Otherwise, it defies explanation.
"People came to me and said it was Russia. President Putin said to me 'it's not Russia.' I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be."
Donald Trump in Helsinki.
We watched Donald Trump in Helsinki. He looked and sounded like the prisoner in a hostage video.
We watch Trump risk impeachment and removal to try to blame Ukraine, not Russia, for hacking the 2016 election. We watch him openly side with Russia against the combined opinions of his own intelligence services, led by people he appointed. We watch Trump desperate to keep secret records of his real estate and tax transactions.
Weird facts need explanations. Herbert Rothschild offers one. Trump is not a free man, not really. Putin has something on Trump.
Weird facts need explanations. Herbert Rothschild offers one. Trump is not a free man, not really. Putin has something on Trump.
Rothschild is a retired professor and lifelong activist for civil rights and peace. He lives in Southern Oregon. The photo is from the Peace House Peacemaker Award ceremony, one of several areas of Rothchild's activism. (Photo by Allen Hallmark.)
Guest Post by Herbert Rothschild
"Under Duress."
"Below is a rewritten and updated version of my last weekly column in the Daily Tidings, which I titled, 'Say it: Trump is a Russian agent.'
 |
| Herb Rothschild |
What I appreciated about Hill is that she hasn’t bought into the New Cold War attitude toward Russia. As she testified, “I do not think long-term conflict with Russia is either desirable or inevitable. I continue to believe that we need to seek ways of stabilizing our relationship with Moscow even as we counter their efforts to harm us.” That’s my position. As I asserted in the column, Russia’s hostility to us is almost entirely of our doing. In 1990, to induce Mikhail Gorbachev to begin talks that led to the reunification of Germany, the U.S. assured him that NATO would not expand “one inch eastward.” We broke that pledge and ringed Russia with bases. I would have rejoiced had Trump acted openly and skillfully to reset the relationship.
But that’s not what Trump has done. Without explanation he did the following: Tried (unsuccessfully) to loosen the economic sanctions imposed by Congress on certain Russian oligarchs and their companies. Tried (unsuccessfully) to get the G-8 to readmit Russia. Insisted from the start that Russia didn’t interfere in the 2016 election. Regarding that last behavior, lately he’s been peddling what Hill called a “fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services” that Ukraine, not Russia, was behind the disinformation campaign. And it’s come out in the impeachment inquiry that Trump is uninterested in supporting Ukraine’s effort to end the insurrection, supported militarily by Russia, in its eastern provinces.
What finally led me to assert that Trump was acting as Putin’s agent was his abrupt decision, made without consultation, to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria. He ordered the withdrawal after Turkey’s president requested U.S. permission to assault the Syrian Kurds and occupy the borderlands. I couldn’t discern that Trump had anything to gain by betraying our only reliable ally in Syria. Indeed, it upset Congressional Republicans at the very time he most needs their unwavering support. For me the answer came when Russia became the main power broker in Syria and its troops occupied abandoned U.S. bases.
Putin’s hold on Trump probably originated in Trump’s reliance on Russian money to save his sinking real estate business. The best explanation for his fierce resistance to the release of his tax returns is that they may reveal his complicity in the crimes of corrupt oligarchs.
The only way to shake the loyalty of Trump’s base, and thus persuade Senate Republicans to convict him of the articles of impeachment, is to accuse him publicly of treason. The lack of proof beyond a reasonable doubt shouldn’t prevent prominent Democrats from doing so. In regard to such allegations, Trump has set a bar well below even probability."
9 comments:
One could be a professor of political science, and be and expert on politics, or one could be a retired English professor like Rothschild, and not know what the hell he's talking about. Particularly when one is also an ACLU founder. Talk about being a progressive. Herb Rothschild is no more knowledgeable about politics than your local grocery store checker, and he's a whole lot more biased.
Herb, who do you support for president, so that we can discuss your choice? Bernie the communist?
Herb Rothschild is an admired thinker and scholar. It is likely that he is right about Putin's hold on Trump. Still, the level of proof available to the public isn't strong enough at this point to support his allegation. It is just as likely that Trump embraces unproven allegations because he is more comfortable with deviousness than with reality. I agree with Herb that "had Trump acted openly and skillfully to reset the relationship" that would have been a good thing. But, Trump doesn't know how to act openly.
Thinking people like Herb Rothschild are probably right to believe that treason has been shown by a standard of more probably than not but the evidence to date does not support that as a conclusion. Let's wait until the evidence is shown. That's how we do it in a system based on law and justice.
Notice to Commenters:
I just deleted two comments to yesterday's post. One was supposedly written by "Penis Sage" and another urged me to leave up that comment and others written by a local political vandal. The second comment attributed a name to that person and speculated that the frequent references to penises, limp dicks, and open and closet homosexuality were all signals of the homosexual interests of the frequent commenter. This second comment made disparaging comments about the eyes and hair of the vandal-commenter.
I am aiming at a higher plane in these comments.
I prefer to leave the comment section open, as it is now, and will continue to remove the obscene ones as I notice them.
Peter Sage
I respond to Anonymous only because his way of dealing with substance is typical of what Trump and his Republican supporters habitually do--namely, ignore content and attack persons. This habit was on striking display during the impeachment hearings before the House Intelligence Committee. Almost invariably, the Republicans on the committee spoke of what the Democrats were trying to do ("overturn the 2016 election results") and not what the witnesses were saying.
So let me try an experiment, Anonymous. Tell us how you would explain Trump's decision to abandon our allies the Syrian Kurds, allow the Turks to force tens of thousands of them from their ancestral homes, and jeopardize their ability to keep captured ISIS fighters from escaping. No name calling, no putting me or others down. See if you have the capacity to focus on a fact situation. You might discover something about yourself that will be helpful as you function at home and in the workplace.
When is Herb going to write an article about Joe and Hunter Biden taking bribes from China and Ukraine? How about when Hillary took $145 million in bribes from Russia? Democrats like to make false charges of criminal activity that they themselves partake in the same acts. Herb, are you that partisan?
Russian trolling helped elect Trump. Putin said so...smiling...business as usual.
He is reportedly in debt to Russians, the full nature of which is unknown, and suspiciously being kept secret.
Ergo, he is unwilling to speak negatively about Russia.
Note that Paul Manafort was either directed or opportunistically sought to join the campaign which remains a mystery...but the Russian connection is there as well.
One result of these and other events coming to light is that a Trump enabling Republican party is implicitly and overtly supporting Russian interests, which include suppressing democracy.
Finally, there are 3000 companies that continue doing business in Russia despite sanctions, including most of the Fortune 500. They all lobby, mostly to Republicans.
http://www.aalep.eu/american-companies-operating-russia
Do the math...
This is why there are prohibitions on foreigners and their governments contributing to American elections.
We probably should enforce them.
Oh, my, Anonymous. You just proved Dr. Rothschild’s point. This time you use the time (dis)honored approach of deflecting. The topic is the question of what would make Trump make a particular decision, if not to please Putin.
Come on, Anonymous. Rise to the challenge. When you have to deal with a situation at home or at work, do you behave in this fashion--either attacking someone personally or changing the subject, rather than deal with the matter at hand. If that is the case, I suspect that you're not doing very well at work or at home. I'm urging you to change your behavior, not your opinions. This will be my last attempt.
I'm in the middle of reading "The Common Good," by Robert Reich. I urge everyone to read that because it provides the history behind our current quid pro quo schema that did not begin with Donald Trump and that we all seem to talk so cavalierly about (the "new normal"). Democrats and Republicans alike have contributed to this self-rewarding corruption and demise of the commons and common interests. Sad, very sad.
Andy Seles
Post a Comment