Home | About | Donate

What’s Behind Trump’s Assault on Europe


What’s Behind Trump’s Assault on Europe

John Feffer

Donald Trump didn’t fly to Europe to meet with NATO, European leaders, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. He got there by stepping through the looking glass.


Simple answer: Treason.


The lack of comment to this article says a lot…


How does all this relate to NATO’s continued buildup along Russia’s western border, the sale of heavy weapons to Ukraine (where a US-backed anti-Russian coup relied significantly on real live Nazis), the continued and increasing sanctions on Russia and Russians, and the continuing pressure on Europe to buy American natural gas and buy nothing from Russia. Maybe Trump loves Putin, maybe Putin has something on Trump (as I’m sure does Benjamin Netanyahu), maybe Trump embraces a similar philosophy to Putin. It doesn’t explain any of the above policies.


I though this was interesting:

Are we still going with the VIPS memo being sacrosanct as evidence for no hack?


Shhhh, you are questioning the narrative.


Wrong again PonyBoi. You and your like minded whack-os have a crazed view of a country like Hungary or Poland expressing self interest rather then erasing their borders.

The author spews, “But Euroskeptic governments have also taken over in Hungary, the Czech Republic, Austria, and Italy.”

Take a gander at the truth and tell me why they’d have to be nutz NOT to be “Euroskeptic”?

And you calling President Trump treasonous because he doesn’t want that crap here? Up your meds, your current dose is ineffective.


Aren’t “personal attacks” part of the REgressive playbook, as you repeatedly insist? What’s it called when you protest ad hominem attacks out of one side of your mouth while spitting them from the other? Hypocrisy.


You’re correct-my apologies. No excuse.

Good use of Alinsky Rule #4-kudos dude


“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

I had never heard of Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” I learned something from you. [Choke, sputter, gasp…]


As I recall it, US – and I think Eisenhower who was still military at time of post-war Europe – encouraged or even put in place the national health care systems for Germany and same for Japan. Obviously, also for Great Britain.

US was still claiming to be a democracy fighting for democracy all over at the world at that time.

Also note that Germany and Japan – our two prominent enemies during WWII – rose again, with the help of the US government, to be two of the strongest economic powers in the world.

The newly drafted Operations and the replacement of the OSS by the CIA hadn’t quite yet taken hold – but their drafts had been worked out by Cord Meyer in 1943 as WWII was coming to an end and Hitler’s top military were visiting our Pentagon and making deals. Later these operations were carried out by Allen Dulles at the CIA. See: Operation Mockingbird, Paperclip and Gladio.

They were designed to take our free press, to move 200,000 ex-Nazis into the US government, used to found the CIA, funneled into the FBI and other government agencies - and to “hot spots” around the world. Gladio was designed to ensure that ONLY right wing governments would rise in the nations over which the US had influence and control at the end of WWII.


More and more information coming out now confirms what has long been suspected – i.e., that Hitler and his henchmen were “let go” by our government in a protected escape – and that they were allowed to take Nazi wealth with them, based in funding by Elites all over the world.


Just let me add that I did make several points along with a video supporting my contention that not to be skeptical of mass immigration of people with beliefs that are diametrically opposed to the existing culture and traditions is “whack-o”

I’ve been called far worse here in comments. Comments that are wholly hateful and that refuse to contend with any points I’ve made.


Maybe the hatefulness you receive reflects the hatefulness you often exude? I know I receive the meanest responses when I make the snarkiest, angriest, most inciteful comments. I first reacted to you with hatefulness a long time ago when I came across a quite vitriolic stream of insults traded between you and someone with a history of offering comments I liked and respected. I said to myself, “Ah, a troll attacking a kindred spirit. I’ll just have some fun and counter-troll.” So, I let loose, and we escalated and escalated and now we “hate” each other (and sometimes it really feels like hate instead of umbrage, but mostly it just feels ridiculous, even shameful). It’s been mostly a waste of time (except for the occasional malicious grin), which is why I don’t spend much time around here except to poke and prod now and then. I don’t attach a whole lot to these threads because I really don’t expect any words I put up here to change anyone’s mind about anything. Do you expect to change anyone’s mind, even if you discard pejoratives like “REgressive” or “whack-o” or rise above it when people call you worse? Even if you crafted arguments that would impress a debate champion by obeying all rules of evidence, logic and presentation? Nah, we’re all pretty much stuck where we are, hollering in our echo chambers, disturbed and aggravated by the one thing we maybe can agree on: we’re all in a world of hurt and it’s getting worse. Sadly, beyond that, we will probably never agree on the nature of the problems or how to respond.

Frankly, and I’m totally dropping my guard here, I don’t want to hate you. Not so much for it’s impact on you (Texans are tough, right?), but because it feels really unhealthy all the way around. So, with that, I’m going to stop hatin’ on you. Well, I’ll do my best anyway (I am, after all, and despite opinions to the contrary, human).


Yes, but most of us here know, and yet somehow still tolerate Michael Mattei, from Lamesa Texas’s shit-for-brains, dick-headed, ass-backwards comments. They usually include him arguing with himself using immature and not well thought arguments on your behalf that he then tries to put in your mouth which he then uses to ridicule you, despite you never writing any such thing. A pencil-necked geek for sure, and portraying sure signs of dementia or sociopathy. He also drops a lot of “truth-y” statements with no links or proof offered, like folks who watch too much Faux News.
Ignoring him online is where it’s at.
Michael is an ass hat who wants you to know, And he’ll be the 1st to tell you after he already called you names in his initial post, that he is the victim here!
That’s ridicule-ously or ridicule worthy funny, but take a pass!