As The Gateway Pundit has been reporting for over a year — the Russia Collusion fairy tale is the largest conspiracy theory ever perpetrated on the American public.

The Democrats and their media at CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the AP, CBS, ABC, etc. have fabricated a story without a single iota of truth that the Trump Campaign was colluding with the leadership of Russia to steal the 2016 US election.

And now there is a poll to prove how well the Fake News mainstream media has pushed this lie on the American public.

Yet, two-thirds of Democrats and 48% of ALL women believe Russia not only colluded but tampered with the vote tallies in 2016.

This is the biggest lie ever perpetrated on the American public.

And yet they label Gateway Pundit and other conservative websites fake news.
These are not good people.

Power Line reported:

Fake news is a serious problem in our political life. I’m not referring to a pathetically small number of Facebook ads bought by Russian provocateurs. I’m talking about the fake news that was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee; fabricated by Democratic Party-allied consultants; propagated by the FBI and the CIA; promoted by the broadcast networks, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Associated Press; trumpeted by pretty much every senior elected Democrat; and kept alive by the appalling Robert Mueller. The claim that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to “steal” the 2016 presidential election is the great fake news of our time.

How successful have the Democrats been in propagating that myth? This survey by The Economist and YouGov suggests that they have been successful beyond their wildest dreams. . .

via Fake News of the Century: Two-Thirds of Democrats Believe Trump-Russia Collusion Fairy Tale …Congratulations Fake News! You Did It

Daria Roithmayr –

This post argues that race and racism are segmenting the new “on demand” labor markets, in ways that facilitate the transition to this new sector of the economy.  Scholars of racial capitalism have argued that modern capitalism could never have gotten off the ground without the violence of slave labor in the cotton economy. Violent racism operated to segment plantation workers into free and unfree labor, and unfree labor made cultivating cotton in bulk possible, facilitating the transition to industrialized cotton production and then to industrialization more generally.

Likewise, I argue here that race and racism are segmenting the new labor markets into more free and less free labor, and that this segmentation plays a central role in the transition to the new economy.  Platform-based “on demand” service firms like Amazon and Instacart rely for their flexibility on a core of so-called “motivated” gig workers—workers whose economic survival depend on gig work. As it turns out, these workers are “motivated” because they are workers of color who are less free to turn down unstable work, or to bargain for a wage premium for doing risky, back-breaking or otherwise odious work. As we’ll see, race does very important work in constituting this segment of the workforce, and in keeping this core of workers “motivated.” [ . . .]

via Racism is at the Heart of the Platform Economy — Law and Political Economy

Only 7? Sounds a bit moderate. It’s interesting how these ideas keep getting circulated but never really catch on beyond the margins. Are that many people really that unhappy with the system? Or are political partisans really just equivalents of sports fans (with “extremists” like the Antifa and Alt-Right merely assuming the role of the football hooligans)?.

By Bonnie Kristian

The Week

Look, we had a good run.

Well, maybe “good” isn’t quite the right word … but certainly it’s been interesting. These United States were a grand experiment. But the experiment has gotten out of hand. It’s time to peacefully dissolve the union.

I know, I know. This is not what good Americans are supposed to suggest. “Four score and seven years ago” and all that. But to borrow a lesser-known phrase from that brief address, it seems to me we have tested whether this nation “can long endure,” and increasingly it is clear it cannot. It’s just not working. Do you really disagree? Do you like the way things are?

We are fresh off a midterm election which has guaranteed two years of gridlock and rancor. But the issues that animated this campaign season are in no sense resolved. David Brooks’ recent diagnosis of “two electorates” conducting entirely separate conversations and motivated by entirely different primal fears remains equally perceptive. Mutual partisan hatred is still nearly total. It is still the case that the sort of person who would attend a Trump rally and one who joined the Women’s March do not wish to share a country with each other.

They may not explicitly say so, but they do come very close. How else should we interpret, “If you don’t like it, leave,” or, “If [candidate] wins, I’m moving to Canada”? However unserious, these are basically expressions of a desire for separate nations. . .

via We should chop America up into 7 different countries. Seriously.

MEMO | November 10, 2018

Iraqi MP Ahmad Al-Assadi, senior leader of the Iraqi Construction Alliance, revealed on Friday parliamentarian moves to pressure the Iraqi government to evict US forces from the country.

Al-Assadi said that the previous Iraqi parliament had started the calls, but now the new parliament was calling for a clear timetable for the US withdrawal from Iraq, Arabi21 reported. He added that US forces had entered the country at the request of the Iraqi government for training purposes and assistance in fighting Daesh.

Yet Al-Assadi stressed that: “After the big victory against these gangs [Daesh], the Iraqi government has the right to evaluate the need for American forces to remain on Iraqi soil”. He also said that the calls for US forces to leave would be doubled during the next parliamentary term, noting that the parliament was likely to accept the existence of advisors and trainers based only on the need specified by the authorities.

Regarding the position of the government, Al-Assadi said: “The government has the right to estimate its need for advisors and trainers. The parliamentary discussions, which called for revealing the number, places and need for the American forces were not closed”.

He stressed however that the parliament is entitled to make the final decision regarding whether US forces remain in Iraq or are asked to withdraw.

via Iraq parliament calls for US forces to leave

The conference marks Russia’s attempt to get the Afghan authorities and the Taliban together at negotiating table.

Russia is hosting talks in Moscow to end the war in Afghanistan, drawing delegates from a body appointed by the Western-backed government in Kabul and a group representing the Taliban, as well as officials from a dozen nations, including the United States.

Opening Friday’s meeting, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the participation of both Afghan leaders and the Taliban was an “important contribution” aimed at creating “favourable conditions for the start of direct talks”.

“I am counting on you holding a serious and constructive conversation that will justify the hopes of the Afghan people,” he said before the talks continued behind closed doors.

Russia hopes “through joint efforts to open a new page in the history of Afghanistan,” the Russian foreign minister said.

He emphasised the threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) in Afghanistan, saying that it has relied on foreign sponsors in a bid to “turn Afghanistan into a springboard for its expansion in Central Asia”.

Pakistan, which has long been accused of providing support to the Afghan Taliban, would “definitely” attend, foreign ministry spokesman Muhammad Faisal told AFP news agency.

India has also sent its representatives at a “non-official level”, reassessing its policy on talks with the Taliban group.

The conference marks Moscow’s attempt to get the Afghan authorities and the Taliban together at a table. The US Embassy in Moscow has sent a diplomat to observe the discussions.

Russia’s first attempt to hold the conference in September fell through after the Afghan authorities refused to attend.

This time, the Afghan government has not sent its envoys, but members of the government-appointed High Peace Council (HPC) are attending the event. The council was established to lead reconcilation efforts with the Taliban.

Taliban officials and HPC members have met at past forums elsewhere, and while no formal talks were ever held they have had some face-to-face discussions.

Push for peace

The talks come weeks after newly appointed US special envoy for peace in Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, held talks with the Taliban group in Qatar. He will visit Afghanistan,Pakistan , the United Arab Emirates and Qatar from November 8 to 20 to push for peace negotiations with the Taliban.

Khalilzad’s meeting with the Taliban, which was overthrown from power by US-led forces in 2001, is part of efforts to find a way to end the 17-year-long war in Afghanistan.

“On his last trip to the region in October, Special Representative Khalilzad called on the Afghan Government and the Taliban to organise authoritative negotiating teams, and has been encouraged to see that both parties are taking steps in that direction,” the State Department said in a statement.

“The United States remains committed to a political settlement that results in an end to the war and to the terrorist threat posed to the United States and the world.”

A US watchdog agency said last week that the Afghan government was losing control of districts to the Taliban while casualties among security forces had reached record levels.

The government had control or influence over 65 percent of the population but only 55.5 percent of Afghanistan‘s 407 districts, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction said in a report.

The latest phase of Afghanistan’s decades-old war began in 2001 when the US-led troops overthrew the Taliban government in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States.

via Russia Opens Afghan Peace Conference In Moscow

Eric Zuesse
China’s “Belt and Road Initiative” is famous as an extension of their domestic infrastructure investments, but Russia is also investing heavily in infrastructure. Both countries need to do it in order to improve the future for their respective populations, and both Governments have avoided the Western development model of going heavily into debt in order to pay for creating and maintaining infrastructure. Both are, in fact, exceptionally low-debt Governments.

According to the “Global Debt Clock” at Economist, China has a public debt/GDP of 17.7%, and Russia’s is 8.0%. For comparison, America’s is 93.6%. (Others are: Germany 85.8%, Spain 91.2%, Italy 122.6%, Greece 147.1%, India 54.2%, Pakistan 47.0%, and Brazil 55.0%.)

The United States isn’t going into public debt in order to finance building or maintenance of infrastructure, but instead to finance expansions of its military, which is already (and by far) the world’s largest (in terms of its costs, but not of its numbers of troops).

While the US Government now spends around half of the world’s military expenditures and plans to conquer Russia, China, and all countries (such as Iran and Syria) that cooperate with those ‘enemies’ (and please click onto a link wherever you question the truthfulness of an allegation made here), Russia and China plan to improve their infrastructures, in order to boost their national economies and to minimize the impacts that (the mainly US-caused) global warming will have. These infrastructure projects are optimistic and long-term expenditures, which are being planned and built only because the countries that the US aristocracy are targeting to conquer, expect the US aristocracy to fail to achieve its clear #1 goal, of controlling the entire world and conquering them — of America’s rulers finally achieving the global fascist empire that, in World War II, Hitler and the other Axis powers had been hoping to become.

By contrast, US infrastructure is rotting; and, while every recent US President has promised to reverse that decline, none has done anything significant to repair this nation’s rotting infrastructure — it has always been just talk and empty promises. A nation that spends over a trillion dollars a year on ‘national defense’ can’t have much left over to spend on things that ‘can wait’ — such as repairing its bridges, roads, etc. — and so those repairs do wait, while even more money, than before, becomes devoted to purchases of new weaponry, such as the F-35 program. . .

via Russia and China Invest in Infrastructure, US Instead Spends on Military

Exclusive: Pentagon balked at U.S. border troops building detention facilities – officials

Pentagon says troops won’t ‘come in contact’ with caravan migrants at Mexico border

via Trump said the military was building migrant detention facilities along the border. The Pentagon Said “NO”

Migrant Caravan: Pentagon Refuses Trump Order to Deploy US Troops to Border

“He creates this word picture for people that these troops are going to be hurling back invaders at the border. That’s just not the case.”

Vera Bergengruen  BuzzFeed News Reporter

Department of Defense  Soldiers from the 97th Military Police Battalion and the 41st Engineer Company from Fort Riley, Kansas, string concertina wire near the Mexican border.

The image President Donald Trump has presented of what US troops will be doing along the southern border bears almost no resemblance to what military leaders say the troops will be doing.

Trump has promised the US military would be blocking “very bad thugs and gang members” from crossing into the country, and he’s painted a picture of armed US troops repelling “very tough fighters” from entering the country. “We hope nothing happens,” he said Thursday during a White House address. “But if it does, we are totally prepared.”

That bellicose language, however, is a clear exaggeration of what Pentagon planners anticipate the up to 7,000 active-duty troops will actually be doing.

The deployment includes no ground combat units. The troops are not allowed to detain or arrest anybody at the border. They are barred from enforcing immigration or criminal law. There is no indication that troops will be manning border checkpoints. Of the 39 units dispatched, only seven are military police units. The rest are trained to do engineering work and provide logistical support or medical assistance.

Five of the units are made up of public affairs specialists, combat photographers, and media support staff — troops assigned to provide photos and news releases about what the other units are doing. As of Saturday afternoon, the Defense Department’s media site had posted more than 350 photos and videos showing the troops’ deployment and arrival in Texas and Arizona. . .

via Donald Trump’s Tough Talk About The Border Deployment Doesn’t Match What’s Really Taking Place

Far too many people on the center left and center right have bought into the idea that nations such as Russia or China are genuine enemies of the global system, and far too many people on the far left and far right have bought into the idea that these nations represent credible alternatives to the global system. While it is certainly true that the Washington-London-Brussels-Berlin-Tel Aviv-Riyadh axis is the real international ruling class, the Asian powers are merely backwater provinces in the global system that are occasionally unruly.

The major Asian nations like Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Japan, etc., whether they are officially “allies” or “adversaries” of “the West” or not, are still just components within global capitalism. They may have large populations, and their nuclear weapons may make them impervious to invasion, but their real function within global capitalism is to provide cheap labor for Western corporations and cheap loans for Western governments. America’s national debt, for example, is bankrolled both by “allies” like Japan and Saudi Arabia and “adversaries” like Russia and China.

Nor it is helpful to criticize Zionist power without engaging in a parallel or even more vituperative criticism of Anglo power. Israel is more like California, New York or Texas in the sense of essentially being a province of the USA that has a lot of influence over the policies of the federal government and, by extension, foreign policy and international relations. The way to look at it is like this: Imagine if the USA had about 120 states rather than 50, with 30 more in Europe, and dozens more in the Middle East and East Asia, with Israel (along with Saudi Arabia) being among those states with the most influence, with the other Asian nations being territorial colonies of Western capital. . .

via Here’s who owns a record $21.21 trillion of U.S. debt

How does it feel to know your daughter, son, niece, nephew, granddaughter or grandson has £50,000 debt to their name by the age of 21? That’s the reality.

Since the 2012 rise in University tuition fees that allowed universities to charge up to £9,000 a year, students have been graduating with more than a degree. They’re also welcomed by a letter telling them just how much debt they’re in. In June 2017, graduates walked out of uni with an average debt of £32,220, and this is expected to rise each year. Adding interest to that number also makes it extremely unlikely that the average student will ever pay this debt off.

But some young people are still fighting for this unfair expense on young people to end. We spoke to Kara Duzgan, a member of the Youth Parliament about how the high student fees are affecting young people, and what she’s doing to try and fix it.

Stand Up Magazine: Can you tell us more about your efforts to decrease or abolish University tuition fees in England?

Kara Duzgan: The new legislation allows universities to increase the tuition fees as much as they want with no means to improve our educational system so what do we get out of it? In my opinion, we don’t get anything different from what students got ten years ago, like a bad poker night gambling our lives with the dream job to pay off the debt we owe. The education system is the same but the price keeps on rising. I want students, young people to stop and think “is this fair?!” Is it fair that we will have to pay an average debt of nearly £60,000 +6.1% interest rate without even getting a job yet? That is why I am designing a survey to see what the youth think about this matter, I have also contacted many MPs about my campaign and hopefully can take it to the House of Commons in the next year.

Stand Up Magazine: How do the high tuition fees effect young people?

Kara: Many can not take the risk of having such a huge debt which is understandable as some people try to avoid having such repayment. Which is ironic as the government encourages us to live a debt-free life, to use our money responsibly, however the first thing that happens when we enter “the real world” is huge amount of debt on our shoulders.

“The government encourages us to live a debt-free life, to use our money responsibly, however the first thing that happens when we enter “the real world” is huge amount of debt on our shoulders”

Stand Up Magazine: Why do you think it’s so important to make University more financially accessible for young people?

Kara: We are the next generation, and to have a career most of the time you need a degree and where do you get degree from? Universities. So when young people cannot attend universities the next generation is in danger, I am talking about youth that’s wanting to be the next doctors, engineers, teachers, scientists, accountants, where are they going? Society just forgets about them. So if the poor cannot afford that, the rich can, which means most people with a degree will have a wealthy background, which takes us back to hundreds of years of work and trying to break this hierarchy where the rich are more likely to succeed in life. . .

via It’s Time to Stop Shafting Young People — Stand Up Magazine – Empowering Millennials