Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's interpretation of what is happening in Ukraine is in stark contrast with the truth. Her disinformational statement that Russia is making "aggressive moves" on NATO's borders, rather than the other way around, betraying long-promised America/NATO non-encroachment on Russia's, is a disingenuous and reckless misinterpretation. And further, American diplomats were caught red-handed fomenting regime change there.
This might be the single most dangerous facet of the neolib Hillary Clinton's neocon-playbook foreign policy. It will be good to have this important speech archived, because we will want to compare what she promises to do with what and how she delivers-- or doesn't.
However, her speech is definitely presidential-sounding. It's a big blow against Trump, though it may not matter since A. She's going to win anyway; and B. she is part and parcel of the neocon grand strategy of regime change in the interest of the "New American Century"; and besides, C. one must infer that ISIS is actually OUR asset by our refusal to target and destroy the oil convoys that continue to put money in the hands of ISIS.
Note: she is also Israel's and AIPAC's choice. Obviously, they aren't going to go for a guy who says they ought to allow ISIS to take over Syria?! Trump will lose the Jewish vote, even in New York!
This election is hinging, simply, on this reality-show hosting real estate huckster Republican presumptive nominee being completely unqualified to begin with, and then repeatedly self-disqualifying himself throughout the primary campaign. People will be forced to vote for her by his utter unsuitability to hold nuclear codes; he didn't even know what the Nuclear Triad was, Marco Rubio had to school him on the spot!
Hillary Clinton is ensuring her landslide against Trump with every appearance she makes now.
However, I can't believe that the GOP will not find some way to cancel Trump's nomination-- surely the insiders are pursuing every avenue-- and then draft John Kasich, who would make the election close because he is A. a skillful speaker and debater; B. a moderate financially and at least not a strident religious social conservative. Politically speaking, he inhabits roughly the same area on the political spectrum as Hillary does; C. He is a professional politician and consulter of advisors, and he would be very well prepared to attempt the uphill battle of replacing the mistake the GOP somehow made (we won't go into the reasons, that's another column).
There is, truly, only one explanation if the GOP actually nominates Trump and let's him stagger to the end of the landslide: and that is that the CORE Republican political strategy, usually forgotten by everyone, like the magician's hand you're not watching, is to continue and increase Republican dominance of state legislative bodies. It always has been.
Their goal is to increase that lead in legislatures held until it is clear that in a Constitutional Convention, various social-conservative wish-list items might be ratified as CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS, which neither executive nor legislature can legally undo.
Only the Supreme Court would then stand between, say, Dominionist-Christian assertion of the identity of church and state and its permanent enshrinement in the U.S. Constitution.
In my last column I outlined possible scenarios based upon who gets indicted (if indictments should happen to Trump, Clinton or both) and how the timing of such indictments might affect the campaign.
I will now have to say that if Trump gets on the debate stage against someone as precise and detailed as Hillary just presented herself (whether we know, or suspect, all of her multitudinous scandals to be damning), Hillary is going to eviscerate him almost as badly as Bernie would have.
However, Trump will still get a good percentage of the "low-information Americans" he famously claimed to love in a speech, so the margin of the landslide may not be as great as the 25-30 percent polls showed Sanders beating Trump by.