Рэнд Пол
Рэнд Пол
Рэндал Говард "Рэнд" Пол (Randal Howard "Rand" Paul, p. 7 января 1963 года, Питтсбург, Пенсильвания) — американский политик, сторонник либертарианских политических взглядов, сенатор от штата Кентукки, член Республиканской партии, один из активистов движения чаепития. С ...

Рэндал Говард "Рэнд" Пол (Randal Howard "Rand" Paul, p. 7 января 1963 года, Питтсбург, Пенсильвания) — американский политик, сторонник либертарианских политических взглядов, сенатор от штата Кентукки, член Республиканской партии, один из активистов движения чаепития. Сын Рона Пола, первый в истории США действующий сенатор, один из родителей которого является членом Палаты представителей США.

 

Рэндал Говард Пол родился 7 января 1963 года, в Питтсбурге, штат Пенсильвания, в семье Рональда Эрнеста Пола и Кэрол Пол (урожденной Уэллс). В семье третий ребёнок из пяти В подростковом возрасте стал верующим христианином.

В 1968 году, семья Пола переехала в Лейк-Джексон, штат Техас, где он вырос. Когда ему было 13 лет, его отец был избран в Палату представителей США.

В 1988 году поступил в медицинский университет и закончил его в 1993 году.

5 августа 2011 года вступил в должность сенатора США.

7 апреля 2015 года объявил о намерении баллотироваться на пост Президента США в качестве кандидата от Республиканской партии на выборах 2016 года.

Вики

 

Официальная страница на сайте Сената США

Развернуть описание Свернуть описание
20 апреля, 11:15

Правительство США предоставило «нулевые доказательства» химатаки в Думе – американский конгрессмен 

Американский конгрессмен Томас Масси заявил, что глава национальной разведки, министр обороны и госсекретарь США предоставили...

18 апреля, 10:34

«Ударил не подумав»: Трамп подвергся критике консервативных сторонников 

Президент США Дональд Трамп подвергся критике со стороны своих консервативных сторонников, которые с осторожностью относятся...

03 апреля, 13:15

15 Celebrities You’d Be Surprised Own a Gun and the Reasons Why

This list of celebrity gun owners might shock you. We reveal the celebrities who pack heat -- and the surprising reasons why.

03 апреля, 00:42

The Atlantic Politics & Policy Daily: Eggsecutive Time

President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump hosted the annual White House Easter Egg Roll.

02 апреля, 20:26

Dems Fuel Caravan Invasion Of U S Borders

When President Trump signed the 2,232 page left right corpracratic 1.6 Trillion Omnibus last week that barely anyone read or was able to read, Trump along with many American voters affected by the rampant flow of drugs and illegal immigration had hoped for more funding for the border wall. Instead the budget included a measly 1.6 Billion of the needed 25 Billion. And as Rand Paul tweeted plenty of funds went to wasteful spending.And Now a caravan of 1,000 mainly Honduran migrants are heading toward the US border in the hopes of benefiting from of the catch and release program where they will be released into the United States while they await for their court hearings. Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show Follow us on social media TWITTER: https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerickJones G+: https://plus.google.com/+infowars/ GAB: https://gab.ai/RealAlexJones MINDS: https://www.minds.com/Infowars :Web: http://www.infowars.com/ http://www.prisonplanet.com/ http://www.infowars.net/ Funding the Infowar is more important than ever! Support: http://infowarsStore.com & get the latest books, documentaries, Infowars swag, survival & preparedness gear & nutritional products Alex Jones and his family trust, while supporting the growth of our expanding media operation. Sign up for the Infowars daily newsletter to become an 'Underground Insider' & bypass censorship bots of social media plus get exclusive content + coupon codes for our shop! - http://www.infowars.com/newsletter :Subscribe and share your login with 20 friends: http://www.prisonplanet.tv http://www.InfowarsNews.com INFOWARS HEALTH - START GETTING HEALTHY BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - http://www.infowarshealth.com/ The Alex Jones Show ©copyright, Free Speech Systems.LLC 1995 - 2017 All Rights Reserved. May use for fair use and educational purposes #AlexJones #Infowars

02 апреля, 17:30

Dems Fuel Caravan Invasion Of U.S. Borders

When President Trump signed the 2,232 page left right corpracratic 1.6 Trillion Omnibus last week that barely anyone read or was able to read, Trump along with many American voters affected by the rampant flow of drugs and illegal immigration had hoped for more funding for the border wall. Instead the budget included a measly 1.6 Billion of the needed 25 Billion. And as Rand Paul tweeted plenty of funds went to wasteful spending.And Now a caravan of 1,000 mainly Honduran migrants are heading toward the US border in the hopes of benefiting from of the catch and release program where they will be released into the United States while they await for their court hearings. Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show Follow us on social media TWITTER: https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerickJones G+: https://plus.google.com/+infowars/ GAB: https://gab.ai/RealAlexJones MINDS: https://www.minds.com/Infowars :Web: http://www.infowars.com/ http://www.prisonplanet.com/ http://www.infowars.net/ Funding the Infowar is more important than ever! Support: http://infowarsStore.com & get the latest books, documentaries, Infowars swag, survival & preparedness gear & nutritional products Alex Jones and his family trust, while supporting the growth of our expanding media operation. Sign up for the Infowars daily newsletter to become an 'Underground Insider' & bypass censorship bots of social media plus get exclusive content + coupon codes for our shop! - http://www.infowars.com/newsletter :Subscribe and share your login with 20 friends: http://www.prisonplanet.tv http://www.InfowarsNews.com INFOWARS HEALTH - START GETTING HEALTHY BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - http://www.infowarshealth.com/ The Alex Jones Show ©copyright, Free Speech Systems.LLC 1995 - 2017 All Rights Reserved. May use for fair use and educational purposes #AlexJones #Infowars

02 апреля, 15:00

The Passing of the Libertarian Moment

The end of the Cold War and the rise of Donald Trump have left classical liberals without a political home.

29 марта, 22:32

Exclusive: Russian ambassador pleads for help in securing Washington meetings

Anatoly Antonov has been rebuffed by U.S. government officials who are reluctant to be seen as friendly toward the Kremlin.

27 марта, 12:02

CIA may have to reveal Haspel’s hidden past

Senators in both parties are demanding the spy agency share more details on her role in using brutal interrogation tactics.

27 марта, 11:43

Американский сенатор: Безусловно, глубинное государство в США существует

Сенатор от штата Кентукки республиканец Рэнд Пол в интервью для The Laura Ingraham Show заявил, что термин «глубинное государство» в точности описывает то, как невыбираемые высокопоставленные представители служб безопасности без ведома Конгресса влияют на политику США.

26 марта, 21:55

Former Israeli Defense Chief: Bolton Pushed Israel's Military Toward Preemptive Strike On Iran

Between now and John Bolton taking up his post as Trump's new national security adviser, set to happen April 9, there will no doubt continue to be an avalanche of testimony coming out of US and foreign officials highlighting the crazed and hawkish actions he's taken in the past. And Bolton seems fully aware of this, as he told Fox News last week in an attempt to perhaps soften his image as the preeminent beltway hawk on Iran, North Korea, Russia and Syria: “Look, I have my views, I'm sure I'll have a chance to articulate them to the president… If the government can't have a free interchange of ideas among the president's advisors, then I think the president is not well served.” Yet Bolton's past actions in government suggest that instead of merely "articulating" his views he's willing to break ranks to get things done on his terms, even reaching out to allied foreign officials to push for preemptive strikes on America's enemies.  Former Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and John Bolton. Image source: Al Jazeera via AP.One notable example of this was revealed in bombshell testimony over the weekend issued by a former Israeli defense minister (2002-2006) and deputy prime minister (2006-2009) who had extensive interaction with Bolton when he was ambassador to the UN under the Bush administration. According to the Times of Israel, Bolton pushed then Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz to attack Iran even though no discernible threat was presented by Iran. As the Times reports: A former Israeli defense minister and chief of staff said Sunday that John Bolton, US  President Donald Trump’s incoming national security adviser, once pushed him to order airstrikes against Iran. “I know John Bolton from when he was the US ambassador to the UN. He tried to convince me that Israel needs to attack Iran,” Shaul Mofaz told a Jerusalem conference held by the Yedioth Ahronoth daily. “I don’t think this is a smart move—not on the part of the Americans today or anyone else until the threat is real,” he added. Ironically Mofaz himself - in line with the Israeli defense establishment - takes a generally hawkish position on Iran, as he told the Jerusalem conference during the same speech, “the Iranian threat is very significant to Israel’s security... It is impossible to guarantee a future for the children of Israel if Iran has a nuclear weapon." And yet he recognized Bolton's proposal as not "a smart move" as the existential threat level from Iran wasn't "real". In prior reporting, the Times of Israel has noted that while outside of government Bolton wasn't shy about expressing his desire that Israel should bomb Iran: Bolton, who’s been a resident at the conservative American Enterprise Institute since he left the Bush administration, has advocated for Israel bombing Iran to curtail its nuclear ambitions. “Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed,” he wrote in an op-ed in The New York Times in May 2015. “Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.” This accurately highlights something that shouldn't be forgotten amidst the current national flurry of Bolton commentary: on Iran and other so-called "threats" like Syria and Russia, Bolton speaks from within the very heart of the national security establishment.  A recent Al-Jazeera op-ed articulates the problem of seeing Bolton as in truth some kind of exceptionally hawkish D.C. outlier: Mr Bolton, however, is only a by-product of a general policy environment in Washington continually primed to directly confront Iran. Such a policy may not regularly appear overt, but it always seems to lie in waiting. As many will correctly worry that Mr Bolton's appointment raises the likelihood of war with another Middle Eastern country, of equal concern should be his ability to draw upon a robust think-tank, policy and lobbying complex heavily populated with ideas advocating opposition to Iran, designating it as the premier security threat to a stable Middle East, and well-disposed to grease the wheels of confrontation. It should be remembered, for example, that the Iran nuclear deal was struck under the Obama administration at the very moment the CIA and Pentagon under Obama were arming Sunni jihadists in Syria in order to wage proxy war against pro-Iran and regional Shia interests. As one as one formerly secret US intelligence memo spelled out, US sponsored proxy war was geared in the long term toward rolling back "the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)." This had a broad following within the beltway consensus - a consensus within which full and overt regime change in Tehran is hardly a fringe or outlier position.  Iran, for its part, has stayed relatively quiet regarding Trump's appointing Bolton as national security adviser. One high official in Iranian parliament called the move "a matter of shame" while highlighting Bolton's closeness to the Iran opposition group in exile, Mujahideen e Khalq (MEK) - considered by Iran and many other countries (and not long ago by the US State Dept.) as a terror organization. But Bolton is not alone here either as the MEK has for years received broad financial and political support from within the Washington mainstream, with dozens of sitting Congressmen and notable US politicians having attended their international conferences on an annual basis.  Thus Bolton and others like him are a logical consequence of the system, and certainly don't stand in opposition to it. As the latest testimony from a former Israeli defense chief confirms, Bolton was urging Israel to accomplish the neocons' dirty work in bombing Tehran. This trend really constitutes nothing new, but sadly is more in line with the norm. * * * Interestingly (and surprisingly refreshing) even Foreign Policy magazine - in a rare moment of clarity from the deep within the establishment - recognizes the uncomfortable fact of Bolton's quite "mainstream" and "acceptable" views: Instead, whether Trump knows it or not, putting Bolton, Pompeo, and Haspel in key positions looks more like a return to “Cheneyism,” by which I mean a foreign policy that inflates threats, dismisses serious diplomacy, thinks allies are mostly a burden, is contemptuous of institutions, believes that the United States is so powerful that it can just issue ultimatums and expect others to cave, and believes that a lot of thorny foreign-policy problems can be solved by just blowing something up... [sound familiar to basically all mainstream foreign policy-related public discourse???] * * * ...Thus, the real lesson of the Bolton appointment has less to do with Bolton himself and more about what it says about the U.S. foreign-policy establishment. You’re undoubtedly going to read a lot of heartfelt, knickers-in-a-twist commentaries in the next few weeks about the dangers of appointing a wild-eyed radical to such a sensitive position, but the plain fact is that Bolton is not really an outlier within the U.S. foreign-policy community. It’s not like Trump just appointed Medea Benjamin (from the left) or Rand Paul (from the right) or even an experienced and knowledgeable contrarian such as Charles W. Freeman Jr. or Andrew Bacevich. Instead, he appointed someone with decidedly hawkish views but who is still within the “acceptable” consensus in Washington. Look at Bolton’s pedigree and career. He’s a graduate of Yale University and Yale Law School. He worked at Covington & Burling, a venerable D.C. law firm where former Secretary of State Dean Acheson also worked. He has been a senior fellow for years at the conservative but mainstream American Enterprise Institute. He writes frequently for obscure, wild-and-crazy, “radical” publications including, er … the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and even Foreign Policy. Is this your idea of a “fringe” figure?

26 марта, 21:16

McConnell backs bill to ease up on hemp cultivation

Mitch McConnell will introduce legislation to allow states to regulate their own hemp industries, a move that could be a boon to the Senate majority leader should he pursue reelection in 2020.The Kentucky senator announced on Monday he will pursue a bill that would make states the primary regulators of hemp, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture. Hemp growth was once outlawed in the United States, but McConnell worked in 2014 to write a new law allowing pilot programs for it. Since then, Kentucky has become the state with the third-most acres of hemp growth.“Hemp has played a foundational role in Kentucky’s agricultural heritage, and I believe that it can be an important part of our future,” McConnell said on Monday at an event at the state Department of Agriculture in Frankfort, Ky. "I believe that we are ready to take the next step and build upon the successes we’ve seen with Kentucky’s hemp pilot program.”Hemp is an agricultural product with a myriad number of uses, from fabric to paper. But federal law does not allow its cultivation other than for research because of its similarity to marijuana, though hemp cannot be used as a drug.McConnell's move to relax regulations on hemp production comes as his colleagues increasingly believe the Kentucky Republican will seek a seventh term in 2020, when he is next up for reelection. In interviews last week, several GOP senators said privately that they believe McConnell is far more likely than not to run again.The majority leader is set to introduce the bill with Democratic senators and junior Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in the coming days. Congress must pass a farm bill by the end of September when current law expires, and McConnell's hemp proposal could be included. As majority leader, McConnell is in prime position to enact his priorities, and he also still serves on the Senate Agriculture Committee.A spokesman said McConnell will be looking at "all available options" to get the bill signed into law.

25 марта, 13:00

A Domestic Budget to Make Barack Obama Proud

The Republican Congress didn’t just ignore Trump’s proposals: The $1.3 trillion spending bill actually fulfilled—or even exceeded—many of the funding requests of his Democratic predecessor.

24 марта, 22:30

"The Obama People Better Start Packing Their Shit" - John Bolton Expected To "Clean House" At The NSC

The cautious and considered HR McMaster is leaving the White House to be replaced by one of the most polarizing, irascible figures operating in contemporary national security circles: Former UN Ambassador John Bolton. Bolton, who recently penned an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing that a preemptive strike against North Korea would be both legal AND desirable, is widely believed to be one of the most interventionist figures to ever hold a senior position in the US government. Case in point: Before 9/11, Bolton helped found a group calling for the unilateral overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Rand Paul declared that Trump was wrong to trust someone who is "unhinged as far as believing in absolute and total intervention." So it should hardly come as a surprise that Bolton plans to shake up the National Security Council staff when he arrives in the West Wing.  Foreign Policy reports that Bolton, Trump's third NSA in 15 months, is preparing to begin firing staff and replacing them with his own allies, as well as a few allies of former NSA Michael Flynn, who share Bolton's hawkish views. As one might expect, the Obama holdovers and McMaster loyalists will be the first to go. But they won't be the only ones: Those targeted for removal include officials believed to have been disloyal to President Donald Trump - especially those who have leaked about the president to the media. "Bolton can and will clean house," one former White House official said. Another source said "He is going to remove almost all the political [appointees] McMaster brought in." A second former White House official offered a blunt assessment of former Obama officials currently detailed or appointed to the NSC: "Everyone who was there during Obama years should start packing their shit." The circumstances surrounding McMaster's departure will only embolden his successor to make sweeping changes. As FP reports, McMaster was reportedly planning to hang on for a few more months, but a recent leak about Trump's decision to congratulate Russian President Vladimir Putin. McMaster’s departure may have been hastened by leaks emanating from the White House. Two sources familiar with the matter said McMaster was going to stay on until early summer. But when the Washington Post reported this week that Trump had congratulated Putin in a phone call on his fraudulent election win — after receiving written briefing materials from the NSC instructing him not to congratulate Putin — the president reacted furiously and blamed McMaster. The story caused Trump to speed up McMaster’s departure, the sources said. Bolton is already in talks with certain longtime advisors and is likely preparing to offer several of them jobs in the West Wing. One such advisor is Matthew Freedman, a Republican consultant who previously advised Bolton at the State Department and the United Nations.  Freedman and many other Bolton allies are pushing the incoming national security advisor to make sweeping changes (changes that will, of course, benefit them). On Thursday evening, just hours after Trump tapped him for the job, Bolton held a call with longtime advisors, including Matthew Freedman, a Republican consultant who once advised Bolton at the State Department and the United Nations. Freedman is currently helping manage the transition, according to a source familiar with the call. "Freedman is a very political guy that Bolton likes," one Republican source said. "He is overly ambitious about cleaning house." Freedman disputed that account, saying he was not aware of the Thursday phone call. "I can tell you there is no list," he said. Another source close to Bolton said it was premature to be talking about personnel changes. While Trump might object to Bolton's mustache (the president has a distaste for men with facial hair), the two at least see eye to eye on policy issues. In a way, Bolton could be considered a "proto-Trumpian" figure due to his criticism of the United Nations and the European Union - positions that Trump has also embraced.  Bolton's friends believe this closeness will allow Bolton to make swift changes at the White House. Indeed, Bolton's allies already have two names that should be at the top of Bolton's list of staff to fire: Deputy NSA Nadia Schadlow and former McMaster deputy Ricky Waddell. Among the officials Bolton’s allies are urging him to fire is Nadia Schadlow, currently the deputy national security advisor for strategy. Schadlow was the primary author of the administration’s recently released National Security Strategy, which was viewed as a surprisingly mainstream document that reaffirmed many traditional U.S. foreign-policy positions. Another official likely to be targeted in a Bolton purge is McMaster’s deputy, Ricky Waddell. It wouldn’t be the first purge to follow a change in Trump’s national security advisor. When Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster replaced retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in the job last year, McMaster systematically eliminated officials seen as loyal to his predecessor. According to four sources close to the White House, those so-called "Flynnstones" - advisors loyal to Flynn - are believed to be plotting their return to the NSC. Whether Bolton will sign off on the staff purge his allies and advisors are pushing is less clear, though he has been insistent about ousting so-called Obama holdovers. "You could easily say that people close to Bolton want these people to go," one source said. Other sources stress that Bolton, a veteran bureaucratic infighter, makes his own decisions. A source close to Bolton cautioned that any staffing changes would take time, given the need to process security clearances. That means Bolton will likely be stuck with his current staff for the May summit meeting between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Trump and Bolton have reportedly discussed staffing changes since at least last July, when Bolton was offered the job as McMaster’s deputy - a position currently held by Waddell. Trump told Bolton that the deputy job would lead to the top post, but Bolton declined, saying he’d rather wait until he was offered the national security advisor job. However, there are two factors that Bolton's allies believe could make life difficult for the former ambassador to the UN. One is his hawkishness toward Russia - which puts him at odds with Trump (though Trump, who is planning to expel dozens of Russian diplomats over the Skripal incident). Another is whether he manages to get along with Chief of Staff John Kelly - very much a supporter of the establishment view of American foreign policy. Bolton also has Trump's ear, which could lead to tensions between the two men. Since he arrived in the West Wing, Kelly has proven incredibly effective at keeping his job, and has helped dispatch many West Wing rivals. Bolton will need to tread carefully if he wants to outlast his two predecessors.

24 марта, 19:02

Конгресс США тихо прописал CLOUD act на странице 2201 бюджета

В течение нескольких месяцев Конгресс США разработал новые законы, направленные на усиление полномочий федеральных служб по доступу к частным сообщениям и файлам американских граждан, хранящихся на компьютерах за рубежом. Теперь, вместо того, чтобы на самом деле обсуждать и совершенствовать такое законодательство, законодатели решили закрепить на объемном бюджете 2018 года(прим. переводчика - 2018 Omnibus Spending Bill ) [PDF] и попытаться провести его через черный ход. Документ на 2232 страницы покрывает государственные расходы в размере 1,3 трлн с сегодняшнего дня до сентября, и, если они пройдут, мы избежим закрытия федеральных учреждений в эти выходные. Несмотря на то, что законопроект был обнародован в среду вечером, Палата представителей приняла его в четверг днем 256 голосами за, 167 голосами против. Теперь законопроект ожидает одобрения Сенатом, прежде чем он получит ОК от президента Трампа. Спрятанный на странице 2,201 законопроекта - это Закон об уточнении законного заграничного использования данных (CLOUD act), который был представлен в Сенат в феврале и далее никуда не прошел. Законопроект позволит американским правоохранительным органам получать личные данные своих граждан с серверов в любой точке мира, при условии, что они убедят американского судью утвердить повестку.Это важный момент, поскольку он позволяет полицейским и федералам обращаться в суд на американской земле и получать разрешение требовать информацию, хранящуюся в системах в другой стране. Прокуроры США пытались сделать это с Microsoft - пытаясь через нью-йоркского судью утвердить запрос на получение электронных писем, хранящихся в Ирландии, - и это превратилось в уродливое судебное разбирательство. Закон CLOUD, независимо от того, прошел ли он или является частью законопроекта о расходах, стремится избежать этого кошмара в будущем.Законодательство также предоставит правительству США право устанавливать двусторонние соглашения с другими странами, предоставляя им доступ к информации о гражданах этих стран, которые могут проживать в США. Всё, что иностранные государства должны для этого сделать, дать честное слов, что они будут использовать информацию на законных основаниях и уважать права человека."Спрятанный в бюджете CLOUD act - это положение, которое позволяет Трампу и любому будущему президенту делиться частными электронными письмами американцев и другой информацией со странами, которые ему лично нравятся", - сказал сенатор Рон Уайден (D-OR) в четверг. "Это означает, что он может заключать сделки с Россией или Турцией с почти нулевым участием в Конгрессе и без надзора со стороны американских судов. "Этот законопроект содержит только беззубые положения о правах человека, которые приятели Трампа могут встретить, просто поставив галочку. Это законодательная халатность, что Конгресс без минутных споров в Сенате спешит принять CLOUD act через обязательный к принятию Бюджет". Уйден не является единственным сенатором, у которого есть проблемы с легализацией данных законов. Рэнд Пол (R-KY) использовал процессуальные правила Сената, чтобы приостановить голосование по законопроекту о расходах на том основании, что никто его не читал, поэтому пока он не просмотрит его по страницам, голосование не будет проведено.Well here it is, all 2,232 budget-busting pages. The House already started votes on it. The Senate is expected to soon. No one has read it. Congress is broken... t.co/izvJlUEgUMВсе внимание устремлено на Сенат, чтобы проверить, пройдет ли законопроект, а вместе с ним и CLOUD act. Если законопроект получит зеленый свет, это будет сделано с минимальным контролем. Демократия! ® Обновлено для добавления Сенат США одобрил законопроект о расходах и полномочия облачного наблюдения, оставив его президенту Трампу подписать. Однако "главный твитер-начальник"(Tweeter-in-Chief) угрожает наложить вето на закон. Окончательное обновление Несмотря на угрозы ветирования, президент Трамп подписал закон, и CLOUD act теперь является законом.(https://www.theregister.c...)

24 марта, 05:45

US Doubles Down As Empire Declines

Authored by Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers via DissidentVoice.org, US empire is in decline. Reports of the end of the US being the unitary power in world affairs are common, as are predictions of the end of US empire. China surpassed the United States as the world economic leader according to Purchasing Power Parity Gross National Product, and Russia announced new weapons that can overcome the US’ defense systems. What is happening in the United States, in response, is to do more of what has been causing the decline. As the Pentagon outlined in its post-primacy report, the US’ plan is more money, more aggression and more surveillance. Congress voted nearly unanimously to give the Pentagon tens of billions more than it requested. Military spending will now consume 57% of federal discretionary spending, leaving less for basic necessities. The Trump administration’s new nominees to the State Department and CIA are a war hawk and a torturer. And the Democrat’s “Blue Wave” is composed of security state candidates. The US is escalating an arms race with Russia and China. This may create the mirror image of President Reagan forcing Russia to spend so much on its military that it aided in the break-up of the Soviet Union. The US economy cannot handle more military spending, worsening austerity when most people in the US are in financial distress. This is an urgent situation for all people in the world. In the US, we carry an extra burden as citizens of empire to do what we can to oppose US imperialism. We must be clear that it is time to end wars and other tools of regime change, to become a cooperative member of the world community and to prioritize the needs of people and protection of the planet. There are a number of opportunities to mobilize against US empire: the April 14-15 days of action, the Women’s March on the Pentagon in October and the mass protest planned against the military parade in November. Turmoil in Foreign Policy Leadership This week, President Trump fired Secretary of State Tillerson, nominated CIA director Mike Pompeo for the State Department and chose Gina Haspel to replace Pompeo at the CIA. As we write this newsletter, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is on the verge of being fired [since been fired and replaced by uber-hawk John Bolton]. The deck chairs are being rearranged on the Titanic but this will not correct the course of a failing foreign policy. The Pompeo and Haspel nominations are controversial. Pompeo believes torturers are patriots. He is a war hawk on every conflict and competing country, including Russia and especially Iran. And, unlike Tillerson, who stood up to Trump on occasion, Pompeo kisses-up to Trump, defending his every move. Haspel led a CIA black site torture center and ordered destruction of evidence to obstruct torture investigations. The Democrat’s record on torture is not good. President Obama said he would not prosecute Bush era torturers, infamously saying, “we need to look forwards as opposed to looking backwards.” John Brennan who was complicit in Bush-era torture, withdrew under pressure from becoming CIA director in 2008, instead becoming Deputy National Security Adviser, which did not require confirmation. After Obama’s re-election, Brennan became Obama’s CIA director. Brennan was inconsistent on whether torture worked. He tried to elevate Haspel, but the controversy around her prevented it. When the CIA spied on the US Senate Intelligence committee over their torture report, Brennan originally lied, denying the spying, but was later forced to admit it. He was not held accountable by either the Democrats or Obama. Haspel headed a black site in Thailand where torture was carried out. She ordered the destruction of 92 secret tapes documenting torture even thoughthe Senate Judiciary requested the tapes, as had a federal judge in a criminal trial. According to a federal court order, the tapes should have been turned over to comply with a FOIA request. Counsel for the White House and CIAsaid the tapes should have been preserved. Haspel’s actions should lead to prosecution, not to a promotion as head of the agency, as CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou, who exposed torture and served time in prison for it, reminds us. The Trump nominations leave the Democrats on the cusp of a complete surrender on torture in an election year. Caving on torture by approving Pompeo and Haspel will anger Democratic voters and risk the high turnout need for their anticipated 2018 “Blue Wave”. Republican Senator Rand Paul says he will oppose both nominees. If all the Democrats oppose, the Senate will be split 50-50, requiring one more Republican to block the nominees. Fifteen Democrats supported Pompeo’s nomination as CIA director, so Democratic opposition is not ensured. Will Democrats oppose torture or be complicit in normalizing torture? Democrat’s Security State Blue Wave Militarism and war are bi-partisan. When Trump submitted a military budget, the Democrats almost unanimously joined with the Republicans to increase the budget by tens of billions of dollars. But, that is not all, a series of investigative reports by the World Socialist website reported the Democratic Party is becoming the party of military and intelligence candidates. The series identifies more than 50 military-intelligence candidates seeking the Democratic nomination in 102 districts identified by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee as targets for 2018. The result, as many as half of all new congressional Democrats could come from the national security apparatus. An example is the victory in Pennsylvania by Conor Lamb, an anti-abortion, pro-gun, pro-drug war, ex-Marine, which is being celebrated by Democrats. The Sanders-Democrats, working to make the Democratic Party a progressive people’s party, are being outflanked by the military-intelligence apparatus. In the end, Democratic Party leadership cares more about numbers than candidate’s policy positions. Patrick Martin writes: If on November 6 the Democratic Party makes the net gain of 24 seats needed to win control of the House of Representatives, former CIA agents, military commanders, and State Department officials will provide the margin of victory and hold the balance of power in Congress. The presence of so many representatives of the military-intelligence apparatus in the legislature is a situation without precedent in the history of the United States. Just as Freedom Caucus Tea Party representatives hold power in the Republican Party, the military-intelligence officials will become the powerhouse for Democrats. This takeover will make the Democrats even more militarist at a dangerous time when threats of war are on the rise and the country needs an opposition party that says ‘no’ to war. What does this mean? Kim Dotcom might be right when he tweeted, “The Deep State no longer wants to rely on unreliable puppets. They want to run politics directly now.” What does it mean politically? There is no two-party system on militarism and war. Those who oppose war are not represented and must build a political culture to oppose war at home and abroad. US Foreign Policy Elites in Denial About Russia’s New Weapons There is dangerous denial among US foreign policy elites about the Russian weapons systems announced by Putin in his state of the union speech last week. Military-intelligence analyst the Saker compares the US’ reaction to the five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. US elites are in the first two stages. The US does not have an adequate defense to the weapons announced by Putin. As the Saker writes, “Not only does that mean that the entire ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] effort of the USA is now void and useless, but also that from now US aircraft carrier battle groups can only be used against small, defenseless, nations!” US leadership cannot believe that after spending trillions of dollars, Russia has outsmarted their military with ten percent of their budget. Former Secretary of Defense William Perry exemplifies this denial, claiming Putin’s weapons are “phony,” exaggerated and do not really exist. Then he blames the Russians for starting an arms race. Of course, in both the National Security Strategy and Nuclear Posture Review, published before the Putin speech, the US announced an arms race. US political and military leadership brought this on themselves. The US’ leaving the SALT treaty in 2002 and expanding NATO to cover the Russian border led to Russia’s development of these new weapons. Further, Obama, and now Trump, support spending more than a trillion dollars to upgrade nuclear weapons. Perry falsifies history and blames Russia rather than looking in the mirror, since he was defense secretary during this era of errors. The new Russian weapons systems do not have to lead to an unaffordable arms race. The US should re-evaluate its strategy and find a diplomatic path to a multi-polar world where the US does not waste money on militarism. We can divest from the military economy and convert it to civilian economic investment, as the US has many needs for infrastructure, energy transition, health care, education and more. US global dominance is coming to an end. The issue is how will it end? Will the US hang on with an arms race and never-ending wars, or it will it wind down US empire in a sensible way. The Saker writes: The Russian end-goal is simple and obvious: to achieve a gradual and peaceful disintegration of the AngloZionist Empire combined with a gradual and peaceful replacement of a unipolar world ruled by one hegemon, by a multipolar world jointly administered by sovereign nations respectful of international law. Therefore, any catastrophic or violent outcomes are highly undesirable and must be avoided if at all possible. Patience and focus will be far more important in this war for the future of our planet than quick-fix reactions and hype. The ‘patient’ needs to be returned to reality one step at a time. Putin’s March 1st speech will go down in history as such a step, but many more such steps will be needed before the patient finally wakes up. As of now, the Pentagon and US leadership are in denial and not ready to face reality. The people of the United States, in solidarity with people of the world, must act now to end the war culture and convince US leadership that a new path is necessary.

24 марта, 01:45

The World According To John Bolton... In His Own Words

Via MiddleEastEye.net, Trump's new national security adviser has been branded a bully, abrasive and 'unhinged'. Here are some of his most outspoken statements... John Bolton is set to replace HR McMaster as Donald Trump's national security adviser in a Lazarus-like resurrection for a man regarded as among the most hawkish of American politicians.  The US president announced the move on Thursday afternoon. Bolton will become Trump's third national security advisor in less than 15 months. Last year, Michael Flynn was forced to step down because of his failure to disclose that he discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador in Washington before Trump took office. Bolton is a Bush-era defence under-secretary and former ambassador to the UN, and one of the signatories to the influential, pre-9/11 neo-conservative "Project for a New American Century", which openly called for the unilateral removal of Saddam Hussein. I am pleased to announce that, effective 4/9/18, @AmbJohnBolton will be my new National Security Advisor. I am very thankful for the service of General H.R. McMaster who has done an outstanding job & will always remain my friend. There will be an official contact handover on 4/9. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 22, 2018 Described by critics as abrasive, confrontational and, in one case, "unhinged", Bolton was accused of manipulating US intelligence on weapons of mass destruction before the Iraq war and of abusive treatment of his subordinates. He joins the president's new-look top team - Mike Pompeo, the former CIA chief, is Trump's new secretary of state. Gina Haspel becomes the CIA's new spymaster. John Bolton On the UN, 1994: "There is no United Nations. There is an international community that occasionally can be led by the only real power left in the world, and that's the United States, when it suits our interests and when we can get others to go along." On UN bureaucracy, 1994 (scroll to 16.00 in video below): "The secretariat building in New York has 38 storeys. If you lost 10 storeys today, it wouldn't make a bit of difference. The UN is one of the most inefficient... organisations going, Unesco is even worse and things go downhill from there." On UN reform, 2000: "If I were redoing the Security Council today, I'd have one permanent member because that's the real reflection of the distribution of power in the world... the United States." (Bolton later claimed he had been quoted out of context) On Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, 2002: "We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction." On Bush's 'axis of evil' of Iran, Iraq and North Korea, 2002: There is "a hard connection between these regimes - an 'axis' along which flow dangerous weapons and dangerous technology." On Iran in 2009, before the signing of the international nuclear deal: "Ultimately, the only thing that will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons is regime change in Tehran." Advocating US-Israel bombing of Iran, 2015: "Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed. Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran's opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran." On claims Barack Obama is a Muslim, 2016: "King Abdullah of Jordan, who is not simply the Muslim king of a Muslim country - unlike our president."  On the attempted coup against Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, 2016: "Erdogan... wants an Islamic state. The failed military coup was most likely the last gasp of the secular generals. Whether he goes on to declare a Turkish caliphate or not, I don't know, but he has laid the ground." On the Iranian nuclear deal, 2016: "The Iran nuclear deal, in my opinion, was the worst act of appeasement in American history." On Israel, 2017: “The Middle East peace process has long needed clarity and an injection of reality, and Trump has provided it by making the decision to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.” On Russia, 2018: "There needs to be a strategic response to Russia's new nuclear missiles to show our allies in Europe that we will not let Russia push the US or its allies around." Bolton has also appeared in an unusual Russian video in which he talks about loosening gun laws for Russians, NPR reported on Thursday. In 2013, he recorded a video for the Russian group Right to Bear Arms, which was founded politician Alexander Torshin. Torshin is under investigation by Robert Mueller for possibly funneling money into the NRA to help Trump during the 2016 US presidential election. "Thank you for this opportunity to address the Russian people on the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Russian Constitution," Bolton said. "Were the Russian national government to grant a broader right to bear arms to its people, it would be creating a partnership with its citizens that would better allow for the protection of mothers, children and families without in any way compromising the integrity of the Russian state," he added in the video. Others on John Bolton "I think I would rest easy if he was dog catcher in Stone Mountain, Georgia. But maybe not." - Carl Ford, former head of the State Department's intelligence bureau. "It concerns me that Trump would put someone in charge who is unhinged as far as believing in absolute and total intervention." - Rand Paul, Republican senator. "My long-standing support for a fix for the Iran deal may have just died an untimely death." - Mark Dubowitz, Foundation for Defence of Democracies think tank, on Bolton's appointment.  

23 марта, 23:36

Trump Can't Get What He Wants and Doesn't Know Why

The president’s irate criticism of the omnibus spending bill demonstrates his continued attachment to a flawed theory of the presidency.

23 марта, 16:31

Rand Paul Destroys The "Rotten Crumb-nibus" $1.3 Trillion Spending Bill

Authored by S.M.Gibson via TheAntiMedia.org, U.S. Senator Rand Paul is fed up with Congress’ drunken sailor spending style and looked to challenge the bloated spending package as it reached the floor of the Senate overnight. Despite being given approximately 24-hours to read the 2,000-plus pages of financial waste before a possible vote, the senator from Kentucky decided he would not only read the entirety of the bill (likely the only member of the Senate to do so), which he has repeatedly called “terrible” and “rotten,” but also live-tweeted out the highlights of where taxpayer dollars are actually going. As of this writing, Paul is roughly 500 pages into reading the legislation and has already uncovered a mountain of waste. You can read the senator’s tweets below. This story will be updated as more tweets become available. Shame, shame. A pox on both Houses – and parties. $1.3 trillion. Busts budget caps. 2200 pages, with just hours to try to read it. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 //--> //--> //--> Well here it is, all 2,232 budget-busting pages. The House already started votes on it. The Senate is expected to soon. No one has read it. Congress is broken… pic.twitter.com/izvJlUEgUM — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 It’s a good thing we have Republican control of Congress or the Democrats might bust the budget caps, fund planned parenthood and Obamacare, and sneak gun control without due process into an Omni…wait, what? — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 21, 2018 I ran for office because I thought the Obama spending and trillion dollar annual deficits were a real problem for our country and now Republicans are doing the same thing. https://t.co/Fdi9riA3YK — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 FYI- The 2200+ page, budget-busting Omnibus has been printing for two hours in my office and still isn’t done. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018   //--> //--> //--> 1. On page 207. 2000+ pages to go! Reading about the ever wasteful $6 billion National Science Foundation. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 2. Remember the $350,000 NSF spent asking if japanese quail are more sexually promiscuous on cocaine? — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 3. Reading this monstrous bill full of grant programs begun decades ago reminds me of Reagan’s critique: the nearest thing to immortality is a government program. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 226 of terrible, no good, rotten deficit spending bill. I found a kernel of hope: “no funds in this act will be used to support or justify torture.” — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 240 good news for states rights: no funds will be spent to prevent any state’s medical marijuana initiatives. Thank you Congr. Rohrbacher — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 278. (1954 to go!) $961 million to destroy our chemical weapons. Who was it, exactly, who convinced our government to pay billions to develop weapons we now find deplorable? — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 281 of “crumni-bus”. CIA retirement funding. Wouldn’t it be great to amend out the retirement benefits of Trump hater John Brennan and Congressional dissembler James Clapper? pic.twitter.com/rRG6qGKcx6 — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Here are a few more highlights: o $1m for the Cultural Antiquities Task Force o $6.25m for the Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation o $20m for Countering Foreign State Propaganda o $12m for Countering State Disinformation and Pressure — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 o $5m for Vietnam Education Foundation Grants o $2.579m for Commission on Security and Co-operation in Europe o $15m to USAID for promoting international higher education between universities o $2.696bn for International Disaster Assistance — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 o $1.371bn for Contributions to International Organizations o $51m to promote International Family Planning and Reproductive Health o $7m promoting International Conservation o $10m for UN Environmental Programs — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 o $1m for the World Meteorological Organization o $218m for Promoting Democracy Development in Europe (yep..the birthplace of democracy needs promoting) o $25m for International Religious Freedom o $10m for disadvantaged Egyptian Students — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 o $12m for Scholarships for Lebanon o $20m for Middle East Partnership Initiative Scholarship Program o $12m in military funding for Vietnam o $3.5m in nutrition assistance to Laos o $15m in Developmental assistance to China o $10m for Women LEOs in Afghanistan — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 on page 355. NSA prohibited from targeting US persons with FISA 702 program. sounds good —but — privacy advocates fear that NSA still does back-door targeting of US persons. Courageous Senator Wyden has asked how many US persons caught up in supposedly foreign data base. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 But Brennan and Clapper too busy spewing hatred of Trump to respond to legitimate requests. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 357. Sec. 8116 no funds can be used in Iraq in contravention of the War Powers Act sounds good but . . . haven’t we been back in Iraq at war against new foes without any new congressional authorization? — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 348 of terrible, rotten, no-good budget busting bill, a nugget that I wish we obeyed sec. 8103: none of the funds may be used in contravention of the War Powers Act — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 hmm . . . that would mean we shouldn’t be spending $ in undeclared wars in Yemen, Libya, Niger, Somalia, Afghanistan wonder why the party that talks about the rule of law, doesn’t obey the rule of law? — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 and I’m STILL reading. This bill is no @bradthor thriller. Page 365: Overseas contingency operations. aka military slush fund that circumvents budget caps. All told, we’ve spent over a trillion dollars in this budget busting category. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 376 of terrible, rotten, no-good budget busting bill: I found it! I found it! Border security, what President Trump wanted! no . . .wait a minute section says Defense can spend what funds it determines to enhance the border security of Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and Tunisia — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 eyes getting tired but really someone should read this beast. Page 392 sec 9007: no $ shall be spent “for the permanent stationing of US forces in Afghanistan” Wonder what they meant by permanent? Some might argue that after 16 years we approaching the definition of permanent. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 430 of “crumni-bus:” Good news. The government is going to “earn” $350 million by selling oil from Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Bad news is the $ won’t go to reduce the $21 trillion debt. The $ will be instead be spent elsewhere by the Federal government. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 447: a little over $30 billion for Dept of Energy Wonder if anyone would notice if we had no Dept of Energy Put oversight of nuclear waste in DOD and let supply & demand be our Energy policy — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 Page 485: No $ used by the IRS to target citizens for exercising 1st amendment rights. Do you think Lois Lerner knew about this part of the law before she targeted Tea Party groups? pic.twitter.com/t41kZ63oD8 — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 ⚡ “Tweeting the 2018 Omnibus”https://t.co/qgTCivVbrX — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 22, 2018 *  *  * Anti-Media’s independent journalism and analysis takes substantial time, resources, and effort to produce, but we do it because we believe in our message and hope you do, too. If everyone who reads our reporting and finds value in it helps fund it, our future can be much more secure. For as little as $1 and a minute of your time, you can support Anti-Media. Thank you. Click here to support us

11 апреля 2015, 20:18

В президентскую гонку вступил кандидат, готовый покончить с гегемонией США

Сенатор Рэнд Пол официально объявил о своем выдвижении в президенты США вторым среди республиканцев. Сейчас невозможно предсказать ни исход выборов 2016 года, ни даже фамилию республиканского кандидата, но Пол в любом случае занимает уникальное место в американском политическом истеблишменте, потому что реально бросает ему вызов. Доктор Пол идет ломать вашингтонскую машину и закрывать глобальный проект.52-летний сенатор от Кентукки вступает в кампанию под лозунгом «Разрушить вашингтонскую машину! Дать волю американской мечте!». Тут интересно все: и обещание сломать сложившуюся власть партийно-бюрократической элиты, и невольная перекличка с главным китайским лозунгом последних лет, выдвинутым председателем Си Цзиньпином и обещающим достичь «малого процветания» (важный элемент достижения «китайской мечты») как раз к 2020 году, то есть времени, когда завершится срок полномочий президента США, избранного в 2016-м.Конечно, «мечтой» спекулируют многие американские политики, но практически все из реально претендующих на высшую власть считают, что мировая гегемония Америки является неотъемлемой частью американской миссии. А Рэнд Пол – антиинтервенционист, который видит Америку «достаточно сильной, чтобы отразить любую агрессию, и достаточно мудрой, чтобы не ввязываться в ненужные интервенции». Причем эта позиция Пола совершенно логично вытекает из его консерватизма и либертарианства – он один из вождей и кумиров «чайной партии», движения, апеллирующего к наследию отцов-основателей и занимающего сейчас очень серьезные позиции в среде республиканцев. Далеко не все «чайники» столь миролюбивы во внешней политике, но Рэнд еще и сын своего отца, чья известность сыграла немалую роль в быстром взлете молодого сенатора.79-летний Рон Пол больше двух десятилетий провел в Палате представителей, но был там абсолютной «белой вороной», выступая не только за жесткое ограничение власти федерального правительства и его вмешательства в жизнь граждан и права штатов, за кардинальную реформу американской финансово-банковской системы (настаивая на ликвидации Федеральной резервной системы), но и за отказ США от внешней экспансии. Пол голосовал против войны в Ираке, предлагал выйти из ООН и НАТО, а уже во время украинского кризиса осуждал вмешательство США, говоря, что «без спонсируемой США «смены режима» сотни людей не погибли бы в ходе беспорядков, которые последовали за свержением президента Януковича».«Если наша гиперинтервенционалистская политика с большой вероятностью дает нам такую «отдачу», нужна ли нам такая внешняя политика? Оно реально того стоит? Основной акцент нашей критики, другими словами, состоит в том, что внешняя политика правительства ставит под угрозу американский народ и делает его более уязвимым для атак, чем было бы в других случаях... Внешний интервенционализм не приносит выгод гражданам Америки, а является угрозой нашим свободам», – подчеркивал он.Пытаясь опорочить Пола, его называли расистом, гомофобом и антисемитом. При этом сам Рон не согласен считаться даже изоляционистом:«Любой, кто защищает антиинтервенционистскую внешнюю политику, должен быть готов к тому, что его заклеймят изоляционистом. Но я, например, никогда не был изоляционистом... Настоящие изоляционисты – это те, кто изолируют свою страну, настраивая против нее мировое общественное мнение, проповедуя бессмысленную агрессию и войну, которые не имеют ничего общего с легитимной концепцией национальной безопасности».Именно благодаря своей последовательности и идейности Пол стал очень популярен среди либертарианцев, а позднее и консервативного «движения чаепития». Пол-старший – абсолютная противоположность Бушу-старшему или Клинтонам, и более чем символично, что его сын вступает в борьбу за президентство в кампании, которую многие уже считают обреченной стать битвой двух президентских фамилий и династий.Но если Пол-старший антисистемщик (будучи при этом весьма последовательным сторонником как раз исконных американских ценностей, от которых отошли сами американские элиты), то его сын пытается хоть как-то приспособиться к системе, чтобы изменить ее. Осуждать Рэнда Пола за измену принципам, как это делают некоторые из сторонников его отца, не стоит – в США просто невозможно прийти к власти, минуя одну из двух «партий власти»: сама выборная машина построена так, что независимые кандидаты или представители карликовых партий не имеют никаких шансов (максимум, на что они способны – будучи очень богатыми эксцентриками собрать много голосов, как это сделал Рос Перро в 1992-м). Для победы нужна партийная поддержка, и Рэнд Пол пытается ее получить, учитывая при этом неудачный опыт своего отца, который тоже не раз боролся за выдвижение от республиканцев.В 2008 году Рона Пола игнорировали мейнстримные СМИ, но он был очень популярен среди интернет-аудитории, что проявлялось даже в том, что он получал больше всех пожертвований на свою кампанию (и это были именно переводы от обычных граждан). В 2012 году Пол первое время даже лидировал по популярности в опросах среди республиканских избирателей. Но тогда не помогло ни движение чаепития, ни симпатия избирателей – он проиграл праймериз Миту Ромни, который в свою очередь не смог лишить Барака Обаму второго срока.А политическая карьера его сына началась всего двумя годами ранее – в ноябре 2010 года Рэнд был избран сенатором от Кентукки. До этого Пол-младший никогда не занимался политикой – врач, как и его отец, он 18 лет проработал офтальмологом (так что в случае избрания станет вторым президентом с такой профессией наряду с Башаром Асадом). О его президентских перспективах заговорили почти сразу – впрочем, очень многое зависело от внутренних процессов в Республиканской партии. «Чайники» наступали, и как ни сопротивлялась партийная машина, приобретали все большее влияние в партийных структурах и Конгрессе.«Чаепитие» нельзя назвать чисто антиэлитным движением, это скорее сочетание низового протеста с внутриэлитной борьбой: не говоря уже о том, что большинство американцев выступает за ограничение власти правительства, в США достаточны сильны противоречия и между экспансионистскими элитами побережий, и элитами внутренних штатов, между теми, кто давно уже считает себя частью и ядром мировой наднациональной элиты, и сторонниками самодостаточной Америки. Это и не чистой воды изоляционизм, но это очень важный шаг к нему.Понятно, что сейчас в американской элите преобладает интервенционистская позиция – конечно, в разных ее вариантах, но ключевые фигуры как среди республиканцев, так и среди демократов не ставят под сомнение миссию США по «поддержанию порядка» во всем мире. Рэнд Пол, конечно, не столь жесткий антиинтервенционист, как его отец, но все же его внешнеполитическая концепция однозначно резко отличается что от взглядов Клинтон, что от позиций Джеба Буша или Тэда Круза. Во время своего выдвижения Пол заявил, что внешняя политика США «должна порождать стабильность, а не хаос».При этом в отношении украинского кризиса Пол, сначала, до присоединения Крыма, призывавший «не стремиться ущипнуть Россию», в марте прошлого года изменил позицию, потребовав «принять решительные меры против российской агрессии». Жесткая позиция Пола вызвала недоумение у сторонников его отца, который в те же дни выступал с прямо противоположных позиций.Но поведение Рэнда объясняется достаточно просто – сенатор уже тогда готовился к президентской кампании и понимал, что для успешной борьбы за выдвижение ему необходимо будет существенно увеличить число своих сторонников. Отмолчавшись по Крыму и Путину, в отношении которых тогда в Штатах было абсолютное согласие, Пол рисковал маргинализацией. Для России при этом принципиальны не эти высказывания Рэнда Пола, а его общий настрой на отказ от внешней экспансии США, от которого в случае его победы на президентских выборах он в любом случае не сможет отказаться.#{interviewpolit}Пол, конечно, не сможет свернуть американский проект и отказаться от планов глобализации (президент в США все-таки достаточно зависимая фигура), но он сможет существенно повлиять на их корректировку, а значит, и способствовать хотя бы относительному снижению мировой напряженности и смягчению процесса ухода Америки с позиции мирового гегемона. Пол не Обама в том смысле, что он имеет стройную систему взглядов и не откажется от их воплощения. Он боец. Достаточно вспомнить, как два года назад он пытался заблокировать утверждение Бренана директором ЦРУ, выступив в сенате с 11-часовой речью, или то, сколь упрямо он настаивает на аудите ФРС.К тому же внешнеполитическая концепция Пола является лишь продолжением внутриполитической. А она, ограничивая власть федерального правительства и уменьшая его влияние, как раз очень серьезно бьет по интересам и власти глобалистски настроенной части американского истеблишмента. Меньше государства внутри США автоматически означает и меньше империи вовне. Президент-антиинтервенционист проторит дорогу президенту-изоляционисту, но есть ли сейчас шанс на победу Пола?Пока что по всем опросам Клинтон побеждает любого республиканского кандидата. Но это сейчас – ее известность и влияние не сравнятся ни с одним из республиканских кандидатов. Против Клинтон играет слишком многое – президентство однопартийца Обамы, в целом оцениваемое скорее как неудачное, собственный тяжелый характер, слабая работа в качестве госсекретаря. Кроме того, республиканцы сейчас на подъеме, они, по сути, правящая партия везде, кроме Белого дома. У них большинство в обоих палатах Конгресса, власть в большинстве штатов. У них есть огромное желание отыграться – вопрос только в том, сумеют ли они выбрать сильного кандидата.Сейчас у «слонов» нет явного фаворита, хотя понятно, что республиканская элита выдвинула бы Джеба Буша, сына и брата президентов. Но непонятно, насколько он избирабелен, хотя сейчас его рейтинг выше, чем у остальных претендентов-республиканцев, Клинтон он все равно проиграет. Да и внутри Республиканской партии у бывшего губернатора Флориды не все просто.По опросам Буш пока что немногим опережает губернатора Висконсина Скотта Уокера (консерватор, дважды победивший в либеральном штате). Вслед за ними идет группа преследователей, в которую входит и Пол – опросы пока что дают ему с третьего по пятое место.В этой группе бывший губернатор Арканзаса Майк Хакаби (серьезно боровшийся за выдвижение в 2008-м, но уступивший Маккейну), знаменитый нейрохирург чернокожий Бен Карсон (неожиданно включившийся в гонку), губернатор Нью-Джерси Крис Кристи (пару лет назад считавшийся фаворитом) и сенатор Тэд Круз (близкий к «чайной партии»), в конце прошлого месяца первым объявивший о своем официальном выдвижении.Но эти опросы мало о чем говорят, потому что впереди еще много времени – все будет зависеть от борьбы партийных элит и настроений внутри партии, а также способности победить Клинтон. Второго чернокожего претендента подряд (Карсона) республиканцы стране явно не предложат, баптистский пастор Хакаби не способен сплотить республиканцев и свое уже отыграл. Кристи после скандалов сидит в засаде, Круз слишком молод, а есть спрос на опыт.Самый опытный, конечно, Буш, но у него и множество минусов. Главный из которых – само происхождение. Тот факт, что Америка уже открыто уподобляется так любимому отцами-основателями Риму с его соперничающими за власть патрициями, не нравится очень многим избирателям. И в этом смысле кампания Клинтон–Буш сама по себе может стать серьезным ударом по и так уже очень низкому авторитету центральной власти.На борьбу со сложившейся американской номенклатурой (связки политиков с финансово-промышленной олигархией), которую и называют «вашингтонской машиной», и вышел Рэнд Пол. Подтверждением этому является и то, что из всех республиканских кандидатов Пол пользуется наибольшей симпатией среди неопределившихся и беспартийных, то есть его воспринимают шире, чем просто партийного кандидата. Внутри Республиканской партии пока что Пола будут пытаться остановить Уокером – консерватором, который не имеет антиэлитарных убеждений и вполне приемлем для республиканского истеблишмента, но понятно, что главная борьба ему предстоит с Бушем.Она и станет главной интригой нынешней кампании, причем это будет не обычное американское шоу, в котором разница во взглядах имеет второстепенное значение, а принципиальный спор. Пол представляет собой «другую Америку» – ту, которую давно уже оттерли от ключевых рычагов управления. И которая хочет взять реванш – опираясь на ключевые принципы самоуправления, прийти в Вашингтон, чтобы лишить его большей части власти, незаконно присвоенной им у штатов.По исходу противостояния Буш–Пол можно будет судить о том, насколько ситуация в Штатах созрела для подобных революционных изменений. Которые интересны нам в первую очередь теми последствиями, которые они окажут на поведение США на глобальной арене, ведь именно там мы будем заниматься изолированием «атлантической империи», минимизацией разрушительных последствий ее агрессивного мессианства. Было бы неплохо – и для самих США, и для России – если бы новый президент облегчил нам эту задачу. Даже если Пол станет президентом не в 2016-м, а в 2020 году.источник