Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

China to eradicate poverty in 3 years

The plan is both ambitious and achievable based on China’s remarkable economic and infrastructural records.

Published

on

2,094 Views

Chinese news outlet Xinhua has released the full remarks of President Xi Jinping from a 23 June symposium on the eradication of poverty which took place in Shanxi Province.

During his speech President Xi stated that he seeks to embark on a three year plan to fully eradicate rural poverty in the county.

The Chinese economic boom which begun during the reformist era of Paramount Leader Deng Xiaoping, has transformed China from a mainly agrarian developing economy to an industrial powerhouse and leading exporter. The IMF has recently stated that it expects to move its headquarters to China within a decade as it is projected with almost complete certainty that in terms of GDP, the Chinese economy will soon outpace that of the United States which had led the world for most of the 20th century and into the 21st. In many other areas, China already leads the world.

Three major developments have occurred under the leadership of Xi Jinping which have had further transformative effects on China.

First of all, it was during XI’s period in office that in 2013, China announced One Belt–One Road, the wide reaching trading/commerce infrastructure plan which seeks to harmonise world trade and elevate the trading capacities of both developing and developed economies. Crucially, unlike western derived schemes such as the WTO, One Belt–One Road does not include any requirements on governance or a nation’s economic characteristics. Instead, China seeks to integrate each nation’s growing capacities along wide reaching land roads and maritime belts in an interlocking system which plays to the existing and projected strengths of economies across several continents.

The second great achievement of the Xi era has been the flourishing of China’s internal market for not only basic goods but also Chinese made luxury goods. It is not out of the question that in the near future China’s number one market for Chinese made goods, will in fact be China, just as this was the case in respect of the United States during much of the 20th century.

Finally, China is rapidly moving on a path towards energy self-sufficiency and doing so in a manner that relies greatly on green technology. New cities in China are increasingly running primarily or entirely on solar energy at a pace which outstrips every other major nation and global region.

In many ways, the logical final frontier of China’s march towards full prosperity is the eradication of what remains of poor conditions in some rural areas.

President Xi said the following on the subject,

“We must send our best talents to the front line of the tough battle with extreme poverty. All levels of government should actively send cadres to station in poor villages in an effort to fortify the party leadership”.

He continued,

“The priority for the next stage is to solve the problems of social services, infrastructure and a basic medical services shortage in areas with deep-rooted poverty issues”.

The South China Morning Post further reports that Xi’s plan includes the following goals 

–An equitable distribution of land in poor rural areas 

–Relocate certain residents in decrepit areas to areas with modern living and working accommodations 

–Improve rural medical facilities and care, with an emphasis on the elderly and ill

–Employ local residence in environmental protection initiatives 

–Improve rural education 

–Create new transport infrastructure to poor rural locations 

–Create a plethora of new jobs in rural areas 

–Remove 12 million people from the official definition of poverty 

President Xi has stated that he believes these ambitious goals can be accomplished in spite of their broad scope. He has said,

“As long as we pay great attention, think correctly, take effective measures and work in a down-to-earth way, abject poverty is absolutely conquerable”.

China’s growth between 1978 and the present day has confounded most naysayers and defied the trends which have shaped modern expectations for economic and infrastructural growth.

Based on this reality, there is every chance that President Xi’s ambitious plans will in a few short years, become a settled reality for China.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Shahna
Guest

I realise it’s been pretty rough for some but nonetheless it’s been simply amazing.
Amazing what a govt can achieve when it also works for all its people instead of only for itself and a rich few.

….Even more amazing that this should be so for China – and not a Western nation where instead we see, increasing poverty.

Hamletquest
Guest
Hamletquest

However you describe it, communism with a capitalist twist or capitalism with a communist twist the state organised economy seems to work.

Simon
Guest
Simon

I’d describe it as getting your priorities right, based on reality.
Of course if they ‘enjoyed’ Liberal Democracy they might prioritise spending $2 trillion on a 16 year war in eg Bolivia or Congo instead.

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

I cannot imagine a Liberal China with a high proportion of its 1.38 BILLION people confused about gender identity.

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

I don’t know who I admire more – Putin or Xi. Together, these guys are presenting the world with a viable way forward as the Empire dies.

tomo stojanovic
Guest
tomo stojanovic

it’s simple – to prosper, a country just needs to make sure psychopaths are not put in positions of power. They cannot care about others even if they wanted to, such is the nature of their sickness. Putting them in charge of a country is like putting a fox in charge of a hen house. Americans instead glorify and worship them.

Godfree Roberts
Guest

If you study it, you’ll see that our system weeds out anyone who’s not sociopathic.

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

IMO the economic models of both Russia, and China are National Socialist. Read Mein Kampf, and pay special attention to the economic theories posited by Gottfried Feder. This exercise requires conscious thought so it’s not for those faint of heart or foggy of mind. Reading Mein Kampf will no more turn a person into a Nazi that reading Das Capital will turn someone into a Communist so please spare me the “NAZI, NAZI, NAZI !!!” hysteria. It seems that a number of nations, especially in the Pacific rim, have begun to move purposefully toward the NS economic model. Regardless of… Read more »

Shahna
Guest

….. Have you actually read Mein Kampf? I mean … started on the first page and gone all the way to the last? I ask because I tried. Really – I REALLY TRIED But it’s a whole big lorry catootie of …. endless WAFFLING. (I thought the preface’s description of “political pornography” was… kind.) It was banned here you see, so of course, I wanted to read it. And I eventually lent it to someone under the same terms I received it: You may borrow it if you promise never to return it. Nationalist Socialist Germany had some really very… Read more »

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

Political Pornography? Do you think the reviewer could be somewhat biased. Yes, I’ve studied Mein Kampf. I have the two major translations from German to English: Murphy, and Manheim. I also have papers done my Chinese, Japanese, and Russian scholars. There is also an on line searchable version of Mein Kampf. Obviously, I don’t view Mein Kamph in the way you do, and the reason could be that I read with an open mind. Considering that you live in a society where Mein Kampf is banned perhaps you should ask why? What is it that your social engineers are afraid… Read more »

Shahna
Guest

Was the writer of the preface biased? Probably – seems to me everyone is biased about MK one way or the other. I asked you because I was curious… I read most of the book but found it excruciatingly waffly. (And that was a LONG time ago.) I was hoping for …. reason rather than ‘just umbrage.’ I don’t live in a society where MK is banned. I live in South Africa: it was banned under the Apartheid Govt and book banning went the way of that govt. (NP govt was VERY good friends with Israel. And I mean VERY… Read more »

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

You wrote that you’ve read Mein Kampf (see: http://hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/ ). Chapter 11 succinctly articulates Adolf’s extreme racism against the Jewish people. Under Germany’s national socialist policies, the country miraculously recovered economically from the severe financial demands put upon it by the World War I reparations outlined in Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles. However what if the fuehrer: 1. Didn’t blame the woes of German poverty on an entire race of people? 2. Didn’t extol the false virtues of Aryan society propaganda? 3. Didn’t put Germany on a path to destruction by making war in Europe? In your opinion:… Read more »

Seán Murphy
Guest
Seán Murphy

Hitler and Germany didn’t start WW2: France and Britain declared war on Germany. Germany didn’t have much choice in the matter.

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

Germany invaded Czechoslovakia in March of 1939 and Poland on September 1, 1939 (today is the 78th anniversary). If you don’t consider those two events as the start of WW II, then you’ve read the wrong history books.

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

Germany invaded Czechoslovakia, and Poland to protect ethnic Germans from extermination. Also, there was the issue of taking back territory the return of which was provided for in the Versailles Treaty. England, France, and the Soviet Union piled on to turn a local issue into a war that deeply damaged their nations, and murdered as many as 75,000,000 people. Perhaps you’ve read the wrong history books.

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

The three and a half million ethnic Germans who lived in the North and Western regions of Czechoslovakia (Sudetenland) were never threatened with “extermination” as you falsely wrote.

Hitler coerced the Czechs into giving up Sudentenland or face invasion. The Munich Treaty that was brokered by Britain’s Neville Chamberlain allowed Germany to annex the regions thereby gaining 10,000 square miles of territory in September, 1938. Six months later, the German Wehrmacht occupied Prague and Hitler declared Czechoslovakia “no more” (see: http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/service_awards/sudetenland_occupation.htm ).

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

Nations come, and nations go; history is replete with that. Czechoslovakia peeled off of the Austro-Hungarian empire in 1918, bounced around as pseudo nation until 1993, and then dissolved. During that time it was troublesome, and added greatly to global conflict. It reminds me of that other pseudo nation: Ukraine.

Constantine
Guest
Constantine

Come on, dude. Hitler attacked Poland. What should the allies do? Sit and watch? They already did that in 1938, when it was only the USSR that prepared for a military conflict if necessary in order to aid Czechoslovakia.

Hitler and Germany DID start WWII. The revisionist view I tend to vehemently oppose is the one that originates in the Anglo-American countries, in Poland and the Baltics, always by virulent Russophobes. This is that the USSR is equally responsible for the outbreak of the war.

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

My post concerned the economics of NS Germany. I don’t care one wit about the Jewish people. What if? Who cares? What if you Jews didn’t invent the holohoax, and use it as an excuse to steal Palestine? What if you hadn’t put Israel on a path to destruction by feeding on the rest of the world? Do you really think you can protect yourselves with white quilt generated by your propaganda forever? Trust me, you will soon find that the sun does not rise, and fall on your fat kosher butt. A. The policies of exceptionalism, and militarism don’t… Read more »

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

Please, your accusations of being a Zionist sympathizer are wasted. You couldn’t even give an opinion without running your racist mouth off. My question to you was based on historical facts relative to Germany’s rise from the ashes of financial ruin, poverty and starvation of its people. If Hitler focused on growing the nation into an international hub for commerce instead of war, Germany may have been one of the great economic powers of that era. Germany was one of the first European nations to extricate itself from the Great Depression. Under the national socialists, unemployment was reduced from 6… Read more »

Constantine
Guest
Constantine

While many policies of the Nazis were positive, the underlying context was that of a sacrosanct state of the chosen, superior race. And that affected the course of the country. Thus, the reduction of unemployment was based to a certain extent to the mobilization of the war industry and the expansion of the armed forces. And success was further fed by territorial expansion. This is the case of the gold reserves of Czechoslovakia (much of it being the former Russian Imperial gold seized by the Czech Legion during the Civil War) which were used to balance the increasing military costs… Read more »

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

Actually, I’m more of a fan of accurate history presented without distortion, and bias. You should try it sometime.

So tell me, Constantine, do you really view yourself as an Emperor?

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

Why can’t you stay on the subject of economics? In what way am I racist? Am I racist simply because I refuse to worship a pack of thieving Zionist Jews? Is it because your primary motivation is to use what you view as racism to attack anyone who fails to bow before your Zionist Jews? The world has grown weary of your constant cries of racism, and antisemitism. Besides, Judaism is supposed to be a religion not a race.

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

Glad you’re back. Let’s continue this thread and try and come to an understanding. You asked four questions in tandem. Q1: “Why can’t I stay on the subject of economics?” I did but I had to establish the background of Hitler’s racism he so succinctly declared in his autobiography as the foundation of my two points being, (A) his consuming bigotry towards the Jewish people blinded him from his greater achievement of leading Germany’s economic recovery and (B) by exploiting the success of his work and spreading it throughout Europe, he may have laid the genesis for the European Union… Read more »

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

Indeed, let’s come to an understanding; 1. I made a comment on pre-WW 2 German economics, and you immediately piled on with the Jew garbage after I firmly stated that I was not supporting the Nazi cause. Why did you do that? Because the Jew is terrified of the effect of NS economics on their banking cartel. I submit a quote for Winston Churchill: “The unforgivable sin of Hitler’s German was to develop a new economic system by which the international bankers were deprived of their profits.” You then went on to obfuscate the subject by introducing spurious tidbits of… Read more »

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

X-Man, I have to shake my head at your ridiculous assumptions and lack of comprehension when someone posts historical, irrefutable facts that you deliberate misconstrue to support a line of personal thought that reveals your blind, unwarranted hatred for an entire race of people. Your original post is not in dispute about the economic benefits of the German government’s national socialist economic model in the early 1930’s. I even concurred with your understanding of that period in my initial post. Did you even read what I wrote? Here let me repeat it again, word for word. “Under Germany’s national socialist… Read more »

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

I’ve studied all of the Abrahamic religions, in excruciating detail, and that’s why I don’t subscribe to them. You, sir, regardless of any or no religion that you profess, are a Jew. In this instance you are condemned by your own words, “Jews are a people who may or may not follow a religion.” It’s no small wonder that you are terrified by a discussion of NS economics.

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

Your rant is incomprehensible and your conversation foul. You try and make a case for defamatory accusation based on what; that I wrote the truth? Despite your hatred for Jews, they are a tribe of people recognized by the world; the last of the Hebrew race. Like all peoples, there are good Jews and bad Jews representing the eternal struggle of man. They will all be judged in the end, like the rest of us. Your attempt to fashion a cogent argument about period economics and commingle it with racial condemnation is incredulous. You want to write about Germany’s national… Read more »

XRGRSF
Guest
XRGRSF

NS economics not NS policies. However, I love the way you people react when you’re desperate: Insults, name calling, and big words. Shakespeare had you pegged long ago, “All sound, and fury signifying nothing.”

MyWikiDisQus
Guest
MyWikiDisQus

Whoa, back up a few posts, X-Man, it was you who slung the first vitriol, not me! However I apologize, I’ll try not to use “big words” to confound you in the future.

Policies are the administrative foundation for a government’s action. For example, The National Socialist policy for the German Workers Party was based upon a 25 point program (see: http://www.hitler.org/writings/programme/ ).

Here is some more detail on their economic policies (see: http://ihr.org/other/bauer1939economicpolicy )

and here (see: https://nazieconomicpolicy.wordpress.com/2010/10/29/1933-to-1936/ ).

Born Free
Guest
Born Free

I’ll believe it when I see it. They are in a bad financial position now and have been for years….way worse than America…

Godfree Roberts
Guest

They’re in great shape financially, according the the BIS. Average debt for their peers (way less than Japan’s) fast, sustainable growth, strong public support. Perhaps you’ve read too many headlines like these: 1990. The Economist. China’s economy has come to a halt. 1996. The Economist. China’s economy will face a hard landing 1998. The Economist: China’s economy enters a dangerous period of sluggish growth. 1999. Bank of Canada: Likelihood of a hard landing for the Chinese economy. 2000. Chicago Tribune: China currency move nails hard landing risk coffin. 2001. Wilbanks, Smith & Thomas: A hard landing in China. 2002. Westchester… Read more »

louis robert
Guest
louis robert

Confirmation:

“Democracy is Failing | Eric X Li | Oxford Union”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9kqwMKyBvLc

Godfree Roberts
Guest

Weirdly, it’s China that’s the real democracy:https://www.unz.com/article/selling-democracy-to-china/#new_comments

louis robert
Guest
louis robert

Very interesting. Thanks, Godfree.

China will be central in my grandchildren’s world, a very different one indeed from the current one.

Born Free
Guest
Born Free

Disagree. China is facing a bank crisis because of their debt. It’s much greater than ours as a percentage of GDP.

Godfree Roberts
Guest

Here’s ours and theirs:comment image

Latest

FBI recommended Michael Flynn not have lawyer present during interview, did not warn of false statement consequences

Flynn is scheduled to be sentenced on Dec. 18.

Washington Examiner

Published

on

Via The Washington Examiner…


Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who arranged the bureau’s interview with then-national security adviser Michael Flynn at the White House on Jan. 24, 2017 — the interview that ultimately led to Flynn’s guilty plea on one count of making false statements — suggested Flynn not have a lawyer present at the session, according to newly-filed court documents. In addition, FBI officials, along with the two agents who interviewed Flynn, decided specifically not to warn him that there would be penalties for making false statements because the agents wanted to ensure that Flynn was “relaxed” during the session.

The new information, drawn from McCabe’s account of events plus the FBI agents’ writeup of the interview — the so-called 302 report — is contained in a sentencing memo filed Tuesday by Flynn’s defense team.

Citing McCabe’s account, the sentencing memo says that shortly after noon on Jan. 24 — the fourth day of the new Trump administration — McCabe called Flynn on a secure phone in Flynn’s West Wing office. The two men discussed business briefly and then McCabe said that he “felt that we needed to have two of our agents sit down” with Flynn to discuss Flynn’s talks with Russian officials during the presidential transition.

McCabe, by his own account, urged Flynn to talk to the agents alone, without a lawyer present. “I explained that I thought the quickest way to get this done was to have a conversation between [Flynn] and the agents only,” McCabe wrote. “I further stated that if LTG Flynn wished to include anyone else in the meeting, like the White House counsel for instance, that I would need to involve the Department of Justice. [Flynn] stated that this would not be necessary and agreed to meet with the agents without any additional participants.”

Within two hours, the agents were in Flynn’s office. According to the 302 report quoted in the Flynn sentencing document, the agents said Flynn was “relaxed and jocular” and offered the agents “a little tour” of his part of the White House.

“The agents did not provide Gen. Flynn with a warning of the penalties for making a false statement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 before, during, or after the interview,” the Flynn memo says. According to the 302, before the interview, McCabe and other FBI officials “decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport.”

The agents had, of course, seen transcripts of Flynn’s wiretapped conversations with Russian then-ambassador Sergey Kislyak. “Before the interview, FBI officials had also decided that if ‘Flynn said he did not remember something they knew he said, they would use the exact words Flynn used … to try to refresh his recollection. If Flynn still would not confirm what he said … they would not confront him or talk him through it,'” the Flynn memo says, citing the FBI 302.

“One of the agents reported that Gen. Flynn was ‘unguarded’ during the interview and ‘clearly saw the FBI agents as allies,'” the Flynn memo says, again citing the 302.

Later in the memo, Flynn’s lawyers argue that the FBI treated Flynn differently from two other Trump-Russia figures who have pleaded guilty to and been sentenced for making false statements. One of them, Alexander Van der Zwaan, “was represented by counsel during the interview; he was interviewed at a time when there was a publicly disclosed, full-bore investigation regarding Russian interference in the 2016 election; and he was given a warning that it is a federal crime to lie during the interview,” according to the memo. The other, George Papadopoulos, “was specifically notified of the seriousness of the investigation…was warned that lying to investigators was a ‘federal offense’…had time to reflect on his answers…and met with the FBI the following month for a further set of interviews, accompanied by his counsel, and did not correct his false statements.”

The message of the sentencing memo is clear: Flynn, his lawyers suggest, was surprised, rushed, not warned of the context or seriousness of the questioning, and discouraged from having a lawyer present.

That is all the sentencing document contains about the interview itself. In a footnote, Flynn’s lawyers noted that the government did not object to the quotations from the FBI 302 report.

In one striking detail, footnotes in the Flynn memo say the 302 report cited was dated Aug. 22, 2017 — nearly seven months after the Flynn interview. It is not clear why the report would be written so long after the interview itself.

The brief excerpts from the 302 used in the Flynn defense memo will likely spur more requests from Congress to see the original FBI documents. Both House and Senate investigating committees have demanded that the Justice Department allow them to see the Flynn 302, but have so far been refused.

In the memo, Flynn’s lawyers say that he made a “serious error in judgment” in the interview. Citing Flynn’s distinguished 30-plus year record of service in the U.S. Army, they ask the judge to go along with special counsel Robert Mueller’s recommendation that Flynn be spared any time in prison.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Macron offers crumbs to protestors in bid to save his globalist agenda (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 36.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a quick look at French President Macron’s pathetic display of leadership as he offers protestors little in the way of concessions while at the same time promising to crack down hard on any and all citizens who resort to violence.

Meanwhile France’s economy is set for a deep recession as French output and production grinds to a halt.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via Zerohedge


As if Brussels didn’t have its hands full already with Italy and the UK, the European Union will soon be forced to rationalize why one of its favorite core members is allowed to pursue populist measures to blow out its budget deficit to ease domestic unrest while another is threatened with fines potentially amounting to billions of euros.

When blaming Russia failed to quell the widespread anger elicited by his policies, French President Emmanuel Macron tried to appease the increasingly violent “yellow vests” protesters who have sacked his capital city by offering massive tax cuts that could blow the French budget out beyond the 3% budget threshold outlined in the bloc’s fiscal rules.

Given the concessions recently offered by Italy’s populists, Macron’s couldn’t have picked a worse time to challenge the bloc’s fiscal conventions. As Bloomberg pointed out, these rules will almost certainly set the Continent’s second largest economy on a collision course with Brussels. To be clear, Macron’s offered cuts come with a price tag of about €11 billion according to Les Echos, and will leave the country with a budget gap of 3.5% of GDP in 2019, with one government official said the deficit may be higher than 3.6%.

By comparison, Italy’s initial projections put its deficit target at 2.4%, a number which Europe has repeatedly refused to consider.

Macron’s promises of fiscal stimulus – which come on top of his government’s decision to delay the planned gas-tax hikes that helped inspire the protests – were part of a broader ‘mea culpa’ offered by Macron in a speech Monday night, where he also planned to hike France’s minimum wage.

Of course, when Brussels inevitably objects, perhaps Macron could just show them this video of French police tossing a wheelchair-bound protester to the ground.

Already, the Italians are complaining.  Speaking on Tuesday, Italian cabinet undersecretary Giancarlo Giorgetti said Italy hasn’t breached the EU deficit limit. “I repeat that from the Italian government there is a reasonable approach, if there is one also from the EU a solution will be found.”

“France has several times breached the 3% deficit. Italy hasn’t done it. They are different situations. There are many indicators to assess.”

Still, as one Guardian columnist pointed out in an op-ed published Tuesday morning, the fact that the gilets jaunes (yellow vest) organizers managed to pressure Macron to cave and grant concessions after just 4 weeks of protests will only embolden them to push for even more radical demands: The collapse of the government of the supremely unpopular Macron.

Then again, with Brussels now facing certain accusations of hypocrisy, the fact that Macron was pressured into the exact same populist measures for which Italy has been slammed, the French fiasco raises the odds that Rome can pass any deficit measure it wants with the EU now forced to quietly look away even as it jawbones all the way from the bank (i.e., the German taxpayers).

“Macron’s spending will encourage Salvini and Di Maio,” said Giovanni Orsina, head of the School of Government at Rome’s Luiss-Guido Carli University. “Macron was supposed to be the spearhead of pro-European forces, if he himself is forced to challenge EU rules, Salvini and Di Maio will jump on that to push their contention that those rules are wrong.”

While we look forward to how Brussels will square this circle, markets are less excited.

Exhausted from lurching from one extreme to another following conflicting headlines, traders are already asking if “France is the new Italy.” The reason: the French OAT curve has bear steepened this morning with 10Y yields rising as much as ~6bp, with the Bund/OAT spread reaching the widest since May 2017 and the French presidential election. Though well below the peaks of last year, further widening would push the gap into levels reserved for heightened political risk.

As Bloomberg macro analyst Michael Read notes this morning, it’s hard to see a specific near-term trigger blowing out the Bund/OAT spread but the trend looks likely to slowly drift higher.

While Macron has to fight on both domestic and European fronts, he’ll need to keep peace at home to stay on top. Remember that we saw the 10Y spread widen to ~80bps around the May ’17 elections as concerns of a move toward the political fringe played out in the markets, and the French President’s popularity ratings already look far from rosy.

And just like that France may have solved the Italian crisis.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Watch: Democrat Chuck Schumer shows his East Coast elitism on live TV

Amazing moment in which the President exhibits “transparency in government” and shows the world who the Democrat leaders really are.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

One of the reasons Donald Trump was elected to the Presidency was because of his pugnacious, “in your face” character he presented – and promised TO present – against Democrat policy decisions and “stupid government” in general.

One of the reasons President Donald Trump is reviled is because of his pugnacious, “in your face” character he presented – and promised TO present – in the American political scene.

In other words, there are two reactions to the same characteristic. On Tuesday, the President did something that probably cheered and delighted a great many Americans who witnessed this.

The Democrats have been unanimous in taking any chance to roast the President, or to call for his impeachment, or to incite violence against him. But Tuesday was President Trump’s turn. He invited the two Democrat leaders, presumptive incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and then, he turned the cameras on:

As Tucker Carlson notes, the body language from Schumer was fury. The old (something)-eating grin covered up humiliation, embarrassment and probably no small amount of fear, as this whole incident was filmed and broadcast openly and transparently to the American public. Nancy Pelosi was similarly agitated, and she expressed it later after this humiliation on camera, saying, “It’s like a manhood thing for him… As if manhood could ever be associated with him.”

She didn’t stop there. According to a report from the New York Daily News, the Queen Bee took the rhetoric a step below even her sense of dignity:

Pelosi stressed she made clear to Trump there isn’t enough support in Congress for a wall and speculated the President is refusing to back down because he’s scared to run away with his tail between his legs.

“I was trying to be the mom. I can’t explain it to you. It was so wild,” Pelosi said of the Oval Office meet, which was also attended by Vice President Pence and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). “It goes to show you: you get into a tinkle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you.”

This represented the first salvo in a major spin-job for the ultra-liberal San Francisco Democrat. The rhetoric spun by Mrs. Pelosi and Chuck Schumer was desperate as they tried to deflect their humiliation and place it back on the President:

With reporters still present, Trump boasted during the Oval meeting he would be “proud” to shutdown the government if Congress doesn’t earmark cash for his wall before a Dec. 21 spending deadline.

Pelosi told Democrats that Trump’s boisterousness will be beneficial for them.

“The fact is we did get him to say, to fully own that the shutdown was his,” Pelosi said. “That was an accomplishment.”

The press tried to characterize this as a “Trump Tantrum”, saying things like this lede:

While “discussing” a budgetary agreement for the government, President Donald Trump crossed his arms and declared: “we will shut down the government if there is no wall.”

While the Democrats and the mainstream media in the US are sure to largely buy these interpretations of the event, the fact that this matter was televised live shows that the matter was entirely different, and this will be discomfiting to all but those Democrats and Trump-dislikers that will not look at reality.

There appears to be a twofold accomplishment for the President in this confrontation:

  1. The President revealed to his support base the real nature of the conversation with the Democrat leadership, because anyone watching this broadcast (and later, video clip) saw it unedited with their own eyes. They witnessed the pettiness of both Democrats and they witnessed a President completely comfortable and confident about the situation.
  2. President Trump probably made many of his supporters cheer with the commitment to shut down the government if he doesn’t get his border wall funding. This cheering is for both the strength shown about getting the wall finished and the promise to shut the government down, and further, Mr. Trump’s assertion that he would be “proud” to shut the government down, taking complete ownership willingly, reflects a sentiment that many of his supporters share.

The usual pattern is for the media, Democrats and even some Republicans to create a “scare” narrative about government shutdowns, about how doing this is a sure-fire path to chaos and suffering for the United States.

But the educated understanding of how shutdowns work reveals something completely different. Vital services never close. However, National Parks can close partly or completely, and some non-essential government agencies are shuttered. While this is an inconvenience for the employees furloughed during the shutdown, they eventually are re-compensated for the time lost, and are likely to receive help during the shutdown period if they need it. The impact on the nation is minimal, aside from the fact that the government stops spending money at the same frenetic pace as usual.

President Trump’s expression of willingness to do this action and his singling out of the Dem leadership gives the Democrats a real problem. Now the entire country sees their nature. As President Trump is a populist, this visceral display of Democrat opposition and pettiness will make at least some impact on the population, even that group of people who are not Trump fans.

The media reaction and that of the Democrats here show, amazingly, that after three years-plus of Donald Trump being a thorn in their side, they still do not understand how he works, and they also cannot match it against their expected “norms” of establishment behavior.

This may be a brilliant masterstroke, and it also may be followed up by more. The President relishes head-to-head conflict. The reactions of these congress members showed who they really are.

Let the games begin.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending