Israel-Palestine (http://www.thebellforum.com/category/asia-europe-and-middle-east/israel-palestine)

http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/forward.png Forward (http://blackagendareport.com/forward?path=node/5302) http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/print.png Print HTML (http://blackagendareport.com/print/what-hillary-n-trump-agree-on-01) http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/reddit.png Reddit (http://reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5302&title=The%20Imperial%20Consensus%2C%20Part%201%3A%20Hillary%20and%20Trump%2C%20Republicans%20and%20the%20Congressional%20Black%20Caucus%20Agree%20on%20Israeli%20Apartheid) http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/viadeo.png Viadeo (http://www.viadeo.com/shareit/share/?url=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5302&title=The%20Imperial%20Consensus%2C%20Part%201%3A%20Hillary%20and%20Trump%2C%20Republicans%20and%20the%20Congressional%20Black%20Caucus%20Agree%20on%20Israeli%20Apartheid) Google Plus One (http://blackagendareport.com/node/5302) Linkedin Share Button (http://blackagendareport.com/node/5302) Share on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php) Tweet Widget (http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5302&count=horizontal&via=blkagendareport&text=The%20Imperial%20Consensus%2C%20Part%201%3A%20Hillary%20and%20Trump%2C%20Republicans%20and%20the%20Congressional%20Black%20Caucus%20Agree%20on%20Israeli%20Apartheid&counturl=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5302)

2016 presidential campaign (http://www.thebellforum.com/taxonomy/term/6941)

http://blackagendareport.com/sites/default/files/styles/image-400x300/public/hillary-n-trump-03.jpg?itok=YBRZ8t_O (http://www.thebellforum.com/what-hillary-n-trump-agree-on-01)

by BAR managing editor Bruce A. DixonWhether it’s gentrification, privatization, environmental destruction, threatening the planet with nukes or maintaining global empire, differences between the parties of the one percent are often less important than the bipartisan disasters upon which our masters agree. In the first of several installments, we look at the issues elite Republicans and Democrats agree on. This week it’s Israel, the world’s premiere apartheid state.
The Imperial Consensus, Part 1: Hillary and Trump, Republicans and the Congressional Black Caucus Agree on Israeli Apartheidby BAR managing editor Bruce A. DixonFor the two capitalist parties this election year, nothing is more important than controlling the public convertsation. Republicans want you to know that Hillary is a liar and a crook. Democrats need to keep reminding you that Trump is an unrepentant racist and con man. What neither party or candidate, and none of the corporate media news outlets talk about are the places where Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are on the same page, the issues on which the entire one-percenter US political establishment is of a single mind. So for the next couple weeks here at Black Agenda Report, we’ll talk about where Hillary and Donald Trump agree.
The first obvious point of agreement in the US political establishment, not just between Hillary and Trump, but between all the corporate media outlets and from the downticket hacks and flacks on the Republican side to the Congressional Black Caucus and the so-called Progressive Caucus there is nearly unanimous and unflinching support for the apartheid state of Israel (http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/israeli-apartheid).
From the moment of its founding (http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/ref-nakba.html) in 1948, Israel has been a vicious colonial settler state, a savage ethnocracy (http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/smart-living/blumenthal-settler-colonialism-ethnocracy-at-root-of-gaza-conflict/vp-AAd27pt) bent upon the violent expulsion and dispossession of all the land’s non-Jewish inhabitants. To maintain its high-tech, well-armed, white military outpost in that sea of brown people next to a large fraction of the planet’s most easily accessible oil, the US has made itself Israel’s armorer, financier and diplomatic sugar daddy, an arrangement condoned by the leaders of both imperialist parties.
Both Trump and Hillary showed up at AIPAC’s annual meeting in March. Trump (http://time.com/4267058/donald-trump-aipac-speech-transcript/) declared Israel “a strategic ally” and “the only democracy in the Middle East.” Hillary doubled down (http://time.com/4265947/hillary-clinton-aipac-speech-transcript/) and denounced the nonviolent global movement to boycott, divest from and sanction the apartheid regime as “alarming,” equating it to antisemitism.
And it’s not just the one percenter presidential candidates. Republicans from John Kasich (http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2015/03/gov_john_kasich_says_he_attended_netanyahu_speech_to_express_support_for_israel.html) and John McCain and Democrats from Rahm Emanuel to the Congressional Black Caucus (http://blackagendareport.com/content/cowardly-hypocritical-subservient-congressional-black-caucus-endorses-israeli-apartheid-and-) are solid, nearly unanimous backers of re-arming, re-financing and diplomatically reinforcing the apartheid state. New York governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, championed and signed into law a 2016 bill banning individuals and corporations identified as supporting the BDS movement from contracting with the state, and provided for a state-run blacklist of BDS supporters, (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simon-mccormack/gov-cuomos-bds-blacklist-free-expression_b_10383198.html) much like the old Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_State_Sovereignty_Commission) which furnished information about local Freedom Movement activists of the 1950s and 60s to vigilantes who harassed and sometimes murdered them.
Outside the US, Israel’s pedigree as an apartheid state is almost universally recognized. But the only US presidential candidate to utter the words “Israel” and “apartheid” in the same sentence has been the Green Party’s Jill Stein (http://www.jill2016.com/statement_on_us_foreign_policy_palestine_israel_and_bds), whom Democrats and Republicans alike desperately need to ban from televised debates, lest she expose not the difference between the two corporate parties, but the distance between them and the American people.
For Black Agenda Report, I’m Bruce Dixon. Find us on the web at www.blackagendareport.com (http://www.blackagendareport.com/).
Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, and a member of the state committee of the Georgia Green Party. He lives and works near Marietta GA and can be reached via email at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com.*
*








00:00


















(http://www.thebellforum.com/)
(http://www.thebellforum.com/)








More... (http://blackagendareport.com/what-hillary-n-trump-agree-on-01)

#1 on the list should be that Ds & Rs agree that Hillary should be prez.

*****

More evidence Trump wants to lose to Clinton
By Brent Budowsky, columnist, The Hill

http://thehill.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_full/public/blogs/trumpdonald_092515gn8_1.jpg?itok=VqMRVlH6

I now believe there is a 50 percent probability that GOP nominee Donald Trump wants to lose to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the race for president, and then seek to create an alt-right media conglomerate including players ranging from Breitbart to former Fox News boss Roger Ailes.

I raised this possibility in my Aug. 12 piece for The Hill, "Is Trump deliberately throwing the election to Clinton?" Let's consider why events since mid-August add support to this possibility.


First, Trump has allowed Clinton to dominate him in television advertising. His ad buys have been very limited, even though he began August behind Clinton in ad spending by an historically unprecedented margin for presidential nominees. Why hasn't Trump done much more to compete with Clinton on the airwaves?
One could have argued many months ago that Trump's free saturation television exposure given to him by television execs made for up the lack of paid campaign advertising. But free media coverage has turned harshly against Trump, to the degree that Trump responded to the daily deluge of negative coverage by declaring a virtual war against the media, which the media are winning because the facts routinely contradict Trump's claims and promises.

Second, since Aug. 12, Trump has opened a paltry number of campaign offices in battleground states, continuing his huge disadvantage in the political ground game compared to the grassroots juggernaut assembled by Team Clinton. Why hasn't Trump made any effort to build a ground game, at the same time he has not made any effort to effectively compete with significant paid television advertising?

At this moment, with Labor Day approaching, Trump is at a huge disadvantage in both the ground game and the battle over the airwaves and has made no effort to effectively compete in these two crucial aspects of successful presidential campaigning. Is this the behavior of a candidate playing to win?

Third, despite his claims to vast personal wealth, why hasn't Trump written his campaign a huge check to fulfill his longtime promise to self-finance his campaign? Either Trump does not really possess even remotely the wealth he claims, or he refuses to keep his campaign promise to self-finance his campaign because he really does not want to win.

Fourth, the Trump has handled the immigration issue in a way designed to hyper-galvanize his limited base — a base that would be the foundation for the television venture he is rumored to be gunning for — in a way that alienates Hispanic voters for a generation and repels independent voters and even many Republicans.

Several days ago, Democrats were privately worried that Trump would use his visit to Mexico and his major immigration speech in Arizona to "soften" his position and widen his circle of supporters, which is what a candidate who wants to win would have done. This is exactly what most of his surrogates were hinting in the days before his major immigration speech.

Instead, Trump humiliated many of his surrogates by doing the exact opposite. He began his big day by sounding more elevated in his joint appearance with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, continued his day when the humiliated Mexican president essentially called Trump a liar by stating that he did in fact tell Trump that Mexico would never pay for the wall, and ended his day with a red-meat speech so extreme (a word Trump himself used when describing his proposed vetting process) that even some of his few prominent Hispanic supporters headed for the exits.

A recent story in The Washington Post, "Poll finds rejection of many of Trump's views on immigration," discussed a new Pew Research Center poll, which tracks similar results from a recent Fox News poll. While Trump's hardline immigration policies reap great support from the minority of voters who support him and would form the foundation for a future Trump rightist media venture, they are anathema to far more voters and are seen by huge numbers of Hispanic voters as a declaration of political war against them.

From the time I first raised the possibility on Aug. 12 that Trump could be throwing the election to Clinton, he has acted in a manner that is consistent with a candidate who wants to lose the presidential campaign and segue to a new alt-right media venture after the election.

Would a billionaire candidate who wants to win the presidency deliberately fail to substantially increase television ad buys, fail to open a flood of campaign offices to build an effective ground game, refuse to self-finance his campaign as he promised, and escalate his extremism on immigration in a way that further destroys his ability to widen his support and could alienate Hispanic voters from Republicans for a generation?

The Republican nominee is acting in ways that make it far more likely that Hillary Clinton is elected president, while positioning himself to be the Citizen Kane of the alt-right media before the sun sets Clinton's first day in office.

Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas) and former Chief Deputy Majority Whip Bill Alexander (D-Ark.). He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. Contact him at brentbbi@webtv.net

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/294259-more-evidence-trump-wants-to-lose-to-clinton

Despite the source this appears to be true. I would add that he appears to be making some attempt to disillusion his base with the various prevarications and I suspect that this trend will accelerate.