Trump’s Fake Anti-Establishment Con

Trump’s Fake Anti-Establishment Con November 13, 2016

Most of the people who voted for Trump did so largely because they believed he was truly anti-establishment, that he would go to Washington and “drain the swamp” or corrupt politicians taking payoffs from lobbyists and be a new and totally different kind of Republican president. They got punked.


Trumpface4

An organizational chart of Trump’s transition team shows it to be crawling with corporate lobbyists, representing such clients as Altria, Visa, Coca-Cola, General Electric, Verizon, HSBC, Pfizer, Dow Chemical, and Duke Energy. And K Street is positively salivating over all the new opportunities they’ll have to deliver goodies to their clients in the Trump era. Who could possibly have predicted such a thing?

The answer is, anyone who was paying attention. Look at the people Trump is considering for his Cabinet, and you won’t find any outside-the-box thinkers burning to work for the little guy. It’s a collection of Republican politicians and corporate plutocrats — not much different from who you’d find in any Republican administration…

No, their commitment is to be of service to that most oppressed and forgotten group of Americans, the wealthy. Trump’s tax plan would give 47 percent of its benefits to the richest one percent of taxpayers. Paul Ryan’s tax plan is even purer — it gives 76 percent of its cuts to the richest one percent in its first year, and by 2025 would feed 99.6 percent of its benefits to the top 1 percent.

Once that’s accomplished, Trump and the Republicans plan to either gut or completely repeal the Dodd-Frank financial regulations, the greatest wish of Wall Street bankers. Can you feel the anti-establishment wind blowing?

That anyone could be gullible enough to fall for this con is sad and pathetic. Seriously, this was his argument: Politicians get bought off by rich people to do their bidding, and I should know because I’ve been buying them off for decades to do my bidding. So they somehow thought that putting in a non-politician who bribes to get what he wants would be so much better than putting in a politician who accepted the bribes. Talk about hiring the fox to guard the chicken coop.


Browse Our Archives



error: Content is protected !!