Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump, Unione Europea

Trump & Macron. Eutanasia dei buoni rapporti diplomatici.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-02-18.

Trump e Macron 001

Una consolidata regola diplomatica impone di mandare un telegramma di augurio ad un nuovo eletto entro il giorno stesso della elezione. Nel caso di Mr Trump, Francia e Germania provvidero ben oltre dopo una settimana. Questo fu uno sgarro del quale ben difficilmente ci si potrebbe dimenticare.

Francia e Germania avevano fatto attive campagne elettorali a favore di Mrs Hillay Clinton. Nulla da eccepire, tranne il fatto che una potenza straniera mai dovrebbe ingerirsi negli affari interni di un’altra potenza.

Mr Macron e Frau Merkel furono tra gli ultimi ad essere ricevuti alla White House, e non per invito, ma a loro richiesta.  Mr Trump concesse a Mr Macron un’accoglienza trionfale durata svariati giorni, mentre Frau Merkel fu ricevuta prima da un addetto di quarta categoria, e poi poté vedere per 17 minuti il presidente Trump.

Questo linguaggio diplomatico è molto chiaro.

Ci si domanda quindi come si sia potuto deteriorare un rapporto Trump – Macron che, apparentemente, era iniziato abbastanza bene.

* * * * * * *

«After 18 months of frustrating efforts to sustain a partnership with America’s president, the “special relationship” is over.»

*

«On a damp Tuesday evening in December, most of France was focused on the Yellow-Vest crisis that had seen demonstrators smashing up Paris. But holed up in his Elysee palace, President Emmanuel Macron and his team were dealing with a greater threat to the status quo not just in France, but across the western world.»

*

«Donald Trump was about to announce the pullout of U.S. troops from Syria …. Such a decision would be a body-blow to U.S. allies in the European Union»

*

«EU leaders can no longer rely on the U.S. to help underpin European security»

*

«On the call that night in December, the 41-year-old president reminded Trump of his pledge to stand alongside his allies in the fight against terrorism and urged him to consider his responsibilities to Europe. Less than 24 hours later, Trump announced the withdrawal in a tweet.»

*

«“Both of us are probably mavericks,” Macron said in April during a state visit to Washington. “We have a very special relationship.”»

*

«Call logs from both presidents’ offices, which can sometimes be incomplete, indicate the two men held at least 19 phone calls last year. Trump spoke to Merkel just three times»

*

«By the time Trump returned to France to commemorate the centenary of the end of World War I, any pretense at a rapport was gone.»

*

«Macron lectured Trump in front of dozens of world leaders, saying nations that put their own interests first had lost their moral compass. Trump responded by mocking France for its military defeats to Germany.»

*

«Behind the scenes, French aides insisted Macron’s attacks on nationalism were not directed at Trump. But they also signaled that the French leader was deliberately taking a more assertive posture in diplomatic relations»

*

«Trump though has frequently shown tepid support for the alliance, complaining that U.S. allies don’t spend enough on defense and raising questions about Article V. An actual U.S. withdrawal would mean a tectonic shift in the global order and hand Putin the biggest victory of his career.»

*

«allies should consider buying American missiles.»

*

«The two men aren’t due to meet again until the G-20 summit in Japan in June. Then Macron himself will host the G-7 leaders in France in August.»

*

«Macron’s team …. are leaning toward not even attempting a joint statement at the end of the meeting»

* * * * * * * *

Per cercare di comprendere la dinamica del sistema, sarebbe necessario razionalizzare alcuni concetti che, essendo semplici, suscitano una quasi naturale repulsa: tutto qua?

«Da oggi ci liberiamo dal socialismo e dal politicamente corretto»

Questa frase detta da Mr Jair Bolsonaro, Presidente del Brasile di fresca elezione, sintetizza ciò che Mr Trump vuole e sta facendo negli Stati Uniti e nel mondo.

È un outsider, Macron lo ha definito un ‘maverick’: nei fatti non è espressione propria dei repubblicani, molti dei quali abituati da lunga pezza a trovare in loggia accordi con i democratici, per poi spartirsi i ruoli sul palcoscenico, recitando però lo stesso copione.

Obiettivo primario, strategico, di Mr Trump è l’annientamento dei liberal democratici negli Stati Uniti e dei loro alleati all’interno dell’Occidente. Lo scacchiere estero è giocato tutto in funzione del conseguimento dell’obiettivo primario.

Compreso questo banale concetto, Mr Trump si rivela essere facilmente capibile e prevedibile.

In patria sta sistematicamente tagliando tutte le fonti di finanziamento dei liberal, nonché delle enclavi di posti politicamente donati tramite sussidi statali. Sta bonificando il parastato americano, giustizia compresa. Li sta semplicemente strozzando economicamente. Un caso eclamptico, il suo comportamento nei confronti del ‘clima’ e dell’Epa.

All’estero, la Francia di Mr Macron e la Germania di Frau Merkel sono le realtà da ridimensionare.

Del tutto sequenziale la attuale posizione americana nei confronti di Polonia, Ungheria ed Italia.

Del tutto logico il suo appoggio ai Gilets Jaunes che hanno imbottigliato Mr Macron in un vicolo cieco, così come il suo comportamento nei confronti della residua industria tedesca: senza produzione industriale la Germania è kaptt, così come sarebbe finita senza l’approvvigionamento del gas russo.

Mr Trump sa che il tempo lavora per lui: ancora una decina di anni e la Germania inizierà a spopolarsi della sua popolazione autoctona, e saranno forti dolori. Tollera ancora Frau Merkel solo perché è l’unica persona al momento in grado di distruggere la Germania.

Infine, Mr Trump sa benissimo come gli europei siano impantanati in un welfare non più a lungo sostenibile, Ma sa anche benissimo come senza forze armate sia impossibile concepire ed attuare una politica estera.

Se Mr Macron si fosse dichiarato suddito leale lo avrebbe anche sopportato: ma dal momento che si è dimostrato superbo lo annienta.

Mr Macron si era semplicemente illuso di poter trattare Mr Trump in via paritetica.

«Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento:

hae tibi erunt artes, pacisque imponere morem,

parcere subiectis et debellare superbos.»

[Virgilio, Eneide, VI, 850 – 853]

macron 008


Bloomberg. 2019-02-13. The Moment Macron Gave Up on Trump

After 18 months of frustrating efforts to sustain a partnership with America’s president, the “special relationship” is over.

*

On a damp Tuesday evening in December, most of France was focused on the Yellow-Vest crisis that had seen demonstrators smashing up Paris. 

But holed up in his Elysee palace, President Emmanuel Macron and his team were dealing with a greater threat to the status quo not just in France, but across the western world. A White House contact had warned Macron that Donald Trump was about to announce the pullout of U.S. troops from Syria.

Such a decision would be a body-blow to U.S. allies in the European Union. It risked releasing hundreds of Islamic State veterans and giving Russia’s Vladimir Putin influence over the flow of refugees which has fueled a populist backlash in the EU.  For Macron, it heightened his concerns that the U.S. might back away from another, more sacred commitment: the NATO defense alliance.

As Macron prepared for a call with the White House that evening, his view on Syria was informed by a broader realization after 18 months of frustrating efforts to woo Trump: EU leaders can no longer rely on the U.S. to help underpin European security.

This account of how Macron was forced to rethink his entire relationship with Trump is based on conversations over several months with three people who have detailed knowledge of the president’s thinking.

On the call that night in December, the 41-year-old president reminded Trump of his pledge to stand alongside his allies in the fight against terrorism and urged him to consider his responsibilities to Europe. Less than 24 hours later, Trump announced the withdrawal in a tweet.

The decision came as a shock even in Washington, and triggered the resignation of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. For Macron and his inner circle, it was a watershed moment.

Though in public, Macron still maintains that the historical alliance between France and the U.S. runs too deep to be jeopardized by disagreements between two presidents, something in him snapped.

The previous month Trump had offered Macron assurances both on Syria and on NATO during a visit to Paris. A few weeks later, the Syria commitment was history. From now on, the French leader will assume that Trump is liable to ditch any commitment he might have made if he decides it serves his interests.

The French leader had invested significant amounts of time and political capital in trying to establish a relationship with Trump since coming to power in Paris in May 2017. 

Early last year, people close to him were keen to play up the symmetry between the two presidents. They argued that both were political outsiders who’d shaken up the establishment with their election victories, and their straight-talking style made them a good match personally.

They shared macho handshake games and private talks, watched military parades and had dinner at the Eiffel Tower with a special, meat-heavy menu, to appeal to the U.S. leader’s taste. 

“Both of us are probably mavericks,” Macron said in April during a state visit to Washington. “We have a very special relationship.”

That effort succeeded in making Macron the guy you call when you want to speak to Europe. 

Call logs from both presidents’ offices, which can sometimes be incomplete, indicate the two men held at least 19 phone calls last year. Trump spoke to Merkel just three times and dished out public humiliations to Britain’s Theresa May—in July he trashed her Brexit plans—making it clear where she stood in the White House spheres of influence.

But Trump’s America First policy was always likely to become a problem and that became clear as Europe was drawn into the U.S. trade offensive. Macron’s lobbying effort during his April trip to the White House failed to avert tariffs on European steel and aluminum. Just as he failed to keep the U.S. in the Iran nuclear deal or the Paris Climate Accord.

The phone records suggest that the relationship started to cool after that visit, with their recorded conversations becoming less frequent. Before that they spoke as many as six times a month. Since then the contact has dwindled.

By the time Trump returned to France to commemorate the centenary of the end of World War I, any pretense at a rapport was gone. 

Macron lectured Trump in front of dozens of world leaders, saying nations that put their own interests first had lost their moral compass. Trump responded by mocking France for its military defeats to Germany. 

Behind the scenes, French aides insisted Macron’s attacks on nationalism were not directed at Trump. But they also signaled that the French leader was deliberately taking a more assertive posture in diplomatic relations.

Talking to people close to the president around the turn of the year, their confidence in his ability to do business with Trump has evaporated. One described the Elysee’s attitude to Trump as “clear-eyed.” Asked about reports in January that Trump had considered pulling out of NATO officially, the person said nothing the U.S. could do now would surprise the French leader. 

Macron’s approach to Trump at this point is more about managing the U.S. president’s impulsiveness rather than genuine engagement. His advisers plot their response to different scenarios, they seek intel on his state of mind and his personal agenda, and try to work out how that might affect the post-war alliance with Europe. 

But the Syria withdrawal still stung.

“An ally must be reliable, and coordinate with other allies,” Macron said from a military base in Mali, where French troops are involved in anti-terrorism operations. Macron said he “very deeply regretted” Trump’s decision.

After the December announcement, Macron kept up the pressure on Trump for a time with several subsequent calls, trying to persuade the U.S. leader to change his mind, or at least allow an orderly withdrawal.

He urged Trump to stay on the battle field. He told him the U.S. army was the backbone of the coalition forces and warned of the message it would send to Iran and Syria’s Bashar al Assad if he left with the job half done. It made little difference.  

The final U.S. pullout may still be some weeks away as U.S.-backed Syrian forces launch an offensive against Islamic State in the east of the country. Macron hasn’t spoken to Trump for over a month. 

Macron’s discussions about French security strategy are now framed by question marks over all joint French-U.S. operations. The two countries are currently fighting together against Islamists in Africa and the Middle East and combating piracy in the Indian Ocean. France is also supporting U.S. efforts to contain China’s expansionary instincts in the South China Sea. 

America’s commitment to NATO, though, is the elephant in the room. Under Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s founding text of 1949, all are obliged to come to the defense of any members that come under attack. 

That was the foundation of the western bulwark against the Soviet bloc during the Cold War and has served to deter Russian efforts to extend its influence in eastern Europe since then. 

Trump though has frequently shown tepid support for the alliance, complaining that U.S. allies don’t spend enough on defense and raising questions about Article V.

An actual U.S. withdrawal would mean a tectonic shift in the global order and hand Putin the biggest victory of his career. 

More recently, however, Trump has switched from criticism to claiming credit for getting European allies to bolster their defense spending. At the armistice commemoration in Paris in November, the U.S. leader told Macron he was committed to NATO. On Jan. 17 Trump said he was backing NATO “100 percent” and then added a rider: allies should consider buying American missiles.

But doubts remain. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo put international organizations on notice that they shouldn’t take U.S. support for granted during a December speech in Brussels, where NATO has its headquarters. Organizations such as the EU and the United Nations, Pompeo said, “must be reformed or eliminated.”

For Macron, the doubts are enough to shift his outlook: a security guarantee you can’t depend on is no longer a guarantee. 

“Trump’s attitude and statements affect the credibility of NATO as a deterrent and a defense instrument,” said Bruno Tertrais, deputy director of the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris. “The question is whether this is a transitory crisis for the European-U.S. post-war alliance, or something deeper.”

The two men aren’t due to meet again until the G-20 summit in Japan in June. Then Macron himself will host the G-7 leaders in France in August. 

Welcoming the G-7 to the Atlantic resort of Biarritz will give the French some control of the choreography. Macron’s team has observed the drama Trump caused at recent international gatherings in Canada and Argentina and they are leaning toward not even attempting a joint statement at the end of the meeting. 

Such a departure from protocol offers a bleak view of the state of relations between the U.S. and its allies. But it’s one less opportunity for Trump to cause trouble.

Annunci
Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Energie Alternative

Davos. Riunione di nobili decaduti senza terra e denari. Le defezioni aumentano.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2019-01-20.

2018-11-25__davos 001

Il Meeting di Davos ricorda da vicino la riunione dei nobili decaduti, sotto la terza arcata del ponte sull’Elba a Dresden. Le prime due arcate erano state occupate da migranti in via di integrazione.

Si vedevano, si salutavano con la deferenza dovuta al titolo, si chiedevano vicendevolmente, con tutto garbo e stile da noblesse oblige: “Ma Lei signor Visconte, ha portato qualcosa da mangiare?”.

La riunione si sciolse poco prima del tramonto, non senza essersi divise le zone dove poter rovistare nei cassonetti alla ricerca di un qualcosa di commestibile.

*

Eppure fino al 2015 i titoli di Davos erano roboanti.

There’s A Plan Floating Around Davos To Spend $90 Trillion Redesigning All The Cities So They Don’t Need Cars

«That is one of the more ambitious (and possibly outlandish) ideas knocking around the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, this morning. The Davos meeting is the annual conclave of the world’s ruling class: presidents and prime ministers, CEOs, and religious figures (and the thousands of journalists who follow them, hoping for a soundbite or two).

The $90 trillion cities proposal came from former vice president Al Gore and former president of Mexico Felipe Calderon, and their colleagues on the The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate. That group hopes to persuade the world’s leaders to do something about humanity’s suicidal effort to heat the Earth’s climate. ….»

*

The 2018 Report of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate

«We are significantly under-estimating the benefits of cleaner, climate-smart growth. Bold climate action could deliver at least US$26 trillion in economic benefits through to 2030, compared with business-as-usual. There are real benefits to be seen in terms of new jobs, economic savings, competitiveness and market opportunities, and improved well-being for people worldwide.»

* * * * * * *

Si parlava con nonchalance non di milioni, e nemmeno di miliardi, bensì di trilioni di dollari americani. Un trilione equivale a mille miliardi.

Partnerships for better growth and a better climate.

«The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, and its flagship project The New Climate Economy, were set up to help governments, businesses and society make better-informed decisions on how to achieve economic prosperity and development while also addressing climate change.

The New Climate Economy was commissioned in 2013 by the governments of seven countries: Colombia, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Norway, South Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The Commission has operated as an independent body and has been given full freedom to reach its own conclusions. Lead by its global commission, it has disseminated its messages by engaging with heads of governments, finance ministers, business leaders and other key economic decision-makers in over 30 countries around the world.»

* * * * * * *

Mr Al Gore avrebbe voluto spendere 90 trilioni, poi scesi 26 trilioni. Tutti denari che avrebbero dovuto essere prelevati dalla tasche dei Cittadini Contribuenti, per transitare in quelle dei liberal, democratici negli Stati Uniti e socialisti in Europa.

Ben si comprendo gli urli di dolore che si stanno levando di questi tempi!

* * * * * * *

Eccovi il report odierna di Sky tg24.

«Una globalizzazione 4.0 che funzioni e sia inclusiva e sostenibile. Una governance internazionale efficace. Il rilancio dell’agenda climatica. Sono questi i temi principali del Wef 2019. A spiegarli è lo stesso Klaus Schwab: “Nella società attuale, una ulteriore integrazione mondiale è inevitabile e i modelli esistenti di governance globale hanno difficoltà a promuovere azioni concrete fra le potenze mondiali”. “Questa quarta ondata della globalizzazione deve essere centrata sull’uomo”, aggiunge Schwab che ha anche invitato i leader presenti al summit a trovare “l’immaginazione e l’impegno necessari”, per affrontare “un periodo di profonda instabilità globale portata dall’impatto della quarta rivoluzione industriale, dal riallineamento delle dinamiche geo-economiche e delle forze geopolitiche”. ….»

Tra i grandi della Terra assenti Trump, Macron, Xi

«Quest’anno alla conferenza manca Donald Trump, ospite d’onore arrivato nel 2018 da rockstar. Il tycoon aveva già anticipato la sua assenza a causa della questione Shutdown negli Stati Uniti. Per lo stesso motivo è stata cancellata la partecipazione dell’intera delegazione della Casa Bianca: era previsto l’arrivo del segretario di stato Mike Pompeo e il segretario al Tesoro Steven Mnuchin. Da sottolineare anche le assenze di Ivanka Trump, figlia del tycoon, e del genero Jared Kushner. Mancherà anche Xi Jinping, primo presidente cinese presente al Wef che nel 2017 lanciò una controffensiva a suo modo globalista. Impegnato sul fronte gilet gialli, anche il presidente francese Emmanuel Macron sarà assente a Davos.»

*

Le idee di Mr Trump sul ‘clima’ dovrebbero essere note: del tutto normale che non perda tempo andando a Davos.

Il forfeit di Mr Xi è urente.

Dapprima annuncia che la Cina aumenterà del 25% la quota di energia elettrica generata bruciando carbone:

Carbone. Consumi mondiali. I numeri parlano chiaro. La Cina.

Quindi annuncia che la Cina cesserà le sovvenzioni alle energie alternative: sono un fallimento economico.

Cina. Energie alternative solo se più economiche. Fine delle sovvenzioni.

Infine, manda a Davos il suo vice, che vi sarà nell’intermezzo della visita in Svizzera:

Cina. Davos. Sarà presente Mr Wang Qishan, vice presidente cinese.

*

Una sconsolata Cnn  annuncia che anche Ms May se ne guarda bene di andare a Davos.

Theresa May is skipping Davos, citing Brexit

* * *

Ma mica che sia finita qui. Persino l’inclito Mr Macron non attenderà i lavori di Davos: lui che si era proclamato l’erede universale del ‘clima’, che avrebbe portato avanti la sua battaglia per la vittoria finale del ‘clima’.

Ma, Vi ricordate che cosa aveva detto?

Macron. Ricordiamo cosa disse un anno fa a Davos.

Bene. Sono bastate qualche decina di migliaia di lebbrosi, Gilets Jauns, che gli hanno messo a soqquadro la Francia a causa delle imposte sul carburante e che adesso reclamano la sua testa.

Da autoproclamato imperatore del mondo si è trasformato nel recluso nell’Eliseo, che non osa nemmeno di andare a far visita in carcere al beneamato Benalla che pur tanto si è prodigato per lui.

*

Resta l’immarcescibile Frau Merkel, l’anatra zoppa di Europa, che si abbracccia a mr Macron, barcollante sotto il peso del distacco da Mr Benalla.

Il 24 gennaio 2018 aveva detto:

Merkel Davos: Trump impari dalla storia.

«Abbiamo bisogno di un’Unione europea sempre più integrata”, dall’unione bancaria alla difesa comune. Ha aggiunto la Merkel tornando a esprimere rammarico per il voto britannico a favore della Brexit, ma allo stesso tempo notando come il progetto europeo sia “chiaramente incoraggiato dall’elezione del presidente francese Emmanuel Macron, che ha dato all’Unione nuovo impeto che ci rafforzerà.

“Abbiamo bisogno di un’ Unione europea sempre più integrata”, dall’unione bancaria alla difesa comune. Ha aggiunto la Merkel tornando a esprimere rammarico per il voto britannico a favore della Brexit, ma allo stesso tempo notando come il progetto europeo sia “chiaramente incoraggiato dall’elezione del presidente francese Emmanuel Macron, che ha dato all’Unione nuovo impeto che ci rafforzerà” ….

La Francia sarà “un modello nella lotta contro il cambiamento climatico”. Emmanuel Macron ha imbracciato la bandiera ambientalista di fronte alla platea del Forum di Davos. “Stiamo perdendo la battaglia. Nel 2020, se non saremo in grado di presentare dei risultati, cosa diremo alla gente?

Fortunatamente non avete invitato nessuno scettico rispetto al riscaldamento globale quest’anno

La Francia e tornata al centro dell’Europa”, dice poi Macron, “non vi sarà un successo francese senza un successo europeo»

* * * * * * *

Su queste basi, oramai Davos è diventata quasi innocua.

Homo sine pecunia est imago mortis.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Sistemi Politici, Trump, Unione Europea

Ambasciatore Usa Grenell chiede spiegazioni allo Spiegel.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-12-24.

2018-12-23__Spiegel__001

Il problema è, o dovrebbe, essere noto.

Spiegel. Centrale operativa liberal di fake news nel mondo. Lo dicono loro. – Spiegel.

«Claas Relotius committed his deception intentionally, methodically and with criminal intent. For example, he included individuals in his stories who he had never met or spoken to, telling their stories or quoting them. Instead, he would reveal, he based the depictions on other media or video recordings»

* * * * * * *

Se il caso Relotius fosse accaduto in una testata ragionevolmente obiettiva, per esempio la Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, alla unanime condanna dell’operato di Herr Claas Relotius si sarebbe associato un commento di solidarietà per la redazione, colpevole al massimo di non aver sorvegliato a sufficienza quel reporter.

Invece lo scandalo è sorto in seno alla Spiegel, una delle testate più visceralmente liberal di questo mondo:

L’ambiente culturale e politico dello Spiegel è il prototipo dell’incubatore di fake news: la redazione non poteva non sapere, sempre che essa non ne fosse anche la mandante.

Tutti gli articoli dello Spiegel trasudano e grondano ideologia liberal e demonizzazione ad ogni costo dell’avversario politico vissuto come nemico mortale da uccidere con ogni possibile mezzo.

Ecco un florilegio di titoli dello Spiegel.


A .38-Caliber Rosary The Dangerous New Face of Salvini’s Italy

«Shots fired at foreigners, assaults on minorities, neo-fascist marches: Italy’s extreme right wing feels emboldened by the country’s new leadership. Many are pointing fingers at Interior Minister Matteo Salvini»

Stranieri presi a pistolettate in Italia?? E quando mai??

Dito puntato su Mr Salvini?? Ma se sta volando nelle propensioni al voto!!

*

Addressing the Inevitable: Preparations Begin for the Climate Change Deluge

«Global sea levels are rising steadily as a result of climate change and the IPCC believes the deluge has already begun. What will it mean for humankind? And what changes will this bring to our coasts and our way of life?»

Ma i redattori dello Spiegel non si ricordano quando in terza liceo avevano studiato i teoremi di incompletezza di Kurt Gödel, per cui nessun sistema di assiomi coerente può essere completo?

Il peccato mortale dello Spiegel, come peraltro quello degli ideologi liberal e socialisti, consiste nel credere come credo religioso che esista la verità scientifica e che questa sia assoluta. Come corollario, loro ne sarebbero i depositari: saccenti depositari. Questa assunzione è falsa.

* * * * * * *

«US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell on Friday demanded an independent investigation into a German journalist who was caught making up key details in a series of reports for Der Spiegel news magazine»

*

«He said the revelations “are troubling to the US Embassy, particularly because several of these fake stories focused on US policies and certain segments of the American people.”»

*

«He said he wrote to the editors of the respected news weekly calling for an “independent and transparent investigation.”»

*

«He said it was clear the US had been the victim of institutional bias at the magazine, saying the outlet encouraged anti-American reporting, particularly since Donald Trump was elected president»

*

In almeno una cosa però lo Spiegel non mente: un malignasso avrebbe potuto dire, per caso.

«We apologize to all American citizens who have been insulted and denigrated by these reports. We are very sorry. That should never have happened,” Der Spiegel‘s Dirk Kurbjuweit wrote.

“However, I would like to contradict you on one point. If we criticize the American president, it is not anti-Americanism, but criticism of the policy of the man in the White House»

* * * * * * * *

Una indagine svolta da parte terza sarebbe il meglio possibile per dirimere la situazione.

Notiamo tuttavia il persistere della mezogna.

«criticism of the policy of the man in the White House»

Una cosa è esprimere perplessità e/o discordanza politica: questa è cosa corretta, lecita e benvenuta.

Una cosa invece totalmente differente è il clima di odio verso la persona di Mr Trump che trasuda da tutti gli articoli dello Spiegel.

Se lo Spiegel volesse essere rispettato per le idee che sostiene, altrettanto dovrebbe fare con quelle degli altri

Non si vede perché Mr Trump debba essere trattato come un incolto visionario oscurantista perché è convinto che il ‘clima’ sia un problema inesistente, sollevato ad arte dai liberal per trarne illeciti guadagni: non è un eretico, anche perché il ‘clima’ non è oggetto di fede. Scambiando i termini, i visionari incolti ed oscurantisti sono i liberal della redazione dello Spiegel.

Invece che a Mr Trump, la redazione dello Spiegel farebbe bene a controllare meglio l’operato dei suoi redattori.


Deutsche Welle. 2018-12-22. US ambassador to Germany demands Spiegel fake news investigation

Richard Grenell has demanded an investigation after a journalist for a respected news weekly in Germany was caught falsifying reports from the US. The magazine has rejected claims of anti-Americanism.

*

US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell on Friday demanded an independent investigation into a German journalist who was caught making up key details in a series of reports for Der Spiegel news magazine.

He said the revelations “are troubling to the US Embassy, particularly because several of these fake stories focused on US policies and certain segments of the American people.”

He said he wrote to the editors of the respected news weekly calling for an “independent and transparent investigation.”

Anti-American bias

He said it was clear the US had been the victim of institutional bias at the magazine, saying the outlet encouraged anti-American reporting, particularly since Donald Trump was elected president. 

Journalist Claas Relotius, 33, resigned after admitting to making up stories and inventing protagonists in more than a dozen articles in the magazine’s print and online editions. Since then, other outlets the freelancer wrote for, such as Die Welt and Die Zeit, have been poring over their articles. 

Spiegel responds

On Friday, Der Spiegel published a letter in response to Grenell’s requests.

“We apologize to all American citizens who have been insulted and denigrated by these reports. We are very sorry. That should never have happened,” Der Spiegel‘s Dirk Kurbjuweit wrote.

“However, I would like to contradict you on one point. If we criticize the American president, it is not anti-Americanism, but criticism of the policy of the man in the White House. Anti-Americanism is deeply foreign to me and I am absolutely aware of what Germany owes to the United States: a great deal. At Spiegel, there is no institutional bias towards the USA.

“You suggest that in other cases, too, there has been erroneous reporting about your country. Please tell us about these cases and we will investigate them immediately,” Kurbjuweit wrote.

One of the cases that particularly infuriated the Americans was a story where Relotius claimed to have visited a small American town to find out why people there had voted for Trump. He fabricated major elements of the story including people, quotes and geographical details. In another story he wrote about a woman who watches executions in America. In that case the woman does exist, but they only met briefly and he invented large portions of the story. In another case he wrote about a civilian militia on the border with Mexico in which he made up quotes and details.

On Saturday Der Spiegel published a 23-page special report on how the award-winning reporter, faked stories for years. It said the deceit was the “worst thing that can happen to an editorial team.” It also apologized for the mistake and promised to “do everything to boost our credibility again.”

Grenell bites back

Grenell later shared what he saw as examples of anti-American bias at the magazine.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump, Unione Europea

Macron. Adesso dice che sia stato Mr Trump a fomentare i Gilets Jaunes.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-12-10.

2018-12-09--trump_France__001

«Il ministro degli Esteri francese, Jean-Yves Le Drian, ha invitato il presidente americano Donald Trump, che ha commentato con una serie di tweet le manifestazioni di gilet gialli in Francia, a non immischiarsi nella politica interna francese»

*

«Io dico a Donald Trump – ha affermato il capo del Quai d’Orsay alla tv LCI – ma anche il presidente Macron glielo dice: ‘noi non ci immischiamo nei dibattiti americani, lui ci lasci vivere la nostra vita di nazione’»

*

«Noi da parte nostra …. non facciamo considerazioni sulla politica interna americana e ci piacerebbe che fosse reciproco»

*

«Ieri, Trump aveva parlato di un “tristissimo giorno” a Parigi collegando ancora una volta la manifestazione dei gilet gialli con l’accordo sul clima: i manifestanti – ha twittato – “scandiscono ‘vogliamo Trump’. Io adoro la Francia”.»

2018-12-09--trump_France__002

* * * * * * *

«Mentre a Parigi lentamente riaprono negozi, musei, monumenti, teatri rimasti chiusi ieri per la 4/a manifestazione dei gilet gialli, arrivano le ultime cifre del ministero degli Interni: 136.000 i manifestanti in tutto il Paese, lo stesso numero di una settimana prima»

*

«Macron, obiettivo numero uno della protesta, dovrebbe prendere la parola davanti ai francesi fra domani e martedì, anche per disinnescare una nuova protesta sabato prossimo»

*

«Un silenzio lungo una settimana e molto pesante: Emmanuel Macron non ha mai preso la parola in questa settimana cruciale del suo mandato, quella in cui all’Eliseo è circolata la parola “golpe” e la popolarità del presidente investito dalla rabbia dei gilet gialli è precipitata al minimo storico del 21%.»

*

«la popolarità a picco, i fischi durante l’omaggio alla tomba del milite ignoto profanata, gli slogan ostili quando è andato in visita a Puy-en-Velay, dove i casseur avevano incendiato la Prefettura»

2018-12-09--trump_France__004

* * * * * * *

I twitter di Mr Trump sono taglienti.

Ricorda ai francesi, e quindi anche a Mr Macron,  come negli Stati Uniti il gas costi 2.69$ contro il 5.57$ della Francia: quasi il doppio. Prezzo enorme perché gravata da un volume elevato di accise e tasse volte a sostenere il finanziamento di un ‘clima’ oramai rottamato da mezzo mondo. Le vogliette ideologiche si pagano, costato care, ed alla fine i Contribuenti scendono in piazza e fanno il diavolo a quattro.

Ma il veleno non si ferma mica qui.

Mr Trump ricorda sommessamente a Mr Macron come la popolarità del primo sia al 50%, mentre quella del Presidente Francese si al 18%. Gran brutta ferita purulenta quella di Mr Macron, la cui superbia luciferina continua a tormentarlo, facendogli provare prematuramente quello che poi sarà la sua definitiva collocazione nell’inferno. Mr Macron passa da una colica colecistica all’altra al solo pensiero che i francesi siano così ingrati da non voler riconoscere il suo immenso valore. Il 18% è urente come un ferro incandescente immesso nel loculo a lui più caro.

Ma il coup de grace è quando Mr Trump cita Mr Salvini, ossia quel personaggio che Mr Macron ha indicato come il suo ‘nemico mortale’.

«Salvini: «Macron n’est plus un problème pour moi

mais pour les Français»»

Già. Macron non è più un problema per Mr Salvini: lo è invece per i francesi.

* * * * * * *

Ma dentro l’alcova ovattata ove il fido Benalla cerca di lenire i dolori del Presidente Macron girano nefasti pensieri.

Tradimento!

Chi mai avrebbe potuto macchinare un qualcosa contro il buon Mr Macron?

Chi mai avrebbe potuto mobilitare centinaia di migliaia di persone nelle piazze francesi? Chi mai le sobilla? Chi mai le ha istruite e le guida? Infine: chi paga tutto questo? Rôti de Macron?

Il convitato di pietra se la ghigna tranquillo, irride la rabbia impotente di Mr Macron.

^ ^ ^

Ma la realtà è ancora peggiore.

I deputati eletti alla Camera nelle fila del partito del Presidente dapprima guardavano attoniti il disfacimento della loro formazione, adesso invece stanno facendo i conti con le prossime elezioni, alle quali saranno trombati.

Sempre che prima non tradiscano il loro boss.


Ansa. 2018-12-09. Gilet gialli: Parigi chiede a Trump di non immischiarsi

Il ministro degli Esteri francese, Jean-Yves Le Drian, ha invitato il presidente americano Donald Trump, che ha commentato con una serie di tweet le manifestazioni di gilet gialli in Francia, a non immischiarsi nella politica interna francese. “Io dico a Donald Trump – ha affermato il capo del Quai d’Orsay alla tv LCI – ma anche il presidente Macron glielo dice: ‘noi non ci immischiamo nei dibattiti americani, lui ci lasci vivere la nostra vita di nazione’ “.”Noi da parte nostra – ha continuato Le Drian – non facciamo considerazioni sulla politica interna americana e ci piacerebbe che fosse reciproco”. Ieri, Trump aveva parlato di un “tristissimo giorno” a Parigi collegando ancora una volta la manifestazione dei gilet gialli con l’accordo sul clima: i manifestanti – ha twittato – “scandiscono ‘vogliamo Trump’. Io adoro la Francia”. Le Drian ha smentito in modo netto: “per quanto ne so io i gilet gialli non hanno manifestato in inglese – ha replicato – e, per dirla tutta, le immagini apparse negli Stati Uniti in cui si sentiva ‘We want Trump’ erano state girate a Londra durante una visita di Trump diversi mesi fa”.

Mentre a Parigi lentamente riaprono negozi, musei, monumenti, teatri rimasti chiusi ieri per la 4/a manifestazione dei gilet gialli, arrivano le ultime cifre del ministero degli Interni: 136.000 i manifestanti in tutto il Paese, lo stesso numero di una settimana prima. Sono state 1.723 le persone identificate, per 1.220 di loro è scattato lo stato di fermo. Emmanuel Macron, obiettivo numero uno della protesta, dovrebbe prendere la parola davanti ai francesi fra domani e martedì, anche per disinnescare una nuova protesta sabato prossimo. Ieri sera il presidente si è limitato ad un tweet in cui ha ringraziato le forze dell’ordine impegnate sul territorio “per il coraggio e l’eccezionale professionalità”.

IL PUNTO – Ora Macron dovrà aprire al dialogo coi gilet gialli – Un silenzio lungo una settimana e molto pesante: Emmanuel Macron non ha mai preso la parola in questa settimana cruciale del suo mandato, quella in cui all’Eliseo è circolata la parola “golpe” e la popolarità del presidente investito dalla rabbia dei gilet gialli è precipitata al minimo storico del 21%. Lo farà ad inizio settimana e il fatto che la situazione non sia precipitata oggi a Parigi lo aiuterà nella sua iniziativa. Macron aveva condannato le violenze a 11.000 chilometri dal suo paese, mentre si trovava al G20 in Argentina, subito dopo che i suoi collaboratori gli avevano mostrato sul cellulare le terribili immagini degli Champs-Elysees. Dopo il rientro ha lasciato la scena al premier Edouard Philippe, considerato fino a quel momento l’uomo meno disponibile al dialogo con i gilet gialli. Per il presidente, solo rovesci: la popolarità a picco, i fischi durante l’omaggio alla tomba del milite ignoto profanata, gli slogan ostili quando è andato in visita a Puy-en-Velay, dove i casseur avevano incendiato la Prefettura. Per non parlare della pesante ironia via tweet centellinata da un Donald Trump che continua a ripetergli che la rivolta dei gilet gialli è la conferma che lui aveva ragione a bocciare gli accordi di Parigi sul clima. Il silenzio e la riflessione sono stati interrotti soltanto da incontri con rappresentanti delle forze dell’ordine o per riunioni con Philippe e gli stretti collaboratori per cercare di trovare una via d’uscita a questa crisi. E’ lui nel mirino della protesta, nonostante le concessioni volute personalmente, come la marcia indietro sull’ecotassa. Ed è lui che dovrà risolvere il problema, uscendo dal silenzio per il quale in questi giorni è stato rimproverato anche dai portavoce dei gilet gialli, che l’hanno interpretato come “segno di disprezzo”.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Senza categoria, Unione Europea

La prossima guerra civile europea è iniziata in Francia. – Bloomberg.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-12-08.

2018-12-07__Trump__010

Non desta meraviglia che il più importante evento ed il relativo articolo articolo di questi ultimi anni abbia avuto una risonanza medio – bassa:

Trump patrocina l’Alleanza mondiale dei partiti Sovranisti.

Forse sarebbe anche un bene. Molte persone usano una straordinaria violenza verbale, riaffermano in modo altisonante  principi universali, spesso mal riportati e male intesi, ma quando finalmente si sia arrivati al dunque della devoluzione delle ideologie liberale e socialista, dello statalismo statocratico e statolatra, nemmeno se ne accorgono.

Eppure presto, se tutto procedesse come adesso sta procedendo, la resa finale dei conti si sta avvicinando a grandissimi passi.

Gli Stati Uniti di Mr Trump hanno dichiarato guerra ai liberal socialisti europei: vogliono semplicemente che se ne vadano via dalle stanze dei bottoni.

I sovranisti europei avrebbero trovato un santo patrono, potente in opere e parole. Frau Merkel dovrebbe ben saperne qualcosa.

Emmanuel Macron : Donald Trump profite des Gilets jaunes pour le descendre

«La bromance entre Emmanuel Macron et Donald Trump toucherait-elle à sa fin ? Il faut croire que oui ! Via son compte Twitter, le Président américain n’a pas hésité à profiter du mouvement des Gilets jaunes pour tacler son homologue français…

Le plus fidèle utilisateur de Twitter vient à nouveau de frapper ! Depuis qu’il a été élu à la tête des Etats-Unis, Donald Trump a fait du réseau social une arme de destruction massive. A coups de messages de 280 caractères, le père d’Ivanka, Donald Trump Jr., Barron, Tiffany et Eric, n’hésite pas à étriller ses opposants politiques.»

* * *

«The political vultures are circling around the French president and there’s much at stake for the world order»

*

«Less than a month ago, French President Emmanuel Macron staked his claim as the flag-bearer for globalism»

*

«In a speech to 60 world leaders at the Arc de Triomphe, he eulogized the United Nations and declared nationalism the “betrayal” of patriotism.»

*

«Last Saturday, tear gas and cobblestones flew in the same part of Paris as protesters trashed the iconic monument and demanded Macron’s embattled government withdraw a proposed fuel-tax increase»

*

«For the first time in his presidency, he backed down. It was a humbling moment for opponents of the populist revolts that spawned Donald Trump»

*

«Poland is flirting with the far right and nationalist parties cajoled by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban are plotting a rebellion at European Parliamentary elections in May. Meanwhile, Italy has collided with the European Union by taking a defiant stand on its budget spending»

*

«But Merkel’s power on the world stage was underpinned by a political fortress at home, and the French leader looks anything but solid»

*

«You can’t make speeches about defending the international order when your popularity is at 20 percent and there are protesters in the street, …. It’s very difficult to get your credibility back»

*

«The images televised around the world last weekend were of burning cars in the French capital. The retreat by the 40-year-old French leader was mocked by Trump»

*

«No tax merits putting our nation’s unity in danger»

*

«Trump ignored him and withdrew from the Iran nuclear accord and the Paris climate agreement. Trump tweeted that Macron’s climb down over a carbon tax that would raise fuel prices was proof that he’d been right all al»

*

«French opposition parties will file a joint no-confidence motion against the government on Monday. It’s unlikely to make much difference»

*

«But European elections and a series of municipal and regional votes over the next two years could shape up as referendums on his policies, according to Antonio Barroso, an analyst at Teneo Intelligence, which looks at political risk.»

*

«Even after Macron climbed down on the fuel taxes, the Yellow Vests have said they won’t dismantle their roadblocks and blockades. While they don’t have the formal organization of populist groups Italy’s Five Star Movement, the momentum is with them. Copycat protests have spread to Belgium and the Netherlands»

* * * * * * *

Già.

I Gilet Jaunes in Francia non stanno lottando per una mera riduzione delle tasse. vogliono la testa di Mr Macron e quelle dei suoi Ministri.

Ma la loro protesta è destinata ad estendersi in tutti i paesi retti da governi liberal socialisti, Germania inclusa.

Ci saranno degli alti e dei bassi, sicuramente, ma alla fine il Popolo Sovrano si riapproprierà di ciò che gli compete: il governo politico della nazione.

Ed intanto, il 23 maggio si voterà perle elezioni europee.

Siamo solo agli inizi, solo agli inizi.


Bloomberg. 2018-12-07. Macron’s Defeat in Paris Sounds Alarm for Europe

The political vultures are circling around the French president and there’s much at stake for the world order.

*

Less than a month ago, French President Emmanuel Macron staked his claim as the flag-bearer for globalism. In a speech to 60 world leaders at the Arc de Triomphe, he eulogized the United Nations and declared nationalism the “betrayal” of patriotism.

Last Saturday, tear gas and cobblestones flew in the same part of Paris as protesters trashed the iconic monument and demanded Macron’s embattled government withdraw a proposed fuel-tax increase. For the first time in his presidency, he backed down. It was a humbling moment for opponents of the populist revolts that spawned Donald Trump.

Europe has seen many a critical juncture in recent years, from the Greek debt crisis to the anti-immigrant backlash against refugees and Britain’s Brexit vote. Rarely, though, have so many political vultures been circling around one leader with so much at stake for the world order.

Poland is flirting with the far right and nationalist parties cajoled by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban are plotting a rebellion at European Parliamentary elections in May. Meanwhile, Italy has collided with the European Union by taking a defiant stand on its budget spending.

With the EU’s erstwhile firefighter, Angela Merkel, planning to step down as German chancellor, the baton was supposed to pass to Macron to uphold liberal democracy.  But Merkel’s power on the world stage was underpinned by a political fortress at home, and the French leader looks anything but solid.

“You can’t make speeches about defending the international order when your popularity is at 20 percent and there are protesters in the street,” said Nicholas Dungan, a Paris-based senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “It’s very difficult to get your credibility back.”

It’s a stark contrast to the weekend of Nov. 11 as leaders marked a century since the end of World War I. Macron championed the need for global cooperation while Trump cut an isolated figure. Europe’s divisions were laid bare that day as Polish government officials marched through Warsaw with far-right groups to mark the country’s Independence Day. Macron, though, stood firm as Europe’s statesman.

The images televised around the world last weekend were of burning cars in the French capital. The retreat by the 40-year-old French leader was mocked by Trump. Macron admitted, via his prime minister, that he’s not been able to connect with the French people. “No tax merits putting our nation’s unity in danger,” Edouard Philippe said in a televised address.

The trouble for opponents of Trump-style nativism and protectionism is that there’s no one else to take up his mantle, Dungan said.

After Macron was elected in May 2017, he sought to work with Merkel and a friendly government in Rome to deepen European integration. He reached out to Trump to convince the American president to stick to international agreements.

Trump ignored him and withdrew from the Iran nuclear accord and the Paris climate agreement. Trump tweeted that Macron’s climb down over a carbon tax that would raise fuel prices was proof that he’d been right all along.

Prevailing Wind

Merkel, meanwhile, was wounded in German elections in September 2017 and is about to be replaced as the head of her party, almost certainly by someone less keen on European integration. Italy elected a Euroskeptic government in March.

“His ambitions for a strong Europe had already taken a hit from events in Germany and elsewhere,” said Philippe Moreau Defarges, an adviser at the Paris-based French Institute for International Affairs.  “But he emerges seriously weakened from the recent events. He’s just not appeared up to the level, and France’s image has taken a terrible blow.”

At home, his popularity has been sinking, hurt by the failure of his early unpopular changes to labor and tax law to revive the French economy. Macron’s policies are seen to favor the wealthy, and poll after poll have shown the French electorate thinks the former banker is aloof and arrogant. His approval rating is at 28 percent, according to an average of seven polling institutes.

Then came the “Yellow Vests.” The grassroots protest movement was sparked by opposition to his environmental policy of hiking taxes on diesel and gasoline to fund incentives to buy cleaner cars and home housing systems. But it’s evolved into widespread anger about the rising cost of living and declining services in rural and small-town France.

The protesters’ demands have expanded accordingly. Some want to restore the wealth tax, increasing pensions, raising the minimum wage, cutting the salaries of politicians, and even to Macron resigning and replacing the National Assembly with a “people’s council.” Polls show three-quarters of the French support their demands, even if they also disapprove of the violence that’s accompanied many of the protests.

Macron doesn’t face national elections until 2022, and he’s always said he doesn’t care about popularity polls. French opposition parties will file a joint no-confidence motion against the government on Monday. It’s unlikely to make much difference. 

But European elections and a series of municipal and regional votes over the next two years could shape up as referendums on his policies, according to Antonio Barroso, an analyst at Teneo Intelligence, which looks at political risk.

“Whether Macron will have enough political space to implement more economic reforms will probably be determined by the European Parliament elections, which will likely be interpreted as a ‘midterm vote’ on the presidency,” Barroso said.

Isolated

Even after Macron climbed down on the fuel taxes, the Yellow Vests have said they won’t dismantle their roadblocks and blockades. While they don’t have the formal organization of populist groups Italy’s Five Star Movement, the momentum is with them. Copycat protests have spread to Belgium and the Netherlands.

Most of its members will vote for either Marine Le Pen’s anti-immigrant National Rally or Jean-Luc Melenchon’s far-left France Unbowed, said Marc Lazar, a professor at Sciences Po in Paris. Both party leaders were defeated by Macron last year and eye another shot at power. The worry for the EU is that neither of them are defenders of the bloc’s integrity.

Any breakthroughs by those parties in May’s European elections will make it difficult for Macron to push on with his agenda — for France and beyond. “Macron emerges from this extremely weakened and isolated,” said Lazar. “Both at home and in Europe.”

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump patrocina l’Alleanza mondiale dei partiti Sovranisti.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-12-07.

White House Gatto 001

Il discorso di Mr Pompeo era nell’aria da tempo, ma ora se ne può parlare ore rotundo, apertamente.

Per chiarezza si dovrebbero premettere alcune considerazioni.

L’Internazionale Socialista era l’unione mondiale dei partiti d’ispirazione socialdemocratica e laburista, costituita nella presente forma il tregiugno 1951 a Francoforte. In essa erano confluiti tutti i partiti mondiali di ispirazione liberal oppure socialista: scopi primari erano l’elaborazione di strategie politiche concordate comunemente al fine di diventare la cultura politica egemone e, soprattutto, il mutuo aiuto. Il partito liberal oppure socialista anche del più minuscolo stato aderente aveva la certezza che sarebbe stato aiutato a cresce, a consolidarsi, ad andare al potere: nel caso gli stati membri lo avrebbero anche difeso militarmente. Costituiva un vero e proprio governo sovranazionale. l mondo in cui viviamo ora è una sua eredità.

Il 14 dicembre 2012 fu fondata a Roma, ed ufficializzata a Lipsia il 22 maggio 2013, Alleanza Progressista. Ispirata e voluta dal partito socialdemocratico tedesco nelle persone di Her Sigmar Gabriel ed Herr Hans-Jochen Vogel.

Alleanza Progressista era il superamento storico e politico della vetusta Internazionale Socialista, nella quale i partiti socialdemocratici non si riconoscevano più. Cambiato il credo politico, restarono immutati i criteri organizzativi: era una immensa società di mutuo soccorso. Vi aderivano il Partito Democratico degli Stati Uniti, il Partito Laburista israeliano, il Congresso Nazionale indiano, il partito socialdemocratico austriaco, il partito Socialdemocratico belga, il Partito Socialista francese, il Partito Socialdemocratico tedesco, il Partito Democratico italiano, Alleanza della Sinistra Democratica in Polonia, il Partito Laburista inglese, il Partito Socialdemocratico Operaio spagnolo, il Partito Socialista svizzero più le formazioni di sinistra di oltre novanta nazioni. È grazie alla pochezza dei personaggi che la gestivano se in pochi anni sono scomparsi dalla scena politica mondiale.

*

All’epoca in quasi tutto l’Occidente i partiti di Alleanza Progressista erano al potere, ossia in posti di governo, e la situazione è sotto gli occhi di tutti.

Erano in molti a vedere con occhio perplesso questa istituzione, alla quale facevano capo tutta una serie di ramificazioni non governative ma strettamente dipendenti, quali quelle per il ‘clima’, per il femminismo, per il giuspositivismo, le ngo, etc.

A partire dal 2016, con grande sforzo mondiale, iniziò il declino di Alleanza Progressista: dapprima le elezioni americane con la vittoria di Me Trump, quindi il crollo del partito socialista francese, ridotto ad un simulacro al 6%, seguito dal crollo della socialdemocrazia tedesca adesso quotata attorno al 14%, per non menzionare la clamorosa sconfitta elettorale del partito democratico italiano, piombato al 17%. Anche l’attuale governo liberal socialista dell’Unione Europea è nei triboli, e si vedrà a maggio l’entità del disastro.

Coloro che nel 2016 si credevano si essere onnipotenti mostrarono chiaramente al mondo la loro nullità.

* * * * * * *

Il primo e maggiore obiettivo strategico era quello di scalzare i governi liberal socialisti, anche a costo di lasciar residuare qualche turmoil locale. Ma, guardando il quadro di insieme, si direbbe che il piano sia riuscito in modo quasi perfetto. Alleanza Progressista, pur con le sue sfaccettature, è ancora al governo solo in Francia ed in Germania, ma sia Mr Macron sia Frau Merkel contano come la polvere sui piatti della bilancia. La loro caduta è solo questione di tempo.

*

Con le elezioni di midterm il Presidente Trump non solo non ha subito la tanto sbandierata Blu Wave ma ha anche aumentato il controllo che già aveva sul senato, organo questo che è chiamato a ratificare le nomine presidenziali dei giudici federali. Nella Corte Suprema Mr Trump ha già piazzato due suoi giudici, le Loro Giustizie Mr Gorsuch e Mr Kavanaugh, riportando la maggioranza repubblicana.

*

Ultima precisazione.

Nella terminologia liberal, la parola “liberal” indica una ideologia a substrato illuministico socialcomunista, mentre nella terminologia di Mr Trump significa esattamente l’opposto:ha come obiettivo il completo ritiro dell’ingerenza dello stato nella società e nell’economia.

* * * * * * *

«US secretary of state praises president whose bonfire of treaties has alarmed Europe»

*

«Donald Trump is building a “new liberal order” under US leadership, based on the principle of putting national sovereignty before multilateralism for its own sake»

*

«In a speech in Brussels before a Nato ministers meeting, Mike Pompeo sought to frame Trump’s foreign policy decisions as a coherent doctrine to a European audience that is increasingly anxious about US withdrawal from a string of treaties and Trump’s antipathy towards the European Union»

*

«He listed a series of current international institutions, including the EU, UN, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, that he said were no longer serving their mission they were created»

*

«He argued that Trump’s reassertion of national sovereignty through his “America First” policy would make those institutions function better»

*

«At last week’s G20 summit, European officials pushed back against their US counterparts who were under instructions to eliminate references to multilateralism and a rules-based international order.»

* * * * * * *

Da quanto detto, dovrebbe essere chiaro che sta per inaugurarsi un lungo periodo di tempo a cui saranno aliene le ideologie liberal, quella socialista e tutte le relative conseguenze vissuto come credi religiosi, quali per esempio il ‘clima’, il femminismo, e così via.

I liberal saranno trattati per come hanno trattato.

Nessuno si aspetti eventi trionfalistici. I liberal socialisti hanno ancora in mano gran quota degli apparati burocratici e la quasi totalità dei magistrati occidentali, tramite i quali cercano di governare anche se elettoralmente distrutti. Sarà questa un’opera di bonifica lunga e difficile, ma è già iniziata in paesi quali la Polonia e l’Ungheria.

Le strazianti urla di dolore dei cascami liberal socialisti che ancora si aggirano, il livoroso fraseggio di Mr Macron, ridimensionato per bene di Gilet Jaunes, la sprezzante alterigia di Frau Merkel sono evidenti elementi che identificano la loro sconfitta. E di Davos, chi più ne parla?

Cina. Carbone. Davos. Fallito il piano Al Gore da 90,000 mld Usd.

Bene. Benissimo.

Saranno 90,000 miliardi che resteranno nelle tasche dei Contribuenti invece di finire in quelle dei liberal socialisti.


The Guardian, 2018-12-04. Trump is building a new liberal world order, says Pompeo

US secretary of state praises president whose bonfire of treaties has alarmed Europe.

*

Donald Trump is building a “new liberal order” under US leadership, based on the principle of putting national sovereignty before multilateralism for its own sake, his secretary of state has claimed.

In a speech in Brussels before a Nato ministers meeting, Mike Pompeo sought to frame Trump’s foreign policy decisions as a coherent doctrine to a European audience that is increasingly anxious about US withdrawal from a string of treaties and Trump’s antipathy towards the European Union.

He listed a series of current international institutions, including the EU, UN, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, that he said were no longer serving their mission they were created.

He argued that Trump’s reassertion of national sovereignty through his “America First” policy would make those institutions function better. “In the finest traditions of our great democracy, we are rallying the noble nations of the world to build a new liberal order that prevents war and achieves greater prosperity for all,” Pompeo said at a speech at the German Marshall Fund thinktank. “We’re supporting institutions that we believe can be improved; institutions that work in American interests – and yours – in service of our shared values.”

The remarks were frequently punctuated with praise for Trump, who is referred to 13 times in the text. Pompeo portrayed his president as restoring an era of triumphal US leadership in the world, for the first time since the end of the cold war.

“This American leadership allowed us to enjoy the greatest human flourishing in modern history,” the secretary of state said. “We won the cold war. We won the peace. With no small measure of George HW Bush’s effort, we reunited Germany. This is the type of leadership that President Trump is boldly reasserting.

“After the cold war ended, we allowed this liberal order to begin to corrode. Multilateralism has too often become viewed as an end unto itself. The more treaties we sign, the safer we supposedly are. The more bureaucrats we have, the better the job gets done.”

The Trump administration has alarmed European governments with making a bonfire of treaties, walking out of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, withdrawing from talks with Europe on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, pulling out of the Paris climate agreement and the UN global compact on migration. At last week’s G20 summit, European officials pushed back against their US counterparts who were under instructions to eliminate references to multilateralism and a rules-based international order.

Trump has also declared he wants to abandon the intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty with Russia, because of violations by Moscow. European capitals are seeking to broker a solution that would salvage the treaty, which kept nuclear missiles out of Europe for more than 25 years.

They feared that Pompeo would come to this week’s Nato meeting with a formal notice of withdrawal that would start a six-month clock ticking for its dissolution, but formal withdrawal is now not expected until the new year, leaving a small window open for last-minute efforts to save the treaty through a joint Nato effort to confront Russia over its suspected violation: the development of a ground-launched cruise missile.

Pompeo’s speech received polite applause, but Julianne Smith, a senior foreign policy official during Barack Obama’s time at the White House, said it had shocked US allies across Europe.

“The first words that come to mind are tone deaf,” said Smith, now a senior fellow at the Bosch Academy in Berlin. “It’s as if they have no appreciation of how Europeans are trying to figure out how to cope with an administration that they see as abdicating American leadership.

“The speech just gives Europe a long to-do list – just do this, do that, with no vision to go with it. No one I talk to here believes this administration is committed to a rules-based order.”

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Senza categoria, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump. La Marea Blu potrebbe non vedersi. – The New York Times.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-10-21.

2018-10-18__Trump__001

«An apparent drastic shift toward the Republican candidate highlights the challenges of polling generally, and of polling in certain states particularly.»

*

In a Crucial Pennsylvania District, Gun Policy Reigns Supreme. Oct. 10, 2018

As Suburban Women Turn to Democrats, Many Suburban Men Stand With Trump. Oct. 13, 2018

Republicans Abandon Vulnerable Lawmakers, Striving to Keep House. Oct. 11, 2018

In Deeply Blue New Jersey, an Unexpected Battle for Senate. Aug. 5, 2018.

*

Negli ultimi due anni i liberal democratici hanno a lungo sbandierato il concetto che a midterm si sarebbe vista la Marea Blu. Stando agli annunci, i democratici avrebbero vinto il 90% dei seggi alla Camera e quasi tutti i seggi del Senato messi in palio. Per quanto riguarda i Governatori, ne avrebbero conquistato i quattro quinti.

Insomma, un cappotto completo.

Subito dopo dovrebbe prender luogo l’impeachment per il Presidente Trump e quello per Sua Giustizia Mr Kavanaugh.

*

Con il tempo le previsioni elettorali hanno smorzato in modo sostanziale i toni: vittoria sicuramente sì, ma non certo ai livelli prima proclamati.

Adesso iniziano a comparire anche dei dubbiosi, che prospetterebbero un Senato con 52 – 54 senatori repubblicani.

Insomma: si iniziano a vedere previsioni ragionevoli.

*

L’articolo comparso sul The New York Times apparirebbe essere ancor più cauto. L’ottavo distretto del Minnesota, un feudo democratico, sembrerebbe essere transitato ai repubblicani.

Articolo scritto molto cautamente, ma significativo.


The New York Times. 2018-10-16. Did Minnesota’s Eighth District Really Swing by Almost 20 Points?

Minnesota’s Eighth District is one of a handful of Democratic-held House seats where Republicans have a realistic shot to win in the midterms in three weeks. The incumbent, Rick Nolan, is retiring, and he won by only one percentage point in 2016 in a district President Trump carried by 15.

When we polled this district in September, we found the Democratic candidate, Joe Radinovich, up by one point. Now, we have the Republican, Pete Stauber, up by 15.

The underlying numbers have changed a lot, too. Last time, voters disapproved of Mr. Trump by one point. Now they approve by 18. Last time, Democrats outnumbered Republicans by two percentage points; now Republicans outnumber Democrats by 10.

Is the shift real? Probably not entirely. But there’s probably more truth to it than a lot of Democrats criticizing the poll want to admit.

It’s a case that highlights the challenge of polling in general, and the particular challenges of polling in some states.

The case for a phantom shift

Minnesota is a tough state for pollsters because its voter file, a data set of every registered voter in the state, doesn’t contain information on partisanship, like party registration or whether people voted in Democratic or Republican primaries.

In contrast with most states, we can’t adjust to make sure we have the right number of registered Democrats or Republicans.

Based on all of the other polls we’ve done, we can say with some confidence that the ability to control the number of registered Democrats and Republicans in a poll is a very important factor in results.

Response rates are extremely low nowadays, and our samples, at 500 per poll, are pretty small. Some of our poll results would have been 10 points different without the ability to weight by party registration or primary vote history, and occasionally even more than 10 points different. (Weighting means giving more weight to respondents from an underrepresented group to ensure the sample reflects the demographic profile of likely voters.) In almost all of these cases, it’s Democrats who have been overrepresented, not Republicans.

Based on that, and as we wrote at the time, we decided in September to largely avoid districts without party registration or primary vote history, including some places we’d really like to poll, like Montana or Minnesota’s First and Seventh Districts. For the same reason, we also considered not re-polling Minnesota’s Eighth.

It would be foolish to rule out the possibility that this poll result would have been 10 points different if we could have weighted by party registration, given that we know it has had that kind of effect in other districts. One could find additional evidence for this case by looking at President Trump’s approval rating and the party identification of the poll, two measures that lurched far to the right even though we don’t have much reason to believe that either ought to have moved so far.

It should be noted that this problem isn’t limited to us. A lot of pollsters going without party registration will occasionally get weird results like this. To compensate, some try to weight to party identification — whether people consider themselves Democrats or Republicans.

The challenge of weighting by party identification is that it’s hard to know the “real” party identification. That’s especially true in a congressional district where we’ve done only one poll before (typically, a firm weighting by party identification will choose to weight to the average result over several previous polls of the same area).

If we had weighted to the party identification from our September poll (in which we had Democrats outnumbering Republicans by two percentage points) or the average of the two polls (R+4), the results in this survey would indeed have moved to the left.

Mr. Stauber would have led by nine points if we had weighted to the average party identification of the two polls together. He would have led by four points if we had weighted to the party identification from September.

Either of those results could be a more accurate reflection of the race. But I would note that Mr. Stauber leads in all of these hypothetical situations. There are some reasons that shouldn’t be too surprising.

The case for a real shift

I would guess that response bias — the possibility that Republicans were likelier to respond — plays a pretty meaningful role in moving this result. But there are at least three reasons to think there’s more driving the shift than that.

One factor is that we are now naming third-party candidates in the final stretch, and the Independence candidate, Skip Sandman, has 4 percent of the vote. Mr. Sandman, who has previously attracted 4 percent of the vote here as a Green Party candidate, almost exclusively wins voters who disapprove of President Trump, and voters who live in the Duluth area, which leans heavily Democratic.

Another factor: There has been a lot of campaigning since early September, and this is one of the few districts where Republicans are airing more advertisements than Democrats. Republicans are believed to be favored in basically all of the other contests where they are broadcasting more advertisements.

Third, there’s evidence of improved Republican standing in conservative areas since early September, including in the nearby North Dakota Senate race. If there’s a broad trend toward greater polarization of the electorate along the lines of the presidential election, that might be particularly helpful to Republicans in a conservative area where Mr. Trump won by 15 points. And while Democrats do often win here, it is worth noting that this is a socially conservative area that opposed same-sex marriage by a wide margin in 2012. The Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination fight may be helping Republicans here, too.

Put it all together, and the change from one poll to another is probably a combination of a real shift and of the challenge of polling in a state like Minnesota, without party registration or primary vote history.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Unione Europea

Germania. Il ‘popolo bue’ in rivolta. Più che bue sembrerebbe essere un toro.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-09-30.

2018-09-30__Germania__001

Il mese di ottobre che inizia domani sarà cruciale per i destini dell’Occidente.

Negli Stati Uniti stiamo assistendo alle ultime battute sulla nomina di Sua Giustizia Kavanaugh a membro a vita della Suprema Corte: nel caso che, dopo aver approvato la nomina in sede di Commissione Giustizia, il Senato la confermasse con la votazione in aula, per circa trenta anni questa Corta sarebbe a maggioranza repubblicana. Questo evento segnerebbe l’inizio di una fine certa dell’ideologia libera a socialista negli Stati Uniti.

Se poi, come potrebbe essere, il Presidente Trump alle elezioni di midterm, che si terranno ai primi di novembre, conservasse la maggioranza in Senato, avrebbe il via libera alla nomina di 19 giudici nelle corti di appello federali. Tranne due circuiti giudiziari, tutto il sistema dei giudici americani avrebbe matrice culturale repubblicana.

A questo punto, se anche i liberal democratici assassinassero con efferatezza Mr Trump, per più di una generazione il sistema dei giudici statunitensi governerebbe esattamente come se Mr Trump fosse ancora presente ed attivo.

Nessuno intende sovra enfatizzare quanto potrebbe accadere, ma nei fatti è Harmageddon: la battaglia finale.

Liberal e socialisti hanno sempre disprezzato quel ‘popolo bue‘ dal quale si aspettavano di essere sempre votati, essendo essi gli illuminati, le guide naturali dei popoli.

Non hanno voluto prestargli l’orecchio: nessun problema, i Cittadini Elettori adesso li stanno cacciando via a pedate. La società civile è costituita dai Cittadini Elettori, non dagli iscritti alle ngo.

*

Ma ad ottobre si terranno anche le elezioni regionali e provinciali in Italia, ed anche in questa nazione sembrerebbe ragionevole supporre che i partiti ad ideologia liberal e socialista ne escano ulteriormente ridimensionati: ridotti a percentuali talmente basse da risultare politicamente ininfluenti per un lungo lasso di tempo, se non per sempre.

*

Si voterà anche in Brasile ed in Lussemburgo. In un Brasile insanguinato dall’attentato fatto dai liberal socialisti per eliminare il loro avversario politico Mr Bolsonaro, in Lussemburgo per decidere quale atteggiamento terrà quel piccolo stato in seno al Consiglio Europeo.

*

Ma gli occhi degli europei sono focalizzati ora sulla Germania, ove il 14 ottobre si voterà in Baviera ed il 28 in Hessen.

Secondo le previsioni elettorali disponibili Cdu, Csu ed Spd dovrebbero perdere in modo clamoroso.

Negli ultimi due giorni ben sei differenti società di prospezioni elettorali sono concordi: Emnid, Forsa, Forsch’gr Wahlen, Gms, Infratest dimap, ed Insa stimano la Union, Cdu ed Csu, tra il 27% ed il 28% e la Spd al 16%.

Un ulteriore crollo che si attuerebbe dopo la già severa débâcle del 24 settembre dello scorso anno.

Molto verosimilmente la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel potrebbe dare le dimissioni, aprendo una crisi politica mai vista in Germania. Ma se anche rimanesse al Governo, la sua forza politica in patria e nell’Unione Europea sarebbe semplicemente nulla.

Queste sono le ultime previsioni per la Baviera:

2018-09-30__Germania__002 Baviera

E queste sono le ultime previsioni per l’Hessen:

2018-09-30__Germania__003 Hessen

* * * * * * *

Se si è sicuramente certi che le previsioni debbano essere prese sempre con grande circospezione e buon senso, un calo di dieci punti percentuali per i partiti della Union e di 7 – 8 punti percentuali per la Spd dovrebbe essere l’epitaffio da iscriversi sulla tomba politica di questi partiti.

Né ci si dimentichi che a maggio del prossimo anno si terranno le elezioni europee, ove con questi numeri la rappresentanza dei partiti tradizionali tedeschi sarà ridotta a numeri trascurabili.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump. La guerra privata contro gli stati liberal. – Bloomberg.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-08-30.

Donald Trump photographed at Trump Tower in NYC

Le menti ideologizzate trovano Mr Trump inintelligibile, imprevedibile, capricciosamente estroso e senza un suo proprio piano strategico: nulla di più clamorosamente errato!

Quanti invece siano degli empiristi, privi di ogni residuo ideologico nel capo, quelli che ragionano con logica non contraddittoria, trovano Mr Tump lineare e facilmente comprensibile: tutto sommato, prevedibile.

I liberal risultano essere irritati e sconcertati da un Trump che prima di fare qualcosa di importante li stuzzica nel loro debole: una questione religiosa oppure sessuale. Quelli impazziscono dietro lo straccio sventolato e Mr Trump lavora sotto sotto ai suoi scopi.

*

Alla fine persino i giornalisti di Bloomberg stanno iniziando a darsela.

* * *

Se come sembrerebbe essere probabile ai primi di settembre il Senato americano ratificherà la nomina di Sua Giustizia Kavanaugh, la Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti rimarrà per almeno tre decenni a maggioranza repubblicana. Dalla Corte Suprema si governa il mondo occidentale.

I democratici non amano parlarne, ma lo sanno benissimo.

A quel punto, anche se Mr Trump fosse assassinato, i destini degli Stati Uniti sarebbero segnati.

Fatto si è che Mr Trump ama andare al sodo: colpisce solitamente la chiave portante, quella di volta. Dopo, la costruzione non può fare altro che implodere.

Il suo obbiettivo è portare i liberal democratici alla fame: vir pauper est imago mortis. Deprivati di uno stato da sacchegiare allegramente, i liberal democratici stanno accumulando mancati ‘guadagni’ su mancati ‘guadagni’. Alla fine saranno costretti a lavorare per vivere.

* * * * * * *

«Donald Trump has a powerful philosophy defining his presidency»

*

«That may surprise you»

*

«After all, it’s hard to see a consistent ideology in the areas where he claims to be winning big, as he likes to put it: taxes, trade, regulation, and health care.»

*

«It’s not populism, which he claims to espouse»

* * *

«So what is his philosophy?»

«

Look again at the very same tax, trade, regulatory, and health-care policies, and a different pattern emerges. Check out the places they target.»

*

«His tax overhaul has capped at $10,000 the federal income tax deduction that a homeowner can claim for payment of state and local taxes, affecting taxpayers especially severely in the Northeast and California.»

*

«At the same time, Trump’s continuing efforts to undermine Obamacare will affect states that run their own health-insurance markets under the act—most of them Democratic or trending that way»

*

«Trump’s effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire, which could shift the balance of power for a generation, is yet another blue-state jab. Asking participants if they’re U.S. citizens will likely result in a lower head count, especially in blue states that have provided sanctuary to millions of undocumented immigrants, including those brought to the U.S. as children.»

*

«A lower state tally could translate into smaller population-based federal grants, fewer seats in Congress, and a reduced Electoral College presence for at least the next two presidential elections. For these reasons, blue states are fighting to stop the citizenship question in federal court.»

*

«He’s not just slapping down voters for sending Democrats to Washington. He’s waging war on an economic model that devotes greater resources to public education and a stronger social safety net; relies less on fossil fuels and encourages alternative energy sources; celebrates an urban lifestyle; and welcomes immigrants. The strategy may be working better than even Trump expected»

*

«Blue-state antagonism comes through in his one real legislative victory, the 2017 tax rewrite. By capping state and local tax breaks at $10,000, Trump not only makes it more expensive for taxpayers to live in blue states, he’s shrinking the value of their retirement nest eggs—their homes»

*

«The lawsuit is probably a long shot, but the states have a point: Because incomes are higher and homes generally more expensive in states along the coasts, taxes are also higher. That means the $10,000 cap is easily reached, even by middle-class homeowners. About 3 million California residents alone will hit it. New York has calculated the cost to its residents will be about $14 billion in the first year. For those living in West Virginia and Mississippi, $10,000 probably covers them.»

*

«While Alabama, Kentucky, and South Carolina get more than $2 back for each $1 in taxes they send to Washington, New York gets 56¢ back and California gets 64¢.»

*

«Trump’s tax cut is also making it difficult for blue states to fund their schools. Public education depends on property taxes for revenue. The National Education Association says that over the next decade the tax law will punch a $150 billion hole in school budgets. That puts about 130,000 education jobs at risk. California’s funding loss will come to about $35 billion, while New York’s will be about $31 billion»

* * * * * * *

«For these reasons, blue states are fighting to stop the citizenship question in federal court.»

Già.

Ma se la Suprema Corte è a maggioranza repubblicana, le sentenze emesse da Corti di livello inferiori sono alla fine nullificate, tranciate via ed in modo definitivo, senza possibilità di appello.

Il piano di Mr Trump è di una semplicità angelica: tagliare alle radici le fonti di potere e finanziamento dei liberal democratici.

Tutti questi discorsi, di cui abbiamo riportato soltanto alcuni passi, indicano anche chiaramente la dabbenaggine con cui i liberal avevano costruito il loro impero: il diavolo si cela nei particolari.


Bloomberg. 2018-08-21. Trump’s War Against Blue States

Donald Trump has a powerful philosophy defining his presidency. That may surprise you. After all, it’s hard to see a consistent ideology in the areas where he claims to be winning big, as he likes to put it: taxes, trade, regulation, and health care.

It’s not populism, which he claims to espouse. His tax overhaul has mostly benefited the wealthy, studies show, spurring not higher wages but $679 billion in share buybacks in the first half of this year. By imposing tariffs on thousands of imports, he’s putting a regressive tax on the American consumer. He’s done what he can to undermine the Affordable Care Act, the result of which has been higher premiums for workers who depend on the program.

So what is his philosophy? Look again at the very same tax, trade, regulatory, and health-care policies, and a different pattern emerges. Check out the places they target. His tax overhaul has capped at $10,000 the federal income tax deduction that a homeowner can claim for payment of state and local taxes, affecting taxpayers especially severely in the Northeast and California. As part of his deregulation push, he wants to revoke a federal waiver that lets 13 left-leaning states adopt tougher carbon-pollution standards. He proposes to unwind the fuel-economy standards that automakers agreed to work toward under a deal struck with President Barack Obama.

At the same time, Trump’s continuing efforts to undermine Obamacare will affect states that run their own health-insurance markets under the act—most of them Democratic or trending that way. He also wants to ask about citizenship in the next census questionnaire, which will surely decrease participation in the decennial head count—and likely affect the size of the congressional delegations of states such as California, New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts.

Do you see the pattern? Trump is targeting America’s blue states—those whose voters are mostly liberal or lean left and choose Democrats in presidential elections. (The color coding has its origins in TV coverage of presidential elections.) He’s not just slapping down voters for sending Democrats to Washington. He’s waging war on an economic model that devotes greater resources to public education and a stronger social safety net; relies less on fossil fuels and encourages alternative energy sources; celebrates an urban lifestyle; and welcomes immigrants. The strategy may be working better than even Trump expected.

Blue-state antagonism comes through in his one real legislative victory, the 2017 tax rewrite. By capping state and local tax breaks at $10,000, Trump not only makes it more expensive for taxpayers to live in blue states, he’s shrinking the value of their retirement nest eggs—their homes.

In July four states—New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Maryland—sued the federal government, alleging that a blue-state mugging took place in December 2017 when Trump signed the law. The suit says the Republican-led Congress and the White House deliberately wrote the measure to target left-leaning states, interfering with their legal right to tax their residents.

The lawsuit is probably a long shot, but the states have a point: Because incomes are higher and homes generally more expensive in states along the coasts, taxes are also higher. That means the $10,000 cap is easily reached, even by middle-class homeowners. About 3 million California residents alone will hit it. New York has calculated the cost to its residents will be about $14 billion in the first year. For those living in West Virginia and Mississippi, $10,000 probably covers them.

The cap grew out of a misapprehension. Republican lawmakers took to the House floor to complain that the ability to deduct state and local taxes meant red-state taxpayers were subsidizing more affluent blue-state free-riders. The opposite is true: Many red states have low taxes because they rely heavily on federal aid and have relatively large low-income populations, says the Tax Foundation, a right-of-center policy group. More than 40 percent of Mississippi’s revenue comes from the federal government, for example. While Alabama, Kentucky, and South Carolina get more than $2 back for each $1 in taxes they send to Washington, New York gets 56¢ back and California gets 64¢.

Evidence is emerging that the tax law is having its intended effect. In high-end real estate markets in blue states, some homeowners are finding that buyers are increasingly holding back, often because they’re put off by the prospect of higher taxes, according to Bloomberg News. This is evident in Westchester County, a suburban enclave for New York City commuters. Home sales in the county, where the average resident paid $17,179 in property taxes last year, plunged 18 percent in the second quarter of 2018 from the same quarter in 2017. That was the fourth quarterly sales decline in a row—and the biggest one since 2011.

Other top-end markets in blue states, including Seattle and Silicon Valley, also seem headed for a slowdown in home sales. Of course, additional factors are at work, especially rising interest rates, the runup in home prices in recent years, and weak wage growth. But the national data all began pointing in the wrong direction just months after Trump signed the tax law: Existing-home sales dropped in June for a third straight month. New-home purchases are at their slowest pace in eight months. Housing inventories have begun to grow again, after declining for years. New York City is seeing falling real estate prices. It’s only likely to get worse next year. That’s when homeowners will file their 2018 taxes and for the first time feel the sting of the $10,000 limit.

New York and other states have tried to skirt the new tax law through such means as allowing residents to make tax-deductible donations to charities in exchange for tax credits equal to a percentage of the donations. But the IRS isn’t likely to allow these too-clever-by-half workarounds.

Trump’s tax cut is also making it difficult for blue states to fund their schools. Public education depends on property taxes for revenue. The National Education Association says that over the next decade the tax law will punch a $150 billion hole in school budgets. That puts about 130,000 education jobs at risk. California’s funding loss will come to about $35 billion, while New York’s will be about $31 billion.

The most recent blue-state assault took place in August when officials at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation proposed rules that would suspend the mandatory increases in fuel economy put in place under Obama. Under the new proposal, automakers’ fleets would have to hit only about 37 miles a gallon by 2021 on average, instead of about 47 miles per gallon by 2025.

Automakers had agreed to the stricter fuel-economy rules during the previous administration even though they were tough—and required Detroit to commercialize some technologies that existed only in labs. But the standards were widely supported by industry, labor, and environmental groups alike. Trump would unwind all that and also revoke a waiver that allowed California to set tougher tailpipe greenhouse-gas standards.

His proposal would extinguish efforts by California and the 12 other blue states that follow its lead. Together they account for about one-third of U.S. auto sales. The stricter emissions regime is their way of attempting to moderate the effects of climate change, including the rising tides, hurricanes, droughts, wildfires, and floods that are hitting their states.

Trump is not merely reneging on the Obama deal, he could send automakers back to the pre-Obama era, when they faced two sets of emissions standards—unless the U.S. wins what will be an inevitable lawsuit over the 13 states’ right to exceed the federal rules.

At the same time, Trump is undermining blue-state investments in electric-vehicle charging stations, mass transit systems, and electric buses. Energy Innovation: Policy and Technology LLC, an economic consulting firm, estimates that the White House proposal will increase emissions by 11 percent and cost the U.S. economy $457 billion by 2050.

Trump officials say their proposal will result in less-expensive cars (because fuel-sipping technologies can be costly), which means the national fleet will turn over faster, resulting in safer autos on the road and fewer highway deaths. And that will produce a $198 billion societywide savings for vehicles built between 1975 and 2029.

Nonsense, says Nic Lutsey, the director of the International Council on Clean Transportation’s electric-vehicle and fuels work. He tells Bloomberg News: “There’s no evidence that efficiency regulations have depressed sales and added fatalities as a result—in any market in the world.” Anyway, whatever happened to states’ rights, once an article of faith among conservative lawmakers?

Trump, having been unable to persuade Congress to repeal Obamacare, is finding ways to subvert it. Of the 17 states (including the District of Columbia) that run their own insurance markets under the Affordable Care Act, 13 are blue or lean that way. One study found that those 17 marketplaces had been holding up better than the rest despite Trump’s relentless attacks, including his October 2017 pronouncement that “there’s no such thing as Obamacare anymore,” a month before the start of open enrollment.

The president has used his regulatory powers to let insurers sell skimpy, temporary policies that attract younger, healthier people. These plans tend to be cheaper, because they don’t have to cover needs such as maternity care, drug-abuse treatment, mental-health services, or cancer drugs. As a result, Obamacare-plan insurers are left covering an older and sicker population, forcing them to increase premiums.

Trump’s administration has also stopped paying the ACA law’s important cost-sharing subsidies. Such payments offset the expenses insurers incur for offering plans with smaller deductibles and out-of-pocket costs to lower-income people. More than half the 12 million people who have signed up for coverage through the exchanges benefit from these subsidies.

Trump’s effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire, which could shift the balance of power for a generation, is yet another blue-state jab. Asking participants if they’re U.S. citizens will likely result in a lower head count, especially in blue states that have provided sanctuary to millions of undocumented immigrants, including those brought to the U.S. as children.

A lower state tally could translate into smaller population-based federal grants, fewer seats in Congress, and a reduced Electoral College presence for at least the next two presidential elections. For these reasons, blue states are fighting to stop the citizenship question in federal court.

By law, the census is supposed to find out how many people live in the U.S., not how many citizens do. It’s right there in the Constitution, which requires the federal government to do an “actual enumeration” every 10 years. But asking about citizenship could cause millions of undocumented immigrants—and even some who are documented but reside with others who aren’t and fear exposing them—to recede into the shadows.

The Athenian historian Thucydides understood that people of common heritage but sharply different ideologies will develop interests that clash over time. He saw that developing between the Greek city-states: Athens was the cultural and philosophical center of the world in the fifth century B.C., while its neighbor Sparta, with its militarist culture, produced one of its most efficient armies. “What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear this caused in Sparta,” he wrote. The economic and cultural divide between red and blue states in America may be the Athens vs. Sparta for our times.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Unione Europea

CMA CGM. Trump inarca il sopraciglio e Macron in ginocchio gli lecca i piedi.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-07-11.

Porta Container 001

Un redivivo Victor Hugo riscriverebbe i Les Misérables mettendo Mr Macron al posto di Jean Valjean.

*

Mr Macron soffre di un disturbo di sdoppiamento della personalità

C’è un Mr Macron che inneggia alla Grandeur e, ovviamente, al presidente che ora la rappresenta, mietendo successi diplomatici su successi diplomatici.

Macron in visita nel Burkina Faso. Per poco lo accoppano. Incidente diplomatico.

Cina risponde all’ultimatum di Macron in stile cinese.

Macron licenzia in tronco l’ambasciatore in Ungheria.

L’enigma della bega Macron – Pierre de Villiers.

Macron. Gran bella mazzata le elezioni di Pontoise.

Macron. Litiga anche con il Bahrain. Re al Khalifa annulla visita a Parigi.

I comportamenti tenuti da Mr Macron prima al G20, quindi al G7 ed infine al Consiglio Europeo furono degni di Re Sole: a suo dire Mr Trump si era dovuto nascondere sotto una sedia, supplicandolo di non voler invadere l’America.

E che dire dei suoi apprezzamenti sulla “nuova lebbra” che affligge l’Europa?

E come ciliegina sulla torta, la sua grandiosa trasformazione dell’Unione Europea in nuovi Stati Uniti di Europa è sotto gli occhi di tutti. Mr Macron non è riuscito a farla digerire nemmno ai calamai.

*

C’è però anche un Mr Macron inginocchiato supplice innanzi a Mr Trump, il Presidente degli Stati Uniti di America, tutto intento a leccargli i piedi nell’attesa che questi gli lasci cadere addosso uno sguardo benevolo.

* * * * * * *

«French shipping giant CMA CGM has pulled out of doing business with Iran for fear of antagonizing the US»

*

«Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called on European countries do more to offset renewed US sanctions.»

*

«One of the world’s largest cargo shipping companies has announced that it is pulling out of Iran for fear of becoming entangled in US sanctions»

*

«Washington has ordered all countries to stop buying Iranian oil by November»

*

«It has also ordered foreign firms to stop doing business there or face US blacklists»

*

«European powers, however, still support the nuclear deal and say they will do more to encourage their businesses to remain engaged with Iran»

*

«But the prospect of being banned in the United States appears to have been enough to persuade some European companies to keep out»

* * * * * * * *

Questi i fatti.

Adesso domandiamoci qualcosa.

«Washington has ordered»

Questo è il cuore del tutto.

Mr Macron si metta l’animo in pace e si tolga lo scolapasta dalla testa. I “lebbrosi” gli danno ordini.

Mr Trump è in grado di dare ordini all’Europa, che questa voglia o meno.

E se i suoi governanti sono in delirio euforico, gli imprenditori corrono come leprotti.


Deutsche Welle. 2018-07-08. Iran calls for EU help as French shipping giant leaves

French shipping giant CMA CGM has pulled out of doing business with Iran for fear of antagonizing the US. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called on European countries do more to offset renewed US sanctions.

*

One of the world’s largest cargo shipping companies has announced that it is pulling out of Iran for fear of becoming entangled in US sanctions.

The news comes amid demands from Iranian President Hassan Rouhani that European countries do more to offset the US measures.

The announcement by the French company CMA CGM deals a blow to Tehran’s efforts to persuade European countries to keep their companies operating in Iran despite the threat of new American sanctions.

Iran says it needs more help from Europe to keep alive the 2015 deal it worked out with world powers to curb its nuclear program. In May, US President Donald Trump abandoned the agreement and announced new sanctions on Tehran. Washington has ordered all countries to stop buying Iranian oil by November. It has also ordered foreign firms to stop doing business there or face US blacklists.

European powers, however, still support the nuclear deal and say they will do more to encourage their businesses to remain engaged with Iran. But the prospect of being banned in the United States appears to have been enough to persuade some European companies to keep out.

“European countries have the political will to maintain economic ties with Iran based on the JCPOA [nuclear deal], but they need to take practical measures within the time limit,” Rouhani said on Saturday on his official website.

Following the rules

According to the United Nations, CMA CGM operates the world’s third-largest container shipping fleet with more than 11 percent of global capacity. It said it would halt service for Iran because it did not want to fall foul of the rules, given its large presence in the United States.

“Due to the Trump administration, we have decided to end our service for Iran,” said CMA CGM chief Rodolphe Saade. “Our Chinese competitors are hesitating a little, so maybe they have a different relationship with Trump, but we apply the rules.”

The market leader in shipping, A.P. Moller-Maersk of Denmark, said in May that it was pulling out of Iran.

Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh has defined the tension between Tehran and Washington as a “trade war,” though said it had not led to changes in Iranian oil production and exports.

Zanganeh also echoed Rouhani’s remarks that the European package did not meet all of Iran’s economic demands.

“I have not seen the package personally, but our colleagues in the Foreign Ministry who have seen it were not happy with its details,” Zanganeh was quoted as saying by Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency.

Some Iranian officials have threatened to block oil exports from the Gulf region in retaliation for US efforts to reduce Iranian oil sales to zero. Rouhani himself made a veiled threat along those lines in recent days, saying there could be no oil exports from the region if Iran was shut down.