[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Criticizing Stephen Bannon's Appointment Continues Trump Bashing Criticizing Stephen Bannon’s Appointment Continues Trump Bashing by Stephen Lendman Rewarded for aiding Trump’s electoral triumph, Bannon was named chief administration strategist and senior counselor. He’s not my kind of guy, especially serving close to the levers of power: an influential alt-right figure, former Goldman Sachs investment banker, and executive chairman of politically hard-right Breitbart News - earlier calling it a “platform for the alt-right,” rejecting mainstream conservatism. Despite no formal ideology, it’s accused, true or false, of being racist/white supremacist, Islamophobic, homophobic, anti-Semitic, anti-feminist, and xenophobic. Trump chose Bannon and White House chief of staff designee Reince Priebus (RNC chairman) as “equal partners” to help further his agenda. Is bashing Bannon justified or sour grapes? Trump spokesman Jason Miller said his opponents “didn’t get the result they wanted.” Retiring Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D. NV) demanded Bannon’s firing on Senate floor, telling Trump: “Rescind (his appointment). Instead of hiding behind your Twitter account…show America that racism, bullying and bigotry have no place in the White House or in America.” New York Times editors called him “Steve ‘turn on the hate’ Bannon in the White House,” using his appointment to maintain their anti-Trump drumbeat. Earlier they deplorably called war criminal, racketeer, perjurer Hillary “one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history” - a disgraceful perversion of truth. Bannon may turn out as dreadful as he’s portrayed. Who can know? Judge him by his actions, not by what critics say before day one on the job. Throughout the political campaign now ended, scoundrel media reporting was disgracefully biased for one duopoly power presidential aspirant over the other - the worst in my memory since the 1940s, likely in US history. Ruthlessly dangerous Hillary was practically portrayed as America’s sweetheart, Trump relentlessly bashed unfairly. Media scoundrels supported the worst of Bush/Cheney and Obama’s agenda - unaccountable war criminals belonging in prison, responsible for raping, destroying and pillaging one country after another. Private sector figures Trump and Bannon haven’t attacked other nations, killed anyone yet, caused vast destruction, unspeakable human misery, or committed other state crimes. If culpable once in power, holding them fully accountable should follow. A personal note. I supported true progressive Jill Stein, an exemplary figure, a physician wanting to use her professional skills to help heal a sick nation. I opposed both duopoly power candidates, Hillary more than Trump because of the threat of nuclear war on Russia with her in power. I’m relieved he triumphed, yet uneasy expecting dirty business as usual to continue short of unthinkable potentially cataclysmic thermonuclear war - the deadly risk of a Hillary presidency. Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||