President Donald Trump's decision to pull back U.S. troops from their positions in northeast Syria, which he announced on October 6, has provoked a virulent outcry against him from the war party, which dominates elected officials in both parties, think tanks in the Washington, D.C. area, and most of the nation's media. They responded to his announcement with a flood of disinformation and outright lies, which is typical of the anti-Trump diatribes that has been their modus operandi of the last three-plus years, as they have tried to protect the imperial geopolitical status quo, and its predilection for wars.
Not Impeachment, But a Coup: Dems Attack On Trump is a Disgusting Defense of Collapsing Imperial Order
As the Democratic Party leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives are racing to impeach Donald Trump, the President tweeted on October 1, "As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a coup." The Democrats who have begun impeachment proceedings, such as Representatives Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler, have been demanding the removal of Trump from office since virtually the day of his inauguration. With the announcement of a "whistle blower's" complaint that Trump abused his position to demand that Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky aid in digging up "dirt" on Joe Biden, his possible opponent in 2020, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had previously tried to tamp down discussion of impeachment, suddenly shifted her position on September 24, and the race for impeachment was on.
What led to this sudden rush to judgement against Trump?
This article was co-authored with Paul Gallagher
While most eyes watching events unfold at the UN Climate Action Summit were focused on the abused and rage-filled teen, Greta Thunberg, the truth about who is writing her script came out later that day, on September 23, when Bank of England Governor Mark Carney delivered his warning that, according to the largest banks in the world, no alternative to investments that shift industry “from brown to green” will be tolerated.
The inevitable, yet sudden firing of U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton by President Donald Trump, on September 10, offers him the opportunity to return to his campaign pledge to end the "endless wars" of his predecessors, and to pursue mutually beneficial, cooperative relations with the other great powers, Russia and China, which he promised would be a major focus of his foreign policy. It was inevitable that Trump would dump Bolton, as the renowned war hawk was betraying Trump's stated intention to not just end the wars, but also his commitment to put an end to the regime change policies and fake "nation building" which have characterized Bolton's career as an operative of the famed "Military Industrial Complex", during which he has loyally pursued the geopolitical doctrines serving the interests of the British Empire. In recent months, Bolton has been engaged directly in the sabotage of Trump's major foreign policy initiatives, at times acting as though he were the President.
This article includes contributions from Barbara Boyd
In recent discussions, Schiller Institute founder and President Helga Zepp-LaRouche has emphasized that there is not a single economic problem which could not be solved by U.S.-China cooperation. She noted that the personal relationship between Presidents Trump and Xi, forged during an initial summit in Mar-a-Lago, Florida in April 2017, and deepened during Trump’s visit to Beijing in November 2017, offered hope that the United States might engage in a collaborative relationship with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which could even include Chinese participation in modernizing America’s rapidly deteriorating infrastructure.
The G7 nations engaged in a three-ring circus of obfuscation, while demonstrating a convincing display of their institutional policy bankruptcy, at their August 24-26 summit in Biarritz, France, where they sidestepped discussion of the real issues facing humanity, by avoiding any discussion of the single, defining matter before mankind: The irreversible bankruptcy of the entire London-run trans-Atlantic financial system. While the circus was underway in Biarritz, the real agenda was presented quietly, without much fanfare or publicity, in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, on August 22-24. There, at the annual meeting convened by the Kansas City Federal Reserve, a gang of central bankers and other financial swindlers called for a "regime change in monetary policy", in a desperate attempt to keep their empire intact. As described by the Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche, "The real story is that the Jackson Hole meeting declared a coup, what they themselves call a 'regime change in monetary policy'. They are openly demanding the issuance, by Central Banks, of 'helicopter money,' which would basically eliminate the last aspects of national sovereignty of governments, by giving the authority to the central banks to directly pump fiat money both into official state, but also private channels—and naturally, this is also supposed to all finance the Green Deal."
To anyone who has been paying attention to the exposure by this and other LaRouche publications of the lies spread in the media to support the fabricated narrative of Russiagate, and the anti-science fraud of man-made climate change, there were three very interesting stories in the last week which usefully put a spotlight on this process. The three stories covered different themes, but had a common thread: Lyndon LaRouche and his movement's long history of prescient analysis, which is why it remains a significant factor in shaping U.S. policy today, after LaRouche's passing on February 12, at 96 years old.
Now that legitimate warning signs are flashing that a “significant correction,” or even a global financial collapse is imminent, the usual gaggles of idiots pontificating in mainstream media venues are madly pointing fingers at President Trump. He is to blame for the crisis, they proclaim!—he is wrong for focusing on the Federal Reserve and interest rates; or else he caused the crisis by launching what they call a “trade war” against China. The empty suits in the media blather on about the danger of “inverted yields” on bond markets, while they argue about whether the U.S. or China is “winning” the alleged trade war. They put forward a blizzard of confusing talking points, ultimately designed to convince listeners that there is no alternative but to “batten down the hatches,” and “stay the course.”