No Remorse For Hillary 182

I am hopeful that the commendable discovery process involved in US litigation will bring to light further details of the genesis of Christopher Steele’s ludicrous dossier on Trump/Russia, and may even give some clues as to whether Sergei Skripal and/or his handler Pablo Miller were involved in its contents.

The decision by the Democratic National Committee to sue the Russian Government, Wikileaks, Julian Assange personally and the Trump campaign is an act of colossal hubris. It is certain to reveal still more details of the deliberate fixing of the primary race against Bernie Sanders, over which five DNC members, including the Chair, were forced to resign. It will also lead to the defendants being able to forensically examine the DNC servers to prove they were not hacked – something which astonishingly the FBI refused to do, being instead content to take the word of the DNC’s own private cyber security firm, Crowdstrike. Unless those servers have been wiped completely (as Hillary did to her private email server) I know that is not going to go well for the DNC.

I cannot better Glenn Greenwald’s article on why it is a terrible idea to sue Wikileaks for publishing leaked documents – it sets a precedent which could be used to constrain media from ever publishing anything given them by whistleblowers. It is an astonishingly illiberal thing to undertake. Nor is it politically wise. The media has done its very best to ignore as far as possible the actual content of the leaks of DNC material, and rather to concentrate on the wild accusations of how they were obtained. But the fundamental crookedness revealed in the emails is bound to get some sort of airing, not least as the basis of a public interest defence.

I have often been asked if I regret my association with Wikileaks, given they are held responsible for the election of Donald Trump. My answer is that I feel no remorse at all.

Hillary Clinton lost because she was an appalling candidate. A multi-millionaire, neo-con warmonger with the warmth and empathy of a three week dead haddock and an eye for the interests of Wall Street, who regarded ordinary voters as “deplorables” (a term she used not just once, but frequently at fund-raisers with the mega-wealthy). Hillary Clinton conspired with the machine that was supposed to be neutrally running the primaries, to fix the primaries against Bernie Sanders. The opinion polls regularly showed that Sanders would beat Trump, and that the only Democratic candidate who Trump could beat was Clinton. Egomania and a massive sense of entitlement nevertheless led her not just to persist to get the candidacy, but persist to rig the candidacy. She then proceeded to ignore major urban working class battleground states in her campaign against Trump and focus on more glamorous places. In short, Hillary was corrupt rubbish. Full stop, and not remotely Wikileaks’ fault.

Wikileaks did not go out to get the evidence against Hillary. They were given it. Should they have withheld the knowledge of the rigging of the field against Bernie Sanders from the American people, to let Clinton benefit from the corruption? For me that is a no-brainer. It would have been a gross moral dereliction to have done so. It is also the case that Wikileaks can only publish what they are given. Had they been given dirt on Trump, they would have published. But they were not given any leaks on Trump.

I should put in an aside here which might surprise you. I like Anthony Weiner. I have never met him, but I watched the amazing 2016 fly on the wall documentary Weiner and he came across as a person of genuine goodwill, passion and commitment, undermined by what is very obviously a pathological illness. I realise that was not the general reaction, but it was mine.

But – and now I am going to really annoy people – I have to say that from an international perspective, rather than an American domestic perspective, I am also not in the slightest convinced that Trump has been worse for the World than Clinton would have been. Trump has not, to date, initiated any new military intervention or substantially increased any military conflict during his Presidency. In fact his current actions more closely match his words about non-intervention during his election campaign, than do his current words. Despite hawkish posturing, he has not substantially increased American military intervention in Syria.

My reading of the reported chemical weapon attack on Douma is this. Whether it was a false flag chemical attack, a pro-Assad chemical attack, or no chemical attack at all I do not know for sure. But whichever it is, it was used to attempt to get Trump to commit to a major escalation of American involvement in the war in Syria. So far, he has not done that. The American-led missile attack was illegal, but fortunately comparatively restrained, certainly in no way matching Trump’s rhetoric. All the evidence is, and there is a great deal of evidence from Libya and Afghanistan, that Clinton would have been far more aggressive.

That leaves the dichotomy between Trump’s rhetoric and his actions. Certainly there is every sign of a sharp tilt to the neo-cons, His apparent preference in his press conference with Macron today for an extended presence of France, the former colonial power, and US troops in Syria is deeply troubling. His sacking of the sensible Tillerson from the State Department, and his appointment of the odious John Bolton as National Security Adviser all appear to be terrible signs. But still, nothing has actually happened. There is a reading that Trump is placating the neo-cons with position and rhetoric while his actions – in Syria and in what a hating political class fails to acknowledge has all the makings of a diplomatic coup in North Korea – go in a very different direction.

It is beyond doubt that Hillary, who cannot open her mouth without denouncing Russia for causing her own entirely self-inflicted failure – would be taking the new Cold War to even worse extremes than it has already reached, to the delight of the military-industrial complex and her Wall Street friends. It is open to debate, but I would contend that it is very probable that President Hillary would have launched a major attack on Syria by now, just like she presided over as Secretary of State in Libya.

So my answer is this. Firstly, Clinton caused her own downfall by arrogance, and by failing to grasp the alienation of ordinary people from neo-liberal policies that impoverished them while the rich grew massively richer. Secondly, I strongly suspect that if Hillary were President, more people would be dead now in the Middle East.

So no, I have no regrets at all.


Finally, a change of policy on this blog.

For thirteen years now it has operated with a policy of not accepting donations, except for occasional legal funds. It has now reached a size and cost, not least because of continual attacks, that make income essential. It is also the case that due to change in personal circumstance I am no longer in a position to devote my time to it without income – the need to earn a living caused the blog to go dark for almost five months last year, and the last six weeks this journalism has stopped me doing anything else to pay the rent. So, with a certain amount of pride swallowed, here is your chance to subscribe:

Support This Website

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations

182 thoughts on “No Remorse For Hillary

1 2 3
  • Adrian

    It will be beneficial if the discovery process does get into the nuts-and-bolts of things. Hard to imagine, though, the Dems will allow this – for it will undo the propaganda campaign that has focused on Trump and can be traced to the Russophobia-fueling lies in Salisbury and Syria+.

    As noted in an earlier thread, on the Skripal situation, in late 2016 a private outfit named CrowdStrike fabricated word of an “Ukrainian artillery hack” by the GRU – this provided CrowdStrike and the US intell community the needed “high confidence” re Russia being responsible for a DNC “hack” – and this (amplified by recitation of CS agent Dmitri Alperovitch et al’s false claims in the Washington Post etc.) preceded Obama’s sanctions against Russia.

    Cyber-security expert @jeffreycarr, among others, has debunked the GRU attribution by CrowdStrike: but, as with the Christopher Steele “dossier”, the false reports in the mainstream press created the narrative and, no doubt, helped construct the FBI illusion of things.

    Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats in the USA want to reveal all – and posture around the “no collusion” stance – and steer clear of the “no hack” evidence as the latter would harm the ongoing military desire to stoke a war, cold or hot, with Russia.

    With Christopher Steele, Pablo Miller, Sergei Skripal in the UK script of this Spring and more sanctions against Russia based on smoke-and-mirrors – the official deception reached a place of convergence.

    It would be welcome to see the DNC undo their media campaign with this lawsuit.

    • Antony

      Could get interesting. After summer 2014 Dutch intelligence was (camera- Net) eye witness to Cozy Bear people hacking into a lot of stuff, including DNC servers, and tipped off the NSA about that.
      Finally those huge NSA archives (in Utah?) can become useful to the 99% of Americans who paid for that extravaganza without knowing. Any missing data from HRC’s closet server, DNC group servers, FBI texts or calls should be in there! Use US law to extract those rotten teeth.

    • Stu

      Speaking of manufactured evidence.

      Much has been made of Donald Trump jr meeting with RUSSIANS in June 2016. However the media have been very quiet on the fact that the founder of Fusion GPS met with one of those Russians – Natalia Veselnitskaya – twice on the same day (before and after DTJ).

      It looks possible that Fusion GPS were attempting to set up fake Russian connections to Trump in 2016. I would wager that the original plan was to use this to attack him but it was shelved when the Pussy Grab tape emerged and his poll numbers crashed.

  • CanSpeccy

    A good assessment of Trump, and of the uncertainty concerning the future of his presidency.

    Given Bernie Sanders’s interest in running in 2020, Trump might cut the ground from beneath Bernie’s feet by introducing a free market version of Bernie’s proposed universal employment guarantee.

    The abolition of unemployment could be done in several ways as I have discussed here, and here.

    Specifically, I propose is that governments auction wage subsidies. For example, if it is determined that the minimum wage should be $15.00, government would invite employers to bid in a competitive auction for x number of job subsidies. The employers bidding closest to $15.00 an hour would get the subsidies, i.e., payment by the government of the difference between the hourly wage bid-price and $15.00. That way, everyone seeking work whose work was worth any positive amount could be assured a job, since employers would only be paying what, under the prevailing market conditions, the available labor is worth. At the same time, employers would have to bid a fair price for the available labor, since the number of subsidies offered at auction would be limited.

    There are, of course, other ways of achieving the same end. For example, the elimination of the minimum wage, combined with the introduction of a negative income tax scheme, that would bring the incomes of those able to command only a low wage in the market up to a living wage.

    By ensuring the availability of work to everyone without regard for their ability, three things would be achieved. First, even the poorest workers would obtain work experience and thus increase the value of their labor and hence their future earning potential. Second, young people who are most at risk of unemployment would be saved from the idleness that leads to trouble of various kinds, including crime and mental illness. Third, by making available to employers who can use it, low-skill labor at dirt-cheap rates, some of the manufacturing, e.g., in textiles, that has been off-shored by the Western nations can be recaptured, which would add at least marginally to national GDP, and restore the industries that provide the raw materials, machines, and technology, and R and D on which those basic industries depend.

  • Yalt

    It certainly was illiberal, it may have been politically unwise, but maybe that doesn’t matte (liberality isn’t even a question but it’s possible they still care about political success to some extent). But I thought at least one primary motivation of the lawsuit was exposed by an e-mail I (and presumably millions of others) received within an hour of the filing of the lawsuit.

    From: Tom Perez
    Re: We’re suing the Trump campaign

    As a DNC supporter, I want you to be the first to know: Today, the DNC is filing a civil lawsuit alleging that Russia perpetrated a brazen attack on American democracy.
    Thank you, as always, for your support.


    Tom Perez
    Democratic National Committee

    Contributions or gifts to the Democratic National Committee are not tax deductible….If you’re ready to elect Democrats in all 50 states, make a contribution today.

    Thanks, Tom, that helps clear things up. Here, have my last dollar.

    The one remaining mystery is how they compiled their recipient list. Subscription lists they got from certain journals and magazines? Anyone that ever requested a Democratic ballot in a primary election? Putting together an e-mail list from the latter would be a lot of work; all they would have is a name and address.

  • Basil Fawlty

    Interesting perspective Craig, but you forgot to mention someone – Seth Rich. He’s been pretty much identified (by both Wikileaks and to name but two ) as the source of the DNC emails. Shortly after said leak of the DNC emails he was shot 4 times in the back whilst walking home from a bar. Interestingly, John Podesta discussed punishing the person responsible for the leaks (ironically in one of the leaked emails). I’m sure it was just a coincidence…..

    • Anon1

      Getting in the way of the Clinton crime cartel can be very dangerous to one’s health.

    • fred

      That’s what mobsters tend to do to people they feel have betrayed them. Apart from Russian mobsters that is, they pardon them and let them live abroad with a nice house and car as an example to budding young traitors of how generous and forgiving they are.

    • Doodlebug

      Like yourself I’m tempted to wonder whether the Skripal incident and the Seth Rich murder aren’t points on the same pentagram.

  • DiggerUK

    Ignoring deplorables desperate living standards did for Clinton. You cannot impoverish people forever and get away with it.
    For me, the greatest campaign slogan Trump came up with was “if you’re gonna vote, vote for anybody but Clinton”.
    He is a gross human being. But if I was American, and a gun was put to my head and I was ordered to vote for one of them, I couldn’t in all honesty have voted for Clinton. Sad, but true…_

    • Skyblaze

      Not really. Trump just told people what they wanted to hear because he contradicted himself all the time. The desperate but gullible cherry picked comments they agreed with ignored the rest and hope he wasn’t a typical lying politician….but they were wrong

      • Woke Too Late

        Yes really! Trump is deeply flawed but still much preferable to Clinton. If he manages to peace with North Korea, gets out of Syria (or at least not escalate the war), and doesn’t start a war with Iran then he will have far exceeded my expectations and will earn my respect.

        • Andyoldlabour

          They are three really big “ifs”.
          Let us take North Korea first. Trump intends to go into a meeting with Kim, only if preconditions are met – doomed to failure.
          Syria – the US has no intention of getting out of Syria because they have around 4000 troops there illegally and still want to get rid of Assad.
          Iran – Trump wants to dismantle the nuclear agreement, simply because it was Obama’s idea. If he pulls the US out of this agreement, Iran will react because it will have demonstrated that the US cannot be trusted at all.
          Truimp is a total loose cannon who changes his mind frequently and lies all the time.

          • Woke Too Late

            You have to consider the article in the context of the choice presented. The choice was between Hilary (more war) Clinton or Donald (he seems to be talking about jobs & less war) Trump. I wanted Bernie. I didn’t want Trump, but i definitely didn’t want Clinton.

            Is North Korea doomed to failure? The talk is that China has guaranteed protection for North Korea if they give up their Nuclear Weapons. May be true, may not be true. But this is an outcome that would appear to suit everybody (Trump, China, South Korea, North Korea) apart from (what might be called) the US deep state (who would lose a reason to have troops, bases, and nuclear weapons in the region). Yes, it might not come to anything, but we wouldn’t be aware near here under Clinton. And that’s the difference.

            Maybe Trump would like to be out of Syria but isn’t allowed. Maybe he’s just trying to palm off the mess on to France. Maybe the missile strike on 14th April was, essentially, just a meaningless show, red meat to the neo-cons just to keep them off his back. I really don’t know, but it’s a real possibility. Under Clinton I think we would definitely know and it would be a whole lot worse.

            The Iran deal is a worry. I have never been clear why Trump has so consistently considered it a bad deal. But nothing can be done (militarily) to Iran if the US don’t subdue Syria. The truth is probably that Iran is too big to attack, so the real risk is that Iran will feel they have no choice but to develop their own nuclear missile. But, everyone knows that Iran has always (since 2001/2) been a target for US attacks (regardless of any deal).

            Trump lies, so does Clinton, so did Obama, so did Bush, so does the US, so does May, so does Johnson, so does Blair, so does UK, etc.

            A weakened Trump in thrall to the US deep state might be the real risk, rather than Trump as an individual.

  • Anon1

    Absolutely spot on, Craig. The commenters here were going into meltdown over Trump’s impending destruction of Syria and WW3. I said at the time, wait to see what he actually does. And what did he actually do after all the rhetoric? He bombed a few empty warehouses. Everyone was happy. The Russians, the war hawks, the peaceniks. All sides were placated and the whole thing was deescalated. Assad was sent a warning and Trump showed he wasn’t a Russian puppet. It was a masterful move.

    Donald Trump is proving to be an outstanding President. Not only by not getting the US involved in any pointless conflicts abroad, but bringing jobs back to Americans, bringing unemployment down, bringing the North Koreans to the negotiating table such as no American president has managed before him. And still managing to upset all the right people, including the left. Contrast with the endless cycle of War and debt offered by the crooked Hillary.

    Even the Democrats’ great hope of nailing Trump, the giant nothing burger that is “Russia collusion”, is falling apart. So much so that they are now having to go back at least 30 years into Trump’s sex life to try and bring him down. It’s pathetic.

    • Republicofscotland

      “Absolutely spot on, Craig. The commenters here were going into meltdown over Trump’s impending destruction of Syria and WW3.”

      Maybe not WWIII, however moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, will only heighten tension in the region, which as we’ve seen has led to more deaths.

  • Anon1

    Oh and I have no sympathy for Bernie. After all that was done to him by crooked Hillary, he went on and endorsed her!

    And I doubt very much he would have defeated Trump, whatever the polls may have said. The polls gave Hillary a 98% chance of winning.

    • Kerch'ee Kerch'ee Coup

      He did not seem to generate much enthusiasm \m in his home-state.Vermonters I spoke to expected him to follow this course .He would , have trimmed his sails to the wind even sooner than Trump.

      • Jayeff

        Just out of interest, what percentage of the population of Vermont have you spoken to? 10%? More? Less? Was it a representative sample?

    • Jayeff

      You reckon Bernie should have thrown his toys in the air and stalked off in a huff? Wouldn’t that have been a grown-up sensible thing to do! He clearly thought that Clinton was a marginally better bet for the USA and its citizens than Trump – or, more to the point, a marginally less bad bet – and, in what was always going to be a two horse race, did what he thought best. Also – the polls may have given Clinton a 98% chance of winning, but her approval rating was way down on Bernie’s. That ‘98%’ is totally irrelevant to your argument!

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Jayeff April 25, 2018 at 10:31
        Jill Stein offered to stand down and give the leadership of the Greens to Sanders – I don’t believe he even bothered to reply.
        He is no fool, so he must have known at least some of the dark history of the Clinton pair, yet still supported her as a candidate for the Presidency. As long as the US has just the highly biased two party system, with impossible barriers set up to stop any third party getting into the debates, nothing changes – Tweedle Demoprats v Tweedle Repugnants.
        If Stein had got into the debates, she would have wiped the floor with Clinton and Trump.

    • Republicofscotland

      Of course Sanders went on to endorse a fellow democrat, what is unusual about that. Sanders is described as a democratic socialist, and even though Clinton is a neocon warhawk, if she’d won (and I’m not backing her for one second) Sanders may have gotten the odd concession with regards to socialist reforms, or inequality.

  • Skyblaze

    Disappointing. Just a “but Hillary…” and What if type of argument used countless times already

  • TFS

    Meuller is safe pair of hands and I’m sure history would show this to be the case.

    The investigation is an attempt to kept Trump on his toes and following the Neocon/Israeli agenda.

  • CardinalBeat

    Brilliant! Thank you so much. A keeper, for sure, to be saved and shared just as often as I can. Big respect for the (not-so-great) USA. ????

  • CardinalBeat

    Brilliant! Thank you so much. A keeper, for sure, to be saved and shared just as often as I can. Big respect from the (not-so-great) USA. ????

  • Ngoyo

    Have to agree. That Trump’s bark is worse than his bite has been clear since his very conciliatory victory speech and the CBS 60 Minutes interview which followed. Even his so called Muslim ban was a far cry from his campaign rhetoric, same for The Wall, deportations and so on down the line. He even had some good words for Hillary after he won despite having threatened her with a special prosecutor during the debates.

    Hillary “we came we saw he died” Clinton on the other hand seems to be absolutely nasty. I have no doubt that while uttering suitable humanitarian platitudes, she would have slaughtered many by now. Hillary is a vicious wolf in sheep’s clothing, while Trump seems to be more a skunk in wolf’s clothing. He may nauseate you but not kill you.

    • Republicofscotland

      “Have to agree. That Trump’s bark is worse than his bite”

      Wel it depends on what Trump is barking at, Trump is trying hard to find a way to break the 2015 accord with Iran on nuclrar weapons, it’s said that Rex Tillerson wasnt pushing that particular agenda enough so he was replaced. In contrast, Tillerson’s replacement Mike Pompeo is a long time opponent of the accord.

      Now with Iran covertly backing conflict in Syria and Yemen against western proxy fighters, the need to break the deal has never been greater.

      “When you look at the Iran deal, I think it’s terrible,” said Trump.

      Europe, Russia and China, aren’t as keen to see the accord broken, and they will take more convincing.

    • Jo Dominich

      I cannot agree Trump’s bark is worse than his bite. Moving the USA embassy to Jerusalem is highly inflammatory and designed to derail the so called peace process in the region. In addition to which, he has cancelled all funding aid to the Palestinians. His words are not worse than his actions. He has appointed in Bolton and Pompeo a War Cabinet. He should not be supported or praised for anything – the man is a dangerous megalomaniac. It’s only because the midterms are upon us that he hasn’t done anything amounting to overt aggression but it will come – the writing is on the wall.

      • Ngoyo

        I don’t see how Trump is a dangerous megalomaniac. Pretty much all the predictions of doom arising from his election have not come to pass. This is true on the economy, stock market, immigrant roundups, Muslim ban, North Korea attack, Iran attack etc etc. Even the Syria attacks, especially the last one, have been just slaps on the wrist. The man has been quite moderate relative to his rhetoric. Besides, if he was a dangerous megalomaniac why would he be restrained by the impending midterm elections? He should be praised for what he does right and criticised for what he does wrong, thats the best way to mould his presidency from below.

        The move of the embassy to Jerusalem while provocative is actually a blessing in disguise. The Palestinian issue cannot be solved by a two state solution. Not in a meaningful way. Which is to say, the Palestinians actually get a state with real borders and sovereignty. I think a one state solution is the only real solution now. And Trump has unintentionally(?) began to lay the ground work for that!

  • Old Microbiologist

    You have correctly identified many of the issues in America. For example, the Black minority in the US is only 15% of the population and the self-identified Gay population is 3.5% yet both are vastly over-represented in Democratic politics , MSM, and Hollywood productions. The middle and working classes suffered disproportionately compared
    to the wealthier 1% who actually increased their net worth at the expense of the lower 2/3’s of the population. This was a major factor in the voters turning towards Trump and away from HRC. She was, as you say, a horrible candidate (maybe the worst in American history) and clearly the DNC hasn’t yet understood their hubris and lack of respect for the left leaning citizens. I am always amazed that so many minorities and working class voters still support the Democratic party which clearly no longer represents them.

    I also agree that HRC probably would have moved hard from day one in office to push the neo-con PNAC agenda forward. That likely would result in a real war with both Russia and China and likely the end of humanity.

    With Trump you have to watch what he does and ignore what he says. His gift is in marketing and he is an expert at misdirection. He tweets amazingly ridiculous and highly inflammatory stuff and the MSM then shifts their entire focus to attacking whatever nonsense is in the tweets while he furthers his agenda. Like you say, he is slowly doing everything he promised in the campaign yet all the time swimming upstream against both parties including the Deep State and the neo-con and neo-liberals. We will see how it ends up but you can only judge him by his actions and not by his rhetoric. The plutocrats just can’t seem to understand that as it is so vastly different than politics as usual in Washington. There are a few things he hasn’t touched yet and one I would do soon if I were him would be to eliminate the NED which was created by Executive Order by Reagan. That is the source of funding which is managed by John McCain and put to use in fomenting color revolutions and misdeeds in other nations which run outside the Dept. of State process (often contrary to American national interests) and is not under any Executive or Legislative supervision or accountability. USAID runs parallel frequently and frequently the Soros NGO’s also contribute. It is this liquidity that funds a lot of the PNAC agenda which is still on target yet rarely mentioned.

      • Old Microbiologist

        Among many others. I live in Hungary and whenever McCain visits bad things follow. Every false flag chemical attack in Syria closely follows a visit by McCain and the same is true in Ukraine for some increase in aggression. In Ukraine the Kiev forces bomb the Donbass daily but it ramps up a lot after McCain visits. We all pray he does fastwith his terminal brain cancer. Personally, I might return to the US just to piss on his grave. He is along with a Soros, HRC, Pelosi, Graham among the worst people in America who foment death and destruction around the world.

      • Old Microbiologist

        Not really. You can’t lump all minorities together. Hispanics are for legal purposes considered people of color despite actually being caucasians. Also, minorities in the USA includes 5%Jews and now 6% Muslims. You have to be very judicious when looking at the data. It also includes a large number of illegal aliens who shouldn’t be being counted at all. Orientals also make up a fairly large group as well.

        What is especially interesting is that in the US military minorities make up just over 50% of the enlisted soldiers yet less than 5% of the officer ranks. That is not due to discrimination but reflects that college graduates would rather go into more lucrative careers than the military and this is especiially true for minority graduates. If you examine the death rates in US wars it is overwhelmingly more for minorities which does in a sense reflect institutional racism but really reflects the problem that some minority groups do not test well in the entrance batteries and can only perform in low IQ jobs like infantry. This is why the death rate is higher for relatively less educated minorities and reflects the education bias in the US due to socioeconomic and cultural issues.

  • Xavi

    Hillary and the DNC are giving Trump a run for his money as the greatest embarrassments ever to afflict America. Not only did the former contrive the most embarrassing defeat in US political history – despite huge funding and propaganda advantages over their chimp rival – they have since nailed down the most embarrassing ever reaction to a political defeat. They are history makers who have achieved things that will never be surpassed..

  • quasi_verbatim

    Off-topic, but I note that Quisling Sturgeon has been left with egg on her face as the Welsh have done a deal with the May regime over the repatriation of Brexit powers.

    The Welsh of course have enjoyed their Act of Union with England since 1536 and this has once again paid dividends.

    • reel guid

      The Labour Welsh Government have abdicated control of key powers returning from Brussels which are powers over what are devolved issues by definition. What’s more they have abdicated on behalf of the Welsh nation for nothing more than a nominal promise that these powers will return to the Senedd after seven years. Nothing is codified. They’ve surrendered power for a verbal assurance. Westminster has no intention of keeping that promise.

      In the meantime devolution in Wales will be completely undermined. This power grab drives a wedge under the devolution settlement and sets the precedent of UK ministers having the power of veto over Welsh Government business. That power will not be wrested back easily. We will surely see a coordinated campaign by the mainstream media to ridicule what remains of devolution in Wales to try and nudge the public towards the idea of outright abolition and the return to full Westminster/English control of the Principality.

      There are enough self-respecting and patriotic Scots thankfully, both inside and outside Holyrood, to successfully oppose such a meek abdication that the Tories – and most of Labour – want to see happening as regards the Scottish devolution settlement.

      Carwyn Jones will likely go down as the biggest fool in Welsh history.

      • BarrieJ

        Sad to say the Welsh Assembly have done much to undermine themselves, there is a very real dissatisfaction at grass roots with their performance, made worse by their enthusiasm to add another thirty A.M.s to the existing sixty. So much so there is a growing ‘Abolish the Welsh Assembly’ party.

        Wales has been the recipient of £6 billion of EU Region 1 funding and have little to show for it, apart from a few infrastructure schemes; roads and roundabouts and failed business start ups. There are few success stories, the cost of each kept secret from the people funding them.
        There have been millions of pounds lost in the failure to recover loans made to prospective businesses and badly manged land sales to offshore property speculators.

        The old post industrial South Wales Valleys are some of the poorest in the UK with a wage £2k lower than the UK average. The North feels abandoned.
        Educational standards are poor, job and career prospects low and there are very real problems with the delivery of healthcare within the Welsh NHS, although not as bad as English Tories claim.
        Wales’ resources of coal were in decline a century ago, copper long gone, large scale aluminium smelting gone; today we see the remains of a once world famous steel production grimly hanging on, decimated in scale.
        Financially, Wales is a basket case.

        People were very suspicious of the referendum results that gave the go ahead to devolution by only 0.6%, when the previous referendum had recorded a 60/40% against. My late Welsh speaking father in law, claimed to know no one who wanted it and was convinced the result was rigged in favour of politicians desperate for it. He would describe it as “a talking shop for failed and failing politicians” and there are many today who would agree with him and see plenty of evidence of it.

        Many people see little difference between the largely Blairite A.M.s/M.P.s and the Tories and sad to say UKIP have been the fortunate recipients of their votes, curiously not so Plaid Cymru whose support in percentage terms, together with a hoped for resurgence in the Welsh language has fallen back. The Plaid Cymru A.M. for the Rhondda: Leanne Wood has promised much but delivered little, a disappointment after 13 years of relative inactivity by her predecessor the Labour A.M. Leighton Andrews.

        Although there is a very strong sense of identity and culture, colonisation of Wales goes back a 1000 years, very few of the 600 castles in Wales were Welsh.
        Immigration happened under the Norman’s, Plantagenet’s, Tudor’s, during the Industrial Revolution and again with the exploitation of the coal fields in the mid 18th Century.

        Wales has certainly suffered under any number of poor Welsh Offices and Secretaries of State of similar performance but the Senedd has failed and continues to fail the people of Wales.
        You’d be right to ask: “well whose fault is that?” and I’d flounder to answer you cogently. Can the Senedd be reformed, do the A.M.s there recognise the people’s dissatisfaction and disconnect? I honestly don’t know.
        The Rt Hon Carwyn Jones will go down as a poorly performing First Minister and certainly won’t be missed by a good number of the electorate, however, looking at those likely to replace him fills me with despair.

        Wales is not lacking self respect, nor patriotic citizens but it’s not Scotland.

        • Republicofscotland

          Very good comment BarryJ, as Labour Lord Hain said, of Wales which voted to leave the EU in the European Referendum vote – There will be tragic consequences.

    • Republicofscotland

      The FM of Scotland, has shown her mettle, by not yielding to Westminster in a similar fashion to Carwyn Jones. Jones will not face the future consequences of his rash actions as he’s standing down as Welsh FM, which is very convenient.

      The Scottish government, I hope, will continue to seek a deal with Westminster that’s in the best interests of the people of Scotland, and not Westminster.

      Watch out in the future for Carwyn Jones ennoblement to the HoL, for services rendered.

  • Spaull

    Personally, I think Trump is appalling, and unfit to be President.

    But I don’t disagree with a single word you say about Hillary. Like you Iam sure she would have rushed to a much bigger conflict in Syria. Her warmongering attitude was one of the reasons I thought she was a terrible candidate for the Dems. I could never understand how her supporters could claim “electability” as one of her strengths. Mind you, that is just another manifestation of the same hubris our Blairites demonstrate.

    • Skyblaze

      You are forgetting she actually polled more votes than Trump. So much for democracy when the loser wins. Notice how Craig avoids mentioning that!

  • Scott

    “There is a reading that Trump is placating the neo-cons with position and rhetoric while his actions – in Syria and in what a hating political class fails to acknowledge has all the makings of a diplomatic coup in North Korea – go in a very different direction.”

    My thoughts also Craig.

    My concern even if this is true, is should Trump gets a health scare, what will happen if a neocon ideolog replaces him at the top? The current leadership team is lined up and primed for war.

  • Yonatan

    Clinton was known evil. Trump was an unknown. Clinton was responsible for Libya, and by extension Syria, which depended on the arms looted from Libya. She also said she would ‘dial support for Israel up to 11’ which means she would have broken the nuke agreement with Iran (possibly supported by ‘kinetic action’) from day one and launched full scale military action against Syria. Trump may end up doing the same but he has given Iran and Syria (and the world) time. It looks like both countries will end up with S-300 air defense systems, which mark the end of US military air supremacy the first time they take out a US military aircraft. The recent pathetic cruise missile strike against Syria in which 71 out of 103 missiles were shot down, mostly by modern Pantsir and Buk systems, has highlighted the effectiveness of smaller scale Russian air defense systems.

  • reel guid

    “It would be an outrage if the UK Government decided to use what the people of Scotland did not vote for – Brexit – to undermine what we did vote for: devolution.”

    Mike Russell MSP

  • Dave

    Fully agree, except for, it appears Tillerson was sacked for his part in promoting the false flag plot to re-escalate the conflict.

  • John Macadam

    I have to say Craig, that the evidence to date about Trump means you have a point. He is Nero, not Caligula

  • Charles

    A not always discernible, reflected meme that courses through most if not all of Craig’s posts but certainly the lasts few can be characterised by a family of various quotes from notable thinkers spanning the ages, often attributed to Burke and Plato but many others, this version is from Albert Einstein’s tribute to Pablo Casals;

    “The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it.”

    So who is to blame for the world’s ills, and what can be done about it?

    Is it the IDF soldiers who pull the triggers or the politicians who create the circumstances, the generals who give the orders or the public who re-elect and pay their taxes, that bear responsibility?

    Hitler needed his generals, the ranks, the executers in the death camps but it was the public that allowed the horror to take hold and grow.

    In Britain we re-elected Blair after Iraq, Cameron after Libya. We stood back as our pensions and banks were raped, acquiesced to all manner of hideous cover ups, grumbled about the imposition of the police State, sighed when yet another high profile villain is let off Scott free and found a tut when taxpayer funded weaponry is ordered by May (not Parliament) to inflict further death and destruction on the poor souls of Syria in response to an unproven act that availed no Jurisdiction on Britain to investigate, prosecute nor punish.

    We are not kidded by clever lies, we know what is happening, we tell ourselves there is nothing we can do, we write on blogs.

    So who is to blame? We are!

    What, though, can be done about it?

  • Rhys Jaggar

    I wrote the Hillarybilly Express off as an acceptable US President the day she said she would nuke Russia. What for exactly? Nothing Russia has done since 1991, let alone in the period 2013-2015, remotely justified any form of military action whatever, let alone genocide. She was a cold blooded killer, murdering millions for blood money, buying the MIC etc.

    That left a realistic field of one, given the lack of Americans thinking that Jill Stein, Elizabeth Warren were electable and the absence of Ron Paul from the ballot paper.

    Trump was saying ‘put America first’ and ‘let us be friends with Russia’. Such words can be cynical vote grabbing exercises, but given a guilty genocidalist vs a person who might conceivably become a genocidalist, what do you choose?

    Donald Trump’s sex life is between him and his wives. It is no basis for blackmail by Mossad, CIA or any other bunch of killers.Tell the American people that if they consider adultery a greater crime than mass murder, then the USA is the worst country on planet earth….there are many reasons for adultery and not all of them reveal a dreadful character. It does beg the question why you can only have a marriage blessed through lifelong commitment to monogamy, a highly idealised and unrealistic world view…..a far more realistic commitment is to put all adult sexual disagreements to one side when committing to bring up children lovingly.

    Donald Trump’s business life is one with attitudes not all will agree with. Strategic Chapter XI and all that. Working in construction and property management involves booms and busts. Busts happen in construction. It does not make you per se evil.

    Of course Trump is a narcissist, needing fawning admirers rather than strong characters standing up to him.

    So the question is reduced to this: do you prefer a sex mad narcissist or a far gone psychopath as US President?

    Clearly neither would be preferable, but if you had to choose??

    • ZiggyM

      Rhys Jaggar @ 10:21

      “Donald Trump’s business life is one with attitudes not all will agree with. Strategic Chapter XI and all that. Working in construction and property management involves booms and busts. Busts happen in construction. It does not make you per se evil.

      Also impossible not to have had dealings with the ‘Mob’

    • Skyblaze

      Another “but Hillary” nonsense which hdo up less and less each day. Trump has been President for 14 months deal with REALITY not some bs whatiff scenario

  • Macky

    @Craig, as many diverse friends of Assange have spoken out against his new (month old now) isolation, and are trying to campaign & raise awareness, I must be honest & state that I find it strange that you have not blogged about your friend’s dire new situation.

    • Charles

      I would have legged it by now.

      He is quite a distinctive chap but a make up artist could be employed, a blacked out limo, a motorbike courier with helmet on, same build as him, goes into the building. he comes out dressed identically.

      He’s bright he could work something out. If he wanted to.

    • oah

      Agree but you can only handle so many su jects in a blog. The treatment of Assange by the US Uk and now Ecuador is a scandal of monumental prportions and definitely constitutes torture.

      • Charles

        As Assange is now an Ecuadorian Diplomat the continued persecution of him is against not just Assange the person but an Ecuadorian Official.

        He could be put in a Diplomatic Bag (Crate) and be shipped out, no one never needs to know except when he pops up somewhere but his method of extradition need never be known.

        I have personally witnessed something extremely unexpected come out of a Diplomatic Bag so its something the British have no problem using for the purpose of evasion.

    • craig Post author

      I am trying to resolve the situation, rather than blog about it, which would be counter-productive at the moment.

  • Shatnersrug

    I think there are two parts to US policy that are entirely discrete 1)domestic policy 2) foreign policy

    Whilst trump has appeared to favour less rather than more intervention his domestic policy is appalling, divide and rule. The blaming of immigrants and stoking of racial prejudice, the absolutely gross celebration of greed whilst the country literally falls apart – for example, over 100 important road bridges in Alabama have been closed due to underfunding – what kind of a president won’t spend money on roads? The same is repeated everywhere, schools, courts, you name it. To suggest that trump has done little more than hurry his country to economic decline would be delusional.

    So it’s possible that just like the president before, it’s a vast contradiction because the country is becoming more and more unmanageable

  • Monster

    Remember The Guardian cheering for Hillary and,at the same time, demonising Wikileaks and promoting the Russian interference agenda. Well the Guardian is in the awkward position of having its News Tip server exposed to the eyes of the US courts because of the DNC action; it contains some interesting leaks to the newspaper from the Trump campaign about Hillary. Of course the News Tip is not secure by any means. it may well be operated in conjunction with the UK security services as one man in Leicester found out. This decent upright businessman provided some information to the newspaper about police activity in his city. Some days later he tweeted that a couple of ruffians visited his workplace and made some serious threats. Never trust The Guardian.

  • Jack

    Hillary Clinton is mentally ill , I dont understand why media give this sick person any airtime. It really tells us how she look upon herself and the world, she cant approve the vote and that she lost.
    That she now SUE every imaginable part for her loss once again prove she is not mentally well.

    The democratic party have really sunk deep down, will they ever be able to get back coming 10 years?

  • DaveM

    Hmmm, while I can’t disagree on your conclusions about Hillary herself (sadly, as I would love to see a woman as President), I think it’s more accurate to say that she lost because of the Electoral College system used in the election. After all, she won more popular votes than Trump!

1 2 3

Comments are closed.