RT – A Remarkably Clear View of America & Trump

This is a video of “Crosstalk” on RT Russia Today. It runs about 24 minutes.

One of the guests is Jim Rogers, a legendary investor who has been out of American TV lately (as he moved to Singapore IIRC, to escape American taxes and our growing debt bomb…) He has a very nice clarity about him. Two other guests, one in the EU and one Russian, have a better understanding of America, our media, and our politics, than anything seen on our news shows. IMHO, well worth the time to watch, just to see how we look from ‘outside’ if nothing else.

This kind of show is why I watch RT. (They also have some loony side of left shows, so be advised… it varies by show host and what their political bent might be. So be selective and critical while you get to know the shows.) I’d love to see this kind of show on American TV, but it isn’t going to happen.

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to RT – A Remarkably Clear View of America & Trump

  1. philjourdan says:

    Having an outside perspective of your own house is always going to reveal things that you have not thought of. Just because their interest is not the US interest does not make them irrelevant.

  2. G. Combs says:

    Quite interesting.

    I do not agree with them on Trump and the Economy.

    First Obummer pi$$ed away 4 Trillion on idiotic things like bat-slashing bird-chomping eco-crucifixes and bird cooking solar (mostly built in China) instead of investing in something useful like nuclear power. He also spent tons on weapons eventually going to ISIS, overthrowing the governments of other countries and generally making a mess of things. In all of these things, with the exception of arms, the US citizens were not gainfully employed.

    Where do I expect the government to spend my taxes? #1. Military. #2. Infra-structure.

    As Trump said our roads, bridges and airports are in horrible shape thanks to deferred maintenance. A trucking company owner mentioned to him that now his new trucks are trashed in a short period of time because of the abuse they take from the poor roads and bridges. This would also include any wheeled vehicle and planes too. — Think the broken window fallacy. The money spent for repair/replacement is not spent on wealth building. Or the broken leeves in New Orleans.

    If tax money goes to rebuild infrastructure then people have jobs and spend within the community. An old Pew report showed a dollar earned by an independent farmer circulated 7 times while a dollar earned by Smithfield (then owned by Brazil and now China) immediately left the community. Of cource that dollar is taxed by the US government 7 times — each time it changes hands.

    Then there was the report to Reagan that showed 1/3 of taxes not collected, 1/3 wasted and 1/3 to interest. If Trump slashes government spending, investigates fraud and fires the deadwood/crooks who deserve it, he can redirect money to where it SHOULD go instead of wasting it WITHOUT raising the overall amount.

    Heck Just slash funding of sanctuary cities and welfare/schooling/healthcare for illegals and you save huge amounts. 30 Million Illegal Immigrants in US, Says Mexico’s Former Ambassador

    I am sorry but in my view illegals DO NOT deserve ANY government funded aid INCLUDING education. ($12,300 per pupil per year) As one person said quit putting out free food and the vermin will go else where — vermin control 101. …. in 2010, the average U.S. household received $31,584 in government benefits and services in these four categories.

    Even if you figure ~10 people per illegal household collecting goodies that is ~$10 billion a year minimum and that does not include the under the table wages and welfare $$$ sent back to Mexico and therefore not getting put into the US economy.

    Trump has a degree in economics. He has been looking at this for a couple of decades and I figure he has a solid handle on the situation.

  3. G. Combs says:

    Sundance gets to the heart of the matter Right Now We Have Longest Soup Lines In History of America, You Just Can’t See Them…

    …That term, “electronic soup cards“, is simply brilliant. It is powerfully brilliant because it is entirely correct…

    Factually, if the number of American people on EBT or SNAP welfare benefits had to line up for soup and meals (instead of just get money on an electronic card for use anywhere), there would be massive lines, miles-long lines, all day and all night in hundreds of thousands of soup kitchens nation-wide. Such visibility would make the soup lines of the great depression seem insignificant by comparison.


    …Electronic Soup Cards” hide a reality, that if truly visible -if people actually had to line up for meals created as a result of that governmental expenditure- would crush the professional political apparatchik within hours.

    Not within months, weeks or days…. within HOURS.

    The only difference between the historical soup lines (featured in imagery above) and today, is a reality that today’s soup lines are invisible.

    That, my friends, is a cognitive paradigm shift….

    A term we should all begin using immediately.

    “Will Vote For Soup”

    Trump sees the double whammy.
    Illegal women collect welfare for themselves and their brood while Hubby works under the table. Since they are illegal and were married outside the USA there is no way to vet this. The end result is not only are the illegals collecting welfare, the Americans who would have had that job, paid taxes and added to the ‘velocity of money’* is instead also collecting unemployment or welfare while the money the illegal earns is shipped off to Mexico and fuels THEIR economy. Hidden Report: Mexico Remittances Total More Than Entire Mexican Oil Revenue….

    * The velocity of money is the rate at which money is exchanged from one transaction to another and how much a unit of currency is used in a given period of time. — investopedia

  4. G. Combs says:

    Also mentioned were the people on Trump’s economic team. One complaint is they are Trump donors. Are these people for real??? Do they expect Hillary donors to help Trump with his economic plans? REALLY???

    CNN Money, 2016/08/05 lists Trump’s Economic Advisers and complains there are no women listed. Women traditionally hate math so I doubt there was a good field to choose from. Trump is interested in ability not Affirmative Action thank goodness. After 8 years of an Affirmative Action government screwing everything up I want ability!

    So here is the list and link to a blurb.
    Steven Feinberg — well he certainly thinks outside the box!
    “…PhD is a Neuro-Strategist, the leading authority on applying the study of brain shifts to Advantage-Making behavior.”

    John Paulson

    Harold Hamm — on the short list for Secretary of Energy. I liked the guy when he spoke at Donald Trump Energy Policy Speech at the Williston Basin Petroleum Conference, Montana He was the son of a sharecropper.

    Andy Beal — this is Daniel Andrew “Andy” Beal, an American banker, businessman, investor, poker player, and amateur mathematician. The guy looks like a winner.

  5. G. Combs says:


    Tom Barrack
    PBS: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/why-billionaire-tom-barrack-believes-trump-can-fix-inequality/
    Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/profile/thomas-barrack/

    Steven Mnuchin — WOW the hate for this guy pouring from the MSM just ran out of my computer and onto the desk. From the Forbes article it looks like he worked for Goldman Sachs, with Fox (Murdoch) and with Soros and has savvy business instincts
    Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2013/10/02/onewests-steven-mnuchin-makes-a-big-bet-on-content/#597c4a66af64

  6. John F. Hultquist says:

    The Dems had hundreds of major donors — folks that end up with some nice job in government.
    Trump had a couple of dozen. He will have to stretch farther to fill some of those positions.
    His first wife, Ivana, has suggested herself as U.S. ambassador to Czechia where she was born. That’s a neat idea. I hope that works out.
    A leftist I know was wondering if The Donald would put everything he owns (and so on) into a blind trust. Easy with stocks and bonds. Not so easy when your daughter is a major operative in the company(s). Conflicts. Sure, but who cares. He doesn’t need any more money, nor the $400,000 annual salary.

  7. Gail Combs says:

    I read at the ConservativeTreeHouse months ago that Trump planned to donate his salary as president to charity. Knowing the Donald, it will probably be the veterans and perhaps others.

  8. sabretoothed says:

    Something fishy going on

  9. sabretoothed says:

    Time Magazine, lets cover up Podesta’s Spirit Cooking lololol http://time.com/4570605/marina-abramovic-leonard-cohen/

  10. philjourdan says:

    @Gail – do we really need another Barrack? :-)

    That guy is proud of his last name, he just has it at the wrong time.

  11. E.M.Smith says:

    Testing to see if Breitbart goes to spam:


    Well, didn’t for me. Then again, having fished a bunch of things out of SPAM, maybe ‘it learned’…

  12. gareth says:

    Bug report?
    err… the video link on the main article is about making and canning French onion soup from scratch.
    Click the comments and it’s replaced by the RT video.
    Maybe a video on Russian Onion Soup would be a good compromise?

  13. philjourdan says:

    That is a damn good idea for Ivana!

  14. gallopingcamel says:

    John F. Hultquist, 16 November 2016 at 2:07 am
    “The Dems had hundreds of major donors — folks that end up with some nice job in government.”

    That is why you have to love Trump’s determination to exclude lobbyists from his administration. Furthermore he expects his inner circle to refrain from lobbying for five years after leaving his team.

    Less than two weeks after his election Trump is showing that he intends to deliver on his promises to the electorate. If he does that the Democrats will be the opposition party for at least the next 20 years.

Comments are closed.