Most are not even aware how the Media manipulates them. They think that they vote and make decisions on their own.

            • richardwicks

              No they have not. Americans still turn to the Mainstream media no matter what.

              The people that watch what you call “Mainstream” media either are very old people, or people who leave the television on 24 hours a day 7 days a week, and don’t really pay attention to it.

              Most are not even aware how the Media manipulates them.

              I’m a little doubtful of that, since we didn’t end up with the most criminal scum in history to win the presidency which we would have, if “the Media” manipulated people.

              Clinton is a warmongering murderous piece of scum, yet she still lost.

              They think that they vote and make decisions on their own.

              Undoubtedly SOME do.

              Honestly, do you think your average American believes that Russia hacked the US election system to place Donald Trump in the presidency, and that all these riots against Trump were spontaneous, and that all the media that doesn’t agree with the corporate garbage is “fake news”? What article brought about this discussion? Sure isn’t on MSNBC, Fox, CNN, New York Times, or the Washington Post.

              I can see the corporate media is dying because of the desperation of their marketing.

              Anyhow, I’ve said my bit, you can agree or disagree, I won’t argue this with you as I know precisely what is happening. There wouldn’t be an attack on “fake media”, if “real media” still controlled the narrative.

              • Lillian Smith

                But you seem to forget on thing. That it was the Corporate mainstream media that got Trump elected in the first place. So you see, the Mainstream media is still what counts.

                • richardwicks

                  But you seem to forget on thing. That it was the Corporate mainstream
                  media that got Trump elected in the first place. So you see, the
                  Mainstream media is still what counts.

                  If you say so. I really don’t care to argue the point partially because, like about 1/2 of the population today in the United States, I don’t even have a television.

                  • Lillian Smith

                    That is ok, because it was less than half of the population that voted.

                    • richardwicks

                      It takes about 15% of a population to guarantee a revolution. 20% of *all* Americans voted for Trump, despite the media attacking him non stop, despite not receiving a dime of support from the Republican Party, despite the Republican Party leaders attacking him non stop, despite the establishment attacking him non stop, despite Hollywood attacking him non stop.

                      Now, apparently the reason Trump won is because The Russians Hacked the Elections, and there’s the Fake News of course. Now 2 out 10 Americans voted for Trump, do you think they believe these claims from corporate media? Do you think people who voted for Clinton even believe these claims?

                      Corporate media just shot themselves in the head. Whether you realize it or not, 2 out of 10 Americans, AT LEAST, have clearly witnessed corporate media lying through their teeth. Not making an error, but outright lying.

                      • Lillian Smith

                        But that was part of the psy-op. By painting him out to be an outsider and anti-establishment, people wanted him more. Bad publicity is still publicity. If they really, really do not want you, they will just ignore you and you will get no air time, like Jill Stein and that Johnson fellow. No, definitely Trump was it. I know you do not want to believe it, but that is your choice.

                      • richardwicks

                        But that was part of the psy-op. By painting him out to be an outsider and anti-establishment

                        For goodness sake, he will be in office in about a month. Who cares what you are speculating on? Who cares if you are right are wrong?

                        The important thing is the corporate media has proven itself to be outright propagandists over the last 6 months, to be liars and fully 20% of the entire population can see this to be true, not only one “one side” of the political aisle, but on both sides.

                        I had family on the other side of the Iron Curtain when the USSR collapsed. I know what a collapse looks like. It starts with a collapse of confidence in the trustworthiness of your government and by extension the press, and ends in a repudiation of it.

                        Again, I couldn’t care LESS if Trump is a shill for the same old same old. It doesn’t matter other than he might get Ceaușescu’ed if he is. If he is, just wait for the fireworks in the NEXT election cycle. Joe the Plumber will be able to run and have a chance of winning.

                      • Lillian Smith

                        True. Who cares. The chosen one will win regardless. Joe the Plumber will be just as good as long as he signs on the dotted line when told to do so. As for the Media, they have always been propagandists, it is just that you have only noticed them now.

                      • richardwicks

                        True. Who cares. The chosen one will win regardless.

                        I have doubt that you have any intention of having a sincere discussion, or I may be wrong, and you’re incapable of one.

                      • Lillian Smith

                        And you are suffering from ‘cognitive dissonance’ and cannot accept that your precious Trump is the establishment’s choice and has been from day one.

                      • richardwicks

                        And you are suffering from ‘cognitive dissonance’ and cannot accept that
                        your precious Trump is the establishment’s choice and has been from day
                        one.

                        Sure, if the establishment was willing to sacrifice the credibility of their main propaganda outlet, i.e. the Corporate media, in order to accomplish this. On top of this, the Republican party demonstrated that it was functionally equivalent to the Democratic party when all the Neocon scum came out and endorsed Clinton – and this includes the entire Bush family.

                        Given that Trump is 70, and even if he were able to establish a dictatorship, this seems to be a very large sacrifice for what would amount to, maximum, of 15 years.

                        Seems to be a very large mistake in terms of long term planning.

                      • Lillian Smith

                        The establishment are not going to lose the credibility of their main propaganda outlet – Corporate Media for the simple reason that most people have not figured out how they are manipulated and coerced and never will. This is not something new and if you read Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda, euphemistically now called PR you will see that this has been around for a very long time.

                        And who said anything about Trump establishing a dictatorship? Trump, as you said is 70 years old but he did not run as an independent but for the GOP, so he can be easily replaced. In fact he might be hoping for that himself now that his work is done and he gave them the election.

                      • richardwicks

                        The establishment are not going to lose the credibility of their main propaganda outlet – Corporate Media for the simple reason that most people have not figured out how they are manipulated and coerced and never will

                        A declarative statement is not the same as a true one.

                        And as I said previously, I don’t really think you want an actual discussion. You present statements as facts, and expect me to respond to them as if they were.

                        Media credibility is gone. Really, do you think ANY American thinks Putin has setup Donald Trump as a mole in our government? That’s what corporate media is claiming happened, from “Unnamed sources in the CIA”. Oh here’s another, do you think Hillary Clinton was ahead in the polls right up until election night? Oh, what happened to all those women that were raped by Donal Trump? What happened to all them – where were they before Trump was running for president?

                        Nobody listens to US Правда today. And your statement that people will never figure out how they are manipulated. I had family on the other side of the Iron curtain. You simply don’t know what you are talking about.

                        But again, I think you simply want an argument, not a discussion and I don’t want an argument, so I will just quit responding to you.

                      • Lillian Smith

                        How did Trump discredit the credibility of the mainstream media when they were his major allies? I am not talking about the fake news in regards of blaming Russia for the election, what I am saying is that the news has always been fake inasmuch as the public has always been manipulated and will always be. This Russia business is disingenuous in that it is reinforcing Trump as some type of maverick, which in fact he is not.

                        That the whole election campaign was a charade is my opinion and I am not going to try and convince you or any other person. It is a statement of fact for me. Whether yo agree with me or not is of no interest to me. Others, however might start to remove the blinders from their eyes see what I see.

                      • dale ruff

                        What is your source for the 20%. The American Revolutioin, according to historians, had about 40-45% support. 20% voted for Trump based on his getting billions in free air time, including time to denounce the press he was manipulating. I like the way you make up “facts..” You demanded evidence from me and I provided it and you then ignored it. Now you owe us evidence for your figures. I provided evidence (which you then failed to acknowlede); now it’s your turn: put up or shut up.

                      • richardwicks

                        What is your source for the 20%. The American Revolutioin, according to historians, had about 40-45% support

                        Don’t care to argue this, even though I know it’s false. 15% has been a well observed tipping point, including the Bolshevik Revolution and the French Revolution, not to mention the collapse of the USSR in Russia itself, as well as in Poland and Yugoslavia. But really, I don’t care to argue this point, and I don’t care if you believe it’s correct or not.

                • dale ruff

                  This is correct: Trump got billions in free air time.

            • dale ruff

              Sept 2016: WASHINGTON, D.C. — Americans’ trust and confidence in the mass media “to report the news fully, accurately and fairly” has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year……
              Republicans who say they have trust in the media has plummeted to 14% from 32% a year ago……
              Democrats’ and independents’ trust in the media has declined only marginally, with 51% of Democrats (compared with 55% last year) and 30% of independents (versus 33% last year) expressing trust..”

              This is the same poll Gallup has done since 1972. The Republican distrust doubled after Trump began his ritual denunciation of the media (which got him a lot of media attention), saying” There they are back there (in the cage his rallies provided for the media)…the dishonest media…” Boo Boo.

              Meanwhile, he used the same media to spread his message of hate.

              Lillian, we are on the same page, I think, but the public trust in the corporate media has fallen to new lows, as has the trust in our new President-Select.

              • Lillian Smith

                Obviously it has not fallen enough.

                • dale ruff

                  The younger generation distrusts it most and uses alternative media, which, sadly, is full of both the truth and a fleet of lies. Much of the alternative media is being taken over by the corporate meida, often through dark funding. What is required is critical thinking skills, as the such tragedies as the “poorly educated” who would vote for Trump even if he shot someone in broad daylight (he boasted) who are unable to distinguish information from lies. However, most Americans distrust the media and Trump.

                  • Lillian Smith

                    You are correct Dale. The Alternative Media has been compromised. I have seen many suspect sites that are very cleverly dishing out misinformation if not outright lies. But as you said, the audience needs to be well informed and able to think critically to weed them out.

              • richardwicks

                Yes, I’m supposed to trust the Corporate Media to report on trust in the Corporate Media.

                Haha. Even with 32% having “great deal or fair amount of trust in the media” – is ABYSMAL.

                There’s always going to be idiots too. Who in their right mind would trust corporate media after they lied us into a war in Iraq (and fired Phil Donohue because he didn’t go along to get along), lies about employment statistics, lies about Syria, lies about everything?

                I would guess people who do not participate in the world force, and don’t exit their home much might be the only ones. How many people in the United States do you think are entirely retired?

                Wait, you’re one of them aren’t you?

      • Meridius Tesla

        Paid Zionist NWO Shill alert!!!

        • dale ruff

          I am an amateur jounalist, sadly paid by no one. Who pays you to troll? Zionist: I see Zionism as a racisit ideology currently being used to justify slaughtgering Palestinians. I am recommending you be fired for incompetence by your pimp.

          • richardwicks

            I am an amateur jounalist, sadly paid by no one.

            In order to be a paid “journalist”, either you have to be a believable liar willing to disseminate propaganda.

            .. or ..

            You have to be a very good investigative researcher, like John Pilger, Seymore Hersh, or Gary Webb. Become one of these and you might get murdered for it, like Gary Webb did, when he supposedly committed suicide by putting two bullets into his head.

            You’re not either but you did start off strong with an obvious stawman of Dr. Roberts:

            PCR ignores all this and promotes the fantasy that Trump’s only interest is in dismantling the oligarchy

            That’s just a false position of Dr. Roberts that you fabricated. After that point, you were no longer worth reading.

            • dale ruff

              My heros are Pilger, Hersh, Webb, Scahill, and others. I said I was an amateur journalist because several times a day, I am called a paid shill.

              My know PCR very well. His position is that we need an authoritarian and that Trump will have a top-down revolution to clean out the oligarchy, an obvioius absurdity since he is filling his cabinet with billionaire oligarchs and neo-con war hawks. He calls Trump, Trump the Great and has written that those who protest or call for recounts are seeking a coup and are funded by Soros.

              None of the great journalists you mention have any respect for PCR, who often writes for white nationalists websites, has the largest audience through Russian TV, and still calls the War for Freedom The War of Northern Agression.

              So sad you are unaware of his neo-fascist leanings, his ignoring Trumps history of corruption, using slave labor, his fraud, his choosing
              Bush era neo cons and racists, his choosing a white nationalist (racist) as his strategist.
              What a shame.

              • richardwicks

                My know PCR very well. His position is that we need an authoritarian

                Let’s stop right here before proceeding.

                Produce evidence that Dr. Roberts has ever called for an authoritarian within the United States in any position of power. I’m assuming that’s what you men by “we”.

                It might be also useful to point of your definition of what an “authoritarian” is. To me, it’s a person that calls for strict obedience to the government regardless of whether such demands for obedience curtails individual rights which is, I believe, the generally accepted definition.

                Now, if you cannot show that Paul Craig Roberts has EVER called for an authoritarian to be in power, this would indicate you are not only misrepresenting Dr. Roberts’ position, but most probably KNOWINGLY misrepresenting his position.

                If this is the case, you certainly are a shill. It doesn’t matter if you are paid or not, what matters is that you are producing propaganda by knowingly lying about somebody in order to discredit their other positions.

                If you are unable to produce evidence of your claim that Dr. Roberts has called for an authoritarian to be in power within the United States, all other claims you make subsequent to that claim are suspect because if you show a willingness to lie, nothing you say can be trusted.

                Now if you either show that I am in error, or admit that you are in error, I will look at your next claim about Dr. Roberts with equal scrutiny and we’ll repeat this process until either you demonstrate you are intentionally dishonest, or demonstrate I don’t know what I’m talking about.

                • GALT

                  “But I don’t think they will succeed in changing anything with elections. Possibly, Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined, ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody. You can’t get change out of that.”

                  This was a partial response to the question to Roberts, regarding
                  revolution from the above article, and taken with the rest of his
                  answer, it is hard to conclude that he is describing anything other
                  than an “authoritarian” for the purpose of initiating change and he
                  seems to be favoring that “change”.

                  FDR was essentially in that position and exercised that authority,
                  yet the results which were minimal and over time were rendered moot,
                  while the fantasy regarding them has lived on, with all the others
                  from american mythology.

                  It would seem that Roberts has clearly indicated that he doesn’t
                  expect change from anyone other than an “authoritarian” and it
                  it is rather strange and curious, that he would be in favor of any
                  kind of change that Trump might be capable of initiating, based
                  on his campaign rhetoric…..

                  Roberts would seem to “thrive” on being critical of most things,
                  which if anything can be useful in representing the current reality,
                  but his positions, if any, are nebulous…..and would seem to favor
                  conservative, rather than progressive inclinations.

                  Regardless of what they actually are, his thoughts here clearly
                  indicate that 1.) for any change to occur, it will be accomplished
                  by an authoritarian with a following, and that 2.) Trump may be
                  such a person.

                  He, of course, misses the obvious in that Trump’s intention may
                  be to become an “oligarch”…..and from what better place to
                  do it than the presidency?

                  • richardwicks

                    “But I don’t think they will succeed in changing anything with
                    elections. Possibly, Trump being the kind of very strong-willed,
                    determined, ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you
                    need for a leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some
                    conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody.
                    You can’t get change out of that.”

                    You think that describes an authoritarian?

                    Again, please describe what you think an authoritarian is? What was just described above was somebody that wouldn’t be able to be easily controlled. You know, a leader.

                    An authoritarian is somebody that believes citizens should have a blind respect for government, an unquestioning respect for it, even if that abridges the rights of the individuals. Obama and Clinton were authoritarians. Either you’re with us or against us, and 1/2 the people that disagree with me, well, they are simply deplorable. Right?

                    • dale ruff

                      richard, you are lying. I qujoted the PCR quote in which he uses the word authoritarian and describes it as a virtue. Why don’t you ask PCR what he meant? Oh yeah, he doesn’t allow comment or dissent, like an authoritarian who will no allow other voices.

                      When Trump said his supporters would vote for him even if he shot someone in broad daylight (which you also ignored), he was describing the people that authoritarians use: blind sheep. You have lost all credibility. You demand evidence, and when it is presented, you ignore it and double down. You have lost. Please don’t waste our time.

                      • richardwicks

                        richard, you are lying. I qujoted the PCR quote in which he uses the word authoritarian and describes it as a virtue. Why don’t you ask PCR what he meant? Oh yeah, he doesn’t allow comment or dissent, like an authoritarian who will no allow other voices.

                        For the 3rd time, describe what you think an “authoritarian” is?

                        What Paul Craig Roberts said about Trump, that he’s got an ego, and isn’t a shrinking violent, doesn’t equate to “authoritarian”. You really think this description:

                        “Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined, ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody”

                        equals “authoritarian”? Please give me your definition of authoritarian. I’ve given you mine twice.

                        When Trump said his supporters would vote for him even if he shot someone in broad daylight (which you also ignored),

                        I don’t believe it’s true. I’d have to see a video recording of it along with audio. I’ve seen entirely fabricated quotes made up about Trump, so until I see a video, I don’t consider it to be necessarily true, but nor do I consider it false.

                        Since I’ve seen entirely fabricated quotes made up about Trump, and I gave you the example of “If I were to run, I’d run as a Republican, They’re the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific.”

                        That has been widely repeated as true, but it’s not. Why should I believe your quote about Trump is true?

                        And having said that, I don’t care if some garbage propaganda corporate media outlet says it’s true. I’ve pointed out repeatedly, they are entirely discredited. They lied us into a war into Iraq after all, and then repeated this with Syria, and are STILL doing it.

                    • dale ruff

                      Trump lost the election by 2.85 million votes; 60% disapprove of him; 1 in 4 voted for him…no President-Select has ever lost by more or had less approval. Most Americans disagree with you, and you are a rank phony, as you demand evidence then ignore it when given.

                      Those who rule without having won elections (Hitler, Mussolini Bush II) must rule with violence, intimidation, and lies. You are spreading the lies, one of those Trump in his 1999 NYTimes interview called “morons.” You are the blind sheep he bragged about. You are deplorable, as are the neo-nazis, alt-right, and racists who voted for him. While the American voter rejected him, like Hitler and Bush, he used “legal” means to seize power.

                      Now comes the disaster that all unelected, unpopular leaders create, usually using war to create an illusion of unity and support. Show some integrity or get lost.

                      • richardwicks

                        Trump lost the election by 2.85 million votes; 60% disapprove of him; 1
                        in 4 voted for him…no President-Select has ever lost by more or had
                        less approval

                        I don’t believe for a second we have had an honest election. The reason there was so much confidence in our phony “news” that Clinton was going to win, is that it was assumed that the fraudulent system was well enough rigged.

                        The fact that NOBODY showed up to Clinton’s events tells me who people actually think – they couldn’t give a crap about her.

                        But we can fix this. Let’s have an election system that is traceable and can be audited. This is trivial to do. Voters have a stamp placed on some part of the skin of vegetable dye to prevent multiple voting (traditionally this is the finger), allow real time exit polling by independents, and have ballots numbers along with a receipt, so if there is a problem, the voter CAN be matched up to their ballot if the voter wants to reveal themselves.

                        Why do you think we have a 3rd world, banana republic voting system that is so difficult to audit?

                        Those who rule without having won elections (Hitler, Mussolini Bush II)
                        must rule with violence, intimidation, and lies. You are spreading the
                        lies, one of those Trump in his 1999 NYTimes interview called “morons.”
                        You are the blind sheep he bragged about. You are deplorable, as
                        are the neo-nazis, alt-right, and racists who voted for him. While the
                        American voter rejected him, like Hitler and Bush, he used “legal” means
                        to seize power.

                        Oh please. The last 2 Neocon scumbags we have had in the oval office have lied us into the war in Iraq, and Syria both. We have bombed 7 nations because of those criminals.

                        Even if Trump is as bad as you think he is, some sort of new Hitler, that’s no worse than the last two Hitlers we had. I don’t know what Trump will do, and that is a lot better than what Obama and Bush Jr did, and Clinton would have done.

                        Because it cannot be worse. We have had war criminals running the United States for 16 years. 1/2 of Congress, and all of the Oval Office in those 16 years are war criminals, and should be treated as such.

                        You must be some sort of ageing Boomer. I can generally identify people like you, because you are the only demographic in the United States that still thinks that there’s a dimes worth of difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, because their rhetoric is different. You are the most easily controlled and duped generation that’s ever infested this nation.

                    • GALT

                      Authoritarian and authority both begin with author, which comes from an ancient Latin word meaning “master,” “teacher,” or “leader.”

                      Being a “leader” requires that you have some “authority”, granted
                      willingly by “followers” or acquired by “other” means.

                      So other than the semantical judo, did you have a point or
                      another argument…….this government is essentially authoritarian,
                      and disregards the will of the people, so if its leader is to effect
                      “change”…..it would require the use of “authority” to do so.

                      That this “authority” would be used to “disempower” itself is
                      an unlikely result…..of course, Roberts is essentially wasting
                      time and not making any sense…..and he is not a progressive
                      thinker, or much of a thinker at all……and the “interviewer” here
                      is not very good at exposing this, or defining his position, although
                      this has been edited.

                      A little more semantical judo could include this:

                      : of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people

                      This presents a problem for the ignorant, who have no idea that
                      they have no “rights”, only the illusion of them, since “constitutional
                      responsibility” no longer applies……and hasn’t since 1939, when
                      common “law and equity” was discarded…..a fact which Roberts
                      is either also ignorant of, or too cowardly to address…..and which
                      would be applicable to every politician and journalist.

                      That Roberts makes an appearance here, is a tribute to his ability
                      to not actually have a definable position on anything….but his
                      comments regarding Trump and any possible change are
                      ridiculous, since no expectation of positive progressive change
                      will emerge from his tenure.

                      Which gives Roberts a “position” whether he likes it or not, and
                      gives you one also, under the same conditions.

                      Take care.

                      • richardwicks

                        Authoritarian and authority both begin with author, which comes from an ancient Latin word meaning “master,” “teacher,” or “leader.”

                        Being a “leader” requires that you have some “authority”, granted
                        willingly by “followers” or acquired by “other” means.

                        So, then, any leader is in an authoritarian system then…. That’s your definition?

                        You don’t argue in good faith, you don’t care if you’re right or wrong, all you care about is the perception you won an argument.

                        So other than the semantical judo, did you have a point or another argument…….this government is essentially authoritarian,

                        Well every hierarchical system is, and that’s ANY government, any corporation, even a union, nearly any organization.
                        I don’t get tripped up in semantics, and beyond that, I don’t waste my time talking to people who are more interested in being perceived to win an argument than being interested in evaluating their own viewpoint to test it.

                      • GALT

                        So, you have NO argument. Hardly a revelation, and so
                        easily exposed….as is the “wind talker” Roberts.

                        You are DISMISSED!!!! ( look it up )

                      • richardwicks

                        So, you have NO argument. Hardly a revelation, and so easily exposed….as is the “wind talker” Roberts.

                        Like I said, previously, in the post to which you are responding: “You don’t argue in good faith, you don’t care if you’re right or wrong,
                        all you care about is the perception you won an argument.”

                        I would be genuinely surprised if it’s not a grandiose self delusion of yours to believe you have any readership. This would indicate you have NPD but I am not psychologist.

                        If you actually do have any sort of readership, that’s troubling, because you put in no effort to actually reason or think but a good deal of effort to obfuscate and support what I will generously call “misstatements” of yours.

                        There were a LOT of people like you on the Internet back in the early days of the mid 1990s. One area I have to note has been a marked improvement, is there are many fewer of you today.

                        You are DISMISSED!!!! ( look it up )

                        Bye.

                      • GALT

                        Continuing to FAIL to make or support an argument.

                        Are you concerned about “my following”…….WHY?

                        And if you were, you would at least ATTEMPT an argument.

                        I don’t see one….but you do babble like the “person” you are seemingly
                        attempting to “defend”?

                        I usually classify people as “w.i.f.i.” before I dismiss them, but in
                        your case, you weren’t worth the effort.

                        Or I may be just getting lazy, having to deal with the small minded,
                        who think they can “babble” endlessly, because words have no meaning,
                        and you are “entitled” to your “opinion”.

                        This may be the only democracy you will ever know…..and you FAILED.

                        “The Master said….If names are not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language is not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success……..Therefor a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately. What the superior man requires, is just that in his words, there may be nothing incorrect.”

                        Confucius 551 -479 B.C

                        Our species still hasn’t quite caught on to this…

                        BYE!!!!!!

                      • dale ruff

                        Ad hominem attacks are both a logical fallacy and a confession of impotence: if you can’t present a rational argument, attack. Your attack is laughable. When you descend into the gutter, you discredit only yourself. Wake up and learn to argue rationally.

                      • richardwicks

                        Ad hominem attacks are both a logical fallacy and a confession of
                        impotence: if you can’t present a rational argument, attack. Your
                        attack is laughable.

                        I agree, however I have already pointed out that you have nakedly lied about Paul Craig Roberts, claiming he wanted an authoritarian in power.

                        Your response to this, was insane. Literally insane. I’m questioning your ability to do fundamental reasoning. I am literally questioning your sanity, based on your response when I challenged when you claimed Paul Craig Roberts was calling for an authoritarian to take power.

                        I’m seriously questioning if you’re sane. You strongly remind me of a 40 year old drugged out LSD burnout that was still a “student” when I was a student getting my EE degree. You’re just like him. He used to public the Daily Bolt. Are you Lev? Because that would be hilarious.

              • richardwicks

                And with that, I believe I’ve shown you’re a shill, paid or otherwise.

                You claimed Paul Craig Roberts was an authoritarian, I called you out on that considering it lie. And suddenly, no response from you.

                I’ll be following you from this point forward to correct your, I’ll be generous, “mistakes”. The good news is, I’m not paid to do this, I just hate propagandists and liars. Corporate media and identity politics is dead, and I’m going to do my part to bury both 6 feet under.

                • dale ruff

                  I responded with his quote calling Trump’s authoritarianism a virtue, form his essay Trump the Great. You are a devious phony, who demands evidence, then ignores it. Please don’t waste our time.

                  • richardwicks

                    I responded with his quote calling Trump’s authoritarianism a virtue, form his essay Trump the Great.

                    Yes, but it doesn’t support what you claim it does. Saying this:

                    Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined, ego-type person
                    that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a leader if things
                    are going to be changed. You can’t have some conciliatory, shrinking
                    violet who wants to get along with everybody”

                    doesn’t mean Trump is an authoritarian, and again, I ask you to define what you think an “authoritarian” is because it’s pretty obvious to me either you don’t know what an authoritarian is or, more likely, you are grasping for straws in order to support your lie that Paul Craig Roberts supports authoritarianism.

            • dale ruff

              Richard, this year I have had 120,000 readers at Quora, 26,000 on one article. I have tens of thousands of readers at opednews. I am retired and volunteer my services. What is your background: education, publishing history, etc that qualifies you to criticize me???

              Dodge!

              • richardwicks

                Richard, this year I have had 120,000 readers at Quora, 26,000 on one
                article. I have tens of thousands of readers at opednews. I am
                retired and volunteer my services. What is your background: education,
                publishing history, etc that qualifies you to criticize me???

                Oh that’s easy. I know what what the logical fallacy “argument by authority” is.

                Furthermore, I have caught you in an outright lie when you claimed that Paul Craig Roberts ever suggested that the US should be controlled by an authoritarian.

                I really don’t care where you’ve been published, and I’m fully aware of what an astroturf campaign is and how it works. Judith Miller was read by millions and won the Pulitzer Prize when she worked for the New York Times. By your logic, I have no qualifications to criticize her.

                Now again, demonstrate that Paul Craig Roberts has ever called for an authoritarian leadership in the United States, or retract your statement. If you can do neither, you’re OBVIOUSLY a shill, paid or not. Shills are usually paid to lie, but sometimes, they’re just so morally bankrupt, they’ll do it for free.

                • dale ruff

                  My argument was based on evidence you demanded, then ignored and switched the subject. You wrote, after I presented evidence: ” you were no longer worth reading”

                  I prove you wrong by both the evidence you demanded and then dismissed and my large readership of people who find me worth reading.

                  I already documented the PCR quote from his essay Trump the Great. You have lost all integrity and credibility by demanding evidence I already documented which you then ignored. You are a devious fake.

                  • richardwicks

                    My argument was based on evidence you demanded, then ignored and switched the subject.

                    You jumped to the logical fallacy of argument by authority by citing your, quite admittedly weak, credentials. I underscored the fallacy of their argument by pointing out that Judith Miller won the Pulitzer Prize for helping to lie us into the Iraq War when she worked for the New York Times.

                    Of course I reject your “evidence”.

                    I prove you wrong by both the evidence you demanded and then dismissed and my large readership of people who find me worth reading.

                    Here’s how you create a fake following. You hire a PR firm to create a bunch of fake accounts to give the impression that people follow a particular person or concept. I have no idea if that is being done with you or not – but beyond that, it’s irrelevant.

                    You do not have coherent thinking in my opinion. It doesn’t matter what other people think of you.

                    I already documented the PCR quote from his essay Trump the Great.

                    Yes, the quote is this:

                    Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined, ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody”

                    You are absolutely grasping for the thinnest of straws to conclude that describes an authoritarian, and to prove this point, I keep asking for your definition of authoritarian.

                    I’ll give you my definition of an authoritarian once again, it’s one that demands obedience to the government from it’s subjects even at that cost of their personal rights. Bush Jr. was an authoritarian when he said “either you’re with us or with the terrorists” – this created a false dichotomy, and certainly, who could be on the side of “terrorists”?

                    Neo liberals pull the same card, “either with us or you’re racist/sexist/bigotted/whatever”. Isn’t everybody who was DISGUSTED by Clinton just a basked of deplorables?

        • dale ruff

          Fake name troll alert!

      • 45clive

        If you are defending Viet Nam as a just war, if you defend the official story of 9/11, if you support the Project for a New American Century then you are no friend of mine. You have the moral IQ of a Bartlett Pear.

        • tapatio

          Hey!!! Pears are good.

      • Mike Rights

        You start off your comment with a spin, then lie, then misinterpret.

        • dale ruff

          You are entitled to your unsupported opinion, tho assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. I am betting you didn’t even read my article at opednews where I lay out the evidence and details. I dismiss your comment because it is just hot air.

          • richardwicks

            Time will tell what happens with Trump.

            Trump may be no better than Clinton, but he couldn’t possibly be worse than Clinton, or Obama, or Bush Jr. Maybe he’s no better either, but the point is, he can’t possibly be worse.

            • dale ruff

              Time has told: hate crimes are up, China is pissed, Russia is waiting to see if Trump’s advisors who are ugring bombing Iran, a military ally of both Russia and China, are an illusion (see Bolton’s Bomb Iran oped and Flynn’s “excise the cancer of Islam” quotes) or a threat. Guilaini proposed threatening Russia militarily, and while he was not chosen as Secy of State, he remains close to Trump. Trump plans to trash the Iran deal (he will claim they violated it) and then threaten them….this will wake up the Russian Bear, who will come to the defense of its military ally, as well as China, whom Trump has already angered with his denunciations (“rape”) and his provocation by talking directly with Taiwan.,

              Trump’s words have alreadcy caused a spike in hate crimes, anger from China, and fears of WWIII if he takes the advice of his advisors urging bombing Iran. Since he has no majority support, no consent, he must rule with violence, intimidations (such as his demanding a list from Energy Dept, a McCarthyite tactic of intimidation), and lies (Big ones!).

              Time has already told the toxic effects of his seizure of power while having most Americans distrust and disapprove of him.

    • Pingback: PCR Interview: Oligarchs Are True Purveyors Of Fake News - PaulCraigRoberts.org()

    • December 16, 2016 Russia challenges US to prove campaign hacking claims or shut up

      (CNN) The United States must either stop accusing Russia of meddling in its elections or prove it, a spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday. Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was “indecent” of the United States to “groundlessly” accuse Russia of intervention in the US election campaign, Russian state news agency Tass reported.

      http://www.ksfo.com/2016/12/16/december-16-russia-challenges-us-to-prove-campaign-hacking-claims-or-shut-up/#.WFQNW-UNGi0.google_plusone_share

    • This dovetails nicely in recent events. Dec 16, 2016 Reality Check: 5 Problems with CIA Claim That Russia Hacked DNC/Podesta emails… this is a Reality Check you won’t see anywhere else

      https://youtu.be/CNIrPLHVfdI

      • Douglas Jack

        Spot-on 5min. video for undoing MSM lies! Beyond lies, one should understand how oligarchs who own MSM have a long-term agenda, already mostly realized for command & control of people & planetary resources. Oligarchs are made somewhat in the image of the Jetson TV cartoon of past decades. They see themselves as a few living in bubbles on dead-planets with lots of toys. In their minds, ‘He or she who dies with the most toys wins’. This image reflects the upbringing of oligarch children, mostly in private boarding schools, where they were indoctrinated into institutional 2-dimensional linear hierarchy, separateness, violence, competitiveness etc. Oligarchs don’t generally have the close intimate loving cultural experience of family & neighbour acceptance within community. Institutional ‘education’ (Latin ‘educare’ = ‘to-lead-forth-from-within’) raises its wards as deficits to be filled rather than the original cultural education vision of ‘strengths to be nurtured’. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/structure/6-holistic-science

      • Jacquelinelwhitt

        Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj559d:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj559d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash559HomeClubGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj559d:….,……….