2-party system

Silent Coup Beginning to Overtake America Now [Video]

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

nicholsGreg Hunter – Former Clinton insider Larry Nichols has worked with, and now against, the Clintons. Nichols has some of the top political and financial connections on the planet.  Nichols hopes the public is finally realizing the enormous power struggle going on.

Nichols explains, “There is no two-party system in the United States of America.  Let’s get that straight.  There is no two-party system, there is one.  Part of it is a red team and part of it is a blue team.   You think you have a choice, but as you know you only have a choice between the two they give you to vote for, but here comes Trump.

http://youtu.be/EMfCjNuOfbU

Trump doesn’t need their money . . . he will bust up the system, and he will not only bust up the system for the Republican Party, but he will bust up the system (for both parties).  So, there are many establishment Republicans that have said they would rather vote for Hillary than Trump. . . . They must maintain status quo of the system for these power elite people to stay where they want to be.”

Continue reading →

Bernie Sanders’ Phantom Movement

~ admin ~ 1 Comment

democratic partyChris Hedges – Bernie Sanders, who has attracted numerous young, white, college-educated supporters in his bid for the presidency, says he is creating a movement and promises a political revolution. This rhetoric is an updated version of the “change” promised by the 2008 campaign of Barack Obama and by Jesse Jackson’s earlier National Rainbow Coalition. Such Democratic electoral campaigns, at best, raise political consciousness. But they do not become movements or engender revolutions. They exist as long as election campaigns endure and then they vanish. Sanders’ campaign will be no different.

No movement or political revolution will ever be built within the confines of the Democratic Party. And the repeated failure of the American left to grasp the duplicitous game being played by the political elites has effectively neutered it as a political force. History, after all, should count for something.

The Democrats, like the Republicans, have no interest in genuine reform. They are wedded to corporate power. They are about appearance, not substance. They speak in the language of democracy, even liberal reform and populism, but doggedly block campaign finance reform and promote an array of policies, including new trade agreements, that disempower workers. They rig the elections, not only with money but also with so-called super delegates—more than 700 delegates who are unbound among a total of more than 4,700 at the Democratic convention. Sanders may have received 60 percent of the vote in New Hampshire, but he came away with fewer of the state’s delegates than Clinton. This is a harbinger of the campaign to come.

Continue reading →

UBS – The Swiss Bank That Keeps On Giving

~ admin ~ 1 Comment

. . .  and the Ex-American Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who Keeps on Taking!

Steve Pieczenik – What a Wonderful Parasitic Relationship.

By now, we should all have Clinton-phobia or at least Clinton-Fatigue! Yet, I am still amazed by the insatiable avarice manifested by the Clintons in terms of receiving illegal payments, graft and all other forms of financial irregularities. Perhaps, there is some perversion in my delight at discovering how we, Americans have concluded that the Clinton and the Bush families are by far the most corrupt two families spanning our political spectrum from left to right. If money had an ideology than it would be reconfigured along the lines of a Clinton BitCoin that would suck up whatever was in the US treasury and the rest of the world banks and redirect it to some ersatz paradigm entitled: a non-profit foundation; super pac; or the Chelsea foundation for advanced skulduggery.

clintonI want to thank the two journalists at the WSJ [July 30, 2015]– James V. Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus for detailing the incredibly incestuous relationship between UBS, one of the world’s most corrupt banks, and, of course, our Lady of the Dollar—Hillary Clinton.

“A few weeks after HC was sworn in as secretary of state in 2009, she was summoned to Geneva by her Swiss counterpart…. The American IRS was suing UBS AG to get the identities of Americans with secret accounts.”

Now it gets better…

“Within months, Mrs. Clinton announced a tentative legal settlement—an unusual intervention by the top U.S. diplomat. UBS turned over information on 4,450 accounts — A fraction of the 52,000 sought by the IRS, an outcome that drew criticism from some lawmakers …”

Now comes the piece de resistance….

“From that point on UBSs engagement with the Clinton family’s charitable organization increased. Total donations from UBS to the Clinton Foundation grew from less $60,000 through 2008 to a cumulative total of $600,000 by the end of 2014.”

And where is Bill Clinton in this financial chicanery? Continue reading →

George W. Bush: “What difference does it make if the order is Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama/Clinton or it is Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama/Bush?”

~ admin ~ 2 Comments

bushJonathan Turley – For those who are already upset about the prospect of the country again being given simply a choice between a Bush or a Clinton in the general election, they might not want to read the recent interview of President George W. Bush and Bill Clinton in Time magazine. In a revealing aside, Bush shrugs off the real significance of the result of the election so long as it is either a Clinton or a Bush: says it really does not matter so long as it is either a Bush or Clinton: “What difference does it make,” he said at the time, “if the order is Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama/Clinton or it is Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama/Bush?” It appears that we have a dynastic democracy.

Many Americans are disgusted with the duopoly of not just the two main parties but the two main families controlling the parties. Like Henry Ford saying that customers can have any color so long as it is black, Bush’s comment also suggests that there really is little difference between which color you pick: blue or red. It is either part of some dynastic game of duopoly.

The two parties seem prepared to ignore the sentiments of most Americans and again force a choice between a Bush and a Clinton. The reason is that most Americans are independents and do not vote in the primary. Moreover, the Bushes and Clintons continue to exercise a huge degree of control over their respective parties. The Clintons particularly have been adept in lining up the establishment figures and party leaders who are still “ready for Hillary.” Continue reading →