Donald Trump: what did the president say and what did he do? Impeachment of Donald Trump: the third US president in history who is threatened with removal When trump takes office

Image copyright Getty Images

Donald Trump has become the third president in US history to be impeached by the House of Representatives. The decision on whether Trump will continue to fulfill his duties will now have to be made by the Senate as early as January 2020.

The article on abuse of power received 230 congressional votes in favor of impeachment and 197 votes against.

Article on obstructing the work of Congress - 229 votes for impeachment and 198 against.

To declare impeachment, it was enough to get 216 votes on any of the two articles of charges.

230-197 abuse of power

229-198 Opposition to the work of Congress

0 Republicans backed both charges

2 Democrats against the first accusation

3 Democrats against the second accusation

Source: BBC

On the eve of the vote in the House of Representatives, Democrats made it clear that they were not going to give up trying to remove Donald Trump from power. This vote, however, does not mean that the President of the United States will have to leave his post, and the officially announced impeachment will not prevent him from being elected for another term.

• Impeachment: Democrats bring two charges against Trump at once
• Impeachment: Democrats filed claims against Trump. What's next?
• Trump's impeachment: how the process works and whether the Democrats will remove him from power

Last Monday, Democrats in Congress released a 658-page report accusing the president of bribery and an attempt to force the President of Ukraine to launch an investigation into former US Vice President Joe Biden.

Articles of impeachment

Prior to that, the Congressional Judiciary Committee had approved articles of impeachment against the president - abuse of power and obstruction of the work of Congress. Abuse meant only a conversation between Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on July 25 this year.

During the conversation, the head of the White House asked him to launch an investigation into former Vice President Biden. His son Hunter Biden served on the board of directors of the Ukrainian state oil and gas company Burisma from 2014 to 2019, and, according to the US president, was involved in corruption schemes in this country.

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption On the day of the congressional vote, Trump flew to the pre-Christmas rally of his supporters in Michigan

Joe Biden at that time served as the US Administration Commissioner for Ukraine, and, according to the Republicans in Congress, he was involved in the dismissal of the heads of Ukrainian law enforcement agencies, who were preparing investigations, including against his son on charges of corruption.

Democrats regard these accusations as a call to a foreign state to interfere in the US election process.

In addition, the Democrats in Congress charged the US President with obstructing the work of the House of Representatives: the head of the White House forbade high-ranking administration officials to answer the calls of legislators and speak at hearings in committees as part of the impeachment procedure.

“The counts allege that President Trump has placed his personal and political interests ahead of national security interests, the interests of our fair and free elections... He has engaged in wrongdoing that will continue if we do not stop it. That is why President Trump must be subjected to impeached and removed from power," the Congressional Judiciary Committee said in a report.

On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee approved the rules for voting in impeachment proceedings. However, few doubted that the process would be approved by the legislators in Congress: the committee consists of nine Democrats and only four Republicans who oppose impeachment.

How many Democrats refused to vote?

Even before the impeachment debate in Congress, two representatives of the Democratic Party publicly stated that they were not going to support the initiative to remove the US president from power.

Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey and Colleen Peterson of Minnesota said they would not support charges against the incumbent. At the beginning of the week, American media reported that after this statement, employees of Congressman Van Drew's office filed for resignation.

How many Republicans supported impeachment?

Even before Wednesday's meeting, Democratic leaders called the impeachment of the incumbent US president a "vote of conscience," emphasizing that it has the same significance as voting to send American soldiers to war.

Image copyright Reuters

In November 2019, the Democrats gained control of the House of Representatives by winning the midterm elections. As a result, Trump's opponents had 31 constituencies, which were previously represented by Republicans. The House of Representatives has 233 Democrats and 197 Republicans. One seat is held by an independent legislator, while four remain vacant.

At the same time, not a single Republican supported the impeachment procedure. As early as Monday, two days before the vote, the leader of the Republican majority in Congress, Kevin McCarthy, said that he was not going to refuse to support the president, and none of his party comrades would vote for impeachment.

What will the Senate decide?

After a vote in the House of Representatives, the decision is passed to the Senate, which will finally decide the fate of the President of the United States. According to the constitution, the decision of the congress on impeachment has a "privileged" status, so the Upper House is obliged to postpone all other discussions and consider this initiative first.

Earlier this week, Congressional Democratic leader Chuck Schumer proposed Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell to reach a compromise and agree on an impeachment trial.

According to the constitution, the Senate must consider charges approved by Congress, and all senators in this process will serve as members of the jury. In turn, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is required to appoint lawmakers who will act as prosecutors and witnesses for the prosecution, and the White House will be able to send its own lawyers to the hearings.

Who do the Democrats want to call?

On Monday, Congressional Democratic leader Chuck Schumer sent a letter to the Senate asking for the prosecution to call four witnesses for the prosecution - Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, former National Security Adviser John Bolton, Office of Management and Budget Officer Michael Duffy, and an adviser to the incumbent. Chief of Staff Robert Blair.

All of them, according to the Democrats, were involved in the suspension of military assistance to Ukraine in the amount of $391 million.

Image copyright Reuters Image caption Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi called Trump a threat to democracy and US national security

On Tuesday, Mitch McConnell rejected the Democrats' proposal, reiterating that he was going to coordinate all of his actions in the impeachment process with White House lawyers.

According to the rules, the head of the US Supreme Court, John Roberts, should lead the process of consideration of the impeachment procedure. However, it is not yet clear how long this procedure will take.

In an interview with Fox News last week, Mitch McConnell said he would push for the charges to be heard without calling additional witnesses.

"You know, if you have enough votes and you are sure that the charges have minimal grounds, and this is what the president's lawyers will prefer, you will prefer a short meeting," he said, answering journalists' questions.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

"Putin is laughing at us." How Trump was impeached

President Trump himself, in an interview with reporters, also confirmed that he would prefer a quick consideration of his own case in the Senate.

"I'm ready to do whatever they want, it doesn't mean anything," he said. "I'm ready to go through a long process because I want to see the whistleblower who is a scammer."

What will happen next?

Republicans in Congress are set to begin considering the charges brought by the House of Representatives as early as January 2020. At the same time, few doubt that the upper house of Congress will fully justify the president. His opponents need a two-thirds majority in the Senate, but the Democrats now have only 47 lawmakers to 53.

Another concern is the future of US policy. After Trump is impeached and then the president is acquitted by the Senate, the Democrats will have to work with the White House on a whole list of legislative initiatives. In addition, the announcement of impeachment will not prevent the current US president from running again in the 2020 elections and taking part in the election battles.

How they are going to cooperate with the president after that is not yet known for sure.

"If the president is not held accountable, if my colleagues in the Senate fail to honor their sworn commitments, then our democracy will be in jeopardy," Congressman David Sicillin told the BBC.

On January 20, Washington hosts the inauguration of the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump, who won the majority of the electoral votes. Trump took the oath and officially took office as head of the White House. The oath was also taken by the new Vice President Michael Pence.

About 1,600 guests gathered on Capitol Hill: congressmen, Supreme Court judges, senior officers, governors. The oath of the new president, like that of Barack Obama in 2013, will be taken by the head of the US Supreme Court, John Roberts.

By noon local time (20:00 Minsk time) Trump assumed his new position, by which time Obama's military attache also handed over the nuclear briefcase to his colleague from the Trump team. At 5:00 pm local time (around 1 am Minsk time), Trump, along with the first lady of the country, will cross the threshold of the White House for the first time as its hosts for the next four years.

Donald and Melania Trump at the Lincoln Memorial, Washington, January 20, 2017. Photo: Reuters

By tradition, Trump attended a service at St. John's Church before being sworn in, then, together with his wife and vice president, went to a tea party at the White House, where the outgoing president and first lady Barack and Michelle Obama were waiting for them. The 44th President left a note for his successor, which he placed in the top drawer of his desk in the Oval Office.

Michelle Obama, Melania and Donald Trump, Barack Obama before the traditional tea party at the White House, Washington, January 20, 2017. Photo: Reuters

Attention! You have JavaScript disabled, your browser does not support HTML5, or an older version of Adobe Flash Player is installed.

Among the guests are former US presidents.

The 43rd President of the United States George W. Bush and his wife arrived at the inauguration ceremony of the 45th President Donald Trump. Washington, January 20, 2017. Photo: Reuters
Donald Trump's main rival in the election race, Hillary Clinton, along with her husband and 42nd US President Bill Clinton, also arrived at the inauguration ceremony of Donald Trump. Washington, January 20, 2017. Photo: Reuters

The inauguration takes place amid protests in the country. On January 20, thousands of opponents of Donald Trump rally in New York. Among its participants were celebrities such as actors Robert De Niro, Mark Ruffalo and Cher. have been going on since Trump was elected. The organizers promise protests all day on January 20, as well as a "Women's March" on January 21.

Electors to 227 for Clinton.

In the election program, the new president was going to build a wall from migrants on the border with Mexico, improve relations with Russia and deny protection to those NATO members who do not pay dues.

Equator Donald Trump. How America Becomes Great Again

January 20, 2019 marks exactly two years since the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States. Then, two years ago, the whole world stood still in anticipation, and to say this would not be an exaggeration, whether someone likes it or not. Because the change of official supreme power in the most influential state on the planet is always at least a very important event for everyone. Especially when such an ambiguous and, for many, extremely unexpected figure takes office. But it would also not be an exaggeration to say that America itself held its breath in particular. I think the reasons are quite obvious. And now two years have passed. Trump's presidential term has reached its equator. It is too early to judge the global results of his reign. It will be possible to talk more or less confidently about what his presidency gave the world, at least towards the end of his first term. And, preferably, even the second. But what does his rule bring to America itself? What happens under Donald Trump inside the country he rules? What is "Trumpism" in different spheres of US life?

Foreign policy

If it were possible to name one major defining feature of the foreign policy of the Donald Trump era, for example, characterizing it in one word, then I would say that this word is - confusion. And it manifests itself not only in periodic obvious gaps between the vision of the foreign policy of the president and his administration. In addition to this obvious phenomenon, there is also a deep, viscous quagmire of contradictions in the actions of Mr. Trump himself, in his impulses and unexpected turns, which often contradict each other.

On the one hand, even during the election campaign, Trump insisted on the return of American soldiers from Syria and Afghanistan. Moreover, just after the current Christmas holidays, he confirmed this intention to a group of American Republican Senators, as the US Congressional newspaper The Hill reported on January 16. But at the same time, from time to time, he literally shocked with his militancy. Sometimes even their own advisers. This was manifested, for example, in relation to Iran, on the issue of which Donald Trump has declared pronounced hawkish intentions from the very beginning of his rule.

However, there is confusion here as well. While blatantly demonizing the certainly highly controversial Islamic regime in Tehran, President Trump does not question Iranian interests in Syria – at least not by doing anything of the sort openly and diligently maintaining parity between the Iranian expeditionary force in that country and the forces of the American army. .

A very similar situation is developing in its relations with the DPRK. He either threatens North Korea with “complete destruction”, and, doing this from the UN rostrum, then, after some time, he claims that he “fell in love” with Kim Jong Un. Despite the fact that the head of the DPRK, who has not yet become a real political heavyweight, has by no means shown even a symbolic readiness to dismantle its nuclear arsenal.

As for relations with Russia, if you look closely, they are a reference reflection of those internal contradictions of foreign policy trumpism, which have already been mentioned above. On the one hand, most Putin he criticizes, in general, very reluctantly, which, of course, strengthens the long-standing suspicions that he is “being under the power of the Kremlin”, which is still being pumped up by the press of the “democrats”. It can be assumed that President Trump himself might not be opposed to some détente in bilateral relations with the largest state in the Eastern Hemisphere. But his administration has clearly taken a much tougher stance on this issue. In fact, speaking out against Russia, she adheres to a much more radical line of behavior than her predecessors of the times. Barack Obama, initiating more and more sanctions, blocking Moscow's economic initiatives, supplying lethal weapons to the ruling regime in Ukraine.

However, this has happened before.

But there are three fundamental points that make the foreign policy of the Trump period completely different in nature from all his predecessors for the foreseeable period.

The second fundamental point in Donald Trump's foreign policy vision is the desire to erase the legacy of Barack Obama and many of his predecessors. Almost everything that Obama once actively advocated was either torpedoed by Trump or called into question by him: from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, to the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Paris climate agreement.

And the third fundamental point of foreign policy trumpism is distrust of multilateral agreements and collective political institutions. For the hardened New York businessman Trump, the template in negotiations (and he does not see the difference between business and political negotiations, which has been noted many times), and in the conclusion of transactions is, first of all, direct communication / clash / confrontation of two personalities - a kind of duel of two powerful people standing face to face. This is certainly a kind of professional deformation of the personality - a vision and understanding of the processes that guided him all his life, for many years doing big business. And he continues to be guided by this after he has led the United States. All sorts of "round tables" with many opinions and endless conversations frankly annoy him - he sincerely cannot understand why he should listen to all these foreigners of various calibers, different positions and views, many of whom are not endowed with power at all and do not decide anything at all in this the world. Well, if so, why should he know their opinion? He chose John Bolton national security adviser, primarily in order to stir up this anthill, to make American politics extremely brutal, ready to cut those knots that are too long and difficult to untie.

In general, Trump, as the supreme leader of his country, has not yet passed the test of a real international crisis, which he did not create himself and in relation to which his will is not decisive. Well, there are two years left before the end of his presidential term - we will see if his geopolitical luck continues.

Economy

“There has never been such a powerful economic growth in the history of the United States,” Donald Trump told reporters last year. And this is not far from the truth. He clearly has something to brag about for two years in the White House.

America's current unemployment rate is close to nothing seen since the moon landing. It is noted that a large number of the economically active population left "from the sidelines of life" and began to look for work. There is a reason for this: in two years under Trump, there were more than 5 million jobs created.

Yes, of course, the claim that presidents “create” jobs is rather dubious. But it is even more doubtful to consider that their course has nothing to do with this - the fact remains. However, the current economic growth in America began under Barack Obama. Which, however, does not negate the success of Trump himself, who expresses his intention to become “the greatest creator of jobs that the Lord has ever created.”

In this, he has something to strive for, since he is not a champion in this indicator. At the moment the record is held here Bill Clinton, which created 23 million jobs in two terms. Barack Obama, who was elected in the wake of the worst recession in living memory, created 10 million jobs in two terms and is in second place. Nevertheless, it is too early to draw conclusions here - the start in this matter, nevertheless, is taken promising. Although, there is no small danger in this - after 99 months of growth in the number of jobs in the country, the likelihood of a significant decline is very high.

In one way, however, Trump already has a fundamental advantage over Obama: Under him, wage growth is finally starting to gain momentum — and this is coming after years of stagnation.

In other areas, Trump's economic performance is less clear.

To date, the biggest achievement of his economic policy is considered to be the new $1.5 trillion tax cut package of November 2017. The move has received a lot of controversy and has critics on both the left and the right. In particular, the most criticized reduction in corporate tax from 35% to 20%, which was likely one of the reasons for the victory of the Democrats in the midterm elections in November

And, of course, speaking of Trump's economic policy, it is impossible not to mention its most obvious sign - trade wars. Trump has, in fact, crossed out decades of a well-established system of trade agreements and pitted America against its largest trading partners. The consequences of the unrest he sowed are still being assessed, but the obvious ones are dramatic sell-offs in the stock markets and possibly a slowdown in the Chinese economy. This, in particular, affected the Apple corporation, which issued the first warning to investors since 2002 about lowering the profit forecast, motivating this precisely by the state of affairs in China. Well, this is probably not the last warning.

The undeniable fact is that Trump's economic populism helped him become president. Whether he succeeds in running for a second term will most likely depend on whether he can keep the promises he made when he was elected to the first. So far, his steps in this direction can be considered successful. How productive they will be in the end - time will tell very soon.

Judicial scope

In the American picture of the world, this area is one of the key ones, and understanding what is happening there is no less important when describing America than the economy and foreign policy. And what is happening in the US judiciary now could safely be called "Operation Patriarchy." Yes, old white males are not the dominant group in the demographics of the United States, but the 72-year-old president and 76-year-old Senate leader Mitch McConnell do their best to ensure their pre-eminence in the American courts.

Over the past two years, they have diligently staffed the US high courts with those who belong to this particular population group - white conservative men, whose lifelong status secures these assignments firmly.

Of course, for any party in power, such a line of behavior is a common thing, and not only in America. Here, oddly enough, Turkey is very similar to it, where the attitude towards the judiciary is no less reverent. True, this is expressed a little differently: after the recent coup attempt, mass purges took place there not only in the army, but also among the judges - a fifth of them were replaced. However, returning to American affairs, we can say that in this case it is part of Mitch McConnell's long-term strategy. At one time, he blocked dozens of Obama's candidates for US federal courts, refusing to vote in the Senate, joining the game of bringing a Republican to the presidency in 2016. For example, after the death in 2016 of a judge of the Supreme Court Antonina Scalia McConnell used his control of the Senate to keep the seat vacant for 293 days, blocking Obama's nomination Merrick Garland. For which, later, the Democrats took revenge on Trump himself. What is happening now is a logical continuation of this strategy.

For white evangelical Christians in America's "Bible Belt," the vacant Supreme Court seat was the most compelling reason to vote for Trump, a triple-married alleged serial adulterer who bragged about his sexual exploits and was clearly not "their dream candidate" to religious conservatives. And Trump did not deceive their expectations by nominating a conservative Neil Gorsuch.

Already in 2018, another candidate was appointed to the Supreme Court - Brett Kavanaugh, which had a rather scandalous character in American society. Allegations of sexual harassment were brought against him, which he denied. As a result, despite the protests of opponents, this appointment was nevertheless carried out in an almost forced manner.

As a result, Trump and McConnell formed a conservative majority in the Supreme Court, which can now last for decades, which, in the long term, gives them hope for very significant anti-liberal changes. For example, to cancel the well-known so-called. the Roy v. Wade decision of 1973, which secured the right to abortion.

Just as fast, McConnell and Trump are moving towards a "shift to the right" of the appellate and district courts.

In the past two years, up to 85 judges have been appointed by Trump: 2 to the Supreme Court, 30 to the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and 53 to the District Courts. This is much faster and more efficient than Obama, whose eight-year record was 2 Supreme Court justices, 55 appellate judges, and 268 district judges.

What's more, Trump currently has 70 more candidates in the "operational reserve" that can be approved by a simple majority vote in the Senate, where the Republicans have a 53/47 advantage. And also dominated by white men of respectable age.

House of Representatives, again controlled by Democrats under the leadership Nancy Pelosi, of course, can block republican legislative initiatives. But against Trump's determination to nominate and appoint conservative judges, the Democrats on Capitol Hill are powerless.

Ecology

Trump's attitude to the topic of environmental protection is perhaps most strikingly characterized by the fact that he canceled Obama's plan to combat global warming, calling it falsification, as well as a corruption scandal around Scott Pruitt, now former head of the Environmental Protection Agency.

But this is, rather, what is on the surface and reflects only a small part of the processes going on much more quietly and routinely. For example, during the sleepy and relaxed period between Christmas and New Year's, the EPA decided that emission control regulations were too burdensome for coal companies and should be eliminated in their current form.

This list of rules is the latest in a list of about eighty environmental regulations that have either been repealed or are about to be repealed by the Trump administration. It also dismantles Obama's founding policies and undoes all of his efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector, the planned pesticide ban, and significantly soften the environmental standards of car fuel systems.

On the latter, the new vehicle environmental regulation regime is in a bitter fight with the state of California, which has much stricter pollution control regulations in this area than federal standards. What will be the outcome of this confrontation, it is difficult to predict.

emigrants

Here, Donald Trump immediately took a very serious start. In the first half of 2018, Trump legitimized the forcible separation of migrant children from their families, often causing dramatic scenes in border courtrooms and within the walls of local detention centers, where mothers and fathers begged for the return of their children. In fact, since 2017, thousands of immigrant families across America have gone through this procedure. It is in this regard that very significant bipartisan pressure was exerted on Donald Trump. Trump's daughter and close adviser Ivanka described the moment as critical for her father's administration, which formally abandoned the policy in June 2018. However, the radical immigration agenda has not been replaced and continues to be pursued in other ways.

This concerns not only the natives of Mexico. For example, Trump imposed a ban on travel to America from a number of Muslim countries, including visits to relatives already living in the United States.

The immigration authorities, which have received additional powers, continue to increase the number of arrests and deportations. Currently record 44,000 people are contained in an "immigration detention" because the immigration courts simply can't keep up with the influx of new cases. The new rules on deportation also include those who have already lived in America for decades, started a family and completely arranged their lives in a new place.

At the same time, the Trump administration has reduced the quota for accepting refugees into the country to record low - 30,000 people per year. The quotas for the issuance of "green cards" were also reduced, the lottery for the issuance of which was completely proposed to be canceled. In addition, Donald Trump announced that he intends to stop the practice of obtaining American citizenship for children of illegal immigrants born in the United States.

The real “icing on the cake” in this matter is the decision to build a concrete wall on the border with Mexico, the financing of which President Trump intends to entrust to Mexico itself.

In general, the vector of his administration's policy on the emigration issue is formulated very clearly, clearly motivated and is unlikely to change under any pressure.

Make America Great Again

"Let's Make America Great Again." The slogan under which Donald Trump was elected president. And the promise he made to those who elected him. Will he deliver what he promised? So far it is difficult to say: two years is too short a period to assert anything reliably. But one thing is clear - he aspires to. And at least he wants to "make America great again". At least in the sense that he puts into it. How good it is for Russia - time will tell. As well as how good it will be for America itself.

Donald Trump is a highly controversial person and a highly controversial president. His decisions are controversial and in America itself cause a whole range of emotions, from enthusiasm to furious indignation. The intensity of criticism against him is very high and does not subside. The policy he leads is not supported by a part of American society in the most radical way. But the voters of Donald Trump himself belong to a different part of this society. His policies are supported by those who voted for him. And who will undoubtedly vote for him again, if what he has already undertaken is completed to the end. He knows it. And therefore, the policy that he pursued in the past two years will not change in the next. And all of the above there will be a logical continuation. And opposition to this within America will also be very serious. This is already quite predictable.

https://www.site/2019-11-08/chego_smog_dobitsya_donald_tramp_na_postu_prezidenta_za_tri_goda

“In Trump’s list of priorities, Russia is somewhere in 15th place”

What has Donald Trump accomplished in three years as President of the United States?

Michael Brochstein / ZUMAPRESS.com / Global Look Press

November 8 marks exactly three years since the US presidential election, during which Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton. What are the intermediate results of his reign for America, Russia and the world as a whole? Did he justify the trust of his electorate and did he actually turn out to be the same fiend that the liberal press portrayed him as? The site talks about this with Boris Kagarlitsky, professor at the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences.

“Trump’s economic performance is better than any U.S. president’s performance in the past 20 years”

It has been three years since Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. And all these three years they threaten him with impeachment. How do you assess the impeachment scenario for Trump, will he last his first presidential term?

- At the moment, this threat is completely unrealistic, because it cannot be technically carried out before the elections. It must be taken into account that impeachment supporters do not have a stable majority in Congress. In addition, this is a complex procedure that allows the president to take certain measures in his defense. So this is nothing more than a PR of politicians of the Democratic Party, who are trying not so much to intimidate Trump as to draw attention to themselves. But although the topic of impeachment is not serious, it reflects the level of American politics. Firstly, the degree of its tightening, and secondly, the degree of helplessness of the Democrats, who are now opposed to Trump, but at the same time cannot and do not want to offer a meaningful alternative.

I do not think that this problem somehow puts pressure on Trump psychologically. He has many other real problems that he needs to solve. And most of them are due to his own inconsistency, his inability to create a well-functioning team. All of them are generated by his own activities, and not by opponents who have conceived impeachment.

- In 2016, in an interview with the site, you: “Trump's support is made up of a broad corporate block, which includes workers in the real sector, medium and small businesses. It doesn't sound like Marxist notions of class solidarity, but it's solidarity nonetheless. Solidarity against the dictatorship of finance capital in the US, the dictatorship of the mass media, the "society of the spectacle", which says that democracy is the protection of diverse minorities. Has the attitude of his electorate towards him changed over these three years?

- For three years, dissatisfaction with the dictatorship of finance capital has only intensified. People are anti-corporations and anti-liberal establishment behavior. The majority that voted for Trump in 2016 remains. And what’s more, if the Democrats don’t come up with a real left-wing alternative in 2020, then Trump could win again. Another issue is that this majority is disappointed. Not so much even by Trump, but by the fact that there are few real results from his rule. Yes, he took some steps to implement his promises, but they were clearly not enough. For representatives of the real sector, blue-collar workers, the working masses, it is important that a president appears who is able to carry out a program in their interests, but more radically. Perhaps this is desirable even for a part of the bourgeoisie, but precisely for those who are oriented towards production, the domestic market, and so on. But Trump's inconsistency did not allow him to implement everything he had in mind in three years.

Amir Levy / ZUMAPRESS.com / Global Look Press

This led him to set the stage well for the return of Bernie Sanders, who, as a member of the Democratic left, has an agenda much like Trump's. Therefore, if the Democrats nominate Sanders for president, then they will have a great chance to beat Trump, taking the lion's share of his electorate from him. Another thing is that the Democrats will do everything possible to keep Sanders out of the nomination. And then the Trump electorate will once again vote for him in 2020.

- In your opinion, did Trump manage to raise the real sector of the US economy as opposed to the "dictatorship of financial capital"?

Yes, we can say that not enough jobs have been created, but nevertheless, the results of the Trump administration in the economy are better than the results of any US president in the last 20 years. Ordinary American workers understand that protectionism has paid off. True, since Trump's policy is inconsistent and does not involve complex social and structural transformations, it brings little results.

Trump is being accused of starting a trade war with China that will hurt not only China, but the entire global economy. In particular, the Russian economist Vladimir Milov and some others regularly talk about this. What do you think, how justified are Trump's steps and will they really drag the world into a new economic crisis?

Many liberal economists attribute the recession and stagnation in the economy to the US trade war with China. In my opinion, everything is exactly the opposite. The trade war is a consequence of the accumulated problems in the global economy. This is a reaction and result of the stagnation of the world market. You know, if a person is sick, then they begin to treat him. Another thing is that treatment can be ineffective, inconsistent, not very high quality. And we are told that the whole cause of the disease is that the patient is treated, as if the disease does not exist at all. All liberal propaganda is at this level. They ignore the crisis in the global economy, while Trump and other politicians are trying to resist the crisis.

“Uncontrolled migration is a policy of the white elite aimed at oppressing people of color”

- The establishment accuses Trump of right-wing radicalism, of restricting migration in a country that migrants created - and so on. And although the wall along the border between Mexico and the United States, as Trump saw it, has not yet been built, he continues to make loud statements to limit migration and even some steps in this direction. In particular, Trump suggested denying a green card to those who actively use social benefits. However, the court has recently blocked this bill. How realistic are the measures he proposes and will he be able to implement them?

- In fact, almost no measures have been taken for three years. These measures exist only on a symbolic level. And they rather weaken Trump, because he does not really do anything, but only says words that his opponents immediately use. Trump is the case when they say about a dog: it barks loudly, but does not bite. This is a manifestation of his class limitations, since he represents one of the groups of the same American establishment. But, however, more realistically tuned and adequately understanding where the economic processes are moving.

Omar Martinez / dpa / Global Look Press

It is clear that the issue of limiting migration is very important for American society. And first of all for those very minorities that the liberals allegedly protect. Thanks to uncontrolled migration, it is African and Hispanic Americans who have lost most of their jobs. If 10 Mexicans work for you, and another 150 Mexicans come to their place, completely hungry and ready to work for less money, then, naturally, these 10 previously settled Mexicans will either lose their jobs or will be forced to work for a salary two to three times less . This is a fact that liberal economists are trying to hide: migration reduces wages and job security, and the main victims are representatives of ethnic minorities, yesterday's immigrants.

And we must understand that the white establishment does not suffer from immigration, but only wins. If you take Hollywood stars, they use the labor of migrants practically for free. They have cheap servants, cheap Mexican restaurants with exotic food, fresh vegetables that are grown on plantations where they use virtually slave labor. They enjoy it all. And their incomes, their jobs and positions in society are not threatened by the presence of half-starved immigrants. At the same time, they make films in which they show the “horrors” of migration restrictions. But in reality, migration threatens those who came from Mexico 20 years earlier. Uncontrolled migration is a policy of the white elite aimed at oppressing ethnic minorities of color. This is a classic described by Marx: the formation of a reserve army of labor in order to put pressure on workers.

- In your opinion, who is right in this situation: Trump and his Republicans or their opponents from the Democratic camp? Does the US need to seriously overhaul immigration laws?

- Necessarily. Uncontrolled migration is extremely beneficial for transnational capital, when, on the one hand, pressure is constantly created in the labor market, workers are deprived of their rights, and in poor countries of the South, instead of fighting for their rights, people try to move to another state, to the North. Where they, in turn, create pressure on local workers trying to protect their rights. That is, a global mechanism of strikebreaking has been created. Clearly, individual immigrants cannot be blamed. But the system is arranged in such a way that if it is not broken, it will lead to the impoverishment of the working population. And on both sides of the border.

“Russia is being held up like a dark spot on the globe”

- In Russia, many politicians enthusiastically welcomed the election of Trump. Let us recall the statements of deputies Nikonov, Zhirinovsky, Makarenko and mass applause within the walls of the State Duma on this occasion. The governor of the Omsk region, Viktor Nazarov, generally stated that Trump's victory is "a victory for United Russia." To what extent have these expectations been met?

- These enthusiasm of our politicians about the coming to power of Trump testify to the extreme level of not only their political incompetence, but also political savagery. It's not that they don't understand how American politics works, but they don't understand how politics and political struggle work in general. It is clear that the liberal establishment used the accusation against Trump, suspected of having links with Russia, but this is propaganda like any other. It's amazing that our analysts are ready to take any stupid propaganda at face value.

— And what about the Mueller report, doesn’t it explain the scheme of Russian interference in the US presidential election?

All these are elements of the domestic political struggle in the United States. Russia as such is of little concern to anyone. When you come to Washington, you are amazed at how much there is no interest in our country. During the Cold War, things were completely different. There were many institutes, there were research programs, there was a serious interest. All of this was funded. By the way, the level of funding indicates the seriousness of the attitude to the problem. Now it is almost impossible to get money in America for serious research on Russia.

White House / Flickr.com / Global Look Press

- Under Trump, new sanctions laws were adopted regarding the interests of Russia. True, their real application did not happen. In your opinion, does Trump keep Russia on a short leash, or does he really not want to punish Russia, aggravate relations with her?

We naively believe that the whole world only thinks about us. In reality, Russia is somewhere in the 15th place on the list of Trump's presidential priorities. Maybe he remembers about her once a day for a couple of minutes. Russia plays no major role on Trump's political agenda. It pops up solely for some propaganda purposes. Putin has become a Hollywood villain who can be mentioned on occasion in a purely discursive rather than substantive way. All these are beautiful fairy tales that can be told to each other, but the fact is that Russia does not play a significant role in world politics. Yes, we imagine ourselves as such, but these are only our illusions, which have nothing to do with reality.

As for the sanctions laws, the Americans are always taking some kind of sanctions against different countries. This is a classic measure of America's interaction with countries with which it does not have a full understanding. But the fact is that North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia are far more important to the US than Russia. This policy will continue under any president, because, strictly speaking, American diplomacy knows no other method of influence. Here you still need to understand that over the past 20 years, after the end of the Cold War, American diplomacy has critically degraded.

- In your opinion, why does Trump pay so much attention to North Korea, unlike his predecessors, in three years he has met with its leader Kim Jong-un more than once, does he really hope to change it?

- Some results can be achieved through North Korea, but no results can be achieved through Russia. Russia is kept as a kind of dark spot on the globe, in which no changes can occur, but there is no great harm from it either.

- Trump has repeatedly blamed Europe, in particular Germany, for being dependent on Russian gas, but at the same time using US military power to protect its interests from Russia. At the same time, Trump offered to return Russia to the G8, that is, to stop treating it as a pariah. So what is his vision of the place and role of Russia in US-EU relations?

- There is no vision. Trump is, in principle, an inconsistent person and has little ability to form strategies. Even if he forms some kind of agenda, he does it superficially and often contradicts himself. At the same time, Russia is not a priority for him. Here China is another matter. Interest in North Korea is due precisely to interest in China. These countries are interconnected, and through North Korea it is possible to put pressure on China. As for Russia, today he said one thing about it, tomorrow another, it all depends on how his relations with other partners develop, for example Germany, which is more important to him. That is, Russia is a bargaining chip.

Trump announced the withdrawal of US troops from Syria. How beneficial is this decision for Russia?

- The announcement has been made, but the troops have not been withdrawn, control over the oil fields in Kurdistan is maintained. That is, this is another inconsistency, which is not followed by radical changes in politics. As for the benefits of Russia, it also has no strategy in Syria, except for the interests of Prigozhin and a number of Russian companies. All this is not a strategy, but support for specific friends of the president, everything happens at the level of personal relations between high-ranking officials and oligarchs. The state here only supports them.

- Recently, one of Trump's rivals, Joe Biden, said that "Putin's days of tyranny will be over." If the “Russian card” is played again in the elections in 2020, how will this affect our country?

— Russia is in a state of strategic decline, from which it can emerge only through internal dynamics of development. Therefore, it is not so important what they say about us in the United States - the outcome of events in Russia is determined by internal factors and economic processes. As for Biden, he will most likely lose to Trump. As I said, only Sanders can be a real opponent for him. And Biden's candidacy is being promoted by the establishment of the Democratic Party, not because they hope for his victory over Trump, but because it is more important for them not to miss Sanders in the election than to defeat the current president.

- If you evaluate the results of Trump's rule in several theses, what things would you note first of all?

- Trump was able to provide the American economy with the longest period of expansion in several decades. This suggests that protectionism and the trade war with China have become a cure for the crisis. Another thing is that the causes of the crisis have not been eliminated, we are talking about palliative care. But even so, Trump is the most successful US President in the last 25-30 years.

The US presidential election is over, the winner is known. However, there is still a couple of months left before Donald Trump's full-fledged entry into office. On November 10, the first step was taken to transfer power from Barack Obama to his successor.

On Thursday, November 10, Barack Obama received Donald Trump at the White House. Despite the fact that the incumbent president openly campaigned for Democratic colleague Hillary Clinton during the election campaign, Obama did not break the tradition according to which the incumbent US leader conducts a personal conversation with his successor. At the same time, the wives of politicians, Melania Trump and Michelle Obama, also meet in the White House.

Trump's team is already actively recruiting personnel for leading government posts. Information is leaking to the press about who can take high positions, but officially everything is kept secret for now. already noted on this.

Trump, since the announcement of the results of the vote, already has the right to receive information from intelligence agencies about secret government operations or current secret information about foreign leaders.

The winner of the presidential election is known, but formally the electoral vote is yet to come. They will vote in accordance with the results of elections in each of the states. The procedure will take place on December 19, and the results will be announced on January 6, 2017 in the Senate.

For now, Barack Obama will continue to fly aboard presidential airliners. "Air Force One" will go into the possession of Donald Trump and his associates next year, on January 20.

The official handover of the keys to the White House will take place on the day of the inauguration of the new US president on January 20. However, Barack Obama and his family will start moving out earlier - before Trump moves in, the building will be renovated and the furniture will be replaced. The Obamas plan to stay in Washington until 2018, when both daughters graduate from high school.

Donald Trump will also be able to dispose of US nuclear weapons after his inauguration on January 20. Then he will become the owner of a briefcase with codes to activate the nuclear arsenal. The suitcase is handcuffed to the wrist of one of the officers of the US armed forces, who must always be near the president.

A full transfer of power is carried out at the time of the inauguration of the new president, which will take place on January 20 at 12 noon local time. Traditionally, this ceremony takes place in front of the Capitol building in Washington. For the 9th President of the United States, William Harrison, holding the inauguration in the open air became fatal: a two-hour speech in the cold wind turned into a cold, which developed into pneumonia due to overwork. A month after taking the oath, Harrison died.

After Donald Trump was elected president, Buzzfeed jokingly began to reassure its readers by running a timer until the next US presidential election. The date of the new vote is indeed already known - November 3, 2020. Donald Trump has the right to run again. True, in 2020 he will be 74 years old. At the same time, 70-year-old Trump will already become the oldest president in US history at the time of his first inauguration. The previous record holder for this indicator, Ronald Reagan, won his first presidential election at 69 years old.