"Why Trump Won" - Absolute Claptrap From Trumpkin Jon Caldara

Jon Caldara's accompaniment to his byline insists he is president of the Independence Institute , which has generally professed to be a non-partisan source of opinion, information. But from his latest piece ('And That's Why Trump Won',  Dec. 24) in The Denver Post, it's clear he's merely another pro-Trump PR moron trying to sell people baloney at cheapo rates.

Without reciting too much of his codswallop, he basically has the chutzpah to compare the crazy Right's indignation at Obama's election with the Left's reaction to Trump, with the dazzling distinction that

"I swear to God, no one I know of broke down in tears when Obama won"

Well, maybe because deep in their fake news heart of hearts they knew- when all was said and done- Obama was a rational, sane man, not a psychotic serial pussy grabber, two -bit chiseling, faux business weasel, racist xenophobe and authoritarian Hitler-esque narcissist.  For all the false claims (e.g. "socialist") the Right tried to lay on Obama, he was in the end a steady, no drama Neoliberal, and former constitutional lawyer. Oh, and a bible-believing Christian to boot.

This normality contrasts to the deranged egoism and pure ineptitude of a nincompoop who tweets policy positions and economic opinions at will. Often to the extent that CEOs of major corporations (after his GM tweet yesterday- sending shares briefly plummeting ) are treating his Twitter offal in much the same way as a hazardous waste spill or a health scare, in other words as "crisis management". This according to CBS finance commentator Melanie Hobson this morning, who pointed out how corporate heads are sick at the thought of this loon, "alone in a room with his phone", just popping off at anything that comes to mind. This is the effing asshole Caldara and his Trumpy dregs voted into power.  Hobson then detailed how companies are strategy planning to respond to the next random attacks from this Twitter troll.

Then there have been Trump's lies which continue to undermine the very intelligence agencies that will be protecting his sorry ass - not to mention the nation he is supposed to defend.  The latest was the lie that spat out again from his twitter:

"The 'intelligence' briefing on so-called 'Russian hacking' was delayed until Friday, perhaps more time needed to build a case"

Which was totally shot down by the intel community noting the Friday briefing had always been planned for that day. There was no "delay". Is this something Caldara and his cronies can really live with the next 4 years (IF we're lucky)? A lying ass punk who can't tell the truth to save his sorry ass..

If ANY person isn't disturbed by these sort of responses and cavalier attitudes they need to get themselves checked out by a therapist because they aren't in contact with reality. I would nominate Jon Caldara to be first up for serious psychological evaluation before he writes his next column full of BS.

And don't get me started on all his business entanglements which as a recent Newsweek article ('Tangled Up In Orange'. Dec. 23rd, p. 26) put it:

"Already there is a situation where the President of the United States could be blackmailed by a foreign power"

Referencing Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's earlier divulged plan (to associates) that he "intended to impede America's use of a critical Air Force base in Turkey"  should Trump win the presidency. Then there are Trump's other foreign entanglements, including with the Duterte government in the Philippines. As author Kurt Eichenwald noted:

"The Trump family's dealings in the Philippines will set off a constitutional crisis on the first day of Trump's presidency if anyone in the federal government decides to abide by the law."

Referencing the emoluments clause of the Constitution.

So, let's get this straight: between Trump's rejection of critical intelligence briefings and conclusions, and his foreign entanglements not to mention the total lack of impulse control, we're all supposed to fucking sleep easy at night? Gimme a break! Also, give me the bland, "no drama" Obama any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

The emphasis on Obama's sheer boring normality as a former Illinois state Senator and Democratic Senator is crucial to emphasize here to contrast with the unhinged insanity of Trump. And this needs to be done repeatedly, because I fear too many in the coming weeks - especially in the media- may fall down on the job and not hold a severe enough spotlight on Trump. Opting to choose the easy path of "normalization" that his follower yahoos (like Caldara) already have.

 This is also essential in order to appreciate Caldara's next bit for the balderdash it is, referencing the Right's response to Obama's election - compared to the Left's justifiable angst at Trump's ascension thanks to hacks - including of voting machines in key states.:

"Celebrities didn't post videos of their panicked hissy fits. Teachers didn't scare little grade school kids with doomsday prophecies."

Well, they didn't have to because they instinctively recognized Obama's inherently sober temperament, control of impulses and sensible disposition ("Mr. Spock" persona) . Hence, such reactions weren't needed by any person grounded in reality, i.e. sane.. So Caldara's verbal excrement is merely the screeching of a deranged banshee knowingly agitated by the fact he has supported a psychologically unstable, autocratic buffoon who promises to wreck this nation.

But the biggest bunch of bollocks may be this:

"Watching this meltdown it's clear the anti-Trumpies aren't just poor losers. They just don't get that Trump won because in great part, they had been such poor winners. The hard-edged progressive left just couldn't help doing a dance in the public policy end zone. The Trump victory was the ref's flag for 'excessive celebration'."

Huh?  WHAT excessive celebration? You mean putting together a stimulus package without which this nation would likely have fallen not only into recession but depression? (And for which the Repukes only gave minimal lip service). OR - are you referring to getting the ACA through without any GOP votes - despite the fact that 20 million now depend on it - more than two thirds of them TRUMP voters!   Seems you missed the memo that a good part of your white- worker industrial base actually WANTED THIS PUBLIC POLICY DANCE, as you call it.

Meanwhile, Denver Post letter writer Mike Pisaano had this to retort in last Sunday's paper to Caldara's codswallop:

"Trump did not win because of a Democratic meltdown caused by  “excessive celebration” of Obama’s public policy successes on gay marriage, health care, and environmental and energy changes. It’s because not enough Republican voters are disgusted by a candidate who brags about assaulting women or has regrets about not dating his own daughter. It’s because not enough Republican voters are outraged when Trump disparages John McCain for getting shot down over enemy territory and enduring five years of torture in captivity. It’s because not enough Republican voters are appalled when Trump calls Mexicans rapists and promises to exclude people who embrace Islam from entering the U.S."

Letter writer Ellen Haverl was no less severe and unforgiving in assessing Caldara's claptrap:

"Jon Caldara doesn’t remember anyone breaking down in tears when Barack Obama won because, despite one’s issues with him, his win did not mean the end of civilization as we know it. The reason there is such backlash against the Trump win is because the upcoming leader of the free world is a narcissistic, racist, sexist bully who will rule with a heavy fist. I’m proud to cry and march and sign any document I can to let everyone know that a Trump presidency is unacceptable to me and millions of Americans who genuinely fear for the future of our country. It’s called free speech, something Mr. Trump is not a fan of."

Ah yes, free speech. Something the Trump backers endlessly invoked after Obama was elected, depicting him in every disrespectful way imaginable including as a witch doctor with bone through his nose in their blogs. But now,  in their faux righteousness , they somehow expect all of us on the Left to shelve any animosity and just sing "Kumbaya" as we line up behind Trump.. Sorry, doesn't work like that!

This turkey Caldara then bellyaches about how we have accurately described his anti-global warming lot as "deniers" when they've rejected the consensus science of climate change. He writes:

"It's not that they imposed massive environmental and energy restrictions...it's that they insultingly label those who've come to a different conclusion on global warming as 'deniers':

WTF are you talking about? What "different conclusion"? You cannot have a solid, or sound conclusion unless you base it on real science and the D-E-N-I-E-R-S have NONE! Let me repeat that, none - NO science which stands up to even the most basic scrutiny of thermal physics or actual climate science. These birdbrains don't even accept that the glaciers are melting when they're doing it in from of their stupid faces, e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRTInYTxLr4

So this is basic stuff. IF some semi-educated yahoo denies the sphericity of the Earth, then he IS a denier of the science of geodesy. If a similar yahoo denies  - despite all the evidence from ice cores - that more and more CO2 is warming the Earth then sorry, he IS a fucking denier! Case closed!

Or would Caldara rather we get into the realm of politically correct language and refer to his bunch as

"long term CO2 concentration serial disputators"

Or:

"climate science consensus equivocators"

Well, not going to happen. And just as his gaggle of climate DENIERS despise PC euphemisms, so do we. 

Caldara's op-ed babbling merely reaffirms again how badly divided this country is, and how much more divided it is going to become in the ensuing 4 years. The reason for an ever increasing gulf is simple: Those who treasure and abide by REALITY will never embrace bollocks, bullshit and fake news fantasy even from the likes of FAUX News' pundits, Trumpian pseudo-conspiracy creators and racist enablers. cheerleaders. And so long as enough people stand with the truth against recycled, misbegotten garbage and lies, this divide will remain. Oh, and as the garbage quotient grows so will the divide until two different nations will be effectively at war with each other.


See also: The Case For Beginning Trump's Impeachment NOW:

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/04/does-impeachment-begin-now-the-case-for-building-the-end-of-trumps-presidency-before-it-even-starts/

Of course GeeDumbya BUSH Was Responsible for 9/11

Whether, in fact, Donald Trump, aka "The Donna", could have prevented 9/11 as he claimed in a recent interview, is open to debate - given it's purely a hypothetical. The fact is irrespective of what he may have wanted or legislated, lesser officials may have dropped the ball, including in the intelligence agencies.

However, anyone who really knows anything about the background to 9/11 knows Gee Dumbya Bush, Jeb's illustrious brother, was responsible.

In 2011,  in a CBS interview, NY Times investigative reporter Kurt Eichenwald  noted that Bush's White House received numerous ominous warnings as early as May, 2001. These continued to ramp up over the months following, and the Bushies' response was to do nothing.

As Eichenwald put it:

"What I've been able to see are the presidential daily briefs before August 6 of 2001. And they're horrific, and they are - our reports are 'an attack is coming,' 'there are going to be mass casualties.' The worst of them, the Pentagon, the neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, as the CIA was coming in saying, 'al-Qaeda's going to attack,' said, 'Oh, this is just a false flag operation. Bin laden is trying to take our attention off of the real threat, Iraq.' Andso there are presidential daily briefs that are literally saying, 'No they're wrong, this isn't fake, it's real.'

I decided to check some of these claims by going to the official 9/11 Commission Report. I found the following, under the section: ‘The System was Blinking Red’

Page 254:

"Each PDB (President's Daily Brief) consists of a series of six to eight relatively short articles or briefs covering a broad array of topics; CIA staff decides which subjects are the most important on any given day. There were more than 40 intelligence articles in the PDBs from January 20 to September 10, 2001, that related to Bin Ladin. "

On page 255:

"In the spring of 2001, the level of reporting on terrorist threats and planned attacks increased dramatically to its highest level since the millennium alert. At the end of March, the intelligence community disseminated a terrorist threat advisory, indicating a heightened threat of Sunni extremist terrorist attacks against U.S. facilities, personnel, and other interests."

And further (ibid.):

"On March 23, in connection with discussions about possibly reopening Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House, Clarke warned National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice that domestic or foreign terrorists might use a truck bomb—their “weapon of choice”—on Pennsylvania Avenue.That would result, he said, in the destruction of the West Wing and parts of the residence. He also told her that he thought there were terrorist cells within the United States, including al Qaeda."

Note: Such cells were indeed already in the U.S. doing training runs with mock -simulated aircraft. As for the Saudi 9/11 hijackers themselves, all had been issued temporary visas by the Bushie State Dept. One had a student visa, fourteen had tourist visas, and four had business visas. None of them "snuck" into the country. Further at least six violated their visas.

Further (ibid.):

"In May 2001, the drumbeat of reporting grew louder with reports to top officials that “Bin Ladin public profile may presage attack” and “Bin Ladin network’s plans advancing.” In early May, a walk-in to the FBI claimed there was a plan to launch attacks on London, Boston, and New York.Attorney General John Ashcroft was briefed by the CIA on May 15 regarding al Qaeda generally and the current threat reporting specifically. The next day brought a report that a phone call to a U.S. embassy had warned that Bin Ladin supporters were planning an attack in the United States using “high explosives.”

Thus, Eichenwald's basis for blaming the Bushies was fully confirmed. Despite that, Nora O' Donnell, forever playing misplaced "Devil's Advocate" - even when it's obvious there no real reason for it, blabbed:

"Then when a lot of people hear this, aren't they going to say, 'This is another example of where, not just the Bush administration, but our intelligence community dropped the ball. They failed to heed the warnings that were in a number of these (documents) that went all the way up to the president of the United States.'"

Eichenwald promptly replied:

"Actually, the counterterrorist center of the CIA did a spectacular job, and that's what really comes down. You know, in the aftermath, the White House and others said, 'Well they didn't tell us enough.' No, they told them everything they needed to know to go on a full alert and the White House didn't do it."

Of course, the most sensational Daily Brief of all was that dated August 6, 2001 and headed: Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US . Bush received this while at his Crawford, TX retreat. (He took more vacations than any other president in his first year alone.) And how did Bush respond to this? He gave a quick glance then went to clear some ....bush. But what ought to have made his eyeballs pop out was the short paragraph reading (p. 255-56):

"An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an [—] service at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative’s access to the US to mount a terrorist strike."

I also found it interesting to read through the communication exchanges as the hijackings became apparent, especially for American Flt. 11. According to the transcripts in the Report (page 20):

FAA: Hi. Boston Center TMU [Traffic Management Unit], we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.

NEADS: Is this real-world or exercise?

FAA: No, this is not an exercise, not a test.

The reaction of NEADS (National Emergency Air Defense System), i.e. asking “Is this real world or exercise?” is instructional. Evidently, as came out later, no less than five different military “exercises” were planned and underway, including:

‘Operation Vigilant Guardian’ which simulated hijacked planes in the northeast sector-corridor. This definitely contributed to the confused response on the given day, as evidenced after NORAD received a phone call from Boston Center about a hijacking and Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins responded “It must be part of the exercise”.

Thus delaying critical response to the REAL attacks in NYC.

Then there was ‘Operation Northern Vigilance’ – planned months in advance of 9/11 (tracking to when the peak of terror warning were being issued in May, as reported by the 9/11 Report and Eichenwald) and for which jet fighters were removed from the east coast and sent to Alaska and Canada. Thereby, leaving a security hole at the precise date and region which would be most directly affected

As I learned more about these exercises, and the withdrawal of needed air security, the similarity to what transpired in the days before the Kennedy assassination was striking. Researchers learned only in the wake of that executive action that: 1) The Secret Service detail had been changed in the days leading up to the Dallas motorcade, with an inexperienced agent in Kennedy’s car, while the more experienced guy (Cliff Hill) protected LBJ, and 2) The usual Army security detail from Ft. Sam Houston, TX was removed so their presence was nowhere on Dallas’ streets on Nov. 22, 1963. Ordinarily they’d have had building oversight, ensuring no open windows and have had snipers posted themselves as a counter measure.

Were the 9/11 military exercises, planned in advance as a cover or distraction to make effective air defense response more unlikely? The basic answer is we don’t know, although the extent of withdrawn protection makes one suspicious.

Again, no one is saying the Bushies committed the attacks on the day, but they had to know the security bonanza that would fall their way if such attacks could be made to appear by “surprise”. Especially given Bush’s popularity was at an all time low before 9/11. Barely 36%. It shot up to past 90% afterwards as he donned the mantle of "national protector."

Thus, like it or not, Jeb needs to admit his bro was responsible for 9/11.