Category: political struggle
American Fascist: Nazi Runs Unopposed for US Congress in Republican Primary
| February 11, 2018 | 9:54 pm | Fascist terrorism, political struggle | No comments

The US Congress building. (File)

American Fascist: Nazi Runs Unopposed for US Congress in Republican Primary


Get short URL

Holocaust denier and avowed white supremacist Arthur Jones is running uncontested in the Illinois Republican Primary for the US Congress.

This is the same Jones that recently told The Atlantic that he doesn’t like to call himself a Nazi, but prefers to be referred to as a “white racialist” and that people with white skin are smarter than those whose skin is a different color than his.

“I will work with the [Ku Klux] Klan, with socialists — I exclude communists of course — any patriotic organization that is in general agreement with my beliefs and principles,” Jones said, who has already tried to run for Congress five times beginning in 1998.

Jones, a health-insurance agent, was a member of the National Socialist White People’s Party, previously known as the American Nazi Party, for nearly eight years. He has also been a member of America First Committee since the 1980s, the Atlantic reported.

The 70-year-old also told the Atlantic that he was upset that US President Donald Trump appointed so many people of the Jewish faith in his administration. “There’s a whole layer of other Jews that you don’t see that actually make the policy,” Jones asserted.

In addition, some of his goals include ending America’s war in the Middle East, which he claims only benefits Israel, and clamping down on sanctuary cities. His website includes other bullet points including banning same-sex marriage and abortion, and includes images he claims are documents claiming that the Holocaust, which killed over six million European Jews during World War II, is a hoax.

The Anti-Defamation League refers to Jones as a “longtime neo-Nazi.” The state GOP has also condemned Jones’ decision to run for Congress.

“The Illinois Republican Party and our country have no place for Nazis like Arthur Jones,” said Illinois Republican Party Chairman Tim Schneider in a statement. “We strongly oppose his racist views and his candidacy for any public office, including the 3rd Congressional District.”

Perhaps the Republican party should field a candidate more to their liking, instead of merely distancing themselves from the man.

Washington’s Ominous Credibility Implosion
| February 6, 2018 | 7:43 pm | Political Pandemonium, political struggle | No comments
The day breaks behind the White House in Washington,DC

Washington’s Ominous Credibility Implosion


Get short URL
Finian Cunningham

All statecraft and politics is notoriously deceptive and duplicitous to a degree. It’s part of the Machiavellian game and even at times, arguably, can be paradoxically key to success for good outcomes.

But Washington’s current problem is on an altogether different scale. Its rampant duplicity seems to be spinning itself into an ominous credibility crisis. A crisis that conveys historic existential consequences for American democracy and political function. Perhaps even a harbinger of world war.

Take CIA director Mike Pompeo. Last week, he gave a big interview to Britain’s state broadcaster, the BBC, in which he reiterated serious claims that Russia hacked into the American presidential election in 2016.

Further, he forewarned that Russian state agents were planning to repeat their alleged meddling in the forthcoming mid-term Congressional elections later this year.

However, within days of making such dire accusations against the Kremlin, the American spymaster was reportedly holding meetings in Washington DC with two senior Russian intelligence figures — Alexander Bortnikov and Sergei Naryshkin. The two men represent Russia’s federal and foreign intelligence services, the FSB and SVR, respectively.There was apparently nothing untoward about the top-level meeting. The American and Russian spy chiefs were reportedly exchanging views on counter-terrorism, which arguably is a positive thing. After all, a foiled terror attack in St Petersburg recently was thwarted by Russian security services reportedly following up on a tip-off from the American CIA.

READ MORE: Under Siege: CIA Chief Says Cooperation With Russia Is Critical for US Security

But here’s the thing. Doesn’t it seem a bit strange that the chief of the CIA is warning in very public media interviews that the Kremlin is meddling in US democracy through underhand means, yet virtually his next appointment involves hosting Russia’s top spies?

Not only that, but the two Russian intelligence chiefs in question have been put on an American government sanctions list and travel ban purportedly over Russia’s “annexation” of Crimea and “aggression” in Eastern Ukraine.

So, if American official concerns about alleged Russian subversion in the US and abroad are as vexed as they are made out to be in public announcements, then how does that square with Mike Pompeo greeting his Russian counterparts in a convivial professional setting?

READ MORE: Red Scare: Russian Intelligence Chiefs Visit Rattles Washington Post

When the CIA director was challenged by Congressional Democrats about his meeting with the Russians he responded by claiming there was nothing incongruous about their cooperation in Washington, and, he said, it was tough-talking encounter.

“You and the American people should rest assured that we covered very difficult subjects in which American and Russian interests do not align,” stated Pompeo in a written reply to lawmakers.

“We vigorously defend America in these encounters and pull no punches,” he added.

Still, there does seem to be something weirdly misplaced about the official words and actions of the CIA chief, and Washington’s political class in general, with regard to Russia.

On one hand, the CIA and large sections of the US political establishment, including prominent news media outlets have been harping on about grave allegations of Russian meddling in American democracy for more than a year. Some Republican politicians have even gone as far as describing Russia’s supposed interference as “an act of war” by Moscow.

On the other hand, however, the head of the CIA seems to have no problem holding professional meetings with the Russian “arch enemies” right in the seat of American democracy.What we are talking about here is a stupendous lack of consistency, or put another way duplicity; which in turn undermines American credibility over the whole “Russiagate” narrative that has so dominated Washington’s official discourse.

No bigger discrepancy perhaps is the fact that the American head of state, President Donald Trump, maintains that the allegations of Russian collusion and interference are “fake news” — or at least overblown. That puts the country’s leader completely at odds with his head of foreign intelligence.

READ MORE: CIA Director Claims North Korea Months Away from Being Able to Strike US

How is the world supposed to take anything these people say seriously if they are so inconsistent about a matter which, we are told to believe, is a grave national security concern?

They seem to have shot their own credibility to pieces.

In his BBC interview, Pompeo also warned that North Korea was capable of a missile attack on the US “within months”.

This lack of American credibility and the danger of a catastrophic war are correlated.

America’s credibility problem is much bigger than President Trump or his CIA chief. It encompasses the entire American political class.

This past week, the Trump administration released a so-called “Kremlin Report” which impugned 210 leaders of Russian politics and business. The figures included Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, as well as Foreign and Defense Minister Sergei Lavrov and Sergei Shoigu. The Washington report, drawn up by the Treasury Department, stems from the claims of Russian interference in US politics.No credible evidence has ever been presented to substantiate the “Russiagate” claims. Moscow has repeatedly rejected the claims as baseless.

Indeed, there is plausible evidence — buried by the US mainstream media — that the alleged hacking of Democratic party computers during the 2016 election campaign was not a hack but rather was a leak from within the party by a staffer disgruntled with candidate Hillary Clinton’s dirty tricks against rival Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders.

It is also now emerging that the agencies which quite possibly interfered in the presidential election were not Russian, but rather America’s own “finest” secret services, the FBI, CIA and NSA, who were allegedly trying to sabotage then Republican candidate, and future president, Donald Trump.

For over a year, the provocative and reckless accusations of Russian interference in American democracy, and additionally in European democracy, have run and run without relent. Even though those accusations have no legs of credibility. Just this past week, as noted, the head of US intelligence solemnly reiterated those claims and is warning of more Russian meddling.Washington’s political class and America’s supposed bastions of journalism have indulged this dubious narrative to brain-numbing saturation point.

But when Washington shows such rampant duplicity and inconsistency that’s not just a problem of unfortunate public relations. It conveys a profound crisis of credibility, authority and legitimacy for the entire edifice of government. That is fatally corrosive to the essence of government and American democracy.

READ MORE: Kremlin Report: US Tries to Punish Russia for Success on Int’l Arena — Analyst

And guess what? It has nothing to do with “Russian enemies”. It is a credibility crisis made solely in America by its own morally and politically bankrupt system of governance.

The resulting chasm in Washington’s credibility has onerous implications for an historic political implosion. And surely the much misled American people will take their revenge. It’s going to get raucous and it’s going to get ugly.

Paradoxically, a day of reckoning could be good for renewing American democracy, eventually.

There again it also makes the world a very dangerous place. Because war, for example a US military strike on North Korea, is a proven Machiavellian escape route for political scoundrels facing a dead-end.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

Tories challenged to release tax returns as Corbyn reveals what’s in his wallet
| February 4, 2018 | 2:23 pm | Jeremy Corbyn, political struggle, UK | No comments

Tories challenged to release tax returns as Corbyn reveals what’s in his wallet

Tories challenged to release tax returns as Corbyn reveals what’s in his wallet
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has challenged British PM and rival Theresa May to publish her full tax return. Corbyn made his own financial affairs public when he released details of his £136,762 income.

In the year between 2016-17 Corbyn paid £50,000 tax. Apart from his salary and pensions, Labour’s chief had no other income.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell paid £24,099.20 in tax on a total income of £87,353.

May has not released her tax returns since the 2016 leadership race, and this has not gone unnoticed. May revealed she earned £112,426 in 2014-15, plus £617 in interest and £5,419 in dividends, while giving £685 to charity.

Jeremy Corbyn has rounded on May and her fellow Tories, including Chancellor Philip Hammond to follow suit.

The 68-year-old opposition leader said: “Tax avoidance and evasion deprive our public services of tens of billions of pounds every year and will only be tackled if we have the political will to do it,” he said. “We cannot expect the public to trust us as party leaders if we are not prepared to be open and honest about our own tax arrangements.”

McDonnell said: “I have again published my full tax return. I have done this every year as shadow chancellor because I believe if you aspire to be in charge of the nation’s finances then you should be as open and transparent about your own income as possible.”

He added: “It is right that people in high office are subject to a high degree of scrutiny and I call on the prime minister and chancellor to follow suit and publish their tax returns in full.”

Philip Hammond MP, the Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer has declined to detail his earnings and tax paid.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

No Confidence!
| January 24, 2018 | 9:42 pm | Analysis, political struggle | No comments

No Confidence!

– from Greg Godels is available at:

The big losers in the recent NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist confidence polling (January 08-10-2018) are Congress, the two parties, and the media. Based on the poll, most people in the US have “not very much” or “no confidence” in the legislative body, corporate news and entertainment, or the Democratic or Republican parties. In fact, over two-thirds of those surveyed lack confidence in the media and nearly three-fourths show little or no confidence in Congress!

In light of these numbers, one can only wonder when the pitchforks are coming out. Clearly, dissatisfaction with major US institutions extends very broadly. Yet these results are not new. Nearly a decade ago, a similar Gallup poll showed that only 11% of respondents had a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in Congress. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in 2014 showed that both parties earned a decidedly more negative than a positive image. That same poll put the approval rate for Congress at 12%.
Those pundits and political operatives who discount the depth of dissatisfaction and disregard the festering anger in the US are doomed to misread the meaning of past and most-recent elections. The mainstream media mock Trump’s “fake news” charges while blithely ignoring the negative sentiments of the population toward the news industry. Don’t media elites see that “lack of confidence” is, in fact, a scathing indictment of their own collective performance in delivering the truth?
Failure to recognize the widespread disdain for core US political institutions hinders the understanding that Trumpism is not merely a malignant political alternative, but the consequence of a long history of malignant political alternatives; Trump isn’t the cause of the problem, he’s the result of the problem. As much as Trump disgusts with his vulgarity, he openly expresses thoughts shared by other powerful people who voice them only behind the walls of their mansions or private clubs. As much as Trump attacks the living standards of working people and degrades their safety net, he stands at the end of a relentless, unrelieved half-century of assault on the gains won in the New Deal era. As much as Trump has embraced belligerence and aggression in his foreign policy, he has only belatedly and somewhat reluctantly fallen in line with the imperialist agenda crafted and executed by his predecessors in the post-Soviet era.
He has Defense Secretary ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis to remind him of the agenda. The Wall Street Journal tells us (January 19, 2018) that Trump recently proposed to call off joint ROK/US military exercises as a pacifying gesture to Kim Jung Un. Mattis stepped in and purportedly flattered him with “Your instincts are absolutely correct,” while cajoling him into betraying those same instincts and going forward with the exercises. Incredibly, Mattis is the figure that many liberals cite as the restraining force in the Trump White House.
“Making America Great Again” is the mark of an empire facing increasingly effective threats from imperialist rivals as well as anti-imperialist resistance. While the dream of a Pax Americana imposed on the world is now discredited, Trumpism clings to the illusion that robust, blustery nationalism is the answer to an increasingly fruitless globalism.
Last year, in his lengthy, candid valedictory interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic magazine, one will find many hints of Obama’s lost confidence in the aggressive reordering of the world that he inherited and that was represented in his administration by Clinton, Rice, Power, and Rhodes. Mattis and General Kelly play that same role of sabre-rattlers and war-instigators in the Trump administration despite the popular caricature of them as wise counsel to a wild man.
With Trump, the missionary mask, so long a feature of US imperialism, is cast off. The “humanitarian, human rights” pose used so skillfully by Clinton and Obama’s war makers is of little interest to Trump and his consort. Any renegade thoughts Trump may have of exercising his self-proclaimed “deal” skills or imagined “charm” in negotiating with rivals are quickly squashed by the two pillars of militarism (Mattis and Kelly) within the Trump administration.
In better times, one could count on a sizeable segment of activist liberals to stand with the anti-imperialist left against US militarism and aggression. But, today, they have been mesmerized by a phantasmagoric anti-Russia campaign framed to distract attention away from real issues and the chronically flawed democratic process.
Apart from the demonstrated thinness of liberal principles, the NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll explains exactly why RussiaGate could gain traction despite a lack of evidence. Behind the hysteria are two institutions that retain a great deal of misplaced confidence with the public: the FBI and the military. And behind that confidence is a glorifying and romanticizing of the two in popular culture, especially since the onset of the Mission Impossible-like War on Terror. Network and cable television feature drama of attractive, upright, and diligent FBI agents standing between the US public and chaos, night after night. Similarly, the military enjoys a heroic stature nourished by the media, the entertainment industry, and the chicken-hawk elites whose children never see the enlistment office.
Glenn Greenwald clarifies the self-deception lurking behind this cult of self-righteousness, while speaking in Santa Fe recently: “Every time Trump says or does something that is xenophobic, or bigoted, or militaristic, or threatening, people always say, ‘This is not what America is about,’… I always react to that by saying, ‘It’s not?’”
The RussiaGate mania is now runaway paranoia, perfectly suited to turn the populace from its real problems. Democratic Party operatives have crossed over to insanity, detecting Russia behind the announced candidacy of Chelsea Manning for US Senate. Neera Tanden, prominent head of the Center for American Progress, smelled a Kremlin plot behind Manning running against a corporate Democratic Senator. It may be a long wait for the soft left and the identity Democrats to render support to the heroic Manning. But then they wouldn’t comprehend the real heroism of serving jail time for exposing US war atrocities.
Emboldened by its success in fabricating RussiaGate from nothing, the FBI has turned its scrutiny on the People’s Republic of China. Our intrepid spy hunters are casting their vigilance on Rupert Murdoch’s ex-trophy wife, Wendi Deng Murdoch, a prominent DC socialite. According to “sources” friendly to The Wall Street Journal, Ms Murdoch lobbied for a Chinese garden funded by the PRC at the National Arboretum. The FBI explained that the Arboretum was less than 5 miles from the White House and the Capitol. And, if that were not enough, the plan included a 70-foot tower that the FBI feared might be used for surveillance!
As if the Chinese could not rent a room in a six- or seven-story building in downtown DC to further their nefarious plot without spending $100 million on a Chinese garden.
So, we have a prominent figure who might have lobbied for a project that might have served PRC intelligence purposes by constructing a 70-foot tower that might have a surveillance purpose. But this twisted conspiracy tale goes further– Ms Murdoch socialized with Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner! The FBI has a picture of them together! Of course, that is the point of this inane exercise: meddling in US politics. Let’s see if deranged liberals buy this, too.
And we have the NBC story that reports that a CIA agent who retired in 2007 has been arrested for collaborating with the PRC. But there is a hitch: “U.S. officials told NBC News they don’t believe Lee ever will be charged as a spy, in part because they don’t have all the proof they might need, and in part because they would not want to air the evidence they do have in a public courtroom.” A careful read of the NBC article might lead one to believe that the CIA is embarrassed because their PRC counterparts broke the secret communication system that the CIA used to communicate with their covert agents. One might further surmise that Jerry Chun Shing Lee is the patsy for this failure. But the uncritical, trusting media report the damaging charge even though sources admit that “…they don’t have all the proof they might need…” A fine example of a responsible press in the age of Trump!
As the US empire undergoes further and further stress, more and more dysfunction, the search for scapegoats and distractions will only intensify, and the barbarism of apocalyptical conflict will grow even more probable.

It is not enough to take a small step or two back from the brink, as liberals and the compromised left would like. Delivering a world two steps from catastrophe is a feckless award to future generations.

An angry, disappointed public that has lost confidence in its institutions is searching for a new, more promising road forward. Isn’t it the time to bring the promise of democracy and social justice embedded in socialism before the US public?


Greg Godels
Missing Conyers Already
| January 12, 2018 | 9:09 pm | political struggle | No comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Missing Conyers Already





After Conyers grilled AG Sessions, Judiciary Questioning of Deputy AG Rosenstein Shows Democrats Have Large Shoes to Fill

Article originally published in the Detroit Free Press

By Robert Weiner and Ben Lasky

U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) has been named the new Democratic Leader (“Ranking Member”) of the House Judiciary Committee. It was the powerful post held by Rep. John Conyers’ (D-Detroit), who was pressured to resign from the position and then retire from Congress last month due to allegations of sexual harassment and disclosure of a state-no-guilt settlement.

The national discourse is missing Conyers already. On November 14, his last major public appearance before the allegations broke and the 88-year-old was hospitalized with stress-related issues, Conyers led the Democratic questioning of US Attorney General Jeff Sessions at his committee’s day-long oversight hearing. The event was the center of the media universe for the day because of Sessions’ history of inconsistent answers about the administration’s potential cooperation with Russian interference in the 2016 US elections and the White House recently trying to switch the conversation.

We spent more than six hours with Conyers at the event. In his lead-off questioning, he asked Sessions, “In a functioning democracy, is it common for the leader of the country to order the criminal-justice system to retaliate against his political opponents?”

Sessions answered in general terms: “Mr. Conyers, I would say the Justice Department can never be used to retaliate politically against opponents. That would be wrong.” Conyers, with his usual persistence, repeated the question, “I’ll interpret that as a no. Here’s another. Should the president of the United States make public comments that might influence a pending criminal investigation?” This time, Sessions answered directly, “He should take great care in those issues I would say it’s improper. A president cannot influence an investigation.”

That was Conyers at his finest, pushing witnesses to give direct answers to the key questions.

Now, consider the next hearing, about a month later, on December 13, with Conyers gone, and the witness this time Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Cong. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) used a similar question to what Conyers had asked Sessions, Rosenstein’s boss, a moth earlier: “Do you think it’s appropriate for the president to call for the investigation of specific individuals?”

But the question was more generic and Rosenstein got away with responding: “I’m certainly not going to comment on that Congressman, other than to tell you that it’s my responsibility, along with the attorney general, to make sure that those decisions are made independently by the Department based on the facts and the law.”

Conyers, known for precision, would have used the hearing’s punch and asked something like, “Attorney General Sessions said last month that it is improper for a president to ask DOJ to investigate his political opponent. Do you agree?” He would likely have forced the issue for an answer.

Even if we recognize that some of his accomplishments are decades ago including creating Martin Luther King Day, voting-rights legislation, and laws against hate crimes for civil rights, Conyers during this and the last session of congress led on a host of issues: He obtained a majority of Democrats for the first rime to sponsor his single-payer, “Medicare for All” legislation. He led a pending lawsuit against the President’s violating the Constitution by receiving emoluments (profits) from his properties including the Trump Hotel in Washington, DC. He sponsored passage of a resolution saying no wars in Iran or North Korea without congressional approval. He also sponsored legislation banning bulk data collection by US intelligence agencies of Americans’ phone calls without warrants by US intelligence agencies, a position supported by the Supreme Court. With relevance today, he was the only member of the Judiciary Committee who served and voted on Richard Nixon’s impeachment and had that relevant knowledge.

We already are missing the leadership of John Conyers. Nadler is a strong progressive with a brilliant and insightful understanding of the Constitution. He has large shoes to fill from John Conyers.

Robert Weiner is a former White House spokesman and was communications director for Congressman John Conyers. Ben Lasky is a senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates and Solutions for Change.

The Sultan and the Fascists: MHP Party to support Tayyip Erdogan in 2019 presidential elections
| January 10, 2018 | 7:49 pm | Analysis, Iraq, political struggle, Syria, Turkey | No comments

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

The Sultan and the Fascists: MHP Party to support Tayyip Erdogan in 2019 presidential elections
Devlet Bahceli, leader of MHP, gestures during
an election campaign.
* MHP (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi), the Nationalist Movement Party is an anticommunist, neo-fascist nationalist party, founded in 1969. Its paramilitary wing, known as “Grey Wolves” is a fascist terrorist organization, known for participating in numerous massacres, bombings and assassination attempts. 
The following article is from sOL international: Turkey’s fascist Nationalist Movement Party leader Devlet Bahçeli overtly supports President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for the presidential election in 2019. Not surprisingly, he has lent a help to Erdoğan since the foundation of the AKP party, rallying to rescue the government whenever it has faced political challenges.
Founded in 1969 in the Cold War era as an anti-communist fascist party, Turkey’s Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and its leader Devlet Bahçeli have become a hot topic recently as the party lends an overt support to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP).
As some claim that the failed coup in July 2016 became a breaking point for the fascist MHP party’s apparent support to Erdoğan and AKP government, Turkey’s recent political history shows that the fascist party and its leader Bahçeli have always backed Erdoğan’s manoeuvres whenever he faced political challenges.
By the time Erdoğan founded the AKP party in August 2001, Turkey had been governed by the coalition government of then-Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit’s Democratic Left Party, Bahçeli’s MHP party and Mesut Yılmaz’s Motherland Party.
However, the coalition partner MHP called for early elections scheduled to be held in November 2002, culminating in the victory of Erdoğan’s newly-born AKP party while all the three coalition parties could not pass the 10% electoral threshold. Bahçeli’s fascist party played a key role in paving the way for Erdoğan’s longstanding rule in Turkey.
The Turkish parliament rejected a proposal in March 2003 that would enable the U.S. to use the country as a launch pad for the invasion of Iraq as tens of thousands of protesters chanted slogans, “No to war!”, near the parliament building.
Bahçeli and Erdoğan became unpleased with the parliamentary voting results. “The parliament predominated by the AKP in 2003 could not agree on the memorandum, weakening Turkey in Iraq,” Bahçeli said regretfully although his party was out of the parliament.
As Turkey witnessed the mass Republic Protests in 2007, just before the start of the presidential election process, to prevent the victory of an Islamist candidate from the AKP party, the constitutional court decided that a quorum of two-thirds of the parliamentary seats was necessary, which was impossible without opposition support against the ruling AKP party.
As Erdoğan’s governing party nominated Abdullah Gül for the presidency, Bahçeli declared his decision not to boycott the elections in favour of the AKP party, eventually leading to the presidency of Islamist Gül, Erdoğan’s predecessor.  
When Turkey’s Constitutional Court launched a closure trial of AKP in 2008 for becoming ‘a centre for anti-secular activities’, Bahçeli and his MHP party backed the ruling party on the grounds that “the closure trial would lead to deeper political impacts.”
The fascist MHP party has unconditionally supported Erdoğan and his party in the government’s Islamic and misogynist attacks particularly in the field of education and cultural life until today.
Furthermore, the MHP party has always advocated the government when anti-worker laws and regulations were passed in the parliament. Thus, the AKP could easily privatize all the public entities of the country.
Bahçeli’s anti-labour and pro-market stance has remained at the forefront all the time. His party also supported the government during all the parliamentary memorandums to attack Turkey’s neighbours Syria and Iraq.
The biggest support of MHP to Erdoğan’s government came in 2016 following the failed coup. As the AKP government was planning for a presidential system in Turkey in the aftermath of the coup attempt amid state of emergency, Bahçeli said, “If the AKP brings its plans to parliament … I believe a reasonable outcome will be achieved,” hinting that his party would back the project. 
As Erdoğan’s party decided to hold a constitutional referendum in April 2017, Bahçeli became the leading megaphone of Erdoğan’s ‘yes’ campaign in order to change Turkey’s parliamentary system to a presidential system that brings grip on executive power.    
In this process, the Bahçeli leadership expelled all the dissident party members, who declared to participate in the ‘no’ campaign, from the MHP party. This led to the birth of the ‘Good Party’ under the lead of Meral Akşener, yet another ultra-nationalist figure and an ex-interior minister.
Having announced in April 2014 that “Erdoğan could not be a president”, Devlet Bahçeli totally reversed his tone and has become the feverish sycophant of Erdoğan. So much so that he supports the AKP-led state of emergency and unlawful decrees more than the AKP seniors do.
Even if Erdoğan himself has not declared his candidacy for the presidential election scheduled to be held in 2019, Bahçeli has already announced that his MHP party will support Erdoğan and his government.
Having left his mark on the Turkish political history as a man who paved the way for Erdoğan’s longstanding AKP rule, the President’s yes-man Devlet Bahçeli and his fascist MHP party seem to give Erdoğan a blank check on the road to a presidential system in the country.
Academic: Trump Has Brought a Degree of Chaos to the US Political System

Academic: Trump Has Brought a Degree of Chaos to the US Political System

US First Lady Melania Trump, President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and Karen Pence

Academic: Trump Has Brought a Degree of Chaos to the US Political System


Get short URL

Bloomberg’s pessimist prognosis envisages US President Donald Trump winning a second term which would lead the US to a deep recession. David O’Brien from the School of Contemporary Chinese Studies, University of Nottingham Ningbo China, has told Radio Sputnik that the political chaos instigated by Trump could translate into economic problems.

Sputnik: Bloomberg’s pessimist guide asserts that US would fall into a deep recession. What is the likelihood of this happening and what could trigger this recession?

David O’Brien: A couple of years ago everybody was predicting the decline of the Republican Party. Due to demographic changing nature of the American society the Republican Party was finished. Along comes Donald Trump and everything changed. This prediction always has to be incapable of seeing what’s around the corner. With Donald Trump in office we have seen real political instability in the United States. To some degree that’s what he wants, he works through chaos, he has brought instability to the system but political instability cannot be good for an economy in the long run. And we could see in the very near future a government shutdown if Congress can’t agree to a budget and that is a real possibility. There is a serious trade deficit with China which could trigger a trade war. We have the possibility of international conflict on the Korean Peninsula, which would have very serious repercussions for the world economy, American economy, Chinese economy, environmental disaster or perhaps America’s long slow decline, perhaps, similar to Japan.

READ MORE: Glass Half Full? Bloomberg’s ‘Pessimist’s Guide’ Too Bleak, Expert Says

Sputnik: Which of those scenarios you actually went through? Which you think is the most likely scenario of doom under Mr. Trump?   

David O’Brien: All the indicators are up — GDP, the markets are doing well, unemployment is down, employment is up, people have more money in their pockets. American economy seems to be in the best shape it’s been since before the financial collapse [of] 2008. But can Donald Trump take any credit for that? Is he responsible for that or is this a recovery that was already taking place? Lots of commentators and academics would argue it was already taking place before Trump came to office and that the economy moves slower than that. If we do see any increase in the political instability, if we do see a government shutdown you know that could very quickly come to a halt. I mean Donald Trump has brought a degree of chaos to the American political system. The political system and the economic system are obviously deeply entwined. The economy doesn’t like chaos it doesn’t like uncertainty, it doesn’t like the potential for uncertainty. It’s a real possibility that the political chaos could have an economic impact…or maybe not.

READ MORE: ‘Moore’s Alabama Senate Defeat Could Be Political Death of Trump’ — Analyst

U.S. Senate Republican candidate Roy Moore rides a horse to vote, Tuesday, Dec. 12, 2017, in Gallant, Ala.
U.S. Senate Republican candidate Roy Moore rides a horse to vote, Tuesday, Dec. 12, 2017, in Gallant, Ala.

Sputnik: Is 2018 going to be a turning point? Trump started with the majority support in Congress, we are going to see elections; we are going to see, perhaps, a change in the makeup of Congress and the Senate in 2018.

David O’Brien: Donald Trump came into office with a huge, very strong hand. He had both houses and he has struggled to take full advantage of that. He’s had very little success in getting his legislative agenda passed. Now as he begins to see a decline in the numbers in the Senate, the Republicans have just lost Alabama. There is an indication that he [Trump] is becoming weaker on that front. In mid-term elections are coming up, if Donald Trump performs badly his whole narrative, that of a winner, and if he encounters a situation where he is a loser that could be very tricky for the whole Donald Trump agenda and the whole Donald Trump narrative. So yes, maybe 2018 will be a turning point. But Donald Trump is like nothing we have ever seen before in American politics, hold on to the seats, who knows [what will be].

The views and opinions expressed by David O’Brien are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.