How Democrats are going to overthrow Donald Trump?
Donald Trump’s presidential election win and his inauguration showed the result of the fundamental conflict within the political establishment ever in the U.S.A. Trump’s opponents, including the Democratic Party and its candidate for presidency Hillary Clinton, didn’t accept the publicly-recognized loss and went over to the violent opposition to him and his policy.
They resorted to the organization of mass protests, which include culture and political elite representatives’ negative public utterance against a new President, use of violence in political actions and active shadow actions in frames of so called information war.
A similar political action was approbated during the election campaign. This is about hacks of Democratic Party emails that, in the former administration view, were conducted by the Russian secret services. This method is likely to be ensured a further development and to result in another smear campaign. Thus, “Russian hackers” are likely to once again be accused of hacking public work of state authorities in Europe and the U.S. This thesis is being corroborated by Norwegian security service officer Martin Berntsen, who said that “nine personal civil-servant email accounts in Norway were targeted by hackers in "spear-phishing" attacks”. The attacks had a signature that indicated those behind the hacking could be identified as APT29 (APT29 is another term for Cozy Bear, the hackers that last year broke into U.S. Democratic Party computers and earlier infiltrated unclassified networks at the White House, the State Department and the Joint Chiefs of Staff). “The agency was warned earlier by a foreign agency about "targeted attacks" on the security service”, P.S.T. spokesman underlined.
Playing the “Russian card” in this way pursues far-reaching political goals. From Hillary Clinton and her associates’ point of view, the “Russian trace” on Trump’s victory undermines his political authority. One more action of the kind would only dramatize the situation and avert the normalization of the relations between Russia and a new American government.
From a position of the internal policy, to continue stirring this issue up means to provoke more and more anti – Trump riots in the U.S.A.
The disturbance, started right after Donald Trump won the election, was associated with the name of George Soros. According to some investigative reporters [in particular, there are some pieces of information how a George Soros – backed organization MoveOn.org supports protesting Americans on Donald Trump for President Facebook], the Democracy Alliance is taking an important role in mass disorders organization and propaganda.
The Democracy Alliance is another term for the Club of Donors, functioning as a part of the Democratic Party and financed by Soros and his sympathizers. There’s been a leak that this organization elaborated a plan to bring discredit on Trump’s first 100 days. Gara LaMarche, the president of the D.A., told that “Soros and his foundations have experience with xenophobia in Europe” and “have devoted his foundations to protecting the kinds of open societies around the world that were then threatened in the United States itself”.
According to Daily Caller, a tax-exempt organization The Progress Unity Fund is providing the funding for protests against Trump. It has the same classification as the Red Cross. The group’s mission is to “provide a progressive alternative to mainstream charities”. The fund provides the financial backing for Act Now To Stop War & End Racism (ANSWER) Coalition, a left-wing activist group that began organizing “emergency protests” immediately after Trump’s election, including protests in Chicago, New York, DC and San Francisco, among others.
Earlier in the month protesters hurled smoke bombs, broke windows and sparked a massive bonfire, prompting University of California at Berkeley officials to cancel a talk by a polarizing editor of Breitbart News Milo Yiannopoulos out of safety concerns.
According to Public Policy Polling (P.P.P.), 35 percent of voters would support an impeachment of President Trump. Only 48 percent of voters said they would oppose an impeachment, and 12 percent abstained from voting. As the matter of fact, this P.P.P. surveyed 725 registered voters on January 30-31, 2017. The statistical uncertainty is less than 3.6 percent. These facts indirectly bring to light the results of whipping up tensions among American citizens, in other words, “information hysteria”.
The U.S. Constitution provides impeachment as the method for removing the president, vice president, federal judges, and other federal officials from office. For the official to be removed from office, two-thirds of the Senate must vote to convict the official, and that is rather impossible under the current circumstances.
When the protests were of a peaceful character, they accorded with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (freedom of religion, press, speech, expression, and etc.). The use of violence and mass anti-governmental propaganda then seem to be of an anti- constitutional and illicit character. However, there is a loop-hole in the law.
Under ongoing intensification of retaliatory measures the protesters may appeal to the Supreme Court and demand the interpretation of the following provision of the Declaration of Independence [June 7, 1776] in their favor:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”
The demanded interpretation of the abstract [it should be taken into account that if the judgment is given by the Supreme Court, it can’t be reviewed in a lower court] may become the legal basis for Trump’s opponents. It also explains why he’s undertaking efforts to make his candidate Neil Gorsuch the Supreme Court Justice.
Consequently, the earlier approbated Color Revolution technologies are being nowadays applied right in the U.S.A. Political scientists from all over the world consider mass protests in America very much similar to Color Revolutions, but the U.S. revolution would probably be assigned a name of “the Pink Revolution”.
They resorted to the organization of mass protests, which include culture and political elite representatives’ negative public utterance against a new President, use of violence in political actions and active shadow actions in frames of so called information war.
A similar political action was approbated during the election campaign. This is about hacks of Democratic Party emails that, in the former administration view, were conducted by the Russian secret services. This method is likely to be ensured a further development and to result in another smear campaign. Thus, “Russian hackers” are likely to once again be accused of hacking public work of state authorities in Europe and the U.S. This thesis is being corroborated by Norwegian security service officer Martin Berntsen, who said that “nine personal civil-servant email accounts in Norway were targeted by hackers in "spear-phishing" attacks”. The attacks had a signature that indicated those behind the hacking could be identified as APT29 (APT29 is another term for Cozy Bear, the hackers that last year broke into U.S. Democratic Party computers and earlier infiltrated unclassified networks at the White House, the State Department and the Joint Chiefs of Staff). “The agency was warned earlier by a foreign agency about "targeted attacks" on the security service”, P.S.T. spokesman underlined.
Playing the “Russian card” in this way pursues far-reaching political goals. From Hillary Clinton and her associates’ point of view, the “Russian trace” on Trump’s victory undermines his political authority. One more action of the kind would only dramatize the situation and avert the normalization of the relations between Russia and a new American government.
From a position of the internal policy, to continue stirring this issue up means to provoke more and more anti – Trump riots in the U.S.A.
The disturbance, started right after Donald Trump won the election, was associated with the name of George Soros. According to some investigative reporters [in particular, there are some pieces of information how a George Soros – backed organization MoveOn.org supports protesting Americans on Donald Trump for President Facebook], the Democracy Alliance is taking an important role in mass disorders organization and propaganda.
The Democracy Alliance is another term for the Club of Donors, functioning as a part of the Democratic Party and financed by Soros and his sympathizers. There’s been a leak that this organization elaborated a plan to bring discredit on Trump’s first 100 days. Gara LaMarche, the president of the D.A., told that “Soros and his foundations have experience with xenophobia in Europe” and “have devoted his foundations to protecting the kinds of open societies around the world that were then threatened in the United States itself”.
According to Daily Caller, a tax-exempt organization The Progress Unity Fund is providing the funding for protests against Trump. It has the same classification as the Red Cross. The group’s mission is to “provide a progressive alternative to mainstream charities”. The fund provides the financial backing for Act Now To Stop War & End Racism (ANSWER) Coalition, a left-wing activist group that began organizing “emergency protests” immediately after Trump’s election, including protests in Chicago, New York, DC and San Francisco, among others.
Earlier in the month protesters hurled smoke bombs, broke windows and sparked a massive bonfire, prompting University of California at Berkeley officials to cancel a talk by a polarizing editor of Breitbart News Milo Yiannopoulos out of safety concerns.
According to Public Policy Polling (P.P.P.), 35 percent of voters would support an impeachment of President Trump. Only 48 percent of voters said they would oppose an impeachment, and 12 percent abstained from voting. As the matter of fact, this P.P.P. surveyed 725 registered voters on January 30-31, 2017. The statistical uncertainty is less than 3.6 percent. These facts indirectly bring to light the results of whipping up tensions among American citizens, in other words, “information hysteria”.
The U.S. Constitution provides impeachment as the method for removing the president, vice president, federal judges, and other federal officials from office. For the official to be removed from office, two-thirds of the Senate must vote to convict the official, and that is rather impossible under the current circumstances.
When the protests were of a peaceful character, they accorded with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (freedom of religion, press, speech, expression, and etc.). The use of violence and mass anti-governmental propaganda then seem to be of an anti- constitutional and illicit character. However, there is a loop-hole in the law.
Under ongoing intensification of retaliatory measures the protesters may appeal to the Supreme Court and demand the interpretation of the following provision of the Declaration of Independence [June 7, 1776] in their favor:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”
The demanded interpretation of the abstract [it should be taken into account that if the judgment is given by the Supreme Court, it can’t be reviewed in a lower court] may become the legal basis for Trump’s opponents. It also explains why he’s undertaking efforts to make his candidate Neil Gorsuch the Supreme Court Justice.
Consequently, the earlier approbated Color Revolution technologies are being nowadays applied right in the U.S.A. Political scientists from all over the world consider mass protests in America very much similar to Color Revolutions, but the U.S. revolution would probably be assigned a name of “the Pink Revolution”.