Martin Zeis, 02.11.2016
In past days we’ve seen scenic occurrences and disclosures by Wikileaks (possibly from inside the US governmetal machinery) in regards to the presidential election process – in particular illicit, criminal practices by Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Prof. Chossudovsky considers the questions:
Who is behind Wikileaks which released the E-Mails?
Who is behind FBI Director James Comey?
Has there been a shift in the Corporate Elite’s unbending support for Hillary Clinton? Or are the Elites divided?
What happens, if both candidates (Clinton, Trump) are “dysfunctional”. Is there a Plan B?
Below excerpts of Chossudovsky’s examination … full text is aattached.
Hillary Clinton: Wall Street’s Losing Horse? Constitutional Crisis? What’s the End Game?
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Since the release of FBI Director Comey’s Second letter to the US Congress, the presidential elections process has gone haywire, out of control. The bipartisan political apparatus is in crisis.
“I FBI director [James Comey] am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.”
Two important questions:
WHO IS BEHIND WIKILEAKS WHICH RELEASED THE EMAILS?
WHO IS BEHIND FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY?
In both cases, we are dealing with powerful interest groups. CUI-BONO?
Has there been a shift in the Corporate Elite’s unbending support for Hillary Clinton? Or are the Elites divided? This is something to be carefully investigated.
FBI Director Comey (image right) did not take this decision on his own. While he was described as responding to pressures from within the FBI, the crucial question is: Who are the power brokers behind James Comey? What mechanism incited him to take that decision?
Does he have a relationship with Trump? Several media have even intimated that Moscow could have been behind Comey’s second letter. An absurd proposition.
The Trigger Mechanism (…)
The corporate elites are not monolithic. Quite the opposite. There are major divisions and conflicts within the ruling corporate establishment. What seems to be unfolding is a division between competing media conglomerates, with Murdoch’s News Corp Group (which includes the WSJ and Fox News) supporting Trump and the Time Warner – CNN Group supporting Clinton. In turn, these media conglomerates are aligned with powerful and competing factions within the corporate establishment.
Those who triggered the release of the WSJ report were fully aware that this would lead to a response by FBI Director James Comey, which in turn would contribute to weakening and undermining Hillary Clinton. (…)
Opposition to Hillary Clinton from within the Armed Forces
There is also evidence of resentment to Clinton from within the Armed Forces. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have expressed their opposition to the adoption of a “No Fly Zone” in Syria, which could lead to a war with Russia. Both the “No Fly Zone” as well as Hillary’s nuclear option “on the table” are the object of debate by America’s top brass. Referring to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran, Hillary said “we will obliterate them”.
What Happens if She is Elected? If elected president, Hillary’s criminal record would haunt her throughout her term in office, leading to the possibility of an impeachment. The presidency would become totally dysfunctional from the very outset, which her corporate sponsors including the defense contractors and Wall Street would prefer to avoid. … If Trump is elected president, there will also be attempts to unseat him, calling for his impeachment.
If both candidates are “dysfunctional”. Is there a Plan B?
National Emergency Measures, Martial Law? Continuity in Government (C.O.G.)
Unquestionably the entire US bipartisan political apparatus is in crisis including US foreign policy, marked by the breakdown of diplomacy, America’s military agenda and the unfolding confrontation with Russia.
While it is difficult to predict what might occur in the wake of the November 8 elections, the unfolding political impasse –coupled with rising geopolitical tensions in Syria, Iraq as well as Eastern Europe on Russia’s border– could potentially lead at some future date to the suspension of Constitutional government under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) HR 1540, signed into law by president Obama on December 31, 2011. Most media have failed to analyze the far-reaching implications of this legislation.
The present impasse in the electoral process is a crisis of legitimacy characterized by the criminalization of the US State, its judicial and law enforcement apparatus. In turn, Washington is committed to a hegemonic US-NATO “war without borders” coupled with the formation of giant trading blocks under the TPP and TTIP proposals. This neoliberal macro-economic agenda has since the early 1980s been conducive to the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.
These developments coupled with a potential constitutional deadlock point in the direction of rising political and social tensions as well as mass protests throughout the US which could lead America at some future date into outright suppression of constitutional government and the imposition of “martial law”.
There are multiple US “martial law” legislative procedures. The adoption of the “National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), HR 1540) would be tantamount to a repeal of civil liberties, the surveillance state, the militarization of law enforcement, the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act. (…)