Monday, January 30, 2017

888 Berlusconi a model for Trump? Italy the next anti-establishment revolt?

Berlusconi a model for Trump? Italy the next anti-establishment revolt?

Newsletter published on 12 November 2016

(1) Calls for Trump to Unify with the Losers
(2) Protestors will dog Trump, as they dogged Berlusconi
(3) America is ripe for Trump just as Italy was ripe for Berlusconi -
Roger Cohen (March)
(4) Berlusconi a model for Trump? - the (Rothschild) Economist
(5) Italy could be the next anti-establishment revolt - the (Rothschild)
(6) How we ended up with our own Berlusconi - Chicago Tribune
(7) We’ve seen Donald Trump before: his name was Silvio Berlusconi - The
(8) In Trump, Italy Sees 'Berlusconi Americano' - US News
(9) Corbyn also likened to Trump
(10) Jill Stein had no hope of winning, because of her neutrality on
Israel / Palestine
(11) Trump’s pledge to cut taxes, regulations, and piles of paper work
(12) Elizabeth Warren And Bernie Sanders Tell Donald Trump They’ll ‘Work
With Him’ On Key Economic Issues

(1) Calls for Trump to Unify with the Losers
From: chris lancenet <>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 17:09:55 +0900
Subject: <RIOTS-DEM_Soros>...I'm Getting Nervous About All These Calls
for Trump to Unify with the Losers - The Rush Limbaugh Show

...Now we have all these riots going on, exactly as I predicted...

...Now we have all these riots going on, exactly as I predicted. And,
folks, aside from these little snowflakes that are melting on campus
today, the kids, all of these riots that you're seeing in New York and
Philadelphia and Chicago and Los Angeles are bought and paid for. They
are not real in terms of springing up genuinely and organically.
They're bought and paid for, and we know this from the WikiLeaks email
dumps from John Podesta,
and we know it from Project Veritas videos.

We know that all of the protests at Trump rallies were bought and paid
for primarily by George Soros, by the Democrat Party....

(2) Protestors will dog Trump, as they dogged Berlusconi - Peter Myers,
November 13, 2016

Various commentators have likened Trump to Berlusconi.

Most have had slight regard for Berlusconi, and treated his record as a
reason to reject Trump. "Be forewarned", they were saying.

Yet, in preferring Hillary (by default), they were also turning a blind
eye to her plans for World War III against Putin.

Berlusconi, by contrast, was friends with Putin.

Protestors dogged Berlusconi for years, and can be expected to hound
Trump the same way. Trump, if skilful and diplomatic, may be able to
sever the link between the Trots on the street and the broarder Left. If
the public perceive the demonstrators as dangerous extremists trashing
the cities, they will lose out.

Trots and Anarchists make street theater their hobby. They delight in
physically confronting enemies.

The Economist recently ran an article comparing Trump to Berlusconi
(item 4). Yet it also warns that the current post-Berlusconi Government
of Italy may fall in "the next anti-establishment revolt" following
Brexit and the election of Trump (item 5).

(3) America is ripe for Trump just as Italy was ripe for Berlusconi -
Roger Cohen (March)

The Trump-Berlusconi Syndrome

Roger Cohen

MARCH 14, 2016

In the mid-1980s, when I was covering Italy for The Wall Street Journal,
I profiled a brash, bruising, billionaire businessman named Silvio
Berlusconi who had made a fortune in real estate and parlayed that into
control of an almost unrivaled private television empire.

Berlusconi invited me to the book-lined office in his Milan mansion.
He’d made his money building a garden city called Milano 2 on the
eastern outskirts of Italy’s financial capital. Then he’d made his real
money — billions of dollars — through TV networks gathered in a
controlling company called Mediaset. By the time I met him, a big chunk
of Italy’s television advertising revenue was going into his pocket.

What I recall is the talk — a lot of it — and the voice — he’d worked as
a crooner on cruise ships — and the self-confidence and the vulgarity (I
had the impression that there was nothing inside the leather-bound books
on the shelves). Berlusconi whisked me off in his private jet, and as we
climbed over Milan he gestured to the urban sprawl beneath him and told
me he was by far the "richest man in Italy." I countered that surely
Giovanni Agnelli, then the head of the Fiat group, was richer.
Berlusconi scoffed. There was a lot more of his new money than that old

Within a decade or so, in 1994, Berlusconi was prime minister, at the
head of a right-of-center political party he’d concocted the previous
year, thrust to power on the basis that he would break with Italy’s
dysfunctional politics and that, as a self-made billionaire, he knew how
to fix problems. He used television unsparingly to buttress his meteoric
rise through the wreckage of Italy’s post-1945 political order, which
had recently collapsed with the end of the Cold War.

Widely ridiculed, endlessly written about, long unscathed by his evident
misogyny and diverse legal travails, Berlusconi proved a Teflon
politician. Nothing stuck. He had the gift of the gab. He had a tone. He
connected. He owned a soccer club, for heaven’s sake. Many Italians
thought they saw in him one of their own. He served three terms and nine
years as prime minister before an ignominious downfall.

Nobody who knows Berlusconi and has watched the rise and rise of Donald
Trump can fail to be struck by the parallels. It’s not just the
real-estate-to-television path. It’s not just their shared admiration
for Vladimir Putin. It’s not just the playboy thing, and obsession with
their virility, and smattering of bigotry, and contempt for policy
wonks, and reliance on a tell-it-like-it-is tone. It’s not their wealth,
nor the media savvy that taught them that nobody ever lost by betting on
human stupidity.

No, it’s something in the zeitgeist. America is ripe for Trump just as
Italy was ripe for Berlusconi. Trump, too, is cutting through a rotten
political system in a society where economic frustration at jobs
exported to China is high. He is emerging after two lost wars, as
American power declines and others strut the global stage, against a
backdrop of partisan political paralysis, in a system corrupted by
money. To Obama’s Doctrine of Restraint, Trump opposes a Doctrine of
Resurgence. To reason, he counters with rage.

In the same way, Berlusconi emerged as Italy ceased to be a Cold War
pivot and the Christian-Democrat-dominated postwar political alignments
imploded. Everything was in flux as the "mani pulite" (clean hands)
investigation started by Milan magistrates in 1992 exposed what everyone
knew: that graft and corruption were cornerstones of Italian politics.
No matter that Berlusconi was also a target of the investigation: He was
new, he talked the talk, he would conjure something!

As Alexander Stille wrote recently in The Intercept of Trump and
Berlusconi: "Entering politics, both have styled themselves as the
ultimate anti-politician — as the super-successful entrepreneur running
against gray ‘professional politicians’ who have never met a payroll."

Stille went on to make an important point about how the deregulation of
broadcast media in the United States and Italy — in contrast to Britain
or France or Germany where state media companies still "act as a kind of
referee for civil discourse" and "commonly accepted facts" — has
fostered the fact-lite free-for-all of "alternate realities" conducive
to Trumpism.

If elected president, Trump would have his finger on the nuclear button.
Berlusconi did not. Trump would also face strong institutions, including
judicial institutions. Berlusconi did not. Trump would be the leader of
the free world. Berlusconi ruled from a city, Rome, whose lesson is that
all power, however great, passes.

What Berlusconi teaches is that Trump could go all the way in a nation
thirsting for a new politics. The man known as "The Knight" ended up
convicted of tax fraud and paying for sex with an underage prostitute —
but it took 17 years of intermittent scandal and incompetence, from 1994
to 2011, for Italy to rub the stardust from its eyes.

Take note, America, before the die is cast.

(4) Berlusconi a model for Trump? - the (Rothschild) Economist

Donald Berlusconi

What Donald Trump and Silvio Berlusconi have in common

Americans could look to Italy for a taste of things to come

Nov 10th 2016

DONALD Trump ended his victory speech with the words: "And I love this
country. Thank you." A fondness for fervently patriotic declarations is
just one of many similarities between America’s president-elect and
another billionaire who made his fortune from real estate before turning
to politics.

In 1994, Silvio Berlusconi pioneered a new form of conservative populism
when he announced his intention to run for prime minister in a televised
address that began: "Italy is the country that I love."

Both portrayed themselves as an alternative to mainstream politics. And
convincingly so. Mr Trump won in the teeth of opposition from much of
his party’s leadership. Mr Berlusconi created a party of his own in
months and appointed executives from his advertising firm to top
positions within it.

Both men have legendarily huge egos, a fondness for locker-room bragging
and, while protesting their love of women, seem to judge them solely on
their physical attributes. Both men have been involved in sex scandals.

Like Mr Trump, Italy’s former prime minister–still the leader of a
sizeable party—uses plain, earthy language that resonates with
traditionally left-wing, working-class voters. Like the Republican
candidate, Mr Berlusconi was never one to let the facts get in the way
of a vote-catching assertion.

But does his record in office offer any clues to what Americans can
expect after Mr Trump moves into the White House? Though the real-state
tycoon turned reality-television star is 13 years older than Mr
Berlusconi was when he first took office, one answer could be longevity.
By the time he lost power in 2011, Mr Berlusconi had become the
longest-serving prime minister in the history of the Italian
republic—albeit in non-consecutive terms.

Like Mr Trump, Mr Berlusconi enjoyed significant backing from the far
right; from a recast version of Italy’s neo-fascist party; and from the
Northern League, which, though initially moderate, became steadily more
xenophobic and protectionist in the 1990s. Italy’s former prime minister
certainly presided over the introduction of some radically conservative
measures, notably in the areas of immigration and employment. But what
distinguished his leadership was not so much extremism as his failure to
achieve his stated goals and his intense personalisation of the
country’s government.

When he began his political career, Mr Berlusconi was Italy’s richest
man. Many of his supporters, like Mr Trump’s, hoped he could bring his
Midas touch to the economy as a whole. Mr Berlusconi did nothing to
disabuse them of that idea. He was re-elected in 2001 after a campaign
in which he promised voters a new "economic miracle" and distributed a
glossy account of his own inexorable rise to fortune and fame.

Yet his years in office were characterised by modest economic growth,
interspersed with periods of stagnation and recession. By the end of his
final term in 2011, Italians were poorer in real terms than they had
been when he regained power ten years earlier. If there is a lesson for
Americans to be drawn from the Berlusconi decade, it is that success as
a businessman is no guarantee of the ability to manage an economy.

Where Mr Berlusconi did succeed was in passing copious volumes of
legislation that favoured his own interests. By one count, his
governments introduced more than 30 so-called ad personam laws that
helped his businesses or shielded him from indictment or conviction by
the prosecutors and judges who he argued were hounding him.

Mr Trump may not be able or willing to act similarly, but he may find it
tempting to indulge in another form of personalisation that became a
speciality of the Italian former prime minister: that of diplomacy. Mr
Berlusconi was convinced he could foster Italy’s interests with the same
deal-making skills that had made him rich. Never much at ease with his
EU peers, he found his talents worked best with dictators like Muammar
Qaddafi and the leaders of "illiberal democracies" such as Recep Tayyip
Erdogan and Vladimir Putin.

It can be argued no real harm came of the man-to-man chats of which Mr
Berlusconi was so fond. But it is one thing for the prime minister of
Italy to cosy up to the Kremlin, and quite another for the American
president to do so. After all, he is the man with his finger on the
nuclear trigger.

(5) Italy could be the next anti-establishment revolt - the (Rothschild)

After Trump, Italy could be the next anti-establishment revolt

Soon eyes will turn to a new European vote that is poised to go against
the elite

Nov 9th 2016

BEFORE American voters—especially white, male, rural and older
ones—carried Donald Trump to victory in America’s presidential election,
aggrieved British voters with a similar profile voted to leave the
European Union. Equally surly voters in France have been flocking to
Marine Le Pen of the far-right National Front for months; she is tipped
to make the run-off in next year’s presidential election. Alternative
for Germany, an anti-immigrant party, is picking up support ahead of a
federal election in Germany, also in 2017. Large parts of electorates
across the West are fed up with traditional political parties that have
in recent years presided over rising inequality and slow economic growth.

The next big test of the establishment, however, will come in Italy on
December 4th. Matteo Renzi (pictured), the prime minister, has called a
referendum asking voters to approve proposed changes to the
constitution. The idea is to reform the Senate—making the lower chamber
decisively more powerful than the upper one—and to bring back many
decision-making powers from the regions to the central government. The
effect, if he wins, would be to create a more powerful central
government and to encourage those in favour of liberal economic reforms.

The bosses of Italy’s biggest companies and the heads of its business
associations love the idea of the constitutional changes and back the
referendum. A stronger central government would be expected to be
pro-business and bring about further reforms, such as speeding up the
civil judiciary, cutting bureaucracy and unleashing more competition
into Italian markets so that productive capital can flow in. Mr Renzi’s
referendum thus looks like a call for Italy to open up for more
globalisation—just when a backlash against such ideas is in full swing.

Voters in Britain and America have turned emphatically against policies
associated with globalisation, such as free trade and high levels of
migration. Italian voters, too, are increasingly likely to vote "no" in
the referendum, spurning changes that businesses and some in the
political establishment say are essential. If the constitutional changes
are thrown out, momentum for further liberal reforms will be lost, with
a long-term cost for Italy, one of the largest economies in the euro zone.

The leader of one big business federation in Italy called the Italian
referendum the biggest source of political risk in Europe today—though
he said that well before Mr Trump’s victory. Indeed, there is widespread
concern in the markets that a "no" vote could be the prelude to a
general election from which the populist Five Star Movement (M5S) would
emerge triumphant.

Mr Renzi had, earlier this year, talked of resigning if he loses in
December. He has tried to pull back from that idea more recently. But
the pressure on him to honour his word would be considerable. And the
M5S’s founder was swift to capitalise on Mr Trump’s triumph, nothing on
his blog "quasi-similarities between this American story and the
Movement"; the mainstream media had ignored the rise of the M5S, just as
it had failed to foresee the Republican’s victory.

Renato Brunetta, the lower-house leader of Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza
Italia party, said Mr Trump’s victory meant that the prime minister was
a "dead man walking". That, however, assumes Italian voters will be
emboldened by the American election result to become even more populist
and anti-establishment. That is not certain. They may be more willing to
choose the devil they know.

But on December 4th, Italians will have two known devils to choose from:
Mr Renzi’s government, the fate of which hangs on a "yes" vote, and the
1948 constitution, which will survive in its present form only with a
"no" vote.

A "no", which is the likeliest outcome, would offer the next piece of
evidence that voters in western countries are growing disillusioned and
upset with those in power. It won’t be the last: France holds its
elections in the spring.

(6) How we ended up with our own Berlusconi - Chicago Tribune

How we ended up with our own Berlusconi

Clarence Page

I will no longer mock my Italian friends for electing Silvio Berlusconi.
Now I know how clownish but fabulously wealthy autocrats come to power
in democracies that should know better. We just elected one.

Of course, I should note that I did not vote for Donald Trump. [...]
Even nonwhite voters, like me, who were expected to oppose Trump by
turning out in larger numbers than we did in 2012, didn't.

Some 88 percent of black voters supported Clinton, versus 8 percent for
Trump, according to a CNN exit poll. Trump, who said repeatedly that
black communities are in the worst shape ever, obviously had not spent
much time in black communities. Yet he scored better with us than Mitt
Romney's 7 percent of the black vote in 2012. But then, Romney was
running against President Barack Obama, whose appeal was hard for anyone
to duplicate, including Clinton.

Latino voters were a bigger surprise, since Trump had alienated so many
with stereotypes of undocumented immigrants as criminal aliens and
promises to deport them.

Only 65 percent of Latinos supported Clinton while 29 percent voted for
Trump. Despite widespread reports of record Hispanic turnouts, Trump
edged out Romney's 27 percent and Clinton fell behind Obama's 71 percent
of Hispanic voters that year.

What went wrong for Clinton? Everybody wonders, including Clinton. But
just as intriguing is the question of what went right for Trump. Much of
the answer I believe is in the Manhattan developer's unique skill set as
a reality-TV star and tireless self-promoter — like Berlusconi and
another talented, self-promoting outsider businessman-politician, Ross

Berlusconi was ridiculed when he formed a largely working-class
political movement and publicized himself with outlandish statements and
stunts and wild "bunga-bunga" parties. But his party grew strong enough
to dominate Italian politics for two decades until his conviction for
tax fraud in 2013.

Yes, he was outlandish. So was Perot, in a less colorful way. But like
Trump, both had a winning characteristic that we media folks too often
miss or take for granted: They conveyed to pluralities of voters the
sense that they're "on your side," looking out for you.

Or as Trump said on the stump, "I am your voice."

They identify a strong emotional need in a significantly large
constituency and they say attention-getting things that service that need.

Even when they are suspected of corruption and repeatedly exposed like
Trump was through a parade of investigative journalism, their supporters
don't seem to care. Even when they don't get much done on behalf of
ordinary folks, they are appreciated at least for their entertainment value.

So be it. I didn't vote for Trump, but if he's our president, I will not
be a knee-jerk opponent, unlike some jerks.

I will not say, as right-wing talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh did after
Obama was elected in 2008, "I hope he fails." Nor will I dedicate myself
as GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell said of Obama, to making sure Trump
is a one-term president.

We who opposed Trump's election should not fall for any more political
derangement syndromes. We do not need to deny Trump's legitimacy. We
will not ask for his birth certificate. But we will criticize him when
we think he deserves it, and we will hold him accountable.

I know even modest gestures like that will be too much for many of
Trump's angriest opponents to handle. But Americans of all persuasions
need to do it if we are to regain any sense of unity after our most
divisive election in recent memory.

Besides, we won't have to make up reasons to suspect his honesty and
integrity; he gives us plenty already.

(7) We’ve seen Donald Trump before: his name was Silvio Berlusconi - The

We’ve seen Donald Trump before – his name was Silvio Berlusconi

John Foot

Be warned: Italy’s former prime minister promised the world and
disdained the truth – and became his country’s third longest-serving leader

Friday 21 October 2016 06.23 AEDT Last modified on Friday 11 November
2016 22.25 AEDT

We keep being told that the Donald Trump phenomenon means we have
entered the era of post-fact politics. Yet, I would argue, post-fact
politics has been tarnishing democracy for some time. Twenty-two years
ago a successful businessman sent a VHS tape to Italy’s news channels.
It showed him sitting in a (fake) office. He read a pre-prepared
statement via an autocue.

The man’s name was Silvio Berlusconi, and he was announcing that he was,
in his words, "taking the field". The first reaction was derision.
Opposition politicians saw his political project (the formation of a
"movement" called Forza Italia – Go for it, Italy – just months ahead of
a crucial general election) as a joke. Some claimed a stocking had been
put over the camera to soften the impact of Berlusconi’s face.

But Forza Italia soon became the biggest "party". In the working-class
Communist citadel of Mirafiori Sud in Turin, an unknown psychiatrist
standing for Berlusconi’s movement beat a long-standing trade unionist.
Berlusconi had not just won, he had also stolen the left’s clothes and
some of its supporters. That first government was short lived, but
Berlusconi would dominate Italian politics for the next 20 years –
winning elections in 2001 and 2008 and losing by a handful of seats in
2006. In terms of days in office, Berlusconi ranks as Italy’s third
longest-serving prime minister, behind Mussolini and the great liberal
of 19th-century Italy, Giovanni Giolitti.

The parallels between Berlusconi and Trump are striking. Both are
successful businessman who struggle with "murky" aspects linked to their
companies – tax, accounting, offshore companies. Berlusconi was
convicted of tax fraud in 2013, which effectively put an end to his
political career. But business success and huge wealth was part of his
political appeal, as they are for Trump. Beyond wealth, Berlusconi, like
Trump, always painted himself as an outsider, as anti-establishment,
even when he was prime minister. And, like Trump, Berlusconi’s appeal
was populist and linked to his individual "personality".

Berlusconi’s personal-business political model has since been followed
by others in Italy. It could be argued that both Beppe Grillo’s populist
anti-political Five Star Movement and Matteo Renzi’s insider-outsider
appeal (until recently) have been created very much in Berlusconi’s
image. One could go so far as to say Berlusconi transformed politics.
The mass parties of the postwar period had become increasingly
irrelevant, but he didn’t need a party just as Trump doesn’t really need
the Republican party. ‘Like Donald Trump, Berlusconi’s appeal was
populist and linked to his individual "personality".’

So-called gaffes were a frequent part of Berlusconi’s political strategy
– a dog-whistle strategy that included frequent recourse to sexist,
homophobic and racist stereotypes, and reference to his belief that he
was irresistible to women. He flaunted his Don Giovanni image, but also
attempted to keep a parallel reputation as a family man, whose main
concern was the welfare of his five children.

His electoral campaigns were all about him. Nothing else mattered. He
dominated the agenda from start to finish. When the former mayor of Rome
Walter Veltroni tried to run a campaign against Berlusconi by not
mentioning Berlusconi, he was heavily defeated. Silvio’s "gaffes" would
usually be followed by claims that he had been "misunderstood" or was
the victim of a "hostile media". He was also reluctant to accept the
verdict of the electorate as final when he lost. He would make frequent
(and unsubstantiated) claims of electoral fraud and ballot-stuffing.
Remind you of anyone?

He also created a set of enemies against which he could mobilise his
followers: the judiciary, the media (despite owning much of it),
politics itself, Communism, women (he often commented on the appearance
of female opponents) and the EU and the euro. He presented himself as a
victim of political correctness gone mad, an ordinary/extraordinary man
speaking his mind. He promised the world, and it mattered little if he
was quickly proved wrong, or had no intention of fulfilling any of his
promises. Berlusconi knew that many of the electorate had short memories

And as with Trump (at least until the "locker-room" video), Berlusconi’s
scandals had little effect on his support. The numerous trials and
journalistic scoops regarding Berlusconi’s private and business lives
often seemed merely to reinforce his appeal. The message sent out was,
for many, an attractive one. Be like me. Don’t pay taxes. Enjoy life and
make money. Say what you want. We won’t bother you.

He became so powerful at one stage that he even tried to make himself
immune to prosecution, through a law passed by his own government.
Luckily, Italy’s constitution forbade such a monstrosity. But the fact
that it was even contemplated was worrying. Mass opposition to
Berlusconi rose and fell at various times, and many took to the streets
to protest. Yet his appeal also had roots deep in Italian society – and
in a hatred of politics and politicians that has since moved onto other
forms of populism.

The Berlusconi phenomenon shows that a post-truth politician can rise to
power in one of the world’s strongest and richest countries. The lesson
for America is that for far too long Berlusconi was treated as a joke
and a clown. By the end, nobody was laughing. Twenty years of Berlusconi
at the centre of the system had a deeply damaging impact on Italy’s body
politic and democratic culture and the wounds are by no means healed.
Win or lose, Trump has shifted the terms of political discourse,
campaigning and organisation. As with the Berlusconi era, things will
never be the same again.

(8) In Trump, Italy Sees 'Berlusconi Americano' - US News

In Trump, Italy Sees 'Berlusconi Americano'

The GOP presidential nominee shares similarities and differences with
Italy’s disgraced ex-leader.

By Steve Sternberg

Nov. 1, 2016, at 1:13 p.m.

Citizens of Italy and the U.S. have a few things in common besides their
love of the many dishes made with mozzarella and tomato sauce. Both
countries are bordered by bodies of water, with shorter sea routes
linking countries to the south. Both have major immigration problems.
The steady stream of migrants from Latin America into the U.S. has
turned immigration into a potent campaign issue. And Italy is now
grappling with a flood of refugees from Syria and North Africa. Natural
obstacles have done little to deter desperate immigrants seeking a new
life in a new land.

This year the two countries have something else in common. The U.S.
presidential election, pitting Democrat Hillary Clinton against
Republican Donald Trump, carries special resonance for Italian
election-watchers. They report some surprising parallels between Trump
and Italy's longest-serving postwar prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi,
who served a total of nine years before he was convicted in 2013 of tax
fraud. Berlusconi was able to avoid prison by performing community service.

Like Trump, Berlusconi skillfully exploited the media in his election
bid. Berlusconi also endured withering criticism for his cavalier
treatment of women, including rumored flings with underage girls. He
leaned more heavily on his popularity than the backing of his party to
build his political base. [...]

Berlusconi broke a long tradition of politicians using an archaic,
intellectual language that few people could understand. He spoke simply
and directly to the public using the same language they might hear at
the coffee bar or on the bus.

Here are a couple famous lines from Berlusconi: "Out of love for Italy,
I felt I had to save it from the left." "I am not a saint, you've all
understood that." "It's better to like beautiful girls than to be gay."
"Another reason to invest in Italy is that we have beautiful secretaries
… superb girls." [...]

Berlusconi's "bromance" with Russian President Vladimir Putin goes back
over 10 years. The two men shared a passion for women and power. [...]

Donald Trump says he has never met Putin, but seems to admire his brash,
authoritarian, macho style. Trump never misses a chance to sing the
praises of the Russian leader.

The similarities between Trump and Berlusconi are striking, but there
are also some important differences. Trump is more aggressive. He is a
fighter who likes to win and holds no punches. Berlusconi also likes to
win but his style is that of a suave salesman using gifts, flattery and
jokes to win people over.

Berlusconi served as prime minister for many years and dominated the
Italian political scene for a total of 18 years. During that time I
would say he acquired some of the Machiavellian skills required to keep
your head above water in the Italian political system, learning how to
make compromises and work with politicians from opposing parties.
Although Berlusconi did try to ride roughshod over the Italian legal
system, he eventually faced legal consequences for his actions.

Given all his negatives, what was the source of Berlusconi's appeal?

Berlusconi's appeal was he was rich, he was not part of the Italian
political establishment and he kept things simple. He emerged on the
political scene in 1993 as Italy was coming out of the massive "clean
hands" corruption scandal which exposed massive political corruption in
Italy's dominant parties. He claimed he didn't need money he was just
getting into politics to keep out the left.

I interviewed a fisherman on the shore of the Bay of Naples a few days
before one election. He said he was going to vote for Berlusconi because
"I want him to make me and Italy rich, just like him."

Years later when stories emerged of sleazy "bunga bunga" parties during
which young women were paid to dress up as nurses and nuns and do lap
dances for the prime minister and a few of his cronies, I went out on
the street near the Vatican and asked people what they thought of the
latest revelations. Many people, both men and women, responded with
comments along the lines of: "Why not? He is rich, he is powerful, if he
can get all those women, good for him. Let him enjoy himself. It is his
private business." [...]

(9) Corbyn also likened to Trump

Corbyn could do a Trump! Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry says
there are 'SIMILARITIES' between the socialist Labour leader and the
billionaire Republican President-elect

By Matt Dathan, Political Correspondent For Mailonline

Published: 23:04 +11:00, 10 November 2016 | Updated: 02:37 +11:00, 11
November 2016

Jeremy Corbyn could emulate Donald Trump's shock election victory by
becoming Britain's next Prime Minister, one of his closest allies said

Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry said there are 'some
similarities' between the socialist Labour leader and the Republican
President-elect, despite being at the opposite ends of the political

She compared the 'hundreds and thousands energised' by Mr Corbyn's
leadership of the Labour party with Mr Trump's ability to mobilise
thousands of people as she tried to push the idea of Mr Corbyn following
in his footsteps by shocking the British establishment at the next election.

And Ms Thornberry even praised Mr Trump for his plan to invest in large
infrastructure projects.

Asked if Mr Trump's election gave her hope that Mr Corbyn could achieve
a similar political upset in Britain, Ms Thornberry told the BBC: 'I
think that there are some similarities.'

She added: 'I think it's right there are hundreds and thousands
energised by Jeremy Corbyn being the leader of the Labour party so there
are some similarities.'

'To give him his credit, I never thought I'd say this, but Donald Trump
was talking about the importance of investing in jobs and infrastructure
and in the economies across the country, not just the main cities, and
that's right.'

Emily Thornberry said compared the thousands of people who turned out at
Donald Trump rallies with the enthusiasm of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters
in the UK. Pictured, Donald Trump addresses his supporters alongside his
running mate Mike Pence at a victory rally yesterday

Yesterday Mr Corbyn ignored diplomatic convention and pointedly refused
to congratulate Mr Trump on his emphatic victory over Hillary Clinton.

And repeating his message today, he lashed out at Mr Trump's 'divisive
rhetoric' and said his solutions to America's problems are 'clearly wrong'.

But he did suggest that his election triumph was a good omen for his
radical left-wing agenda for Britain.

Mr Corbyn, 69, said Mr Trump's election was 'an unmistakable rejection
of a political establishment,' adding: 'After this latest global wake up
call, the need for a real alternative to a failed economic and political
system could not be clearer.'

Attempting to portray himself as fighting a similar struggle against the
elite,' Mr Corbyn said the 'failed economic consensus' had 'delivered
escalating inequality and stagnating or falling living standards for the
majority, both in the US and Britain'.

'Many in Britain and elsewhere will be understandably shocked by Donald
Trump's victory in the US presidential election, the rhetoric around it
and what the election result means for the rest of the world, as well as
America,' Mr Corbyn said.

'This is a rejection of a failed economic consensus and a governing
elite that has been seen not to have listened. And the public anger that
has propelled Donald Trump to office has been reflected in political
upheavals across the world.

'But some of Trump's answers to the big questions facing America, and
the divisive rhetoric around them, are clearly wrong.

'I have no doubt, however, that the decency and common sense of the
American people will prevail, and we send our solidarity to a nation of
migrants, innovators and democrats.

'After this latest global wake up call, the need for a real alternative
to a failed economic and political system could not be clearer.'

His response to Mr Trump's election contrasted with Theresa May's
reaction. The Prime Minister extended her congratulations to the winning
candidate in the 'hard fought campaign' and insisted she wants the
special relationship to continue.

'Britain and the United States have an enduring and special relationship
based on the values of freedom, democracy and enterprise,' the Prime
Minister said.

'We are, and will remain, strong and close partners on trade, security
and defence.

'I look forward to working with President-elect Donald Trump, building
on these ties to ensure the security and prosperity of our nations in
the years ahead.' [...]

(10) Jill Stein had no hope of winning, because of her neutrality on
Israel / Palestine

From: DAVE KERSTING <> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016
09:48:34 -0800

So would someone please tell me what’s so "odious" about Donald Trump?
Mainstream hate-spin aside, is he NOT (by far) the least "odious" US
presidential since Jimmy Carter and JFK?

I’ve been searching and asking for any real argument against him for 8
months - something more than bigotry agains a non-conformist - still no

I was seriously surprised when I first heard what Stein says:

We could exchange a "new generation" of nuclear weapons for a "new
generation" of young people. How clever is that? How come no one else
ever realized how easy it would be?

Also - the Fed "could" digitally create the money to pay off the student
loans, and, in so doing, "could" invest in our future. Wow - who would
ever have guessed it "could" be that easy - or that investing in our
future was part of the Fed's job description - when all the research
shows that it's only interest is looting our country four ways from Sunday?

I've never heard such primrose nonsense in my life.

Stein had absolutely no hope of winning, for one simple reason,
well-known to every genuine activist for human equality under law - yes
"even" in indigenous Palestine: any constituency she can find, for her
perfectly necessary, but way too outspoken, position regarding Zionist
Israel, will certainly be blown into the weeds by the Organized Jewish
Community, through its AIPAC and ADL bullhorns.

It's a total deal-breaker and she certainly knows it.

Her actual effect (and probably her purpose) is to use all those
lovely-sounding positions to take votes from Donald Trump - the only
candidate who offers Zionism any real inconvenience, while being more

Hypocrisy is inherent in support for Jill Stein, since it indicates a
self-image of "caring," yet also shows a total absence of real
experience in opposing Zionism - those who have that experience can
easily see why we should support Trump.

Trump’s more gradual approach to reigning in the Zionists is
incomparably more effective.

Stein's claim that she doesn't see much difference between Clinton and
Trump requires her to "overlook" the many ways in which Trump's
real-world behavior is far more effectively anti-Zionist than her own
empty, over-stated verbal opposition.

Some of the huge differences Stein pretends not to see:

Trump is the first presidential candidate in history who's not a
career-politician and has gotten anywhere near this far. That's why he
can be so "politically incorrect." That's most of what he's criticized
for, of course, and it's also why he can bring up the crucial topics
which everyone else in the show has always treasonously avoided.

Trump has set irreversible precedents by using his
presidential-candidate podium to bring the long-taboo language into the
discourse - declaring himself "neutral" toward Israel - calling for an
audit of the Fed and a new investigation of 9/11 - talking about
Israel's connections to ISIS (and even mentioning why he can't say more
just now) - offering to work with Putin against ISIS (though he knows
it's a US-Zionist operation, as do all the candidates and journalists) -
"killing Gadaffi and Sadam was a mistake" - defying the ADL on the
"correctness" of saying "America first" - etc. Trump's plain-talk
condemnation of most journalists is also way overdue and refreshing.

His "political incorrectness" about illegal immigration and gun-rights
both fly directly against the Zionist agenda.

And now he’s being attacked by the ADL again - for speaking out against
the banksters and interntional interests - saying what no one can deny
and desperately needs to be said and has not been said since JFK was

Without being foolishly obvious about it, Trump is far outpacing any
CONSTITUENCY for freedom from Zionism.

The point is to become and create that constituency: against Zionist
immigration policies, Zionist gun-control, Zionist ethnic-cleansing of
Palestine in broad daylight, Zionist obiteration of all independent
Middle East populations, and the Muslim-refugee problems which result.
We must be active about helping to generate that constituency.

(11) Trump’s pledge to cut taxes, regulations, and piles of paper work

November 11, 2016 @ 8:06 pm

President Trump

By Brother Nathanael Kapner

He’s president, whether you like it or not.

Well, the establishment doesn’t like him, and if you don’t like the
establishment, President Trump might do something you’ll like.

You see, Trump’s been waging a different kind of war.

Not against Russia, but against the corrupt political establishment that
has strangled the potential of American citizens.

[Clip: "Working together, we will begin the urgent task of rebuilding
our nation and renewing the American dream. I’ve spent my entire life
and business looking at the untapped potential in projects and in people
all over the world. That is now what I want to do for our country.
Tremendous potential. I’ve gotten to know our country so well —
tremendous potential. It’s going to be a beautiful thing. Every single
American will have the opportunity to realize his or her fullest
potential. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten
no longer."]

And lest we forget, Trump’s pledge to cut taxes, regulations, and piles
of paper work is what will unleash the potential of American citizens.

He did it himself.

I mean, the hacks in DC are never hurt by the laws they make.

But Trump, an entrepreneur who built an empire, had to deal with those laws.

It’s not ‘pay for play,’ it’s paying for a broken system.

[Clip: "So here’s the story, here’s the way I work, here’s the way
government works. So the teleprompter is a bummer. It doesn’t work. That
means the company doing the teleprompter is in the back. That means they
didn’t do a good job. So I won’t pay them, right, I won’t pay them. And
tomorrow, I’ll have a story in the newspaper: ‘Donald Trump did not pay
a contractor who put up the teleprompters.’ Well, why should I? They
don’t work!, And, no it’s true, it’s true."]

And paying taxes to a government that’s not working is bad business too.

(12) Elizabeth Warren And Bernie Sanders Tell Donald Trump They’ll ‘Work
With Him’ On Key Economic Issues

By David Sirota @davidsirota On 11/10/16 AT 4:33 PM

During his unorthodox Republican presidential campaign, Donald Trump at
times touted his support for longtime progressive causes, promising to
reform trade deals, invest in infrastructure, reinstate a key
Depression-era financial regulation and combat political corruption.
Now, some of Trump’s harshest progressive critics are offering their
support for the president-elect on the issues on which they seem to agree.

In a speech at the nation’s largest labor federation, Massachusetts
Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Americans are right to be angry
that "Washington dithers and spins and does the backstroke in an ocean
of money, while the American Dream moves further and further out of
reach for too many families." She credited Trump for spotlighting the

"President-Elect Trump spoke to these issues. Republican elites hated
him for it. But he didn't care," she told the AFL-CIO. "So let me be 100
percent clear about this. When President-Elect Trump wants to take on
these issues, when his goal is to increase the economic security of
middle class families, then count me in.  I will put aside our
differences and I will work with him to accomplish that goal.  I offer
to work as hard as I can and to pull as many people as I can into this
effort.  If Trump is ready to go on rebuilding economic security for
millions of Americans, so am I and so are a lot of other
people-Democrats and Republicans."

Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent who challenged Hillary
Clinton for the Democratic nomination, expressed a similar sentiment.

"Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick
and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the
establishment media," he said in a press release. "To the degree that
Mr. Trump is serious about pursuing policies that improve the lives of
working families in this country, I and other progressives are prepared
to work with him."

With Democrats locked out of power in Washington and in most states,
Warren and Sanders have emerged as two of the most prominent leaders of
a party in disarray. For months, they had been campaigning across the
country against Trump on Clinton's behalf. And while after the election
they offered conditional support to Trump, they also pledged to fight
him on issues like immigration, civil liberties and climate change.

"To the degree that [Trump] pursues racist, sexist, xenophobic and
anti-environment policies, we will vigorously oppose him," Sanders said.

  "Donald Trump ran a campaign that started with racial attacks and then
rode the escalator down," said Warren. "He encouraged a toxic stew of
hatred and fear. He attacked millions of Americans. And he regularly
made statements that undermined core values of our democracy... That
marks Democrats' first job in this new era:  We will stand up to
bigotry. There is no compromise here.  In all its forms, we will fight
back against attacks on Latinos, African Americans, women, Muslims,
immigrants, disabled Americans-on anyone.  Whether Donald Trump sits in
a glass tower or sits in the White House, we will not give an inch on
this, not now, not ever."

No comments:

Post a Comment