portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

election fraud | imperialism & war

Trump & Clinton: Both Are MONSTERS!

worst. elections. ever!
So basically we have a "choice" between a megalomaniacal, sociopathic, racist billionaire tyrant... and a megalomaniacal, sociopathic, racist billionaire tyrant. WAIT, which is which?! Yeah hard to tell, isn't it? This is our "choice". Ok, I'm being a tad disingenuous, I must admit. We have a few choices, actually. We can also vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein, Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, Independent Party candidate Evan McMullin, Transhumanist Party candidate Zoltan Istvan, and Socialist candidate Gloria La Riva. Some of these names may be long familiar with you (if you at all follow progressive politics, you'll know Stein). But you'd be forgiven if you didn't know some of the other names. Fact is, this dying naked empire has long been ruled by a two-party system (more like a two-headed dragon) that shuts out all other political parties and all opposition. Technically, you can "choose" to vote for multiple candidates this year (not every candidate gets to appear on the ballot in every state. Here in Oregon, you won't see McMullin, Istvan, or La Riva as presidential runners). You can even choose to stay home, throw your ballot away, opt out of voting for the next president/CEO, or focus on local/state races and ballot measures instead.

But let's be serious here, there isn't much of a choice... not really. You get to choose between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. One promises a protracted civil/race war and the other promises nuclear fallout with Russia. This election is like someone holding a gun to your head and telling you which poison to take. And all you can think of is which one might be less painful... or would it be better to just take the damned bullet? You can try and argue how one is somehow worse that the other, the fact is they BOTH are fucking horrible, and here's why:


In 1989, Trump took out a full page ad in the New York Times, calling for NY state to re-institute the Death Penalty. For five Black and Latino youths who had been swept up in the notorious Central Park Jogger case at that time. Years later and in their 30's, the Central Park 5 have been completely exonerated. They had always been innocent, and Trump called for their EXECUTIONS.

In 1996, during a speech in which she was supporting her husband's disastrous'94 crime bill, Hillary Clinton called Black youths "super predators", and said that they should be "brought to heel". Only this year did Hillary finally walk those statements back a little. But she never really owned up to nor apologized for what she said.


Trump's "tough talk" against illegal immigration is complete bullshit, once you realize he [had] his entire empire built with imported slave labor. Meanwhile, Hillary's husband also signed NAFTA, which went into effect in 1994. A horrendous "free-trade" pact that ruined the lives of millions of Mexican citizens, virtually over night. So, look at history. Notice how "illegal immigration" was never much of a hot-button issue in this country before 1994. And ever since '94 it's been a massive issue. Comes up every single election, without fail. Yet, with all of his hot air about "illegals", Trump has never addressed NAFTA in any way. That's because Trump himself has benefited handsomely from the Clinton's trade policies - which includes facilitating slave and sweatshop labor into America.


Clinton and Trump both pay lip service to "fighting terrorism" and holding terrorist financiers accountable. This is also bullshit on both their parts. Trumps loves taking Saudi money when it benefits him. Even though Trump supposedly hates Muslims. Unless they are rich Muslims who will give him lots of money. Clinton for her part, has been bedding the Saudis for years. The Wahhabist Saudi empire has even financed her campaign, as well as the Clinton Foundation.


It is no secret that while some of Trump's supporters are merely scared to death and misguided, many of them are violent White supremacists. Some have already taken actions in his name. Trump's base threatens an all-out civil/race war, over phony allegations that the elections are some how "rigged" against Trump. Clinton on the other hand, has never met an act of geo-political aggression she didn't like. From her support of Iraqi sanctions throughout the 1990's, to her vote [with Bush] to invade Iraq in 2003, to the complete dismantling of Libya, a Clinton regime guarantees more war, with almost no limits. Oh btw, she's also egging on a nuclear war with Russia. So, there's that...


A staple requirement for ascending the U.S. presidency, is unquestionable, unwavering support of the bastard "state" of Israel. This is simply a matter of fact. Trump will have Israel's back, no matter what. While Shillary Clinton is and will always be the quintessential Zionist politician.

Your only option here is to choose between two different monsters... who're much more alike than you know. Either way, this dying empire is fucked. We deserve this!

homepage: homepage: http://officerdowntp.blogspot.com/2016/11/trump-clinton-both-are-monsters_7.html

PDX IMC Already Been there, done that 07.Nov.2016 22:49


Nine Reasons Why It Doesn't Matter Who Is President

Posted on July 30, 2016 by Kevin Ryan

The excitement and furor over presidential nominations in the U.S. helps to demonstrate why those nominations don't matter. Here are nine reasons why.

Jill Stein Proved Me Wrong

Posted on September 17, 2016 by Kevin Ryan

My last blog post ( Nine Reasons Why It Doesn't Matter Who Is President  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/07/432869.shtml ) was wrong.

As of September 2016, it does matter who is elected president. That's because one of the candidates has openly called for a new investigation into the crimes of 9/11.

Trump's Endorsement of Clinton 07.Nov.2016 23:03


Thank you for the additional info. Reminded me of the fact that Trump once endorsed Hillary, saying she'd make a great president.

^^ except (since '08) no more 'charitable' DT words for HRC 07.Nov.2016 23:33


at the recent Al Smith charity dinner (an election year tradition for decades in which both major-party candidates are expected to "let down their guard" and keep everything 'in good fun' exclusively...) in New York, Trump dropped some shocker bombs on Clinton - her sitting at the same table, few feet away from him at podium - that went far beyond that event's expected 'good sport' demeanor.

Specifically regarding her criminality, political mendacity and corruption.

the stunned looks on faces of many tony attendees was for the ages.

(both 'monsters' perhaps but...) More differences between than implied 07.Nov.2016 23:51


Trump has virtually the entire corporate mass media (including some of his former TV show employers) against him.

Wall Street is 100% opposed to him and favor Hillary (for example, 2008 bank bailout architect + former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson), many of these Wall St. aligned are top GOP/Republican donors, political leaders and Party officials

Saudis / Gulf oil monarchies are much closer to the Clinton Foundation (cf. Qatar, Saudi Arabia government donations) than to Trump.

Trump speaks consistently against wars, he is absolutely opposed to endless imperial invasions/occupations that produce nothing but dead bodies. Hillary speaks about dead Iraqis / Consequences of U.S. actions?


Donald Trump's Unique Human Decency On Iraq

From a humanitarian standpoint, the content of Trump's condemnation of the war is outstanding. In fact, to grieve over the lives of Americans but not the people of Iraq is a form of racism. Trump is virtually unique among major politicians in taking this stand on the lives of innocents the US has attacked. He should be praised for it.

As election day approaches, it is time to ignore the noise of the moment and think clearly about the crucial issues facing us, none of which is more important than war or peace. The War on Iraq has been a touchstone for these issues over the last 14 years.

On Iraq, Clinton and her operatives have sought to avoid at all costs an accurate comparison of her position over the last 14 years to Trump's. "What did Trump say?" has been buried by the Clintonites and company. "When did he say it?" has been slyly substituted for it. The time line has been used to equate the positions of Hillary the most notorious of hawks with that of Trump.

Let us have a look at Trump's words as well as the dates they were uttered. And compare them to Hillary's:

so yeah Hillary Clinton (a lifetime corporate lawyer and career politician/criminal who actively and even viciously covered up decades of her husband's infidelity) is a greater 'monster' than Trump (lifetime rich kid and successful business owner, who sacrificed 19 months of his life and $100 million of his own assets to perhaps ? lose this coming Tuesday simply because he cares about America and all its Americans)

if Trump loses he (is out $100 million and...) just goes back to his real estate empire.

if Hillary Clinton loses (and even if she wins this is still possible...)she better spread it for the Federal investigation of her family's Foundation.

Donald Trump Could Be The Military-Industrial Complex's Worst Nightmare 07.Nov.2016 23:56

William Greider

Trump came to Washington in March 2016 and dropped a peace bomb on the neocon editorial writers at The Washington Post and the war lobby. Trump wants to get the United States out of fighting other people's wars. He thinks maybe NATO has outlived its usefulness. He asks why Americans are still paying for South Korea's national defense. Or Germany's or Saudi Arabia's.

This Trump talk is definitely career-threatening for the military-industrial complex. It was particularly playful of Trump to choose The Washington Post as the place to drop his bomb; after all, it's the Post that has made itself such a righteous preacher for endless war-making.


(Aug 2016) TPP and NAFTA: Trump Is Speaking Against, Will Cancel TPP 07.Nov.2016 23:59


just fyi, you all (former Bernie Bros hornswoggled / decided to vote Hillary Clinton) etc.

Trump is directly hitting the TPP, and referencing NAFTA (as a horrendous bad deal historically) in his recent speech events. Repeatedly, constantly and insistently.

says fwiw that he will cancel the TPP if he reaches the White House in 2017. Every speech.

Irrespective btw of whether you think it makes no difference who wins November 9th, or if you 'hate Trump'....

Y'all seriously should watch the actual speeches and get a view of Trump communicating directly to his followers, rather than corporate mass media portrayals of Trump/soundbites. Kid you not.

[ Addendum Nov 2016: Trump has a lengthy documented record prior to 2016's campaign of speaking against NAFTA, dating back to the 1990s after it was first signed. ]


Millions Of Ordinary Americans Support Donald Trump. Here's Why 08.Nov.2016 00:06

Thomas Frank

When he isn't spewing insults, the Republican frontrunner is hammering home a powerful message about free trade and its victims

All this stuff is so insane, so wildly outrageous, that the commentariat has deemed it ['racism'] to be the entirety of the Trump campaign. Stories marveling at the stupidity of Trump voters are published nearly every day.

But there is another way to interpret the Trump phenomenon. A map of his support may coordinate with racist Google searches, but it coordinates even better with deindustrialization and despair, with the zones of economic misery that 30 years of Washington's free-market consensus have brought the rest of America.


Time for Alternative Thinking! 08.Nov.2016 05:16

Marc Batko marc1seed@yahoo.com

Unlike a chair, an idea can be shared by a whole people!
The time is right for alternative economics, reduced working hours, environment caring, person-oriented work, labor-intensive investment, community centers, cloud workers, shriveling the financial sector and expanding the public sector!

The myths of the economization of all life, the financialization of the economy, the self-healing market and the invisible hand changing vices like selfishness into virtues like the common good could be cast to the wilderness. We are given 1100 free movies on openculture.com along with 700 e-Books and 450 audio books. How can you be hard-nosed with 1100 free movies?

Education is the great transformer, said John Kenneth Galbraith. Truth dwells outside oligarchs and economic myths. Strength comes from interdependence, exchanging roles and admitting the blindness of narcissism and shock and awe wars of arrogance and hubris. Long live alternatives, humility, and intercultural learning! Viva sharing! Strachnya voyna (war is terrible)!
www.openculture.com, www.therealnews.com, www.citizen.org, www.kickitover.org, www.onthecommons.org, www.commondreams.org and www.truth-out.org

Trump's a phony populist, but it doesn't matter 08.Nov.2016 06:28


Trump has most of corporate media in his back pocket, as they've been giving him free press for decades. And he obviously has the stormfronters and all those in the Alt-Right suckling from his billion dollar teet. But none of this shit matters.

Hillary is already the next CEO, it was decided probably right after Obama's election. This whole election is a sham... and Trump is in on it!

Hillary is the quick painless death you seek. 08.Nov.2016 06:46


aside from the endless hearings, investigations, and impeachment

"most of corporate media in his back pocket" 08.Nov.2016 09:08


"as they've been giving him free press for decades"

- ^ this part of your statement is the only part with some relevance. Trump has cultivated his own 'celebrity' name/brand within mass media as a TV star on several networks for years.

But beyond that name recognition alone, he absolutely does not and did not have "most of corporate media in his back pocket" for the 2016 presidential election campaign.

Please provide hard evidence to the contrary, specifically regarding the 2016 election, if you really believe this supposition.

U.S. corporate mass media is entirely in the tank for Clinton and has been for over a year. Trump has been met with skepticism (at best) from the outset, by corporate media.

Trump media DARLING! 08.Nov.2016 14:16


"Please provide hard evidence to the contrary, specifically regarding the 2016 election, if you really believe this supposition."

Immigration, you're kidding right? How about nonstop blanket coverage for an entire year?

RE: "How about nonstop blanket coverage for an entire year?" 08.Nov.2016 15:47


We already acknowledged/agree that, Trump is not only a billionaire but also a TV celebrity. Therefore by definition, he has name recognition among the media.

Yes capiche. He's a big recognized name, has been since the 1980s. He's a celeb. We know.

But the coverage and characterization of Trump (2016 presidential campaign) is uniformly negative. Any time his name has been mentioned within Google or anywhere else in the corporate plutocratic mediasphere 2016, he is portrayed negatively. Also, individual followers of his campaign are broad-brush portrayed negatively.

You were asked to provide hard evidence about Trump somehow having [QUOTE] "most of corporate media in his back pocket" -

now certainly, if one buys the adage 'any publicity is good publicity' (as Trump's own attitude seems to generally reflect; witness for example his Twitter account) then yes, any time Trump's name simply appears, no matter the absolute 100% negative nature of the coverage, is 'good'....

Also of course (as we all obviously understand and agree) Trump is not only a real estate magnate but also an entertainer who has in the past worked for corporate media, and hosted multiple television entertainment programs. In that sense he's a (former) insider. You should check out one of his speeches sometime, he openly acknowledges and discusses this "insider" (and now "outsider" from the elite) aspect of his life and career, esp. w/ regard to his recent decision to run for president. As in, who his 'friends' are now/remaining in comparison to 18 months ago...

But no (other than the 'any publicity is good publicity' theory), coverage of his 2016 campaign by the corporate mediasphere, both in the U.S. and Western Europe, has been absolutely negative and unflattering. From the Op-Ed pages, on down to the daily campaign event reportage, remarks made by Trump on the trail, tweets from Trump, etc. As have been portrayals of individual Trump campaign supporters i.e. the typical American voter.

Also: The campaign speech rallies are never accurately covered by corporate mass media. In either the content or demeanor of these events, nor accurate reportage of the size-quantity of attendance. Especially when compared with Clinton 2016 rally attendance, etc. And of course, in particular earlier this year when a full-court press was on from both GOP and Democrats vs. Trump, the constant portrayal of 'violence', 'racism' etc. occurring at Trump rallies, via corporate mass media. Basically the only way one person can find out for themselves is (not to read the corporate news media but) actually attend a rally or view the entire playback of a Trump rally via YouTube or similar.

So we're not seeing how "most of corporate media is in Trump's back pocket". Show us the money (positive / lauding coverage of Trump 2016 campaign).

One other thing not commented on above:
Republican elites met openly and spent millions of $$ on attempts to sabotage, sink or otherwise derail the Trump candidacy and/or (in the end unsuccessfully...) to attempt to prevent his nomination by GOP.

These schemes themselves, involved lots of corporate mass media collusion and spending of dollars towards the corporate plutocratic mediasphere.

neither gets it, or got it 09.Nov.2016 16:10


and like Occupy, it was taken over by the painfully stupid. Don't matter amy more, though we'll discuss it for awhile. Go ahead and manage your debt, till we realize, like Marc, it's not about anger, though it all makes one angry, but about alternatives which neither has, or had.

It Doesn't Matter, It Never Really Did 09.Nov.2016 19:26


It really doesn't make a damned bit of difference whether Trump or Clinton were in. For the same reasons I've stated earlier. Hopefully the folks who've been out in the streets all day would still have taken the same actions, had Clinton "won". The one positive thing to come out of Trump's "win" is that perhaps now the sort of revolution we've been desperately needing might come about more swiftly. Devil willing...

Be on the lookout for a sharp rise in hate crimes.