Demiss Hassabis

COMMENTARY: Bilderberg 2018 – New Tech Helps Oil The Wheels Of The Global Elite

When you talk about conspiracy the sheeple look surprised, but then you see how every year Bilderberg is on the ‘news’. We wonder what the Goy ‘think’ if anything when they read about it. Or is it that they are so brainwashed that they enjoy having their lives ruled by their evil masters. Meanwhile, humanity continues on the path of self-destruction. (Please also read the second article on AI).  

Demiss HassabisWith AI high on the agenda, Demis Hassabis, who runs Google’s DeepMind project, has been invited back. Photograph: Lee Jin-man/AP

“Bilderberg 2018: New Tech Helps Oil The Wheels Of The Global Elite,” Source:

This year’s Bilderberg conference has begun in Turin, and as well as billionaires and bank bosses the attendees include four prime ministers, two deputy prime ministers, the Nato secretary general, the German defense minister, the king of the Netherlands and the indefatigable 95-year-old Henry Kissinger.

Like Kissinger, Bilderberg shows no signs of slowing down or complacency. Its recent flirtation with artificial intelligence and Silicon Valley seems to have blossomed into a full-blown affair. This year a Twitter board member, Patrick Pichette, has got the nod, and returning for the second time is Divesh Makan, who has links to Mark Zuckerberg and whose clients include Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder, and Bilderberg veteran.

With AI high on the agenda, Demis Hassabis, who runs Google’s London-based DeepMind project, has also been invited back. He will be joined by his fellow AI luminary Hartmut Neven, the head of Google’s Quantum Artificial Intelligence lab.

The guest list also features researchers from the fields of biotech, robotics, stem cell research and human-machine bio-integration.

It means the conference has both a futuristic feel and a nostalgic air, with “quantum computing” on the agenda alongside “US world leadership” and “Russia”. So even as Bilderberg races into a bio-integrated smart future, there is a simultaneous resurgence of one of the group’s traditional power cliques: big oil. Royal Dutch Shell is represented in Turin by its chief executive, Ben van Beurden, and the French oil and gas giant Total has sent its chairman and chief executive, Patrick Pouyanné, who will be welcomed to the conference by the Bilderberg insider and Total board member Patricia Barbizet.

Sitting alongside Barbizet on Bilderberg’s steering committee is the BP director Sir John Sawers. The former head of MI6 has this year invited BP’s chief financial officer, Brian Gilvary, who can chat about fracking with Dambisa Moyo, a director at Chevron.

The veins of Bilderberg run with oil, and its beating heart is the Dutch royal family and its oil interests. The founding president of the group was Prince Bernhard, the grandfather of the current king, Willem-Alexander. In his inaugural speech at the first conference in 1954, Bernhard set out the purpose of Bilderberg: “Because the free countries of Europe, the United States and Canada must act as a unit, they must try to think the same way. This is a long-term process.”

Out of this consensus emerged the EU, for decades nurtured around the Bilderberg conference table. And yet now, as they stand on the brink of a brave new algorithmic age, everything they have worked so hard to achieve is under threat.

At the top of the conference, agenda are the dire words: “Populism in Europe.” The EU, already given a black eye by Brexit, is facing another thumping from Italy’s populist coalition, and the transatlantic alliance is groaning under the strain of Trump. Which is why Turin is the perfect choice for the 2018 summit.

The city is the spiritual home of Fiat and the Agnellis: the flamboyant Gianni Agnelli was a mainstay of Bilderberg throughout the last few decades of the 20th century, and a close friend of Kissinger (not, in this instance, a euphemism). His grandson, John Elkann, runs Exor, the holding company for the Agnelli billions, and sits on Bilderberg’s steering committee.

Agnelli attended 37 conferences: his spirit will loom large over the Turin gathering, which is being held at the old Fiat HQ. It offers a chance for Bilderberg to reflect on its past, remember its victories and gather courage so that it can hurl itself back into the battle for globalization.

Also at the conference will be George Osborne, who was recently given a job at Exor, chairing a council of business advisers. The Evening Standard editor has recently been criticised for allegedly selling positive news coverage to big business. Is Osborne going to be inking some juicy cash-for-content deals in Turin? Or might he grit his teeth and report on what is discussed?

Of course, Osborne is not the only representative of the media at Turin. In fact, it is a bumper year for journalists: there are columnists, editors, TV anchors, from the editor-in-chief of Bloomberg to the president of Turner International. Elkann is on the board of the Economist Group (Exor has the majority share).

Scratch an industrialist at Bilderberg and you will find a media magnate. Antti Herlin, the Finnish delegate who runs Kone Corporation – “a global leader in the elevator and escalator industry” – also happens to be the vice-chair of the company that owns the daily newspaper Helsingin Sanomat.

And yet with all these media representatives, we will learn little of what is said in Turin.

* * *

“It’s too late to give machines ethics, they’re already beyond our control,” Source: 
Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates and now Demis Hassabis of Google’s DeepMind have all warned of the dangers of artificial intelligence (AI), urging that we put ethical controls in place before it’s too late.
But they have all mistaken the threat: the AI we have let loose is already evolving for its own benefit.
It’s easy to imagine that humans will build ever more clever computers; machines that will end up smarter than we are. Once they pass this point and achieve “superintelligence”, whether trapped inside boxes or installed in roving robots, they can either help or turn against us. To avoid this nightmare, the Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom says we must instil the superintelligence with goals that are compatible with our own survival and wellbeing.
Hassabis, too, talks about getting “a better understanding of how these goal systems should be built, what values should the machines have”. They may not be dealing with threatening robots, but they are still talking about actual “machines” having values.

But this is not where the threat lies. The fact is that all intelligence emerges in highly interconnected information processing systems; and through the internet, we are providing just such a system in which a new kind of intelligence can evolve.

This way of looking at AI rests on the principle of universal Darwinism – the idea that whenever information (a replicator) is copied, with variation and selection, a new evolutionary process begins. The first successful replicator on earth was genes. Their evolution produced all living things, including animals, whose intelligence emerged from brains consisting of interconnected neurons. The second replicator was memes, let loose when humans began to imitate each other. Imitation may seem a trivial ability, but it is very far from that. An animal that can imitate another brings a new level of evolution into being because habits, skills, stories and technologies (memes) are copied, varied and selected. Our brains had to quickly expand to handle the rapidly evolving memes, leading to a new kind of emergent intelligence.

The third replicator is, I suggest, already here, but we are not seeing its true nature. We have built machines that can copy, combine, vary and select enormous quantities of information with high fidelity far beyond the capacity of the human brain. With all these three essential processes in place, this information must now evolve.

Google is a prime example. Google consults countless sources to select material copied from servers all over the world almost instantly. We may think we are still in control because humans designed the software and we put in the search terms, but other software can use Google too, copying the selected information before passing it on to yet others. Some programs can take parts of other programs and mix them up in new ways. Just as in biological evolution, most new variants will fizzle out, but if any arise that are successful at getting themselves copied, by whatever means, they will spread through the wonderfully interconnected systems of machines that we have made.

Replicators are selfish by nature. They get copied whenever and however they can, regardless of the consequences for us, for other species or for our planet. You cannot give human values to a massive system of evolving information based on machinery that is being expanded and improved every day. They do not care because they cannot care.

I refer to this third replicator as techno-memes, or temes, and I believe they are already evolving way beyond our control. Human intelligence emerged from biological brains with billions of interconnected neurons. AI is emerging in the gazillions of interconnections we have provided through our computers, servers, phones, tablets and every other piece of machinery that copies, varies and selects an ever-increasing amount of information. The scale of this new evolution is almost incomparably greater.

Hassabis urges us to debate the ethics of AI “now, decades before there’s anything that’s actually of any potential consequence or power that we need to worry about, so we have the answers in place well ahead of time”. I say we need to worry right now and worry about the right things. AI is already evolving for its own benefit – not ours. That’s just Darwinism in action.

At the moment we create most of the temes out there – uploading photos, videos, and blog posts, sending emails, and creating web pages. And we demand ever more hardware to handle it all. The danger comes, and may already have come, when much of the software and data are evolving on their own. We wouldn’t even know this was happening until we found we were building ever more machines without getting the expected increases in capacity.

Could such a system become artificially intelligent? Given that the natural intelligence we know about emerged from highly interconnected evolving systems, it seems likely if not inevitable. This system is now busy acquiring the equivalent of eyes and ears in the millions of CCTV cameras, listening devices and drones that we are happily supplying. We do all this so willingly, apparently oblivious to the evolutionary implications.

So what might we expect of our future role in this vast machine? We might be like the humble mitochondrion, which supplies energy to all our body’s cells. Mitochondria were once free-living bacteria that became absorbed into larger cells in the process known as endosymbiosis; a deal that benefited both sides.

As we continue to supply the great teme machine with all it needs to grow could we end up like this, willingly going on feeding it because we cannot give up all the digital goodies we have become used to?

It’s not a superintelligent machine that we should worry about but the hardware, software and data we willingly add to every day.



VIDEO: Bilderberg 2018 In Italy – More Russian Connections Than Trump

Russia is a product of the Jewish infiltrated west. This is a fact. But we know that the masses continue to live in ignorance, and this allows the elite to keep on playing the game. The following interview exposes how companies associated with the Bilderberg Group have deep connections to Russia. Keep in mind that all the tensions that the superpowers create, guarantee their stability and continuous profit flow.

BOMBSHELL: Zionist Report’s First Book – Challenge Your Knowledge

This is the first book we published. We strongly recommend you read it. You might think you know history, but this book will surprise you without a doubt. It will take you by the hand and clearly show you, true history. This is not just ‘another book’ it is a book that exposes events in an orderly fashion and will make everyone open their eyes!

INTERVIEW: Henry Kissinger on Trump

Henry Kissinger says the public shouldn’t just write off Donald Trump, calling him the “most unique” presidential figure in his lifetime. He said, “one should not insist on nailing him into positions that he had taken in the campaign.” He says the president-elect is currently undergoing “the transition from being a campaigner to being a national strategist.”

And, who exactly is developing Trump’s strategy? You can bet the Israel Lobby, with Kissinger in the background, will influence Trump every step of the way to shape his foreign policy.


COMMENTARY: The False Dialectics Of Hero Seeking

People in general, are so politically immature that always look for a hero. There are no hero’s in politics and no one makes a move unless there is self-interest behind it. The United States and the Soviet Union, now Russia, have been working together since day one. The entire Bolshevik Revolution was financed by Jewish International Bankers and most of the money came from Wall Street. They have continued playing cat and mouse for centuries to create tension. It’s a game that feeds the minds of useful idiots. Russia has a goal, and that is world control because its leaders never stopped being Communists. Will Trump be able to stop that? or will he be another pawn of the board of this dirty international chess game? 


“The False Dialectics Of Hero Seeking,” Source:

Alt-media simpletons and lackluster analysts believe that gang warfare between global elites is evidence of the benevolence of some of those power players.

Hostility from the “Western establishment” towards Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump is used again and again as a vindication of the latter’s altruism.

This narrow mode of thinking appeals to Messiah-minded wishful thinkers and hero seekers. If all it takes is a little bad mouthing on the part of the Western establishment – which is itself not a monolithic block, but a complex organism of different factions – to confirm a person or group’s righteousness, then these same people should instantly embrace ISIS and a whole slew of cruel tyrants around the world.

Is it not true that the Western mainstream media and political establishment have harnessed all of the resources at their disposal to provoke international opprobrium against ISIS non-stop for the past two years? Does the Western media and political elite do its due diligence in fact-checking and verifying the truthfulness of every sordid allegation against that group? Probably not. Does this media criticism of ISIS ‘prove’ that the group is good, benevolent and a real ‘threat’ to those same Western elites who so sternly condemn it? Of course not. And none of these people who claim that the somewhat hostile press climate around Putin and Trump establishes their heroic rebellious bona fides seem to be using that argument to venerate ISIS. They too, for the most part, are saying the same things about the reprehensible nature of ISIS that the Western media/political elite is saying – perhaps from a slightly different angle and with a few twists here and there.

America and Russia: Historic Frenemies

The Russians and Americans have been playing a cat and mouse game of geopolitical theater – what some would call ‘chess’ – for a very long time. Over the centuries, American and Russian elites have pretended to quarrel, and perhaps even had some legitimate disputes and disagreements at times, but when crunch time came they gladly joined forces to accomplish mutually beneficial geopolitical imperatives. In both World Wars, the US and Russia, despite differences, teamed up to squash other mutual enemies and rivals. A commenter at Non-Aligned Media astutely observed:

Throughout history, the US and Russia seem to have had an unholy alliance in which they act as opposites to accomplish an agenda. “Good cop/bad cop”… of sorts. The Alaskan purchase was in negotiations before our civil war in the middle 1800s. Less than 100 years of occupying the natives land, Russia was literally giving us more native land in hopes of an alliance. Throughout history, these two have held hands from a distance to keep the relationship hidden. They were allies in both world wars, together bringing down the Berlin Wall, and as recently as the Syrian agenda in taking away their defense and organizing a peace negotiation to allow the opposition in. Both the US and Russia have pledged security to Israel and share this as a common denominator.

The Cold War was one big farcical game of cat and mouse, where the elites of the US and the USSR profited immensely by frightening their populations into submission with scare-stories about the other.

‘The Russians are coming,’ was the constant chant of American presidents.

‘The Americans are outside the gates,’ was the rallying cry of Soviet leaders.

Khrushchev would publicly bash the Americans and highlight their hypocrisies; JFK would do the same in reverse. Brezhnev and Reagan played the same tit-for-tat rhetorical war of words. Both powers had myriad faults and duplicities worthy of criticism, but neither had much of a moral high ground over the other in their flaccid moralistic condemnations. Average law-abiding citizens, however, do have the moral high ground to censure the evils of both superpowers.

Russia-US Cold War

Major powers looking to consolidate domestic political control and placate the unhappy masses need and often go out of their way to look for or invent an external enemy or ‘threat’. As Orwell illustrated so convincingly in 1984, by drawing the public’s attention away from the internal problems in their own country, the political class can get away with robbery, murder, corruption and all the other malfeasances they are assuredly engaged in.

During the Cold War both the US and Russia built up their enormous military arsenals beneath the spectre of the ‘nuclear threat’ from the other, whilst never seriously considering a direct confrontation. The Cuban missile crisis was a perfect example of this kind of self-serving PR power play on both ends.

It could be said that genuine proxy wars were fought between the two powers. But apart from the geopolitical tug-of-war behind such conflicts, they produced enormous profits for the military industrial complexes of both countries. Instability is the life-blood of the war industries of the major global powers. The weapons corporations look upon civil wars as a way to expand their market shares, and all the big players want a piece of the pie.

Dialectics and False Reasoning

Even if it’s true that some members of the Western establishment genuinely dislike Putin and would prefer his departure from politics, that does not in any way make the ex-KGB chief a trustworthy, likeable or morally righteous actor. Back in the good old days when Josef Stalin was still the king of the Kremlin, similar clarion calls against the Soviet dictator could be heard from Western capitals, but that doesn’t mean Stalin was anything less than a monster who murdered millions of people.

As we can observe, there is a genuine split in elite circles in the West about Putin. Some, like Nicolas Sarkozy and Henry Kissinger, are extremely friendly with Putin and advocate for closer cooperation with him. Sputnik News proudly reported on a meeting between Putin and Kissinger this past February – one of dozens of such get-togethers over the years –  in which the two ‘old friends’ discussed the future of US-Russia relations. The article stated:

On Wednesday, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger traveled to Moscow to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin for a ‘friendly dialogue’. Greeted by Putin as an ‘old friend’, Kissinger published an article the next day outlining his vision for the future of US-Russia relations. Commenting on the meeting, Russian television network RT recalled that over the years, Kissinger has held nearly a dozen face-to-face meetings with the Russian president. In 2013, Putin complemented the former secretary of state, emphasizing that Moscow always pays close attention to his views, and calling him “a world class politician.”


Sarkozy, the French neocon and Zionist fanatic who spearheaded the Libya war in 2011, has spoken highly of Putin and forcefully champions increased solidarity with Putin’s Kremlin. Sarkozy has called Putin’s record ‘positive‘ and said ‘the world needs Russia.‘ Ehud Barak, the Israeli war criminal, is a long-time fan and admirer of Putin who even modelled his 2009 run for office in Israel on Putin’s past political campaigns in order to attract Russian-Israeli voters. Netanyahu and Putin are also on friendly terms.

Sarkozy-Putin Barak-Putin

Others among the Western elite are more skeptical and critical. However, none of the denunciations from equally damnable Western elites proves that Putin is a ‘good man’ or has any moral compass whatsoever. Putin’s actions, like those of his US and UK counterparts, are guided solely by self-interest (and by self-interest that means the interests of Putin the politician, not the Russian people as a whole who are merely subjects of Putin’s devices). Putin’s skeleton-riddled track record of false flag terror, financial crimes, political assassinations and war crimes is what needs to be analyzed when judging the man, not what some other corrupt and morally bankrupt politicians from the West are saying about him. Mafias and organized criminals often squabble within their ranks, jostling for power, prestige and territory, but that doesn’t mean any side of a gangland dispute are virtuous.

Naturally, Western politicians and media will use Putin’s genuine shortcomings against him, but that doesn’t negate the reality of those ugly flaws. Putin and his controlled media do the same to Russia’s Western rivals. When the Bush administration was making its case for war against Iraq in 2003, they cynically invoked the past crimes of Saddam Hussein – such as his chemical weapons-related atrocities against Kurds and Iranians in the 1980s – as added fuel to build up a climate of hostility towards the Iraqi strongman that would push people further into a war frenzy. Because bad people misused the past misdeeds of Hussein – and fabricated other wrongs that were untrue (WMDs, links with al-Qaeda, etc.) – to justify another calamity does not mean that Hussein was a man of impeccable character. The same goes for Bush administration rhetoric vis-a-vis the Taliban.

The world is not black and white despite how much we may wish it to be. Throughout his career Putin has proven himself to be a brutish power-hungry criminal who will do whatever it takes to maintain his hold on power. His modus operandi is no different and no less egregious than the ruthless stock and breed of thieving politicians ruling over every other major country. Recognizing this does not make one a sympathizer with or proponent of the miscreants who run the West.

If Hilary Clinton says the sky is blue, that doesn’t make it green. People who themselves are not perfect – even morally contemptible people like Clinton – are able to state true things about other deplorable people, regardless of their own inadequacies and hypocrisies. Those who seize on the opposition to Putin of some Western elites as ‘proof positive’ that he is morally good, on our side and a global messiah for the reinstitution of a golden age of peace and prosperity are peddling severely deficient logic to prop up their untenable faith in an impossible saviour figure that does not and will most likely never exist.

Idolizing a man who is in effect a mafia don shows the moral degeneration of many who view themselves as ‘alternative’ thinkers. They are so desperate to find something ‘different’ to the usual slimy hacks and charlatans of Western politics, that they are willing to embrace any thug, no matter how dirty or corrupt, so long as he is centered in the Eastern and not Western hemisphere.

This myopic, tunnel vision thinking has led so many to embrace the Putin hero cult. One wonders when such people will generate a worship cult for the communist dictators of North Korea and China, or when it will become fashionable to heroize the savage despots who rule the African continent.

VIDEO: Idi Amin On Israeli Control of Uganda, America & The World

Idi Amin, in this video, talks about the influence of the Jewish lobby both from Israel and America, and how they went against him when he didn’t obey their demands. This is a perspective you rarely hear in the mainstream media — his side of the story to a massive smear campaign against him.

INTERVIEW: US May Start Wars With Russia, China Under Clinton

The United States is likely to start more wars if Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton makes it to the White House. Bruce Gagnon, an American political analyst, cites the former secretary of state’s track record of being involved in many conflicts around the world and being beholden to the Israel Lobby.

“Many of us in the United States feel that Hillary Clinton will start a war with Russia and China and even possibly use nuclear weapons,” Bruce Gagnon, with the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, told Press TV on Thursday.

“Clinton has a record, she supported war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria,” the analyst noted. “She continually demonizes Russia and China.”

Clinton has time and again warned Americans against what she calls Russia’s ill intentions with regards to the November vote.

Her campaign has blamed Moscow for a series of hacks against the Democratic National Committee that unveiled dark secrets about the party’s attempts to Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders out of the primary race in favor of Clinton.

During the first presidential debate with Republican nominee Donald Trump on Monday, Clinton said she was “deeply concerned” about Russia’s cyber attacks. She also accused her opponent of having close ties with Moscow.

Gagnon said Clinton’s backers among American politicians are mostly linked to the military-industrial complex, who always look for more wars.

“It was [former US president] Bill Clinton that pushed the expansion of NATO right up to the Russian borders,” the analyst said.

Russia and the US-led alliance have been locked in a military face-off near Russia’s borders, where NATO members have been deploying troops and heavy weaponry to defend themselves against what they call “Russian aggression.”

The tensions were intensified following a military conflict in Ukraine, where Kiev forces started to crackdown on pro-Russian groups in the country’s restive east.

“It was Hillary Clinton’s agent at the state department, Victoria Nuland, who organized the coup d’état in Ukraine in 2014 that has turned that country into chaos,” Gagnon argued.

The analyst called the former secretary of state as an “agent of the Zionist AIPAC group,” who has also received donations from Saudis for mediating major weapons deals for them.

“Hillary Clinton in the White House means more wars and even possibly, nuclear war,” Gagnon concluded.

Hillary & Kissinger

Hillary Clinton Courts Henry Kissinger’s Endorsement Even After Meeting His Victims

No surprises here. Hillary takes her advice from one the most heinous Zionist war criminals the United States has ever known. This is very telling on how we should expect her foreign policy to be when/if she becomes president of the United States.

Hillary & Kissinger
Hillary & Kissinger

“Hillary Clinton Courts Henry Kissinger’s Endorsement Even After Meeting His Victims,” Source:

HILLARY CLINTON’S CAMPAIGN has been seeking the endorsement of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and their efforts may pay off, as there are reports that he is expected soon, alongside former Secretary of State George Schultz, to issue a joint endorsement of Clinton.

While those inside the national security community in Washington, D.C., may applaud the endorsement, Kissinger’s legacy of war crimes — from complicity in the 1973 coup in Chile to spearheading the saturation bombing of Indochina — has made him far less popular among human rights observers.

Clinton is well aware of that legacy. As secretary of state, she traveled to areas of the world that were devastated by policies Kissinger crafted and implemented.

The most relevant example is in 2012, when she visited Laos’s Cooperative Orthotic & Prosthetic Enterprise, a joint project between NGOs and the government of Laos dedicated to helping people with physical disabilities get prosthetic limbs and be rehabilitated. The project’s creation was prompted by the millions of submunitions littered across Laos, left over from the U.S. air war on the country during the conflict in Indochina.

A 2009 government report estimated that there are still 300 casualties annually from leftover ordinance.

During Clinton’s visit she met with Peter Kim, a young man who at age 16 happened upon an unexploded American bomb and lost both of his hands and his eyesight. “For everyone who works to help prevent injury and then to help survivors, and to the people of Laos, and I wish everything good for you,” Clinton told Kim as reporters watched on.

Kissinger served as President Richard Nixon’s secretary of state when that president expanded the U.S. air war in Laos. During the 1971 ground invasion of the country, Nixon complained about the media’s critique of the operation, leading Kissinger to quip that if “Britain had a press like this in World War II, they would have quit in ’42.”

The bombings made Laos, “per capita, the most heavily bombed country on earth,” with around a ton of bombs being dropped for every person in the country.

Then-World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz speaking at an IMF meeting in 2007

Iraq War Architect Wolfowitz Putting His ‘Hopes’ in Clinton Presidency

Zionist Kissinger, Wolfowitz, and the rest of the war mongers and war criminals are putting their hopes on a Hillary Clinton Presidency, but hope had nothing to do with it. Wolf, and the rest of his war criminal associates, knew a long time ago that Hillary was pre-selected by the oligarchy for POTUS — despite the Bernie side show.

Then-World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz speaking at an IMF meeting in 2007
Then-World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz speaking at an IMF meeting in 2007

“Iraq War Architect Wolfowitz Putting His ‘Hopes’ in Clinton Presidency,” Source:

Just ahead of a speech by Hillary Clinton in which she is expected to trumpet “American exceptionalism,” the Democratic presidential nominee appears to have received public backing from Iraq War architect Paul Wolfowitz.

The 72-year-old deputy secretary of defense under President George W. Bush and cheerleader for the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq told Politico that Clinton and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump are “both so far from what I believe in.” Yet, he added, “There’s a little bit of hope for Hillary. With Trump, you just have to make this incredible bet that he doesn’t believe anything he says, and once he really sees the situation he’ll be different. But it’s an incredible gamble.”

And in an interview published Friday with Germany’s Der Spiegel, Wolfowitz said he agreed with dozens of former senior Republican security officials who said Trump was a security risk, and said, “I wish there were somebody I could be comfortable voting for. I might have to vote for Hillary Clinton, even though I have big reservations about her.”

Clinton is scheduled (pdf) to speak Wednesday at the American Legion convention taking place in Cincinnati. In her midday speech, which Reuters describes as being “meant to reach out to Republican and independent voters,” Clinton “will make the case for American exceptionalism and call for maintaining America’s military and diplomatic leadership in the world,” according to a campaign official.

She will also portray her Republican rival as a president that would “walk away from our allies, undermine our values, insult our military—and has explicitly rejected the idea of American exceptionalism,” the campaign official said.


Trump, for his part, is scheduled to address the same convention on Thursday, the day after he meets with unpopular Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto.

According to a tally by Vox, “108 prominent Republicans, from former governors and former presidential candidates to conservative pundits and high-profile aides … have all said they cannot support Trump.” Some, like Maine Sen. Susan Collins, won’t be backing Clinton. Yet many neoconservatives are. Project for the New American Century co-founder Robert Kagan, for example, said at a Clinton fundraising event last month, “I would say that a majority of people in my circle will vote for Hillary.”

In These Times contributor Branko Marcetic wrote in March that neoconservative war hawks backing Clinton should come as no surprise, as they “have long had a soft spot for Clinton and her views on foreign policy.”

Still, polls have shown that neither candidate is eliciting warm fuzzies from the nation’s electorate.

Historian Andrew Bacevich writes that “all the months of intensive fundraising, the debates and speeches, the caucuses and primaries, the avalanche of TV ads, and annoying robocalls have produced two presidential candidates who tend to elicit from a surprisingly large number of rank-and-file citizens disdain, indifference, or at best hold-your-nose-and-pull-the-lever acquiescence.”

The latter response, according to former Greek Fiance Minister and author Yanis Varoufakis, may be becoming increasingly difficult.  He tweeted following the Wolfowitz interviews: