thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-03-15--Capitalism is at war with society

Capitalism is at war with society

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible .
Share with kin , friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise .
The coronavirus pandemic is developing into a social , economic and political crisis on a scale that is without precedent .
Yesterday ’ s drastic fall in global markets and especially in the United States , where Wall Street recorded its greatest one-day loss since 1987 , arose from the recognition that the pandemic will massively impact the world economy and profoundly disrupt the existing social order .
Estimates of the probable scale of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anxiety .
The total number of confirmed infections worldwide is approaching 150,000 and rising exponentially , but this vastly understates reality .
Due to the lack of adequate testing and the long latency period before symptoms , the actual number is far higher .
The official death toll is now over 5,000 , and the lives of countless millions throughout the world are in danger .
Italy is deepening its nationwide lockdown , with virtually all stores closed and streets emptied .
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that 60 to 70 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaning that millions will require intensive care or die .
Iran has reportedly begun digging mass graves as the epidemic spirals out of control .
France is closing all schools and universities .
In the United States , major public sporting and entertainment events have been canceled , and grocery stores have quickly run out of basic necessities .
The coronavirus pandemic has exposed the inability of the capitalist system to deal with such a crisis .
Governments throughout the world have responded with a staggering level of incompetence and disarray .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreseeable disaster .
Health care systems , starved of resources , are overwhelmed .
The complete incapacity of the United States , the richest capitalist country in the world , to respond to this emergency is an indictment of a government and of the entire economic system .
In his national address on Wednesday night , President Donald Trump epitomized the indifference of the capitalist oligarchy to the lives of millions of people .
His nationalist diatribe placed blame for the “ foreign virus ” on China and Europe .
Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president , focused entirely on the impact of the crisis on the stock market , proclaimed that everything was fine , that coronavirus was not a serious threat .
He could not bring himself to express an ounce of sympathy for the masses of people in the United States and internationally who are seeing their lives upended .
He announced no measures to address the absence of testing or the extreme shortage of health care facilities .
It is not , however , just a matter of the sociopathic personality of the present @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the product of American capitalism , of a society dominated by unprecedented levels of inequality , in which vast wealth has been accumulated by the financial elite at the expense of everything else .
The class character of the government response was starkly revealed on Thursday .
The Federal Reserve , in a desperate and futile attempt to counteract the selloff on Wall Street , announced that it was allocating $ 1.5 trillion to buy up stocks and other assets .
The US Congress , on the other hand , is haggling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those who are thrown out of work or otherwise impacted—a drop in the bucket compared to what is urgently required .
The outbreak of the pandemic and its consequences can only be understood within the context of the development of global capitalism over the past four decades .
These four decades have revealed all the socially reactionary characteristics of a system based on private ownership of the means of production , in which all considerations of social need are subordinated to the drive for profit and vast personal wealth .
The motto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If the accumulation of our billions requires the death of millions , so be it.
” In 1987 , UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher infamously declared that “ There is no such thing as society.
” Thatcher ’ s dictum was the justification for a wholesale attack on social programs and infrastructure and a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich .
For four decades , the ruling elites , above all in the United States , have engaged in social plunder .
All policy has been based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the expense of society .
Both political parties , Democrat and Republican , have presided over this social arson .
For the past three years , as Trump has waged his assault on workers and immigrants , the Democrats proclaimed that the overriding threat to the American people came from Russia .
All social opposition to the Trump regime was subordinated to the reactionary agenda of the military and intelligence agencies .
Now we see the consequences .
More than any other country , the United States has revealed a level of unpreparedness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Thursday , the director of the Ohio Health Department stated that evidence of community spread indicates that one percent of residents in the state are infected , or 117,000 people .
Only five individuals have actually tested positive .
The Centers for Disease Control has the capacity to process only 300 to 350 tests a day .
In practice it is doing even less .
This very week , even as the contagion spread throughout the country , there were only eight tests on Tuesday and none on Wednesday .
Anthony Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Allergy and Infectious Disease , acknowledged in testimony before Congress on Thursday that “ the system is not really geared to what we need right now… That is failing.
” As the disease spreads , the health care system in the United States will be quickly overwhelmed .
The number of hospital beds and intensive care units is utterly inadequate to meet the expected demand , meaning that tens of thousands of people will simply not be able to get care , vastly increasing the death toll .
Health care workers face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ masks and other essential gear , exposing themselves and their patients to heightened risk .
Workplaces are not equipped to ensure safety , with many workers reporting unsanitary conditions , a lack of soap and even hot water .
On Thursday , an autoworker at a Fiat Chrysler plant in Indiana tested positive for the disease , but the plant , a critical bottleneck for FCA production , is being kept open .
Service workers , most of whom have no paid sick leave , are dangerously exposed .
As schools and colleges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of students face eviction from their dormitories with no plans in place for alternative housing .
Parents are being forced to take unpaid time off work or find childcare with nothing in place to assist them .
The same story is repeated in every country .
Governments are floundering to safeguard the profits of corporations as millions face the consequences with no assistance .
There is no coordination or plan to address the pandemic .
The World Health Organization , which supposedly exists to coordinate responses to health emergencies , is powerless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universally ignored .
Precious time was wasted as the global pandemic gathered fatal momentum .
When the pandemic first manifested itself in Wuhan , Washington was interested in the development only from the standpoint of how the crisis in China might be exploited to the geopolitical advantage of the United States .
The media paid only limited attention to the threat and issued no calls for urgent and globally coordinated action .
In contrast , basing itself on an international socialist perspective that prioritizes the common universal interests of the working class , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and its affiliated Socialist Equality parties recognized the danger and sounded the alarm .
The World Socialist Web Site warned this past January 28 : “ The outbreak has exposed the enormous vulnerability of contemporary society to new strains of infectious disease , dangers for which no capitalist government has adequately prepared.
” The WSWS wrote that the urgent need for internationally coordinated action to fight the pandemic was undermined by national conflicts : Six critical weeks have been wasted by the ruling oligarchs and the global threat has grown exponentially .
Action @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that must guide the response to the crisis is that the needs of the working people of the world must take absolute and unconditional priority over all considerations of corporate profit and private capitalist wealth .
The Socialist Equality Party and the International Committee of the Fourth International demand a massive , internationally coordinated mobilization of social resources to combat the coronavirus , including the allocation of trillions of dollars to ensure access to testing and the highest-quality medical care for all those infected .
The class-based and profit-driven system of health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and universal coverage .
A massive public works program must be initiated to produce desperately needed medical equipment .
Immediate measures must be taken to safeguard the health of workers .
Workplaces where there is a danger of the spread of the virus must be shut down , with full income to those affected .
Where schools are closed , parents must be given paid time off .
College students forced out of dormitories must be provided safe housing .
There must be a moratorium on evictions and utility shutoffs , combined with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forms of emergency assistance .
All those who claim , like Bernie Sanders , that anything can be done without a frontal assault on the capitalist system itself are peddling lies .
In a speech on Thursday , Sanders declared that as many as 400,000 could die from the coronavirus , and that the crisis “ is on a scale of a major war.
” Sanders , however , repeated his claim that measures to address the crisis can be achieved through the actions of both the Democratic and Republican parties .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the urgent necessity of a mass political movement of the working class in the United States and internationally against capitalism and for the socialist reorganization of world economy .
What we are witnessing is the consequence of a society organized on the basis of profit .
A society in which three individuals own more than half the population is incapable of resolving any of the great problems confronting mankind .
The giant banks and corporations must be placed under public ownership and democratic control .
The vast fortunes of the rich must be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universal access to health care , housing , utilities and other social needs .
All of economic life must be reorganized on the basis of a global , planned economy , removing the obstacle of private property and the profit motive .
The last consideration on anyone ’ s minds should be the impact on corporate profits and Wall Street share values .
The pandemic has laid bare the inescapable necessity of a fundamental restructuring of society .
This is not the first time in history that a great crisis has demonstrated that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against inequality .
In an important new book , The Great Leveler : Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century , historian Walter Scheidel writes : “ Throughout recorded history , the most powerful leveling invariably resulted from the most powerful shocks .
Four different kinds of violent ruptures have flattened inequality : mass mobilization warfare , transformative revolution , state failure , and lethal pandemics .
I call these the Four Horsemen of Leveling.
” Each of these Horsemen is now visible .
The future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is at war with society .
The working class , under the banner of international socialism , must wage war against capitalism .
The authors of this editorial are senior members of the wsws.org publishing collective , a Marxian organization .
While using Marxian methods of historical analysis , and working toward a non-capitalist future , The Greanville Post does not endorse Trotkyism or any other specific faction .
Thus we republish only those views we regard as useful and largely free of sectarian distortions .
In a world in which truth and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equality and peace are increasingly difficult to discern due to the proliferation of ideologies , information and disinformation sources , and the confusing imperfections and contradictions of many progressive voices , we try hard to give our audience the most reliable roadmap to effective struggle .

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
Joseph Kishore and David North
The coronavirus pandemic crisis intensifies
Excerpts
The coronavirus pandemic is developing into a social, economic and political crisis on a scale that is without precedent. Yesterday’s drastic fall in global markets and especially in the United States, where Wall Street recorded its greatest one-day loss since 1987, arose from the recognition that the pandemic will massively impact the world economy and profoundly disrupt the existing social order.
Estimates of the probable scale of deaths from the illness are causing growing anxiety. The total number of confirmed infections worldwide is approaching 150,000 and rising exponentially, but this vastly understates reality. Due to the lack of adequate testing and the long latency period before symptoms, the actual number is far higher. The official death toll is now over 5,000, and the lives of countless millions throughout the world are in danger.
Italy is deepening its nationwide lockdown, with virtually all stores closed and streets emptied. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that 60 to 70 percent of the population will become infected, meaning that millions will require intensive care or die. Iran has reportedly begun digging mass graves as the epidemic spirals out of control. France is closing all schools and universities. In the United States, major public sporting and entertainment events have been canceled, and grocery stores have quickly run out of basic necessities.
The coronavirus pandemic has exposed the inability of the capitalist system to deal with such a crisis. Governments throughout the world have responded with a staggering level of incompetence and disarray. No preparations have been made for an entirely foreseeable disaster. Health care systems, starved of resources, are overwhelmed.
The complete incapacity of the United States, the richest capitalist country in the world, to respond to this emergency is an indictment of a government and of the entire economic system.
In his national address on Wednesday night, President Donald Trump epitomized the indifference of the capitalist oligarchy to the lives of millions of people. His nationalist diatribe placed blame for the “foreign virus” on China and Europe.
Trump’s speech came after weeks in which the president, focused entirely on the impact of the crisis on the stock market, proclaimed that everything was fine, that coronavirus was not a serious threat. He could not bring himself to express an ounce of sympathy for the masses of people in the United States and internationally who are seeing their lives upended. He announced no measures to address the absence of testing or the extreme shortage of health care facilities.
It is not, however, just a matter of the sociopathic personality of the present occupant of the White House. Trump is the product of American capitalism, of a society dominated by unprecedented levels of inequality, in which vast wealth has been accumulated by the financial elite at the expense of everything else.
The class character of the government response was starkly revealed on Thursday. The Federal Reserve, in a desperate and futile attempt to counteract the selloff on Wall Street, announced that it was allocating $1.5 trillion to buy up stocks and other assets. The US Congress, on the other hand, is haggling over a few billion dollars in assistance to those who are thrown out of work or otherwise impacted—a drop in the bucket compared to what is urgently required.
The outbreak of the pandemic and its consequences can only be understood within the context of the development of global capitalism over the past four decades. These four decades have revealed all the socially reactionary characteristics of a system based on private ownership of the means of production, in which all considerations of social need are subordinated to the drive for profit and vast personal wealth. The motto of the capitalist oligarchy is: “If the accumulation of our billions requires the death of millions, so be it.”
In 1987, UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher infamously declared that “There is no such thing as society.” Thatcher’s dictum was the justification for a wholesale attack on social programs and infrastructure and a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich. For four decades, the ruling elites, above all in the United States, have engaged in social plunder. All policy has been based on the private enrichment of the oligarchs at the expense of society.
Both political parties, Democrat and Republican, have presided over this social arson. For the past three years, as Trump has waged his assault on workers and immigrants, the Democrats proclaimed that the overriding threat to the American people came from Russia. All social opposition to the Trump regime was subordinated to the reactionary agenda of the military and intelligence agencies.
Now we see the consequences. More than any other country, the United States has revealed a level of unpreparedness that is nothing less than criminal. On Thursday, the director of the Ohio Health Department stated that evidence of community spread indicates that one percent of residents in the state are infected, or 117,000 people. Only five individuals have actually tested positive.
The Centers for Disease Control has the capacity to process only 300 to 350 tests a day. In practice it is doing even less. This very week, even as the contagion spread throughout the country, there were only eight tests on Tuesday and none on Wednesday. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, acknowledged in testimony before Congress on Thursday that “the system is not really geared to what we need right now… That is failing.”
As the disease spreads, the health care system in the United States will be quickly overwhelmed. The number of hospital beds and intensive care units is utterly inadequate to meet the expected demand, meaning that tens of thousands of people will simply not be able to get care, vastly increasing the death toll. Health care workers face a shortage of critical supplies, including masks and other essential gear, exposing themselves and their patients to heightened risk.
Workplaces are not equipped to ensure safety, with many workers reporting unsanitary conditions, a lack of soap and even hot water. On Thursday, an autoworker at a Fiat Chrysler plant in Indiana tested positive for the disease, but the plant, a critical bottleneck for FCA production, is being kept open. Service workers, most of whom have no paid sick leave, are dangerously exposed.
As schools and colleges are being closed, hundreds of thousands of students face eviction from their dormitories with no plans in place for alternative housing. Parents are being forced to take unpaid time off work or find childcare with nothing in place to assist them.
The same story is repeated in every country. Governments are floundering to safeguard the profits of corporations as millions face the consequences with no assistance. There is no coordination or plan to address the pandemic. The World Health Organization, which supposedly exists to coordinate responses to health emergencies, is powerless, and its guidelines and regulations are being universally ignored.
Precious time was wasted as the global pandemic gathered fatal momentum. When the pandemic first manifested itself in Wuhan, Washington was interested in the development only from the standpoint of how the crisis in China might be exploited to the geopolitical advantage of the United States. The media paid only limited attention to the threat and issued no calls for urgent and globally coordinated action.
In contrast, basing itself on an international socialist perspective that prioritizes the common universal interests of the working class, the International Committee of the Fourth International and its affiliated Socialist Equality parties recognized the danger and sounded the alarm. The World Socialist Web Site warned this past January 28: “The outbreak has exposed the enormous vulnerability of contemporary society to new strains of infectious disease, dangers for which no capitalist government has adequately prepared.” The WSWS wrote that the urgent need for internationally coordinated action to fight the pandemic was undermined by national conflicts:
At a time when rational planning across national borders is critical to combat the global spread of a virulent disease, the United States and China are locked in a growing trade conflict in what has been called a new “cold war.” Even as new pathogens require the scientific resources of every continent to combat, the countries of the world are building metaphorical and literal walls. The defense of human civilization against the threat of global pandemics, just like climate change and the growing threat of ecological disasters, requires a level of planning and global cooperation of which capitalism is incapable. Society has outgrown the capitalist system and the arbitrary divisions it imposes on the world. The provision of the most existential social needs requires rational planning. That is, it requires socialism.
Six critical weeks have been wasted by the ruling oligarchs and the global threat has grown exponentially. Action must be taken.
The essential principle that must guide the response to the crisis is that the needs of the working people of the world must take absolute and unconditional priority over all considerations of corporate profit and private capitalist wealth.
The Socialist Equality Party and the International Committee of the Fourth International demand a massive, internationally coordinated mobilization of social resources to combat the coronavirus, including the allocation of trillions of dollars to ensure access to testing and the highest-quality medical care for all those infected. The class-based and profit-driven system of health care must be abolished, replaced with equal and universal coverage. A massive public works program must be initiated to produce desperately needed medical equipment.
Immediate measures must be taken to safeguard the health of workers. Workplaces where there is a danger of the spread of the virus must be shut down, with full income to those affected. Where schools are closed, parents must be given paid time off. College students forced out of dormitories must be provided safe housing. There must be a moratorium on evictions and utility shutoffs, combined with a moratorium on rent payments and other forms of emergency assistance.
All those who claim, like Bernie Sanders, that anything can be done without a frontal assault on the capitalist system itself are peddling lies. In a speech on Thursday, Sanders declared that as many as 400,000 could die from the coronavirus, and that the crisis “is on a scale of a major war.” Sanders, however, repeated his claim that measures to address the crisis can be achieved through the actions of both the Democratic and Republican parties.
In fact, what the crisis proves is the urgent necessity of a mass political movement of the working class in the United States and internationally against capitalism and for the socialist reorganization of world economy. What we are witnessing is the consequence of a society organized on the basis of profit. A society in which three individuals own more than half the population is incapable of resolving any of the great problems confronting mankind.
The giant banks and corporations must be placed under public ownership and democratic control. The vast fortunes of the rich must be expropriated to make funds available to ensure universal access to health care, housing, utilities and other social needs. All of economic life must be reorganized on the basis of a global, planned economy, removing the obstacle of private property and the profit motive. The last consideration on anyone’s minds should be the impact on corporate profits and Wall Street share values.
The pandemic has laid bare the inescapable necessity of a fundamental restructuring of society. This is not the first time in history that a great crisis has demonstrated that human progress is inseparable from the struggle against inequality. In an important new book, The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century,historian Walter Scheidel writes: “Throughout recorded history, the most powerful leveling invariably resulted from the most powerful shocks. Four different kinds of violent ruptures have flattened inequality: mass mobilization warfare, transformative revolution, state failure, and lethal pandemics. I call these the Four Horsemen of Leveling.” Each of these Horsemen is now visible.
The future of humanity is at stake. Capitalism is at war with society. The working class, under the banner of international socialism, must wage war against capitalism.


Bernie’s Last Chance

Originally , the one-on-one showdown was scheduled in Arizona .
In a surreal concession to the coronavirus disaster , the CNN-hosted affair will instead feature just Biden and Sanders onstage in Washington , D.C. , with no studio audience .
We ’ re in a rare moment when boxing clichés are appropriate to politics .
Sanders needs a knockout to stay alive .
More than that , he needs people to see the knockout .
He needs to hype the fight , which he hasn ’ t , suggesting he ’ s already given up .
It ’ s too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like , “ Sunday will be a bloodbath , ” or “ I ’ m gon na beat Joe so bad , he ’ ll need a shoehorn to put his hat on.
” There ’ s not a whole lot of Muhammad Ali in Bernie Sanders .
There ’ s not a lot of Ali in most people .
It ’ s an insult that this debate is even happening .
If Democrats felt something were at stake it would surely be canceled , as the increasingly confused Biden — the former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ salutation , “ God bless our troops , ” a scene straight out of a Mel Brooks movie — stands to gain little from a contentious live argument with a passionate , alert opponent .
That Biden ’ s handlers aren ’ t ducking the showdown suggests they expect a PG-rated affair , in which the breadth of Democratic opinion will be rolled out in a display of congenial sparring .
Key Sanders figures like Jeff Weaver have conceded in advance , reassuring all that Bernie will not be delivering an “ all-out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s thinking past the primary race with lines like , “ I want to thank Bernie Sanders and his supporters for their tireless energy and their passion.
” The media herd is also mostly moving on , as headlines like , “ Sanders offers Biden a path to win over his movement ” are popping up more and more .
Prominent Democrats are offering saccharine olive-branch comments like the following from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi : “ I don ’ t think Bernie Sanders should get out of the race…I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enthusiasm of supporters for candidates and they want to see it play out for the ideas… ” Translation : We ’ re no longer worried , at all , about losing Sanders voters .
Moreover , we think Bernie will be a good soldier and bring his followers in for the big win .
He shouldn ’ t .
It would be a colossal betrayal of Bernie ’ s movement to cave now , rewarding four years of Democratic Party smears and scummery with a premature surrender that in one stroke would undo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national conversation .
There ’ s a reason Democratic strategists of the James Carville type spend long careers fetishizing independents and “ the middle ” : they know “ moderates ” will take their votes elsewhere if they ’ re not happy .
There ’ s no such fear with progressives .
Liberalus Americanus is an animal that always hands you its vote in the end , even after you ’ ve kicked in all its teeth .
Sanders lost any chance at the presidency the moment he started apologizing for his followers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headlines like “ Sanders calls Bernie Bros ‘ Disgusting ’ ” on a silver platter .
( He also all but handed Biden the nomination when he renounced surrogate Zephyr Teachout ’ s op-edabout Biden ’ s “ corruption ” problem , but that ’ s another issue ) .
One doesn ’ t need a study like the one done by Harvard grad student Jeff Winchell to prove there ’ s nothing exceptional about Bernie ’ s online following .
Anyone who ’ s been to a Sanders event knows the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The prototypical Sanders supporter is a young working parent overwhelmed by student or medical debt .
They are women as often as men , and tend to be following Sanders in the first place because they ’ ve done everything by the book ( including voting for traditional Democrats ) , yet are still in a hole .
These are people with real problems , people who need help .
Bernie knows this , but allowed my jerkoff press colleagues to paint his supporters as an unruly mob of dude college students who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insults all day while living off a parent ’ s allowance .
He could have fought back .
The first time someone like Jake Tapper asked him to apologize for “ Bernie Bros , ” Sanders should have asked Tapper to apologize for helping bank and health insurance CEOs avoid responsibility for predatory behavior with bullshit questions about Internet sockpuppets .
Instead , Bernie in his natural terror of trivializing words like sexist and racist took the cheese , engaging the narrative and giving it life .
The storyline snowballed , culminating in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw millionaires Elizabeth Warren and Rachel Maddow take turns bemoaning the awesome destructive power of Bernie ’ s Twitter commentators .
The surprisingly shameless Warren went so far as to suggest that the campaign should devote resources to the ongoing refutation of online Bros .
The Warren-Maddow tête-à-tête was a perfect symbol of everything Sanders spent his career renouncing .
Heading into a pandemic that left the richest country in the world paralyzed for lack of hospital beds , a functioning coverage system , and testing capability , our upper classes wept over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to be or not , the coronavirus disaster is a pitch in Bernie ’ s wheelhouse , highlighting the massive structural obstacles we face precisely because our electoral system is weighted against serious people and in favor of industry-backed nitwits and sellouts .
Our medical bureaucracy is choked with waste and inefficiency and stays that way by mutual consent , with Republicans entirely opposed to health care reform , and Democrats merely opposed to any change that inconveniences insurers and pharmaceutical companies .
The Sanders campaign was a promise to break up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to be pissed that Donald Trump spent months dicking around and worrying that people were trying to use the coronavirus to hurt his approval rating , when he could have been taking the crisis seriously .
It ’ s a “ While Rome burned ” moment .
Any day now , we can expect Trump to nominate someone like Vince McMahon or Kid Rock to lead the Wuhan Task Force .
But people should equally be furious that Democrats spent the last year whining about online insults , Russians , the honor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of other non-issues , when they could have been confronting real problems .
They engaged in smear-driven diversion campaigns instead of self-auditing , and are anxious now to escape discussions about the Green New Deal and Medicare for All , to get back to defining political virtue as “ better than Donald Trump , ” tantamount to no standard at all .
Bernie shouldn ’ t let them .
If this “ quarantine debate ” is to be his last stand , he should make it count .
As has now been proven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gain nothing by playing nice with the Pelosis and Bidens of the world .
It buys neither policy considerations nor even temporary immunity from dirty tricks and slander .
Sunday night , he should hammer the meandering Biden as a symbol of the party ’ s determination to avoid necessary change .
He should make sure the debate audience understands that in this moment of extreme crisis , Democrats threw their institutional might behind a man whose handlers appear afraid to let him outside more than a few minutes at time .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race ends , it ’ s pure black comedy , and for the sake of everything he ’ s tried to accomplish in the last four years , Sanders has to make sure audiences don ’ t see him as part of the punch line .
There may not be time left to win .
But he can at least stop apologizing for trying , and restore his movement ’ s dignity for the sake of the next person who tries to push it up the hill .

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]f Bernie Sanders believed he could win, he’d be trying harder to hype this weekend’s “virtual debate” with Joe Biden
Originally, the one-on-one showdown was scheduled in Arizona. In a surreal concession to the coronavirus disaster, the CNN-hosted affair will instead feature just Biden and Sanders onstage in Washington, D.C., with no studio audience.
We’re in a rare moment when boxing clichés are appropriate to politics. Sanders needs a knockout to stay alive. More than that, he needs people to see the knockout. He needs to hype the fight, which he hasn’t, suggesting he’s already given up.
It’s too much to expect him to say something like, “Sunday will be a bloodbath,” or “I’m gonna beat Joe so bad, he’ll need a shoehorn to put his hat on.” There’s not a whole lot of Muhammad Ali in Bernie Sanders. There’s not a lot of Ali in most people.
It’s an insult that this debate is even happening. If Democrats felt something were at stake it would surely be canceled, as the increasingly confused Biden — the former VP ended a coronavirus speech with the salutation, “God bless our troops,” a scene straight out of a Mel Brooks movie — stands to gain little from a contentious live argument with a passionate, alert opponent.
That Biden’s handlers aren’t ducking the showdown suggests they expect a PG-rated affair, in which the breadth of Democratic opinion will be rolled out in a display of congenial sparring. Key Sanders figures like Jeff Weaver have conceded in advance, reassuring all that Bernie will not be delivering an “all-out assault.” Biden himself is signaling that he’s thinking past the primary race with lines like, “I want to thank Bernie Sanders and his supporters for their tireless energy and their passion.”
The media herd is also mostly moving on, as headlines like, “Sanders offers Biden a path to win over his movement” are popping up more and more. Prominent Democrats are offering saccharine olive-branch comments like the following from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
“I don’t think Bernie Sanders should get out of the race…I’m a grassroots person… I know the enthusiasm of supporters for candidates and they want to see it play out for the ideas…”
Translation: We’re no longer worried, at all, about losing Sanders voters. Moreover, we think Bernie will be a good soldier and bring his followers in for the big win.
He shouldn’t. It would be a colossal betrayal of Bernie’s movement to cave now, rewarding four years of Democratic Party smears and scummery with a premature surrender that in one stroke would undo all the progress made in changing the national conversation.
There’s a reason Democratic strategists of the James Carville type spend long careers fetishizing independents and “the middle”: they know “moderates” will take their votes elsewhere if they’re not happy. There’s no such fear with progressives. Liberalus Americanus is an animal that always hands you its vote in the end, even after you’ve kicked in all its teeth.
Editor's Note: We completely agree with Taibbi on this one, and probably, as he believes too, we don't expect Sanders to live up to even modest expectations. He'll just act politely, conciliatory, as the wet noodle he is, and all but deliver his troops to the enemy. Let's hope his followers learn from this lesson, and above all, see that they should carry on this fight to the end, and not ever again entrust a cause this critical to a man with a poor record of genuine political combat.—PG
Sanders lost any chance at the presidency the moment he started apologizing for his followers, handing outlets like the Daily Beast headlines like “Sanders calls Bernie Bros ‘Disgusting’” on a silver platter. (He also all but handed Biden the nomination when he renounced surrogate Zephyr Teachout’s op-edabout Biden’s “corruption” problem, but that’s another issue).
One doesn’t need a study like the one done by Harvard grad student Jeff Winchell to prove there’s nothing exceptional about Bernie’s online following. Anyone who’s been to a Sanders event knows the “Bro” narrative is a crock. The prototypical Sanders supporter is a young working parent overwhelmed by student or medical debt. They are women as often as men, and tend to be following Sanders in the first place because they’ve done everything by the book (including voting for traditional Democrats), yet are still in a hole. These are people with real problems, people who need help.
Bernie knows this, but allowed my jerkoff press colleagues to paint his supporters as an unruly mob of dude college students who listen to Chapo Traphouse and fire Twitter insults all day while living off a parent’s allowance.
He could have fought back. The first time someone like Jake Tapper asked him to apologize for “Bernie Bros,” Sanders should have asked Tapper to apologize for helping bank and health insurance CEOs avoid responsibility for predatory behavior with bullshit questions about Internet sockpuppets. Instead, Bernie in his natural terror of trivializing words like sexist and racist took the cheese, engaging the narrative and giving it life.
The storyline snowballed, culminating in scenes like one in early March that saw millionaires Elizabeth Warren and Rachel Maddow take turns bemoaning the awesome destructive power of Bernie’s Twitter commentators. The surprisingly shameless Warren went so far as to suggest that the campaign should devote resources to the ongoing refutation of online Bros.
The Warren-Maddow tête-à-tête was a perfect symbol of everything Sanders spent his career renouncing. Heading into a pandemic that left the richest country in the world paralyzed for lack of hospital beds, a functioning coverage system, and testing capability, our upper classes wept over rando Twitter meanies.
Whether he wants it to be or not, the coronavirus disaster is a pitch in Bernie’s wheelhouse, highlighting the massive structural obstacles we face precisely because our electoral system is weighted against serious people and in favor of industry-backed nitwits and sellouts.
Our medical bureaucracy is choked with waste and inefficiency and stays that way by mutual consent, with Republicans entirely opposed to health care reform, and Democrats merely opposed to any change that inconveniences insurers and pharmaceutical companies. The Sanders campaign was a promise to break up this conspiracy of inaction.
Democrats are right to be pissed that Donald Trump spent months dicking around and worrying that people were trying to use the coronavirus to hurt his approval rating, when he could have been taking the crisis seriously. It’s a “While Rome burned” moment. Any day now, we can expect Trump to nominate someone like Vince McMahon or Kid Rock to lead the Wuhan Task Force.
But people should equally be furious that Democrats spent the last year whining about online insults, Russians, the honor of Hunter Biden, and a host of other non-issues, when they could have been confronting real problems. They engaged in smear-driven diversion campaigns instead of self-auditing, and are anxious now to escape discussions about the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, to get back to defining political virtue as “better than Donald Trump,” tantamount to no standard at all.
Bernie shouldn’t let them. If this “quarantine debate” is to be his last stand, he should make it count. As has now been proven over and over, politicians like Sanders gain nothing by playing nice with the Pelosis and Bidens of the world. It buys neither policy considerations nor even temporary immunity from dirty tricks and slander.
Sunday night, he should hammer the meandering Biden as a symbol of the party’s determination to avoid necessary change. He should make sure the debate audience understands that in this moment of extreme crisis, Democrats threw their institutional might behind a man whose handlers appear afraid to let him outside more than a few minutes at time.
If this is the way the 2020 primary race ends, it’s pure black comedy, and for the sake of everything he’s tried to accomplish in the last four years, Sanders has to make sure audiences don’t see him as part of the punch line. There may not be time left to win. But he can at least stop apologizing for trying, and restore his movement’s dignity for the sake of the next person who tries to push it up the hill.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-03-15--HOW TO MEASURE PREJUDICE – DUTCH JUDGE HENDRIK STEENHUIS DEMONSTRATES IN THE MH17 SHOW TRIAL

John Helmer ’ s take on the MH-17 Dutch kangaroo trial .
ALL THESE ELABORATE THEATRICS TO PROVIDE HYPOCRITICAL WASHINGTON WITH YET ANOTHER PROPAGANDA PLATFORM TO DEMONISE THE KREMLIN .
n the first two hours of the first day of the Dutch trial of allegations of murder in the shooting-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 , Hendrik Steenhuis , the presiding judge , revealed that the judgement for Dutch court jurisdiction for the case to proceed is inevitable .
He did that three months before he has scheduled a hearing on the question .
Steenhuis also revealed that a judgement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one Ukrainian defendants is not less inevitable .
Judgements in a trial scheduled to run for at least twelve months , issued before lunch was served to the judges on their first day , are the makings of a show trial .
The presiding judge proved to be a cautious man in one respect .
He read everything , including his name , from a paper script on his desk .
“ My name , ” he read , “ is Steenhuis , I am a judge of the District Court of The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ District Court at the Schiphol office building have been filmed and broadcast by the court .
Watch the archived videotape of the first day ’ s proceedings of March 9 here .
The video record of the second day , March 10 ’ s proceedings can be viewed here .
The court has now adjourned until March 23 .
Steenhuis ’ s credentials for serving as a judge are not recorded in his court curriculum vitae .
He was a state tax collection functionary before becoming a judge .
He introduced “ next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who comprise the panel which will adjudicate in the trial .
The names he read out are Dagmar Koster and Heleen Kerstens-Fockens .
Koster was a prosecution investigator for a Dutch state agency involved in cases of human trafficking , then a judge .
Kerstens-Fockens worked as an intern for the NATO side in the prosecution of Serbians after the Yugoslav war ; she began her professional career as a legal advisor to the Danish Red Cross .
Two alternate or reserve judges were also identified by Steenhuis .
They are Daan Glass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Edith Poppe-Gielesen .
She started as an official of the Dutch aviation administration .
The official biographic records of these five judges appointed by the Dutch Government reveal not one who has experience of private practice in defence of any kind , civil or criminal .
All five were appointed judges after state training ; their official biographies provide no details of what the training was or the institutions awarding their legal credentials .
Despite the presiding judge ’ s acknowledgement that media and international “ interest in this case is huge ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is available of the day ’ s proceedings to read , although a transcript has been made .
In his opening Steenhuis claimed it was forbidden to make video recordings for re-broadcast .
The lack of a document or film archive means the Dutch are restricting the press to presence at a designated courtroom in the Schiphol building and to listen there , making notes as the proceedings unfold .
The Dutch Government is also deciding who may attend from the press , and who may not .
The court ’ s livestream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recovery is possible , officially .
“ Is the case ready to be dealt with on the merits , ” Steenhuis read from his script ( Min 16:08 ) , “ or is further investigation necessary ?
These are questions that today are on the agenda.
” In the five hours which followed , Steenhuis did not address these questions , but he did rule on them .
The official court summary omits most of the rulings the judge issued on the day .
Steenhuis acknowledged the case file prepared by the prosecutors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their indictments last June ; for details , read this .
According to the Steenhuis script for March 9 , the case file – that is the prosecution indictment — has now expanded to 36,000 pages long .
He omitted to say that this is the complete and final version .
He acknowledged that the Russian and Dutch lawyers representing Oleg Pulatov – first identified by Steenhuis in his third minute as “ the accused Pulatov ” ( Min 3:20 ) – have received a copy ; they have reserved the right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence it contains is admissible , and whether additional investigation is required .
“ It goes without saying that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty by law ” ( Min 23:56 ) , Steenhuis said this once ; he went without saying it again .
In his reading , the rights of the victims – the 298 passengers and crew on the flight — and their next of kin were given more than triple the number of script minutes than the rights of the accused .
The term “ presumption of innocence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s recital of the Dutch criminal procedure rules which follow indictment by prosecutors ( Min 23:04 ) .
The defendant ’ s rights , according to the judge , start with “ due process , a fair trial ” ( Min 23:36 ) .
He went on to spell out , at greater length , the rights of victims and next of kin to include the right to “ explicitly address the accused who is standing trial whereas [ sic ] the court has not yet reached an opinion as to whether a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the accused is punishable.
” ( Min 1:03:05 ) .
“ Everyone should respect the general standards of decency ” , Steenhuis declared ( Min 1:04:05 ) .
He did not mention the standard of custody of evidence included in the indictment , nor the standard of proof for the judges to adjudicate .
“ The general standards of decency ” have not been defined in the Dutch Criminal Code .
For the Dutch jurisprudence governing this trial , click to read .
Also missing from Steenhuis ’ s script is the idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presumption of innocence , it is up to the prosecutors to prove their case , not for the defence to prove its innocence .
Steenhuis implied the reverse .
“ It is important that counsel can shed light on the defendant ’ s standpoint ” ( Min 25:49 ) .
He then qualified this : “ In this case we are focusing on the result of the criminal investigation.
” The indictment “ will be discussed [ sic ] at this hearing , and that [ indictment ] constitutes the framework for hearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 1:06:18 ) .
This is a peculiarity of Dutch law ; it is impossible in the Anglo-American , Australian or Canadian courts .
But why is Dutch criminal law applicable to the shoot-down of MH17 ?
Why does the Dutch court have jurisdiction over actions Steenhuis acknowledged as having taken place outside The Netherlands , in a civil war being fought by Ukrainians , involving an attack on an aircraft allegedly by three Russians and a Ukrainian ?
Steenhuis said he accepted the defendant ’ s right to challenge this ( Min @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : there had been correspondence before the March 9 hearing in which the defence lawyers said they “ can not yet take a position on the question as to whether or not it will file such preliminary objections… The main reason is that the defence only received the file only a short time ago ” ( min 1:13:12 ) .
The preliminary objections Steenhuis noted as having been filed were to the Dutch court ’ s jurisdiction and to the admissibility and completeness of the prosecutors ’ evidence .
“ Strictly speaking ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commence the trial until these jurisdictional and other objections had been adjudicated .
He also confirmed that the defence counsel had requested that a hearing and adjudication of these objections should be delayed until June 8 , 2020 ( Min 1:14:33 ) .
In practice , this meant the three-judge panel had to rule first before the prosecution could start its presentation of the case ; for this , the prosecution presentation should wait until after June 8 .
What happened next was that Steenhuis decided to start the presentation of the prosecution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The defence attorneys for Oleg Pulatov – left , Yelena Kutyina , the Russian attorney for the defence ; centre , Sabine ten Doesschate ; right , Boudewijn van Eijck .
For the charges against Pulatov , a former officer of Russian military intelligence , and his three co-defendants , read this .
Pulatov and his Russian lawyer have accepted the Dutch writ of summons to the court on the allegations ; this was agreed wirth the Russian Prosecutor-General , the Ministry of Justice , and a district court in Pulatov ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will not , however , surrender himself to the Dutch police and be held to appear at the trial .
What of the three others accused – Igor Girkin , Sergei Dubinsky , and Leonid Kharchenko ?
Steenhuis read out his script details of the due process accorded to them .
In Girkin ’ s case , the process started with the Dutch prosecutors ’ request to the Russian Prosecutor-General to serve the writ of summons on Girkin at his address of registration in Moscow ; the request was made on October 28 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Russian Ministry of Justice .
In January , the Justice Ministry said the writ could not be served on Girkin because he had not appeared in his local court .
Efforts to serve Girkin by a local policeman at the front door of his address failed ; no one answered the door bell ( min 1:30:11 ) .
Neighbours , including an elderly lady , told the police they had not seen a man at the address .
Steenhuis ruled that service of the summons had failed ; attempts to contact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ email and VKontakte also failed .
The judge reported that Girkin had told the Dutch and Russian press that he did not recognize the jurisdiction of the Dutch court .
Notwithstanding , and without a formal decision on the Dutch court ’ s jurisdiction to proceed , Steenhuis ruled that “ the court has no doubt that [ Girkin , Dubinsky and Kharchenko ] are all aware of these criminal proceedings ” ( 1:54:48 ) .
In consequence , “ in these circumstances.. it may be assumed that they have waived their right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Note this isn ’ t a ruling that the three have been lawfully served .
It is far from a ruling that the court has legal jurisdiction to pursue them at all .
Nonetheless , according to Steenhuis , “ the court will allow the due process to prevail and… in the case against Girkin , Dubinsky and Kharchenko we will proceed ” ( 1:56:05 ) .
Steenhuis omitted to cite a Dutch statute , Dutch criminal procedure , or Dutch case law precedent to allow this ruling .
THE PROSECUTION IS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ABOVE THE DEFENCE Left : the prosecutor ’ s bench to the left and at the same level as the judges ’ bench .
The three defence attorneys can be seen seated below the podium , in the centre .
Right , the lead prosecutor , Dedy Woei-a-Tsoi , commencing her presentation of the case without a ruling by Steenhuis that the court has jurisdiction to hear it .
Tsoi has included in her presentation an attack on alleged Russian espionage and disinformation in the press .
Referring to published leaks of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the indictment file , Tsoi told the court the documents were genuine .
But she said , the leaks have been “ part of a cynical misinformation campaign that has gone on for more than five years now… Only The Netherlands , Belgium , Australia and Malaysia had access to all the published documents .
So far none of the four states have been able to identify the leaks .
We must take into account published information … has come from the possibility of a successful GRU hacking in one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenge the admissibility or relevance of these allegations .
Read the leaked documents and what they mean for the prosecution ’ s case here and here .
The Steenhuis ruling to allow the prosecution to begin its case is also a legal nonsense , for Steenhuis himself had already ruled that whether or not he and his bench had jurisdiction to allow the case to start was an issue to be postponed for the lawyers to argue on June 8 , 2020 .
“ Of course ” , Steenhuis wound up , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a later point ” ( min 1:56:26 ) .
This is a judgement by the judge that there will be a “ later point ” in the trial .
It is a judgement before there is argument on whether the case can proceed .
In the lawyers ’ trade , that ’ s called prejudice .

John Helmer's take on the MH-17 Dutch kangaroo trial.
ALL THESE ELABORATE THEATRICS TO PROVIDE HYPOCRITICAL WASHINGTON WITH YET ANOTHER PROPAGANDA PLATFORM TO DEMONISE THE KREMLIN.
by John Helmer, Moscow
@bears_with
[dropcap]I[/dropcap]n the first two hours of the first day of the Dutch trial of allegations of murder in the shooting-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, Hendrik Steenhuis, the presiding judge, revealed that the judgement for Dutch court jurisdiction for the case to proceed is inevitable. He did that three months before he has scheduled a hearing on the question. Steenhuis also revealed that a judgement of guilt against the three Russian and one Ukrainian defendants is not less inevitable.
Judgements in a trial scheduled to run for at least twelve months, issued before lunch was served to the judges on their first day, are the makings of a show trial.
The presiding judge proved to be a cautious man in one respect. He read everything, including his name, from a paper script on his desk. “My name,” he read, “is Steenhuis, I am a judge of the District Court of The Hague.”
The proceedings of The Hague District Court at the Schiphol office building have been filmed and broadcast by the court. Watch the archived videotape of the first day’s proceedings of March 9 here. The video record of the second day, March 10’s proceedings can be viewed here. The court has now adjourned until March 23. Steenhuis’s credentials for serving as a judge are not recorded in his court curriculum vitae. He was a state tax collection functionary before becoming a judge.
He introduced “next to me” the two other judges who comprise the panel which will adjudicate in the trial. The names he read out are Dagmar Koster and Heleen Kerstens-Fockens.
Koster was a prosecution investigator for a Dutch state agency involved in cases of human trafficking, then a judge. Kerstens-Fockens worked as an intern for the NATO side in the prosecution of Serbians after the Yugoslav war; she began her professional career as a legal advisor to the Danish Red Cross.
Two alternate or reserve judges were also identified by Steenhuis. They are Daan Glass, a former state prosecutor; and Edith Poppe-Gielesen. She started as an official of the Dutch aviation administration. The official biographic records of these five judges appointed by the Dutch Government reveal not one who has experience of private practice in defence of any kind, civil or criminal. All five were appointed judges after state training; their official biographies provide no details of what the training was or the institutions awarding their legal credentials.
Despite the presiding judge’s acknowledgement that media and international “interest in this case is huge” (Min 9:27), no transcript is available of the day’s proceedings to read, although a transcript has been made.
In his opening Steenhuis claimed it was forbidden to make video recordings for re-broadcast. The lack of a document or film archive means the Dutch are restricting the press to presence at a designated courtroom in the Schiphol building and to listen there, making notes as the proceedings unfold. The Dutch Government is also deciding who may attend from the press, and who may not. The court’s livestream link acknowledges it is live; no recovery is possible, officially.
Source: https://www.courtmh17.com/
“Is the case ready to be dealt with on the merits,” Steenhuis read from his script (Min 16:08), “or is further investigation necessary? These are questions that today are on the agenda.” In the five hours which followed, Steenhuis did not address these questions, but he did rule on them.
The official court summary omits most of the rulings the judge issued on the day.
Steenhuis acknowledged the case file prepared by the prosecutors was incomplete at the time they announced their indictments last June; for details, read this. According to the Steenhuis script for March 9, the case file – that is the prosecution indictment — has now expanded to 36,000 pages long. He omitted to say that this is the complete and final version. He acknowledged that the Russian and Dutch lawyers representing Oleg Pulatov – first identified by Steenhuis in his third minute as “the accused Pulatov” (Min 3:20) – have received a copy; they have reserved the right to challenge, Steenhuis announced, whether the evidence it contains is admissible, and whether additional investigation is required.
“It goes without saying that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty by law” (Min 23:56), Steenhuis said this once; he went without saying it again. In his reading, the rights of the victims – the 298 passengers and crew on the flight — and their next of kin were given more than triple the number of script minutes than the rights of the accused. The term “presumption of innocence” was not mentioned in Steenhuis’s recital of the Dutch criminal procedure rules which follow indictment by prosecutors (Min 23:04). The defendant’s rights, according to the judge, start with “due process, a fair trial” (Min 23:36). He went on to spell out, at greater length, the rights of victims and next of kin to include the right to “explicitly address the accused who is standing trial whereas [sic] the court has not yet reached an opinion as to whether a criminal offence has been committed or whether the accused is punishable.” (Min 1:03:05).
“Everyone should respect the general standards of decency”, Steenhuis declared (Min 1:04:05). He did not mention the standard of custody of evidence included in the indictment, nor the standard of proof for the judges to adjudicate. “The general standards of decency” have not been defined in the Dutch Criminal Code. For the Dutch jurisprudence governing this trial, click to read.
Also missing from Steenhuis’s script is the idea that for the defendant to enjoy the presumption of innocence, it is up to the prosecutors to prove their case, not for the defence to prove its innocence. Steenhuis implied the reverse. “It is important that counsel can shed light on the defendant’s standpoint” (Min 25:49). He then qualified this: “In this case we are focusing on the result of the criminal investigation.” The indictment “will be discussed [sic] at this hearing, and that [indictment] constitutes the framework for hearing and for adjudicating this criminal case” (1:06:18). This is a peculiarity of Dutch law; it is impossible in the Anglo-American, Australian or Canadian courts.
But why is Dutch criminal law applicable to the shoot-down of MH17? Why does the Dutch court have jurisdiction over actions Steenhuis acknowledged as having taken place outside The Netherlands, in a civil war being fought by Ukrainians, involving an attack on an aircraft allegedly by three Russians and a Ukrainian?
Steenhuis said he accepted the defendant’s right to challenge this (Min 1:12:07). More, he added: there had been correspondence before the March 9 hearing in which the defence lawyers said they “cannot yet take a position on the question as to whether or not it will file such preliminary objections… The main reason is that the defence only received the file only a short time ago” (min 1:13:12). The preliminary objections Steenhuis noted as having been filed were to the Dutch court’s jurisdiction and to the admissibility and completeness of the prosecutors’ evidence.
“Strictly speaking”, Steenhuis admitted, he could not commence the trial until these jurisdictional and other objections had been adjudicated. He also confirmed that the defence counsel had requested that a hearing and adjudication of these objections should be delayed until June 8, 2020 (Min 1:14:33). In practice, this meant the three-judge panel had to rule first before the prosecution could start its presentation of the case; for this, the prosecution presentation should wait until after June 8.
What happened next was that Steenhuis decided to start the presentation of the prosecution case against Pulatov immediately (1:18:23).
THE DEFENCE OF OLEG PULATOV
The defence attorneys for Oleg Pulatov – left, Yelena Kutyina, the Russian attorney for the defence; centre, Sabine ten Doesschate; right, Boudewijn van Eijck. For the charges against Pulatov, a former officer of Russian military intelligence, and his three co-defendants, read this.
Pulatov and his Russian lawyer have accepted the Dutch writ of summons to the court on the allegations; this was agreed wirth the Russian Prosecutor-General, the Ministry of Justice, and a district court in Pulatov’s home town of Ulyanovsk. Pulatov will not, however, surrender himself to the Dutch police and be held to appear at the trial. What of the three others accused – Igor Girkin, Sergei Dubinsky, and Leonid Kharchenko?
Steenhuis read out his script details of the due process accorded to them. In Girkin’s case, the process started with the Dutch prosecutors’ request to the Russian Prosecutor-General to serve the writ of summons on Girkin at his address of registration in Moscow; the request was made on October 28, 2019. That request then went to the Russian Ministry of Justice. In January, the Justice Ministry said the writ could not be served on Girkin because he had not appeared in his local court. Efforts to serve Girkin by a local policeman at the front door of his address failed; no one answered the door bell (min 1:30:11). Neighbours, including an elderly lady, told the police they had not seen a man at the address.
Steenhuis ruled that service of the summons had failed; attempts to contact Girkin by the Dutch using Skype, email and VKontakte also failed. The judge reported that Girkin had told the Dutch and Russian press that he did not recognize the jurisdiction of the Dutch court. Notwithstanding, and without a formal decision on the Dutch court’s jurisdiction to proceed, Steenhuis ruled that “the court has no doubt that [Girkin, Dubinsky and Kharchenko] are all aware of these criminal proceedings” (1:54:48). In consequence, “in these circumstances.. it may be assumed that they have waived their right to be present” (1:55:44).
Note this isn’t a ruling that the three have been lawfully served. It is far from a ruling that the court has legal jurisdiction to pursue them at all. Nonetheless, according to Steenhuis, “the court will allow the due process to prevail and… in the case against Girkin, Dubinsky and Kharchenko we will proceed” (1:56:05).
Steenhuis omitted to cite a Dutch statute, Dutch criminal procedure, or Dutch case law precedent to allow this ruling.
THE PROSECUTION IS SEATED AT THE RIGHT OF THE JUDGE, ABOVE THE DEFENCE
Left: the prosecutor’s bench to the left and at the same level as the judges’ bench. The three defence attorneys can be seen seated below the podium, in the centre. Right, the lead prosecutor, Dedy Woei-a-Tsoi, commencing her presentation of the case without a ruling by Steenhuis that the court has jurisdiction to hear it. Tsoi has included in her presentation an attack on alleged Russian espionage and disinformation in the press. Referring to published leaks of documents of Dutch intelligence and other parts of the indictment file, Tsoi told the court the documents were genuine. But she said, the leaks have been “part of a cynical misinformation campaign that has gone on for more than five years now… Only The Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Malaysia had access to all the published documents. So far none of the four states have been able to identify the leaks. We must take into account published information … has come from the possibility of a successful GRU hacking in one of the four countries.’’ Steenhuis did not challenge the admissibility or relevance of these allegations. Read the leaked documents and what they mean for the prosecution’s case here and here.
The Steenhuis ruling to allow the prosecution to begin its case is also a legal nonsense, for Steenhuis himself had already ruled that whether or not he and his bench had jurisdiction to allow the case to start was an issue to be postponed for the lawyers to argue on June 8, 2020.
“Of course”, Steenhuis wound up, “the suspects are free to be present at a later point” ( min 1:56:26). This is a judgement by the judge that there will be a “later point” in the trial. It is a judgement before there is argument on whether the case can proceed. In the lawyers’ trade, that’s called prejudice.
" style="display: inline-block; line-height: 1; vertical-align: bottom; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; text-indent: 0px; text-align: center;"> Share
by Editor - Wednesday, March 11th, 2020


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-03-15--Recapitulating Washington’s attempts to strangle the Bolivarian revolution

The Washington mafia and its numerous tentacles ( like the notorious Council on Foreign Relations ) have been busy trying all sorts of stratagems to get rid of the Bolivarian process in Venezuela .
This editorial by respected independent socialist publication Monthly Review ( March 2019 ) provides an excellent summary of the scope , anatomy , and nature of these underhanded and often overt maneuvers .
As we write these notes in the first week of February 2019 , the United States is openly directing a political-economic coup in Venezuela .
At the same time , it has announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Intermediate-Nuclear Forces ( INF ) Treaty .
Together , these events , taking place in late January and early February , mark a new escalation of U.S. imperialism , threatening the entire world .
On January 23 , only weeks after the inauguration of Nicolás Maduro into a new term as president of Venezuela , Juan Guaidó , a right-wing politician who had never run for president and whose name was unknown to more than 80 percent of the Venezuelan population , proclaimed himself president of Venezuela .
He denounced the elected president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters and 31 percent of the Venezuelan electorate cast their votes in the 2018 Venezuelan elections ( as opposed to a minority of voters and only 26 percent of the U.S. electorate in favor of Donald Trump in the 2016 U.S. elections ) —as an “ usurper ” ( Ben Norton , “ Internal U.S. Gov ’ t Document Outlines Program of ‘ Economic Warfare ’ on Venezuela , ” Grayzone , January 30 , 2019 ; Joe Emersberger , “ When Is a Democracy Not a Democracy ?
” Mint Press News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Guaidó was immediately declared the legitimate president of Venezuela by the United States .
Washington proceeded to impose what was , in effect , an embargo on Venezuelan oil coming into the United States , while seizing control of the assets of Citgo , the Venezuela-owned oil company in the United States , in the name of the coup plotters .
Meanwhile , the Bank of England , at U.S. urging , removed the Venezuelan government ’ s access to its $ 1.2 billion in gold reserves .
The present ongoing coup attempt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a series of such attempts by the U.S. government to overthrow the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela over the last two decades .
It can be seen as having three interrelated motives : ( 1 ) the destruction of Venezuelan socialism , ( 2 ) regaining control of Venezuela ’ s oil ( the largest petroleum reserves in the world ) , and ( 3 ) reasserting U.S. hegemony over Latin America .
The United States has backed three successful Latin American coups in the last decade : Honduras ( 2009 ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 2016 ) .
Venezuela , however , is the hardest nut to crack since it is ruled by an elected socialist government and backed by the largest mass of the population and most of Venezuela ’ s poor , who strongly support the revolutionary process and are virulently opposed to U.S. imperialism .
To understand the nature of the January 2019 coup unleashed against Venezuela , it is important to see it in terms of its basis in economic warfare designed to undermine the sovereignty of the Venezuelan state .
Former United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alfred de Zayas , declared in a UN report on Venezuela , completed in August 2018 , that the “ economic sanctions and blockades ” like those being imposed by the United States on Venezuela in defiance of international law were “ comparable with medieval sieges of towns .
Twenty-first century sanctions attempt to bring not just a town but sovereign countries to their knees ” ( United Nations , Report of the Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order on his Mission to the Bolivarian Republic of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 , 14 ; “ Venezuela Crisis : Former UN Rapporteur Says US Sanctions Are Killing Citizens , ” Independent , January 26 , 2019 ) .
U.S. imperial planning , in this respect , has been lodged heavily in the Council on Foreign Relations ( CFR ) , commonly known as “ the imperial brain trust ” and as “ Wall Street ’ s think tank ” ( see Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter , Imperial Brain Trust [ Monthly Review Press , 1977 ] and Laurence H. Shoup , [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In September 2018 , CFR President Richard N. Haass—who in 2000 wrote an article entitled “ Imperial America ” on the need for the resurrection of U.S. imperial domination of the globe , and subsequently served as director of policy planning for the Department of State in the George W. Bush administration , helping to direct regime change in Iraq , before becoming president of the CFR in 2003—came out with an article arguing for U.S. regime-change intervention in Venezuela .
According to Haass , presenting the general view of the CFR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intervention in Venezuela was necessary ( see Richard N. Haass , “ What the Crisis in Venezuela Reveals , ” CFR , September 26 , 2018 ; John Bellamy Foster , [ Monthly Review Press , 2006 ] , 97–106 . )
But it is through its promotion of U.S. economic warfare under the rubric of geoeconomics that the CFR has played a central role in paving the way to the coup in Venezuela .
The strategy is to employ more systematic techniques of “ smart ” economic sanctions to destroy the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris in their ( Harvard University Press , 2016 ) , which has become the manual of CFR ’ s Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies devoted to promoting U.S. economic warfare ( inspired by the U.S. Office of Economic Warfare in the 1940s ) .
Blackwill was himself an advisor to George W. Bush on Iraq , serving as a presidential envoy to Iraq , and was critically responsible for the privatization of Iraqi oil .
Blackwill and Harris note in their book that , forty years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade based , while now they are financially based , allowing for massive disruption of such flows by the United States and other advanced economies and their corporations , representing the “ capitals of capital ” ( War by Other Means , 53 ) .
The primary target of U.S. geoeconomic warfare , according to Blackwill and Harris , should be China , which has been offering generous loans to Venezuela in return for oil .
Attacking Venezuela , with which China is economically aligned , is thus seen as part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reasserting U.S. control over Venezuela and its oil and crushing any idea of a successful socialism .
Amy Myers Jaffe , a fellow of the CFR ’ s Greenberg Center for Geoeconomics , took part in the writing of CFR policy documents with respect to oil privatization in U.S.-occupied Iraq .
In the context of the current coup in Venezuela , Jaffe wrote a January 28 , 2019 , CFR article entitled , “ No Easy Path for Venezuela ’ s Oil in the Struggle for a Transition in Power , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right-wing political coup and already planning the takeover of Venezuelan oil .
Comparing the situation in Venezuela to Iraq , Jaffe argues that the United States , after a successful coup overthrowing the Bolivarian Republic under Maduro , will have to pour billions of dollars into propping up Venezuela ’ s oil industry and increasing production , especially in the face of what she says will be “ multiple renegade armed groups operating inside Venezuela , including Cuban mercenaries.
” She strongly implies that this will require the stability offered by U.S. troops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coup , she observes , will be that “ U.S .
actions have already in effect embargoed imported Venezuelan crude to Citgo and other U.S. buyers , ” as well as seizing Venezuelan oil and gold assets abroad , severing the country from much of its economic wealth .
What made this strategy possible is what Blackwill and Meghan O ’ Sullivan in 2014 referred to in an article for Foreign Policy as the new U.S. petropower arising from fracking ( Shoup , Wall Street ’ s Think Tank , 198 ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States over world oil now gives it the latitude to crush a petrostate such as Venezuela without damaging the U.S. economy .
In response to U.S. sanctions , the Venezuelan government , out of necessity , recently moved away from denominating its petroleum sales in dollars .
Two other petrostates previously adopted this strategy : Iraq and Libya .
Both were annihilated in U.S. regime-change actions .
Even more ominous in the escalation of U.S. imperialism was the Trump administration ’ s official declaration on February 2 that it is unilaterally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , under the provisions of the treaty , a six-month withdrawal period before it can take effect .
This led to a succinct statement by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament based in Britain , which had led the mass popular struggle against intermediate-range nuclear missiles in the 1980s : The struggle against a new nuclear arms race that would imperil the population of the entire world must be one of the highest priorities of our time .
With the ending of the Cold War in the late 1980s , the greatest symbol of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Treaty by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev , fears of nuclear war abated and the peace movement demobilized .
It is now time for a new world mobilization on behalf of peace to counter the dangerous escalations of our time , which means , first of all , confronting U.S. imperialism .

The Washington mafia and its numerous tentacles (like the notorious Council on Foreign Relations) have been busy trying all sorts of stratagems to get rid of the Bolivarian process in Venezuela. This editorial by respected independent socialist publication Monthly Review ( March 2019 ) provides an excellent summary of the scope, anatomy, and nature of these underhanded and often overt maneuvers.
[dropcap]A[/dropcap]s we write these notes in the first week of February 2019, the United States is openly directing a political-economic coup in Venezuela. At the same time, it has announced that it is unilaterally withdrawing from the Intermediate-Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Together, these events, taking place in late January and early February, mark a new escalation of U.S. imperialism, threatening the entire world.
On January 23, only weeks after the inauguration of Nicolás Maduro into a new term as president of Venezuela, Juan Guaidó, a right-wing politician who had never run for president and whose name was unknown to more than 80 percent of the Venezuelan population, proclaimed himself president of Venezuela. He denounced the elected president Maduro—for whom more than two thirds of voters and 31 percent of the Venezuelan electorate cast their votes in the 2018 Venezuelan elections (as opposed to a minority of voters and only 26 percent of the U.S. electorate in favor of Donald Trump in the 2016 U.S. elections)—as an “usurper” (Ben Norton, “Internal U.S. Gov’t Document Outlines Program of ‘Economic Warfare’ on Venezuela,” Grayzone, January 30, 2019; Joe Emersberger, “When Is a Democracy Not a Democracy?” Mint Press News, January 28, 2019). Guaidó was immediately declared the legitimate president of Venezuela by the United States. Washington proceeded to impose what was, in effect, an embargo on Venezuelan oil coming into the United States, while seizing control of the assets of Citgo, the Venezuela-owned oil company in the United States, in the name of the coup plotters. Meanwhile, the Bank of England, at U.S. urging, removed the Venezuelan government’s access to its $1.2 billion in gold reserves.
The present ongoing coup attempt organized in Washington is simply the latest in a series of such attempts by the U.S. government to overthrow the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela over the last two decades. It can be seen as having three interrelated motives: (1) the destruction of Venezuelan socialism, (2) regaining control of Venezuela’s oil (the largest petroleum reserves in the world), and (3) reasserting U.S. hegemony over Latin America. The United States has backed three successful Latin American coups in the last decade: Honduras (2009), Paraguay (2012), and Brazil (2016). Venezuela, however, is the hardest nut to crack since it is ruled by an elected socialist government and backed by the largest mass of the population and most of Venezuela’s poor, who strongly support the revolutionary process and are virulently opposed to U.S. imperialism.
To understand the nature of the January 2019 coup unleashed against Venezuela, it is important to see it in terms of its basis in economic warfare designed to undermine the sovereignty of the Venezuelan state. Former United Nations (UN) special rapporteur, Alfred de Zayas, declared in a UN report on Venezuela, completed in August 2018, that the “economic sanctions and blockades” like those being imposed by the United States on Venezuela in defiance of international law were “comparable with medieval sieges of towns. Twenty-first century sanctions attempt to bring not just a town but sovereign countries to their knees” (United Nations, Report of the Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order on his Mission to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Ecuador , August 3, 2018, 14; “Venezuela Crisis: Former UN Rapporteur Says US Sanctions Are Killing Citizens,” Independent, January 26, 2019).
U.S. imperial planning, in this respect, has been lodged heavily in the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), commonly known as “the imperial brain trust” and as “Wall Street’s think tank” (see Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter, Imperial Brain Trust [Monthly Review Press, 1977] and Laurence H. Shoup, Wall Street’s Think Tank [Monthly Review Press, 2019]). In September 2018, CFR President Richard N. Haass—who in 2000 wrote an article entitled “Imperial America” on the need for the resurrection of U.S. imperial domination of the globe, and subsequently served as director of policy planning for the Department of State in the George W. Bush administration, helping to direct regime change in Iraq, before becoming president of the CFR in 2003—came out with an article arguing for U.S. regime-change intervention in Venezuela. According to Haass, presenting the general view of the CFR, a U.S. “humanitarian” military intervention in Venezuela was necessary (see Richard N. Haass, “What the Crisis in Venezuela Reveals,” CFR, September 26, 2018; John Bellamy Foster, Naked Imperialism [Monthly Review Press, 2006], 97–106.)
But it is through its promotion of U.S. economic warfare under the rubric of geoeconomics that the CFR has played a central role in paving the way to the coup in Venezuela. The strategy is to employ more systematic techniques of “smart” economic sanctions to destroy the country, as articulated particularly by CFR authors Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris in their War by Other Means (Harvard University Press, 2016), which has become the manual of CFR’s Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies devoted to promoting U.S. economic warfare (inspired by the U.S. Office of Economic Warfare in the 1940s). Blackwill was himself an advisor to George W. Bush on Iraq, serving as a presidential envoy to Iraq, and was critically responsible for the privatization of Iraqi oil. Blackwill and Harris note in their book that, forty years ago, cross-border economic flows were mostly trade based, while now they are financially based, allowing for massive disruption of such flows by the United States and other advanced economies and their corporations, representing the “capitals of capital” (War by Other Means, 53). The primary target of U.S. geoeconomic warfare, according to Blackwill and Harris, should be China, which has been offering generous loans to Venezuela in return for oil. Attacking Venezuela, with which China is economically aligned, is thus seen as part of the long-term strategy of undermining China geoeconomically—in addition to reasserting U.S. control over Venezuela and its oil and crushing any idea of a successful socialism.
Amy Myers Jaffe, a fellow of the CFR’s Greenberg Center for Geoeconomics, took part in the writing of CFR policy documents with respect to oil privatization in U.S.-occupied Iraq. In the context of the current coup in Venezuela, Jaffe wrote a January 28, 2019, CFR article entitled, “No Easy Path for Venezuela’s Oil in the Struggle for a Transition in Power,” strongly in support of Guaidó’s right-wing political coup and already planning the takeover of Venezuelan oil. Comparing the situation in Venezuela to Iraq, Jaffe argues that the United States, after a successful coup overthrowing the Bolivarian Republic under Maduro, will have to pour billions of dollars into propping up Venezuela’s oil industry and increasing production, especially in the face of what she says will be “multiple renegade armed groups operating inside Venezuela, including Cuban mercenaries.” She strongly implies that this will require the stability offered by U.S. troops. Key to the success of the coup, she observes, will be that “U.S. actions have already in effect embargoed imported Venezuelan crude to Citgo and other U.S. buyers,” as well as seizing Venezuelan oil and gold assets abroad, severing the country from much of its economic wealth. What made this strategy possible is what Blackwill and Meghan O’Sullivan in 2014 referred to in an article for Foreign Policy as the new U.S. petropower arising from fracking (Shoup, Wall Street’s Think Tank, 198). The increased energy independence and leverage of the United States over world oil now gives it the latitude to crush a petrostate such as Venezuela without damaging the U.S. economy. In response to U.S. sanctions, the Venezuelan government, out of necessity, recently moved away from denominating its petroleum sales in dollars. Two other petrostates previously adopted this strategy: Iraq and Libya. Both were annihilated in U.S. regime-change actions.
Even more ominous in the escalation of U.S. imperialism was the Trump administration’s official declaration on February 2 that it is unilaterally withdrawing from the INF Treaty, requiring, under the provisions of the treaty, a six-month withdrawal period before it can take effect. This led to a succinct statement by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament based in Britain, which had led the mass popular struggle against intermediate-range nuclear missiles in the 1980s:
Trump has announced that he will withdraw the U.S. from the INF treaty. This treaty has been a bedrock of nuclear arms control, having eliminated thousands of deadly nuclear missiles in Europe. This is a very dangerous moment for the whole world. A new nuclear arms race is emerging and the threat of nuclear war grows by the day. The movement must be ready to rise up and oppose the return of US nuclear missiles on British soil if the treaty is to be scrapped at the end of the 6-month withdrawal period. (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, “Trump Abandons INF Treaty,” February 1, 2019)
The struggle against a new nuclear arms race that would imperil the population of the entire world must be one of the highest priorities of our time. With the ending of the Cold War in the late 1980s, the greatest symbol of which was the signing of the INF Treaty by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, fears of nuclear war abated and the peace movement demobilized. It is now time for a new world mobilization on behalf of peace to counter the dangerous escalations of our time, which means, first of all, confronting U.S. imperialism.