PDJT has announced that he will not be doing the first debate. And that may extend to all Republican primary debates. Murdoch of Fox News is furious at the loss of revenue this will entail. Fox is bleeding viewers since the ouster of Tucker Carlson. Ronna McDaniel is also upset since this will undoubtedly reduce the amounts of money coming into the coffers of the RNC. Let’s always remember that the RNC is a private organization. This private organization is beholden to those who fund it.
The NYTimes calls PDJT’s decision “a major affront to both the Republican National Committee and to Fox News…”
Let me see if I understand the NYTimes reasoning here. The RNC has done little to help PDJT counteract the incredibly political indictments for fake crimes by Democratic prosecutors. There has been zero pushback over turning the criminal justice process on its head with these shameless forays into the shredding of everyone’s constitutional rights not just PDJT’s. Why? Because the RNC does not want Trump to be the candidate.
Trump was upsetting the carefully constructed mirage that the DNC and the RNC had constructed to get people to believe that their voting in national elections had some meaning. PDJT exposed and is continuing to expose the corruption that exists in Washington.
What is the purpose of these primary debates? It should be to let the country see where those running for the presidency stand on various policy issues. Would that be the case this year? Unlikely. More likely would be turning the event into one taking potshots at Trump over the various sham indictments that have taken place.
It may be important for the wannabees to get their message out. However, the country already knows what the Trump Doctrine is. We had his presidency to see it in action. The country does not need the primary debates to understand it.
Two huge elements are part of the Trump Doctrine. The first is that economic security is national security. The second, peace is the prize. These were the essence of the Trump Doctrine. And the effectiveness, although largely ignored by Big Media, was unmistakable.
“Largely ignored” is a huge understatement. A better description would be actively censored. I recall about six months into the Trump presidency, I went searching online using the term “Trump doctrine.” The first two screens of results from the Google search engine (20 in all) contained absolutely no description of Trump doctrine. Most of the returns indicated that PDJT had no consistent approach to foreign policy and was flying blind. The predictions about the loss of standing for America were off the wall.
When I entered the term into a different search engine, one that, at the time, had not been compromised in the items being returned, about half of the returns contained an actual description/discussion of the term.
President Trump executed a clear foreign policy – a unique doctrine where national security is achieved by leveraging U.S. economic power. And US economic power was and still is huge in how it relates to world politics. PDJT’s approach was a fundamental shift in that it touched both allies and adversaries within the oft repeated phrase: “Economic security is national security.” Modern U.S. history provided no easy predictive reference for the potential outcomes.
The reason for this was that US foreign policy had been for decades based on what was good for the bottom lines of large multi-national corporations. What was good for the people was secondary if it was a consideration at all. The corporations supported this arrangement by steering large amounts of money towards political campaigns and the pocketbooks of political families.
The Trump doctrine was different. The nature of the Trump foreign policy doctrine, as it became visible, was to hold manipulative influence agents accountable for regional impact(s); and simultaneously work to stop any corrupted influence from oppressing free expression of national values held by the subservient, dis-empowered people within the nation being influenced.
How did this work out?
When Qatar was identified as a financier of extremist ideology, President Trump placed the goal of confrontation upon the Gulf Cooperation Council, not the U.S. That’s Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. They needed to confront the toxic regional influence. The U.S. would support their objectives. That’s what happened.
President Trump’s approach brought North and South Korea together away from the table of conflict. South Korean President Moon Jae-in said U.S. President Donald Trump deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to end the standoff with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program.
Rather than continuing a decades-long policy of ignoring the influence of China, President Trump directly assigned primary responsibility for a DPRK reset to Beijing.
By directly confronting the influence agent, President Trump positioned the U.S. to support a peace objective on the entire Korean peninsula and simultaneously forced China to openly display their closely guarded influence.
While the Red Dragon -vs- Panda influence dynamic was quietly playing out in the background, the benefit of this new and strategic approach brought the possibility of peace between the two Koreas closer than ever in history.
PDJT’s foreign policy brought Israel and the UAE together… and then Bahrain… and then Sudan in the Abraham Accords. And there are many more such successes.
PDJT always put national economic interests at the head of the lists for things that should be most important to any national leader whether it be here or abroad.
“The free world must embrace its national foundations. It must not attempt to erase them or replace them. Wise leaders always put the good of their own people and their own country first. The future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots.”
Sundance notes:
A U.S. foreign policy that provides the opportunity for fully realized national authenticity was a paradigm shift amid a world that had grown accustomed to corrupt globalists, bankers and financial elites who had established a business model by dictating terms to national leaders they control and influence.
We had/have our own frame of reference with K-Street lobbyists in Washington DC. Much of President Trump’s global trade reset was based on confronting these multinational influence agents.
When you take the influence of corporate/financial brokers out of foreign policy, all of a sudden, those global influence peddlers are worthless. Absent of their ability to provide any benefit, nations no longer purchase these brokered services.
When unelected and appointed officials are the primary driver for decision making in economic matters, the people become dis-empowered. The people no longer have a way to voice their thoughts about the direction that a nation is taking.
We see this with the European Union (EU). National voices are drowned out. Since the end of World War II, the U.S. had been a bottomless treasury for EU subsidies. The payments have been direct and indirect. The indirect have been via U.S. military bases providing security and the NATO alliance which was dominated by the US military. Also contributing was U.S. trade policy that permitted one-way tariff systems.
PDJT had long stated that he felt that the American worker could compete with foreign workers anywhere on a level playing field. However, unequal tariff systems made the playing field unequal. The equal opportunity to compete was lost with such systems.
Forcing a reset in trade conditions (think NAFTA to USMCA as one example) ignited the economy in this country. Of course, this threatened the business model of the multinational corporations and led to the plan to steal the 2020 election. There are trillions of dollars at stake.
The Trump Doctrine works. Everyone saw with their own eyes what happens when you leverage economic power for our national security interests. Is there anyone who will be on the debate stage in Wisconsin that will embrace this?