re posted from LAROUCHEPAC
Trump Defies Tradition, Outflanks “Impeachment & War Party” in Midterm Election
After months of mindless babble from political opponents of President Donald Trump and the mainstream media about the upcoming “blue wave” of rejection of him and his policies, American voters not only failed to produce a blue wave, but handed a clear victory to the President. Compared with the historic record of midterm elections, in which the President’s party traditionally suffers substantial losses in both Houses of Congress, the 2018 results increased Trump’s political clout, and his freedom to act.
While the Democrats regained the majority in the House, the numbers were smaller than the historic average gains made by the opposition party in midterms, and many of the Republicans who lost were anti-Trump, Bush-linked neocons. Trump named eight of them in his post-election press conference, identifying their attempt to distance themselves from him as being responsible for their losses. There were also 39 Republican House members who retired or ran for other offices, many of whom were part of the anti-Trump faction in the party. Many of these open seats were won by Democrats, as the new Republican candidates included a number who were not strong supporters of Trump, and the Republican House leadership, under retiring Speaker Paul Ryan, did little to aid their campaigns. These losses, ironically, will strengthen Trump, as the ranks of Republicans who either opposed him, or provided lukewarm support, have been reduced.
With some House races still to be decided, the Democrats have gained 31 seats.
In the Senate, the Republicans increased their majority, due directly to Trump’s aggressive campaigning, as he fired up the base at more than twenty large and raucous rallies in “battleground” states in the last weeks of the campaign. Of eleven Senate races in which Trump personally intervened, the Republicans won eight, with one still undecided. These victories included defeating four incumbent Democrats, in Indiana, Missouri, Florida and North Dakota. In Indiana and Florida, Barack Obama personally appeared to support the losing Democrats. The one Senate seat the Republicans lost was that of Nevada’s Dean Heller, who had often been part of the anti-Trump grouping among Republicans in the Senate.
Compare the results of this midterm with the midterm elections during the first term of former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. In 1994, Clinton’s Democrats lost 54 seats in the House, and 8 Senate seats. In 2010, Obama’s Democrats lost 63 House seats, and six in the Senate. Even some rabidly anti-Trump media grudgingly acknowledge that the resiliency of Trump’s support far exceeded their expectations—or, one might add, their preference, as the so-called mainstream media was an integral part of the campaign against Trump.
There is also a recognition that Trump’s personal intervention has strengthened the Republican Party, and now he can pose a direct challenge to Democrats. Will they work with him, in support of his diplomatic initiatives with Russia and China, which he emphasized during his recent campaign appearances? Or will they continue to be the war party, in favor of geopolitical confrontation, in the tradition of Obama and Hillary Clinton? In a call to Democratic Minority leader Nancy Pelosi, who is poised to again become Speaker of the House, he congratulated her and said he looked forward to working with her.
“I would like to see bipartisanship, I’d like to see unity,” he said. “I think we have a very good chance of seeing that,” adding that joint efforts to rebuild America’s infrastructure, and reduce prescription drug prices would be a good place to start.
However, he added that those Democrats who use their new positions as chairs of House Committees to continue the Russiagate witch hunt, and to disrupt his efforts to improve the American economy, will be met with a “warlike posture.” If the Democrats intend to use their chairmanships to expand the ongoing, fraudulent investigations into Russian meddling and Trump collusion, “then we will likewise be forced to consider investigating them for all the leaks of classified information, and much else, at the Senate level. Two can play that game.”
Trump has meetings scheduled for the end of November with Russian President Putin and China’s President Xi Jinping. These are crucial summits, as tensions have been built between Trump and both leaders, after initial promising summits with them, and coordinated activity aimed at resolving dangerous crisis in the Korean peninsula. While many Republicans have been critical of Trump’s efforts to improve relations with both countries, by emphasizing common interests and concerns, the Democrats have been especially disruptive, going so far as agreeing with leading Trump adversary John Brennan, that Trump committed “treason” during his talks in Helsinki with Putin. Brennan, the former CIA director under Obama, has been one of the coordinators of the ongoing coup being run against Trump, working with Democrats and Bush neocons to build the phony case for impeachment.
IMPLICATIONS FOR RUSSIAGATE
Nunes’ committee, and several other committees presently run by Republicans, have also brought forward proof, which was first presented by LaRouchePAC and its related organizations, that the Russiagate operation was launched in London, by British intelligence, with former MI6 operative Christopher Steele’s dossier alleging Trump was subject to sexual blackmail by Putin. Steele’s dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign, and used by the FBI and DOJ to obtain warrants from the secret FISA Court to spy on the Trump campaign. The evidence produced of illegal collusion by U.S. officials and a foreign government, i.e., Britain, to interfere with a U.S. presidential election, led former U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C. and legal expert Joe DiGenova, to pronounce that this is “far worse than Watergate,” and saying that those involved, including Obama, John Brennan, James Clapper and Hillary Clinton, should face prison terms for their actions.
The takeover of the House by the Democrats means they will try to shut down these investigations. However, Trump has means to counter this attempt to subvert justice. One, mentioned previously, is that he can use the Senate to conduct investigations. Second, he can proceed with the declassification of documents, which include many related to Christopher Steele’s collaboration with FBI/DOJ operatives, and the FISA warrants; also internal emails from former FBI Director Comey and his lieutenants, such as fired former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and disgraced top FBI intelligence operative Peter Strzok, who admitted to his lover, former FBI attorney Lisa Page, in text messages, that he intended to create an “insurance policy” get rid of Trump. When Trump issued an order to declassify these documents, Rosenstein told him that he should hold off, due to requests from the British and Australian intelligence agencies to do so, to avoid exposing their covert operators. While Trump complied, he is under no legal constraint to keep them under classification, and could order them released at any moment.
Third, the resignation of Attorney General Sessions the day after the election, at Trump’s request, means that the President may be in a position to shut down the special counsel’s witch hunt, or to limit it. Session’s ill-advised recusal, which placed the investigation into the hands Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, led to the appointment of Mueller. Rosenstein, who has been accused of working with McCabe and others to get evidence that Trump should be removed using the 25th Amendment, granted Mueller a broad mandate, including the right to investigate activity from decades prior to Trump’s election. The new acting Attorney General, Whittaker, who is replacing Sessions, is now in charge of the investigation, and is on record as saying that the mandate given to Mueller by Rosenstein was too broad.
It remains to be seen what ultimate effect this will have. However, judging from the screams from pro-impeachment Democrats, such as Senator Schumer from New York, they fear that the open-ended star chamber operation of Mueller will be ended or scaled back. Given that Mueller has provided no evidence of illegal activity by Donald Trump, this should free Trump to pursue his announced intention to forge a foreign policy which prominently includes dialogue and collaboration with Russia, without fear of being slandered as a “Putin puppet.” It also frees him to launch an anti-City of London/Wall Street economic policy, incorporating LaRouche’s Four Laws, which would reverse the control the corrupt Wall Street swindlers have over the economy, and return the U.S. to the American System.
And what of the Democrats? Will they accept Trump’s offer, drop the super-partisan attacks which have polarized the nation, and join with him? Will they cooperate with him to support peaceful arms control negotiations and counter-terror operations with Russia, fair trade deals with China, and join with much of the rest of the world in the ambitious Chinese-directed Belt-and-Road Initiative? Will they look for areas to cooperate with Trump to pursue economic policies, such as Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Basic Laws, which include Glass Steagall bank separation, a national credit policy to fund development of new platforms of infrastructure, and investment in research in the frontiers of science, to act for the benefit of the “forgotten men and women”, as Trump called for, in borrowing the phrase from Franklin Roosevelt?
Or will they use divisive “identity politics” to further polarize the nation, and pursue impeachment, putting the nation on a course for war with Russia and China?
Trump’s success in the midterm election holds the promise for a better future. How the Democrats respond is now an existential question for the American people.
Source: Harley Schlanger LaRouchepac.com