Is the Trump Administration Collapsing ???

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Is the Trump Administration Collapsing ???


The Stock market is reeling;

Trump is threatening a partial shutdown of the government against the advice of many in his own party; (bizarre as hell since his party is in control of government);

Trump has ordered the pullout of troops from Syria and Afghanistan — against the advice of the Secretary of Defense, General James Mattis, who has given notice that he is RESIGNING;

There is Turmoil in the West Wing of the White House and the President’s Chief of Staff, General Kelly, has RESIGNED !!!

It appears that Faux News and it’s talking heads have more influence on trump policy than the his advisers; and

IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL OF THIS — Mueller, indictments, and guilty pleas appear to be closing-in . . .


Let me see . . . what else . . .

______________________

Will he resign ???

Will he do something really stupid right now, trying to hold-on to impress his base ???

What?


.
 

MASTERBAKER

༺ S❤️PER❤️ ᗰOD ༻
Super Moderator
Don’t ignore the warnings in Gen. Mattis’ resignation letter


By David French

December 21, 2018 | 6:35pm | Updated


Modal Trigger
james-mattis-trump.jpg

James MattisGetty Images
SEE ALSO
upload_2018-12-22_8-31-20.gif
Defense Secretary James Mattis quits
Defenders of President Trump have long argued that his worst impulses can and will be tempered by the good men and women in his administration. And when they listed the good men and women, the name at the top was always James Mattis. The legendary warrior. The honorable Marine.

But what does an honorable Marine do when he has an irreconcilable conflict with his commander?

No, he doesn’t pen anonymous essays for The New York Times. He can’t disobey lawful commands. But he also can’t in good conscience execute plans and policies that he believes are destructive and wrong.

So the honorable man resigns and states the reasons for his resignation.

That’s what Mattis did Thursday, and America should heed his words. His resignation letter is nothing short of a rebuke of the president’s habits, philosophy and decisions.

I want to highlight two excerpts in particular. Both of them send a clear message to the president.

Here’s the first:

“One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies.​

“Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO’s 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9/11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.”​


Its opening sentence is key:

“One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships.”​


MORE ON: JAMES MATTIS
Mattis quit for the same reasons he served and other commentary

Trump boasts about his toughness in apparent response to Mattis' rebuke

US allies express concern over Mattis' departure

Mattis reportedly quit after Trump refused to reverse Syria decision


He next says,

“We cannot protect our interests . . . without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies.” (Emphasis added.)​

Donald Trump is at a pivotal moment. He can heed Gen. Mattis’ warning — delivered publicly, firmly and respectfully — or he can continue down his current, reckless path.

This letter represents America’s most-respected warrior telling the nation that he doesn’t believe the president sees our enemies clearly, understands the importance of our alliances or perceives the necessity of American leadership. We should be deeply troubled.

But this isn’t just a pivotal moment for Trump.

Republicans in Congress believed that Gen. Mattis’ appointment was one of Trump’s best decisions as president, and Mattis’ very presence at the Pentagon reassured the party and (more importantly) the public that an inexperienced, impulsive president would listen to wise counsel.

After reading this letter, will Republicans in Congress retain their faith in Trump’s judgment?

Will they continue to view him as the leader of the Republican Party, the man they defer to in politics and policy?

Now is the time for Republicans in Congress to declare their independence from the Republican in the White House and refuse once and for all to rubber-stamp Donald Trump’s whims and desires.


Gen. Mattis has performed a profoundly important public service. He has served his country in combat. He has served his country in high public office. He has now served it well with his resignation.

Will the nation heed the warning he delivered?

This piece originally appeared in National Review, where David French is a senior writer.
 

MASTERBAKER

༺ S❤️PER❤️ ᗰOD ༻
Super Moderator
48396279_2009749149105286_3768235470345994240_n.jpg

Mary Kopp

Honestly, I do not know if I want to laugh or cry - our country is in such turmoil due to this mans words and actions. very sad - my opinion.
 

MCP

International
International Member
https://theintercept.com/2018/12/22...-antics-are-driven-by-fear-of-robert-mueller/

Keep Your Eyes on the Narcissist: Donald Trump’s Latest Antics Are Driven by Fear of Robert Mueller

GettyImages-1000790194-1545500606.jpg



The lights temporarily go out in the Cabinet Room as U.S. President Donald Trump talks about his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on July 17, 2018 in Washington, D.C.

A malicious loner paralyzed one of the world’s great cities this week. Meanwhile, a drone operator shut down a major international airport.
Donald Trump and the drone enthusiast who halted flights out of London’s Gatwick Airport apparently have a lot in common. Both have been willing to wreak havoc with a callous disregard for the public.
The motivation behind Trump’s pre-holiday assault on Washington — sowing chaos, breaking promises, shutting down the federal government, changing his policies from one minute to the next, forcing out one top official after another, spooking the stock market – is easily explained. Trump is a psychopathic criminal who feels cornered by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, so he is lashing out in every direction.
After two years in office, at least one thing about Trump has become predictable: He reacts violently whenever Mueller appears to be making progress in his investigation. When he hears Mueller’s footsteps, Trump has one go-to move that he cynically uses time and again: He returns to the issues and slogans that energize his base, no matter what the cost. He embraces his base because he believes it will provide him political protection from the fearful Mueller.
Trump has plenty of reason to worry about Mueller these days. The signs are everywhere that Mueller’s investigation is intensifying and closing in on Trump and the crooks around him. It is even possible that Mueller may soon complete his work and issue a final report – or even a criminal indictment of Trump. What’s worse, from Trump’s point of view, is that in January the Democrats will take over the House of Representatives from his Republican enablers, making it far more difficult for him to get rid of Mueller. In fact, the House Intelligence Committee, which has been a laughingstock under Republican rule, will soon have a Democratic chair with subpoena power to conduct an aggressive investigation of Trump, perhaps picking up where Mueller leaves off.

So it is not really surprising that Trump is throwing a tantrum.

In fact, there’s been so much news about the Mueller investigation and related inquiries recently that it has been difficult to keep up.
Just last Tuesday, Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser who made his name with the Trump crowd by leading chants of “lock her up” about Hillary Clinton at the 2016 Republican National Convention, was dressed down by a federal judge who harshly mused about whether Flynn had sold out his country and could be charged with treason. Flynn was in front of the judge to be sentenced for lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador during the transition after the 2016 election, but his sentencing was delayed to give him an opportunity to cooperate more fully with Mueller’s office in order to win a more lenient sentence.
Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer, has repeatedly been in the headlines in recent weeks, and is now emerging as one of Trump’s biggest potential legal problems. In November, Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about a proposed Trump project in Moscow. Cohen had told Congress in 2017 that the deal had been abandoned by January 2016, but in fact the project was still under consideration as late as June 2016, in the middle of the presidential campaign, when Trump was about to become the Republican nominee. In a separate case in New York in December, Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison for a series of criminal acts, including violating campaign finance laws by making payments to two women to keep their past affairs with Trump from becoming public during the presidential campaign. Cohen says that Trump authorized the payments.

Former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, meanwhile, faced Mueller’s wrath in late November, when the special counsel accused Manafort of violating his plea agreement by lying rather than cooperating fully.
In early December, Maria Butina, a young Russian gun rights activist, pleaded guilty to conspiring to act as a foreign agent by infiltrating the conservative movement in the U.S. on Russia’s behalf and has agreed to cooperate with prosecutors. Butina previously worked with Alexander Torshin, a powerful Russian politician with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Paul Erickson, a longtime Republican operative and Butina’s boyfriend, may also be charged, the Daily Beast reported in December. Though not part of the Mueller probe, Butina’s prosecution sheds light on a related web of Russian influence operations aimed at promoting rightwing ideas championed by Trump and his allies.
In December, the parent company of the National Enquirer admitted that it had paid a woman to suppress the story of an affair with Donald Trump during the campaign and reached a deal to cooperate with federal prosecutors in order to avoid prosecution. David Pecker, the chief executive of the magazine’s parent company AMI, has reportedly been granted immunity in exchange for cooperating with prosecutors.
Meanwhile, the House Intelligence Committee agreed to turn over to Mueller the transcripts of testimony by longtime Trump ally Roger Stone. That suggests that Mueller, who has been pursuing links between Stone and WikiLeaks during the campaign, may be considering charging Stone with lying to Congress.

To top it off, there were reports in recent days that an unidentified foreign company has been fighting a grand jury subpoena issued in connection with Mueller’s investigation. Although it’s not clear what role the company might play in Mueller’s probe, a federal appeals court ruled this week that the firm must cooperate with the grand jury, according to press reports.

With so many of his cronies facing serious legal trouble and ready to cooperate with Mueller, it’s no wonder that a weak and frightened Trump has started insulting them in public. He called Cohen a “rat” for being willing to talk.
Bottom line: Anyone who thinks that Trump’s frenzied troop pullouts and government closure this week have anything to do with substantive policy issues hasn’t been paying attention for the last two years. Anyone who thinks that Trump actually cares about immigration, border security, the well-being of American troops, or U.S. involvement in Syria or Afghanistan will be deeply disappointed when he suddenly reverses himself again a few days or weeks from now, if and when he believes such a reversal will help him survive Robert Mueller.
Never forget that everything Trump does is about saving his own skin.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Trump has ordered the pullout of troops from Syria and Afghanistan — against the advice of the Secretary of Defense, General James Mattis, who has given notice that he is RESIGNING;



The U.S. military says a number of service members were killed Wednesday in an explosion while conducting a routine patrol in Syria — the first instance of U.S. casualties since President Donald Trump announced his intention to withdraw troops from the country last month.

The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the rare morning attack in the U.S.-patrolled town of Manbij in northern Syria, saying one of its members carried out a suicide attack and detonated his vest filled with explosives . . . [this] calls into question Trump's claim that IS has been defeated in Syria — his stated reason for pulling 2,000 American troops out of the country.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...led-in-syria-blast/ar-BBSk3aj?ocid=spartanntp


.
 

MCP

International
International Member
https://www.middleeasteye.net/big-story/after-war-whos-going-pay-syrias-reconstruction

000_Nic6090237.jpg


After the war: Who’s going to pay for Syria’s reconstruction?

Paul Cochrane

Russia and the US, Turkey and Iran, China and the EU: all have played a part in the Syrian conflict. But will they help it rebuild?
The seven-year conflict in Syria is still unresolved. Millions of Syrians now live outside its borders, often in refugee camps. Fighting continues across the country. The infrastructure has been wrecked, with an estimated cumulative cost to Syria of $226bn.
But there is widespread international belief that at some point the government of President Bashar al-Assad and its allies will claim victory – and begin rebuilding.

syria%20human%20cost.png


The expectation is that supporters of Damascus, both at home and abroad, will win the lion's share of those reconstruction contracts. Neighbouring countries, such as Lebanon, will also benefit, so the wisdom goes. Contractors, entrepreneurs and financiers could be forgiven for salivating about a potential reconstruction bonanza.
But it is not that straightforward. The Syrian state is financially broke. It's not even clear how Damascus has managed to finance the six-year war without external support (Iran has provided at least $8bn in credit). The national budget for 2017 is just $5bn. Foreign-currency reserves plunged from $21bn in 2010 to a mere $1bn in 2015.
How much will it cost to rebuild Syria?

Most estimates range from $100bn to $350bn, with some as high as $1 trillion. Jihad Yazigi, editor of independent financial paper Syria Report, puts the sum at the lower end of the range. “The World Bank and UN estimate it will need $100bn to repair what has been destroyed, with more needed to get Syria back on track.”

syria-destruction.png


During the early stages of the war, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) estimated it would take 30 years for Syria's economy to bounce back to its pre-2011 level. That timescale has now lengthened.
How much does Syria need?

The world is facing its worst humanitarian crisis since 1945 in Yemen, according to the UN. Global debt is put at $217 trillion, or 327 percent of global GDP, the Institute of International Finance has warned, with many countries still in austerity mode. The UN appealed for $4.6bn for its 2017 Syrian refugee response plan but has had a shortfall of $2.8bn.
Amid such donor fatigue, there is little desire or ability to fund yet another reconstruction project, more so given the international politicisation of the Syria conflict.

syria%20economy.png


Sources at the World Bank told Middle East Eye that it will not pull out its chequebook for Syria. Western governments have signalled that they will not fund any reconstruction without some form of leadership transition (upshot: Assad quits).
That leaves Damascus' allies such as Russia, Iran and China to potentially pick up the tab after spending billions of dollars on the war – but the returns are uncertain.
Rashad al-Kattan, a non-resident fellow at the Atlantic Council and researcher on the Syrian banking sector, told MEE: "Will they be able to convince their private businessmen to go in to Syria, in a transparent way? No. They will have to compete with nasty [Syrian regime] businessmen to stay in business."
What can Syria offer investors?

Not much. In particular, it lacks two key elements which would make it attractive should the country remain under international sanctions

1. A lack of natural resources means Syria does not have the oil reserves that have made Iraq – the world's fourth-largest oil exporter - attractive for reconstruction funds since 2003.
The country's oil reserves have tumbled for years due to depleting reserves, reaching just 375,000 barrels per day prior to the conflict – that is only 0.2 percent of global production. Its gas reserves are also insignificant at 0.1 percent of global production.
Yes, Russia was awarded tenders during the conflict to develop offshore gas fields in the Mediterranean, but the rest of Syria's hydrocarbons are in the northeast, the former stronghold of the Islamic State group and where the Kurds are now campaigning for independence.

2. High tariffs
have been imposed by Damascus on Western imports. That makes their products less competitive compared with imports from countries with which Syria has free-trade agreements. Syria does not have a free-trade agreement, for example, with the EU.
Western multinationals were barely present before the war. Now Syria needs them more than ever, to get foreign direct investment (FDI) levels back to pre-conflict levels, when FDI surged from $110m in 2001 to $2.9bn in 2010.
More obstacles...

3. Multilateral sanctions were imposed by the US, the EU and the UN in 2011. The initial sanctions targeted members of the Syrian government, state-owned institutions, the military, and related individuals and businesses.
Since then, Syrian access to foreign banks and the use of the SWIFT network – a global payment system – has been restricted, effectively cutting Syria off from the international financial sector.
The sanctions were subsequently expanded. The latest round, introduced by the US Treasury in 2016, targeted private companies, including the interests of Rami Makhlouf, cousin of Assad, such as the airline Cham Wings and private security firms.
Western regulators have kept a close eye on Syria, while international financial institutions avoid any transactions due to the risk of being fined for non-compliance.
Kamal Alam, a visiting fellow at RUSI in London, said: "Syria has been asking for the basic sanctions to be removed, but I doubt it will happen any time soon. The sanctions will be a hindrance to reconstruction efforts."

4. No government strategy:
A Syrian inter-ministerial committee, established in 2012, only met for the first time in October 2017 to devise a reconstruction strategy. Some $200m has been allocated for projects by the committee during the past four years, although little has actually been spent, according to Yazigi.
"What is telling is that the Syrian government doesn't have an economic development strategy," he said. "Will they focus on specific sectors? Will they start in specific cities or areas? What are their economic and fiscal policies? We don't know."

5. No money:
Syria's state-owned and 14 private banks have sustained major losses during the war and do not have the liquidity to invest seriously in reconstruction. Deposits in private commercial banks have plunged to $3.5bn in 2016 from $13.8bn in 2010, according to the World Bank.

This has raised questions about the viability of public-private partnerships (PPPs), which have been floated by the government as a reconstruction strategy.

6. No transparency:
Yazigi said that many investors fear that the PPP law, passed in January 2016, could legalise the transfer of state assets to private investors close to the government.
It's a natural conclusion: many of the laws passed during the conflict have been to the benefit of the elite such as Makhlouf, according to Yazigi.
"One strategy is prioritising regime cronies and upscale urban real estate," Yazigi said. "But they don't declare that of course. What they have done is lowered tariffs and the subsidies for the industrial and agricultural sectors, so they've destroyed local production."
Companies linked to reconstruction, such as the Syrian Metals Council, established in 2015, are run by powerful figures such as Mohammed Hamsho.

In May 2015, a law allowed local administrative units to establish fully owned holding companies, thereby boosting infrastructure work. But these units have close links to leadership supporters: for example, Hussein Makhlouf, the minister of local administration, is another relative of Assad and of Rami Makhlouf.
"For local administrative units to work there needs to be complete reform, as everything is centralised," said a member of the UN in Beirut, speaking off the record as he is not allowed to speak to the media.
"The economy is being run by the warlords, four big ones, with 20 to 30 under each. The war economy has become very organised. There's no competition. Each has his own sector. They will keep running the economy."
Sounds familiar? That is because it recalls Lebanon's post-civil war reconstruction in the late 20th century, which benefited politicians, warlords, banks and contractors close to the Beirut elite.
Iran: Syria the geo-political pawn
So what is the likely international response to Syria's need for investment?
Tehran, which has had economic problems of its own, has discovered that Syria is no easy partner. Iran was awarded a mobile-phone licence in January to become Syria's third provider, as a reward for its support during the war.
But that has now been delayed, to the benefit of Syriatel, a telecoms company owned by government ally Rami Makhlouf. It posted a large increase in revenues in 2017, according to Syria Report.
Iran was also awarded rights to mine phosphate near Palmyra, but then a Russian firm started mining in the same area. The UN source said: "Iran complained to the government, but was told: 'You are both our friends'."
000_PO8OE%20%281%29.jpg

The Revolutionary Guard fire a missile from Iran at Islamic State in Syria in June 2017 (AFP/IRIB)

"The Iranians don't have much economic influence. Iran and Syria have signed five memorandums of understanding (MoUs) since the beginning of the year, but how many have been implemented? None."
Khodro and SAIPA, two Iranian car manufacturing plants established in Homs and Damascus, were not awarded preferential tax rates as they might have hoped, making them less competitive than rival Chinese and European brands.
Then there was the MoU with Iran to pipe natural gas to Syria via Iraq - signed in 2011 - which has still not materialised.
For Tehran, as for Damascus' other allies, intervention in Syria was less about opening up new markets for Iranian goods and services, more about regional strategic goals.
Emad Kiyaei, an Iran specialist and principal at consultancy IGD Group in New York, said: "Iran is playing a long-term game for a key ally in the region. Syria was never meant to be a milking cow, as they don't have the resources to milk."
Instead Kiyaei highlights how Iran has worked on reconstruction throughout the war. Central to this has been the commercial arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corp, which reconstructed the Islamic Republic following the devastating Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. "The IGRC has vast engineering capabilities in post-war reconstruction. We are seeing a similar model in Syria."

Then there is Iran's geopolitical standing. Aside from Syria, it is also involved in the Yemen war and is coming into increasing conflict with regional rivals, most notably Saudi Arabia.
"For Iran, the return on investment is not just in capital terms but in strategic influence to have a more permanent foothold," said Kiyaei. "Yes, some MoUs have not worked this time, and prior to the conflict agreements also faltered, but Iran has a presence today in Syria it never had before."
The Marshall Plan, introduced by the US after World War Two to prevent Western Europe from coming under the control of the Soviet Union, is regarded by the international community as a default template for any post-war reconstruction.
Many believe Iran might be trying this approach in Syria. If something similar were to happen there, then it would be driven by Iran's interests to counter Saudi Arabia.
Kiyaei said: "Iran wants to keep Saudi Arabia out of Syria. As the situation stands now, the Saudis will not be able to crawl back into Syria for years. That is worth every billion Iran will drop in Syria."
Russia: Using the Ukraine model

Russia has only just dragged itself out of recession. It has been a central player in the Syrian conflict, initially providing diplomatic support and from September 2015 direct military intervention, reportedly spending $3-$4m a day on the war. But Russia-Syria bilateral trade crashed to $210m in 2015 - little more than a tenth of the $1.8bn of business done in 2011.
Untitled_0.jpg

Russian President Vladimir Putin (and) Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Moscow in October 2015 (AFP)

Still, it has fared better than Tehran at enjoying some of the spoils of war. Russia's focus has been on energy: its lack of overall economic diversification means it possesses limited goods and services to trade with Syria. Yazigi said: "It doesn't mean there are no negotiations, but so far the Russians seem to be getting more than the Iranians."
In October 2017, it was reported that Moscow is to provide financing for some electricity projects – the first case of direct funding from Moscow in many years, according to the Syria Report.

But Russia's reconstruction will be selective to emphasise that it is part of its humanitarian mission, said Andrew Bowen, a Russia specialist and associate at the Initiative for the Study of Emerging Threats at New York University.
"It is about offering a softer image of Russia in the Middle East. If they are to invest, much of it will be a publicity stunt. They want to drag TV crews out to sell a narrative that Russia is rebuilding Syria."
Bowen expects Russia to follow the model used in its other current theatre of conflict: Ukraine.
"Projects in Crimea were given to firms either directly or indirectly connected to oligarchs close to the regime. They are told to invest in certain sectors: build 10 hospitals, 20 schools, and you'll do it for us as a favour. It's hard to see a legitimate business return for these investments."
Lebanon: You have to go through Hezbollah

Hezbollah, which is based in Lebanon and is an ally of Iran, has fought alongside the Syrian army. It now wants reconstruction to benefit its business interests, affiliates and supporters.
There is also the obstacle of the Hezbollah International Financing Prevention Act (HIFPA). The US legislation has prevented blacklisted members of the group, related businesses and individuals from accessing the global financial system - including in Lebanon itself.
Some in Beirut believe that China may offer more hope of rewards. Lebanon has been trying to persuade Beijing to invest in the northern port of Tripoli, which is being sold as a potential logistics hub for goods and materials to enter Syria.
The%20funeral%20of%20Hezbollah%20Mohammad%20Ibrahim%20who%20was%20killed%20in%20Aleppo%20in%20February%202016%20AFP.jpg

The funeral of Hezbollah’s Mohammad Ibrahim, who was killed fighting in Aleppo in February 2016 (AFP)

"It puts Lebanon in a very strategic place in terms of hunting for opportunities in post-war Syria," a Lebanese political source told the Financial Times in July. "We are talking about billions and billions of dollars."
But Wang Kejian, the Chinese ambassador to Lebanon, said at the Issam Fares Institute in Beirut in September: "Chinese shipping companies have limited relations with Lebanon and are not considering Tripoli yet due to economic factors. Maybe after the Syrian crisis ends there will be linkages between Lebanon and the region, and for a transport network."
China: Security interests

Beijing has supported Damascus at the UN, as well as having provided troops and humanitarian aid.
It also has a history when it comes to overseas reconstruction. For example, Beijing became heavily involved in Angola after its 27-year civil war ended in 2002, as part of Beijing's global Resources for Infrastructure strategy.
More than 50 Chinese state companies and 400-plus private firms pitched in and were rewarded with a share of Angola's $25bn per year of oil exports. But despite Damascus' overtures to Beijing, China has, as yet, not responded. It comes down to what Angola, also Iraq, could offer but which Syria cannot: oil.

syria%20oil.png


Yes, Syria is part of China's $1 trillion, 60-country "Belt and Road Initiative" (BRI), a land and maritime infrastructure development strategy covering much of Eurasia. But it is not a member of the Beijing-backed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), so it cannot appeal for funds despite the country's strategic importance to China in the Middle East.
Alam said: "The money trail regarding Syria and China is impacted by the lack of [Syrian] resources." China's real interest in Syria is security, he said, not the economy.
Beijing fears the radicalisation of Uighur Muslims in its unsettled Xinjiang province by some of the 4,000-plus Chinese Uighur fighters returning from Syria and Iraq, where they supported the likes of Islamic State.
Turkey has historically been a supporter of the Uighurs, to Beijing's chagrin, increasing China's need for reliable intelligence in the Middle East.

"The Turks have never been reliable allies when it comes to capturing Uighurs, so Syria is an important monitor of the local situation," said Alam. "If that means economic investment on the ground [in Syria], fine, they can do that, but not like in Africa or other places where China is investing."
Syrian appeals for stronger investment appear to have failed, outside of private initiatives such as the agreement to locally manufacture China's Dongfeng Motor DFM brand in Homs.
Earlier this year, Beijing refused to issue visas to Syrian officials, although it did grant permission for private businessmen, according to the UN source. That echoes how Assad was snubbed during his first state visit to China in 2004, which was abruptly cut short, according to Andrew Tabler, author of In the Lion’s Den, because Beijing wanted to give greater preference to a visit by Israel's then-trade minister.
Imad Moustapha, the Syrian ambassador to China, has been trying to get more support from Beijing.
But Kattan warned: "China has shown no real confidence about investing in Syria, not just due to the regime. They know that investments will go down the drain due to nepotism and corruption. Maybe they've learned the lesson that there's no leverage over the [Syrian] government."
US: Cheque book firmly shut

Washington is unlikely to fund any reconstruction efforts, despite having backed opposition groups during the war. While there was pressure on the US to "pay for what it broke" in Iraq following the 2003 invasion, Syria is different.
"Funding from the Americans is out of the question," said the UN source.

syria%20dollar.png


Both the Obama and Trump administrations have stated that Assad must go, and they will not perform a policy volte face.
There is minimal appetite for funding reconstruction following the scandals in Iraq and Afghanistan over misappropriated funds. A US Congressional commission estimated that between $31bn and $60bn was lost out of a total of $160bn due to fraud and waste.

As of 2013, Washington allocated some $60bn in reconstruction grants for Iraq, while additional investment was generated by releasing Iraqi funds frozen during the Saddam Hussein era.
Despite ongoing security problems, Baghdad was still able to raise reconstruction funds from its huge oil reserves. In 2016 it produced an estimated 3.6m barrels per day (bpd) to fund its annual budget of close to $100bn.
By comparison, Syria was producing 375,000 bpd in 2010, the last available figures before the conflict and only around 0.2 percent of the global total. That number has now dropped: Damascus' budget was only $5bn in 2016.
Egypt: Problems of its own
Cairo has had a tumultuous relationship with Syria during the past few years.
Relations deteriorated in 2013 when Egypt backed the Syrian opposition, shut the Syrian embassy in Cairo, recalled its own charge d'affaires from Damascus and tried to raise funds for the rebels.
000_Nic6063455.jpg

An anti-Assad protest outside the Syrian embassy in Cairo in February 2012 (AFP)

Ties improved when president Mohamed Morsi was deposed in 2013 and Abdel Fattah al-Sisi assumed power.
Since then, Cairo has had to perform a balancing act, caught as it is between Damascus and allies including the US and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which numbers Saudi Arabia and the UAE among its members.
Egypt sent business delegations to Syria in August 2017 and is keen to normalise relations, which would help Damascus. But with its economy struggling and the country in debt, Egypt can offer only token support and private sector investment.

Cairo itself has tried in vain to attract investors following the 2011 uprising, despite support from the IMF and the GCC. In 2015, it organised the Egypt Economic Development Conference in Sharm el Sheikh, which was publicised as Egypt's Marshall Plan. It turned out to be a damp squib.
Kattan said the gathering reminded him of what may now happen in Syria: "They invited all these multinationals, and the UAE and Saudi Arabia supported them. Billions of dollars in investments were announced, but not much materialised.
"Even if Syria reaches the same stage, with a development conference in April 2018, we will hear of billions pledged, but look at the track record. Maybe only 20-30 percent materialises."
The rest of the Arab world: We want change first

Turkey and members of the GCC have long wanted Assad out. If he had gone, then perhaps these nations and the West would have been willing to bankroll the new Syria. But he hasn't gone. And they won’t cough up cash.
Turkish%20military%20forces%20block%20the%20Mursitpinar%20crossing%20gate%20on%20the%20Syrian%20border%20in%20September%202014%20%28AFP%29.jpg

Turkish military forces block the Mursitpinar crossing on the Syrian border in September 2014 (AFP)

The UN source said: "There is only the GCC left, which may offer $10bn to $15bn if there is a proper political transition and all agree Assad will stay."
But the source said that there was "no way" that the GCC would give contracts and financing to any entity – such as the Syrian government – that has close ties to Shia players such as Hezbollah and Iran.
Alam said the counter-argument is that the GCC may, grudgingly, provide funds and private investment to counter the influence of Tehran and the Shia in Syria. But if that is to happen, then the GCC would have to do a U-turn on its position on Assad.

The same would apply to Ankara, which has opposed Damascus while paying $12.5bn during the conflict to host 3.2 million Syrian refugees within its own borders.
Atilla Yesilada, an Istanbul-based analyst at Global Source Partners, an international business advisory service, said that while Turkey was a natural choice to lead economic reconstruction, political obstacles remained.
"Turkey has no interest in ending the Syrian war and will do its best or worst to keep it going, through proxy or direct intervention, for a solution. Then again, Ankara is relatively pragmatic when it comes to business interests, especially if there is a transitional government in Syria, which would be more palatable to the world."
Europe: Refugees as leverage

The EU is keen to contain the flow of refugees to Europe itself and Syria's neighbours. At present there are more than 970,000 Syrian asylum seekers in EU countries.
The EU is also a key business partner for Syria. In 2016 EU trade with Syria came in at $500m - just under seven percent of what it was before the war in 2010 at $7.2bn.
Would an extensive programme of rebuilding encourage the five million-plus refugees who left Syria to return home?
A%20migrant%20from%20Syria%20and%20her%20child%20arrive%20on%20Lesbos%20in%20April%202015%20%28AFP%29.jpg

A refugee from Syria and her child arrive on Lesbos, Greece, in April 2015 (AFP)

Kattan said: "Damascus has two cards on table: the refugees, as a number of EU countries would like them sent back home, which is why Germany is sending a lot of aid money; and intelligence-sharing on terrorist entities, as happened post-11 September 2001.
"Some Western governments have been visiting Damascus to restart those relations bilaterally outside of the EU framework. It is opportunistic but important for the government."
The EU has said that it wants to contribute to the "stabilisation and early recovery of areas where violence has decreased".

Kattan observed: "'Early recovery' in my mind is reconstruction and development."
But there is one caveat: the EU is another party that wants political transition – that is, Assad to relinquish power. It prompted Moscow to accuse Brussels of "politicising aid".
The same conditions have also been stipulated by western aid organisations, which met in Brussels in April 2017. In a joint statement, CARE International, the International Rescue Committee, Norwegian Refugee Council, Oxfam and Save the Children said that “international support should be conditional on a political solution being agreed, respect for human rights and protection of an independent civil society. Absent these conditions, a move towards reconstruction assistance risks doing more harm than good.”
Likewise, Assad has said the EU has no role to play in Syria’s reconstruction.
As things stand, smaller-scale investments from Europe seem the best hope. In October, Syria's finance ministry said it was preparing to relaunch bilateral business councils with several countries it considers "friendly," including the Czech Republic.
Alam said: "Syria doesn't need massive amounts from outside as people are predicting. They can get by with small infrastructure projects from outside and do the rest themselves.
"Indonesia has donated a few hospitals and ambulances, and the Malays have done the same. It is such small economic activity which keeps the government relevant. France and Europe are mistaken if they think they can blackmail Syria on their terms."
Multinationals: Deterred by tarrifs

Spending power among Syria's consumers is unsurprisingly weak after six years of conflict.
GDP in 2016 was only $15bn – a quarter of what it was in 2010. More than 80 percent of Syrians live below the poverty line, according to the UN. Even before the conflict, the market was one of mass volume. Low purchasing power means low profit margins for businesses.
A%20newly-reopened%20shop%20amid%20the%20ruins%20of%20Aleppo%20in%20July%202017%20%28AFP%29.jpg

A newly-reopened shop amid the ruins of Aleppo in July 2017 (AFP)

That has, at least, made it attractive for second- and third-tier trading countries such as Brazil, India, South Africa, Malaysia, Algeria and Egypt.
Alam said: "The success of the Syrian government before the war was to open up the economy to countries that were not trading much. They [Damascus] are just reviving what they already had - nothing earth-shattering, yet it all adds up."
Kattan cited tariffs and the difficulties of operating in Syria as obstacles for Western FDI. "On the business level, look at the economic perspective prior to 2011. Why were no Western companies present, apart from in energy? Or the Gulf ones, which were affiliated with the regime when things were rosy?
"Now they have to convince multinationals to come in to make money. But the government could expropriate investments or property rights."
The ever-present dominance of warlords and leadership cronies are also deterrents, as are the international sanctions.
Syrians abroad: Are they welcome back?

The Syrian International Business Association (SIBA) was established in July in Marseilles. Sponsored by the World Bank, it is an initiative to encourage Syrian expatriate businessmen to invest in reconstruction.
Riad al-Khouri, director (Middle East) at political risk adviser GeoEconomica based in Amman, said it has potential.

"There is close to $100bn of Syrian money outside of the country," he said. "A lot of this money will come back, as the government needs the diaspora much more than before, so there's an opportunity. The financing will come much quicker than people expect."
Such investment would fit into Damascus' apparent strategy of appealing for small investments from multiple players. However the country is sending mixed messages, according to Yazigi.
While some government members have appealed to expatriates to re-invest and offered incentives, such as industrialists in Egypt, state-owned local press has denounced businessmen who fled Syria as traitors. "There are a lot of conflicting interests," said Yazigi.
In October, Damascus froze the assets of Imad Ghreiwati, a businessman who made his fortune from ties to the government but headed for the UAE once the conflict broke out. "It is a message sent to investors: anyone not supporting us can't play with us," said Yazigi.
So where does this leave the reconstruction of Syria?

Unless there are major policy U-turns by the EU, the US and Turkey towards the Assad government then Syria is not going to get the tens of billions of dollars needed to get the country back on its feet. "The narrative that billions [of dollars] will come is wishful thinking," said Kattan.
Instead, Syria will have to rely on small-scale investments and infrastructure developments to push itself along. Reconstruction will only be a long-term project – and that is only if Damascus eventually develops a strategy.
Alam said: "It will be small investments and a gradual regeneration of businesses. No game-changers, but it will keep the local economy going."
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
MEDIA

10/17/2019 04:04 AM EDT

Anthony Scaramucci Predicts 20+ Senate Republicans Are About To Turn On Trump

The former White House communications director said the president knows "the future does not look
good for him."

Anthony Scaramucci says President Donald Trump’s “meltdown” is going to get a whole lot worse.

On Wednesday night, the former White House communications director who was fired after just 10 days on the job said on CNN that Trump was looking at his future “and the future does not look good for him.”

“As more facts unfold about Syria, as more facts unfold about the people that have been arrested recently, and the conjoinment of all those issues over there, it’s going to be devastating for the president,” he said.

Scaramucci also predicted that Republicans in the Senate will soon turn on Trump and force him out.

“The criminal activity will be so great that the GOP, and there will be 20-plus senators who’ll say, ‘OK, I can’t take this anymore,’” he said.

Trump will then face a moment like President Richard Nixon did in 1974: Republicans in the Senate will break the news to him that he’s got to go or else he’ll lose an impeachment trial.

“That will eventually happen,” Scaramucci said. “And that’s the reason why he’s pressurized.”
 

Mrfreddygoodbud

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
yes in the real world his whole fuckin team blew the fuck up and this whole presidency is one fuckin big global joke...

but under a pseudo global parasitic waning elite cac supremecist world..

He is doing just fine and has a great chance of winning the presidency....

its crazy how this whole system we put so much energy into, thrives off of bullshit propaganda and illusions..
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
He is doing just fine and has a great chance of winning the presidency....

Naw, naw GoodBud, he’s not doing fine; we’re watching the UnGotDamn RAVELING !!!!

Those around him who need to save their own asses are going to bail !!! And, we're watching live. This revolution resolution IS BEING TELEVISED !!!
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
we’re watching the UnGotDamn RAVELING !!!!



POLITICS
The Unraveling of Donald Trump
As the impeachment inquiry intensifies, some associates of the president predict that his already erratic behavior is going to get worse.


The Atlantic
PETER NICHOLAS
October18, 2019


President Donald Trump points his finger at the crowd at a recent 2020 campaign rally.
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / GETTY

The country is entering a new and precarious phase, in which the central question about President Donald Trump is not whether he is coming unstrung, but rather just how unstrung he is going to get.

The boiling mind of Trump has spawned a cottage industry for cognitive experts who have questioned whether he is, well, all there. But as the impeachment inquiry barrels ahead on Capitol Hill, several associates of the president, including former White House aides, worry that his behavior is likely to get worse.

Angered by the proceedings, unencumbered by aides willing to question his judgment, and more and more isolated in the West Wing, Trump is apt to lash out more at enemies imagined and real, these people told me. Conduct that has long been unsettling figures to deteriorate as Trump comes under mounting stress. What unfolded Wednesday inside the West Wing’s walls might be only a foretaste of what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described that day, after a meeting with Trump, as a presidential “meltdown.”

“He’s grown more comfortable in the job and less willing to assimilate new information and trust new advisers,” a former White House official told me. “He’s decided to throw caution to the wind and go it alone, especially when he’s stressed and feels under attack and threatened in various ways. Then his worst impulses and vices shine through.”

On Wednesday alone,
  • he peddled a discredited conspiracy theory in an Oval Office meeting with his Italian counterpart;
  • threw a tantrum during the meeting with Pelosi;
  • dismissed former Defense Secretary James Mattis as “the world’s most overrated general”; and
  • released a letter he wrote to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that was so bizarre, people weren’t convinced it was real (“Don’t be a tough guy. Don’t be a fool!”).
At least one associate has confronted Trump recently about his judgment, specifically his decision to repeatedly attack the Biden family. Isn’t it unseemly for a president to target Joe Biden’s son Hunter? Wouldn’t it be smarter, at least, to outsource this sort of attack to someone else?

According to a person close to the president, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss private conversations, Trump’s explanation was that he acts as any normal person might, and that he won’t be moved by what he calls “political correctness.” “You don’t get it,” Trump said.

Most presidents in the modern era have had emotional moorings to sustain them during crises. President Franklin D. Roosevelt fussed over his stamp collection as he plotted victory in World War II. President Barack Obama would play miniature golf with his young daughters and basketball with old friends from Hawaii as he navigated the financial crisis. In Trump’s world, these sorts of leavening influences don’t seem to exist. Apparently absent from his life are traditional family bonds, creative outlets and hobbies, even exercise. (While some of his children are visible and vocal advocates for their father, Trump’s relationships with them are notoriously complex.) Splayed out on Twitter, his life has always seemed a limitless diet of Fox & Friends episodes and interpersonal disputes. Long gone are the trusted aides with whom he seemed comfortable (and who were willing to speak their mind), such as the senior adviser Hope Hicks.


“I think what we’re viewing, if you think about the human side of it, is the man has no life. He just has no life,” the person close to him told me.
A common question these days is whether Trump has an impairment of some sort that might explain his behavior. Writing in The Atlantic earlier this month, the lawyer George Conway, who is married to the Trump aide Kellyanne Conway, described how some health professionals have ascribed two personality disorders to Trump: pathological narcissism and antisocial personality disorder.
Read: How impeachment is testing Trump’s focus

But the latest concerns about Trump are just a crescendo in a long-running drama. Sam Nunberg, a former 2016 Trump-campaign aide, told me that a colleague once approached him and asked if Trump was losing it, saying they had just had the same conversation twice. Nunberg dismissed such concerns, assuring him that it was only because Trump likely wasn’t paying attention the first time.
His speech has changed over time, too. Software programs show that Trump currently speaks at a fourth-to-sixth-grade level. (Politicians are practiced at speaking to wide swaths of Americans, but Obama, for example, according to those speech analyses, spoke at an 11th-grade level in his final news conference as president.) A study last year by two University of Pittsburgh professors examining Trump’s appearances on Fox News found that the quality of his speech was worsening. They studied his comments over a seven-year period ending in 2017—just as his presidency began—and found that he had begun using substantially more “filler words”such as umand uh, though the authors did not conclude that the change signaled cognitive decline.


Even a casual observer can see the disordered and nonlinear thinking behind Trump’s speech. A case in point was Trump’s rally last week in Minneapolis. Within minutes of taking the stage, Trump launched, without explanation, into a dramatic reading of what he imagined was the pillow talk between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, a pair of former FBI officials who had exchanged text messages critical of the president. He gave no context as to why he was talking about them, leaving it to the audience to fill in the Mall of America–size blanks. Trump never even mentioned that they had worked for the FBI or that Strzok was at one point involved in the Russia investigation—just that they were “lovers” who disliked him. (Still, as theater, it seemed to work. When Trump cooed, “Oh, God. I love you, Lisa!” the audience laughed appreciatively.)

Other people who have worked with Trump in the White House and on the 2016 campaign pushed back on the notion that his mental acuity has eroded over time. “Every president has a super-exaggerated ego and personality in some way,” Tom Bossert, Trump’s former homeland-security adviser and a former official in President George W. Bush’s administration, told me. I asked him if presidents or presidential candidates should be subject to a fitness test measuring whether they’re up to the job. Various psychologists have floated this idea in response to Trump’s behavior. “I’m not sure what the fitness standard would reveal about people who are already wired that way,” Bossert said.

Conventional wisdom in Washington is that impeachment won’t lead to Trump’s removal, but that view rests on Republicans continuing to stay by his side. Even those most loyal to Trump could lose patience if his rash decision making collides with their own interests. Trump’s impulsive decision to pull U.S. troops out of northern Syria last week, setting the stage for Turkey’s attack on America’s Kurdish partners, has already infuriated some of his closest friends in Congress. It was soon after the House, in an overwhelming bipartisan vote, rebuked his Syria gambit on Wednesday that Trump lashed out at Pelosi, prompting her to abruptly walk out of their meeting. (Democrats, of course, are seizing the opportunity. “For those who don’t do politics professionally or even follow it closely: It is getting worse. He is getting worse,” Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii tweeted last night.)

At least one lawmaker thinks that Republicans could hit a tipping point—though he’s a Democrat. Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland told me that it might be easier for Republicans to concede that Trump is unwell than that he’s a criminal who violated his constitutional oath by committing “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The path to removing Trump, in this formulation, might not be impeachment, but the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.

Raskin, a former constitutional-law professor, is sponsoring a bill aimed at clarifying a provision of that amendment—a vehicle for removing a president who is unable to carry out his duties, with the consent of the vice president—by shifting responsibility for making such a judgment from the Cabinet to a panel created expressly for that purpose.

“It may be easier for at least certain Republican colleagues just to admit that the president is acting increasingly incapable of meeting the arduous tasks and duties of his office,” Raskin told me.

That’s still a lot to ask of Republican lawmakers who fully grasp Trump’s mystic hold on his political coalition and fear backlash. The question is whether Trump’s base starts to notice, or care, that the man it elected, facing pressures he’s never seen before, is devolving unmistakably into a different sort of man.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.




.
 
Top