Preparing For The Act 2010 11 Pdf: Fill & Download for Free

The reality is that THE LAW doesn’t allow Donald J Trump to delay the transition. In fact, after George W Bush’s transition was delayed so long in 2001 because of recounts in Florida, one state, related to fewer that 500 votes, the 9/11 Commission cited the transition delay as PARTLY responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and as a result, Congress implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission to help ensure such a delay wouldn’t happen again.United States presidential transition - WikipediaThe 2000-01 transition from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush was shortened by several weeks due to the Florida recount crisis that ended after the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Bush v. Gore, which made Bush the president-elect.So, let’s look at the laws, shall we?Presidential Transition ActH.R.3932 - 100th Congress (1987-1988): Presidential Transitions Effectiveness ActPublic Law 106 - 293 - Presidential Transition Act of 2000 govinfohttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-106publ293/html/PLAW-106publ293.htmPre-Election Presidential Transition Act of 2010 (2010 - S. 3196)Presidential Transitions Improvements Act of 2015 Legislative Search ResultsFive myths about presidential transitionsIn fact, they can start before the General Services Administration gives its blessing.https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-presidential-transitions/2020/11/13/8204d86a-2524-11eb-a688-5298ad5d580a_story.htmlThe clock is ticking and foreign adversaries are watching, experts and past government officials said.Trump is stonewalling Biden’s transition. Here's why it matters.The Presidential Transition Act of 1963 (Pub.L. 88–277) established the mechanisms to facilitate an orderly and peaceful transition of power.The 1963 Act has been amended by the Presidential Transitions Effectiveness Act of 1998 (Pub.L. 100–398), the Presidential Transition Act of 2000 (Pub.L. 106–293 (html) (pdf)), the Pre-Election Presidential Transition Act of 2010 (Pub.L. 111–283 (html) (pdf)) and the Presidential Transitions Improvements Act of 2015 (Pub.L. 114–136 (html) (pdf)).These laws established formal mechanisms to facilitate presidential transitions. Specifically, the act directs the Administrator of General Services to provide facilities, funding of approximately $5 million, access to government services, support for a transition team, and to provide training and orientation of new government personnel and other procedures to ensure an orderly transition.The Pre-Election Presidential Transition Act of 2010 requires the General Services Administration (GSA) to provide potential presidential transition teams with office space.They are also eligible for government funding for staff. For example, spending on Mitt Romney's transition team in 2012 was going to be $8.9 million, all funds appropriated by the U.S. government.The Presidential Transition Act was also amended in 2019 to require the incumbent president to establish "transition councils" by June of an election year to facilitate a possible handover of powerOne senior official is charged with ensuring a peaceful transfer of power when there is an apparent election winner. The Trump appointee is jeopardizing all that.The Presidential Transition Meets Murphy’s Law by Walter M Schaub Jr.Trump’s absurd insistence that he “WON THIS ELECTION, BY A LOT!” is easy enough to ignore.What is harder to ignore is what his appointee who runs the General Services Administration (GSA) is doing.By statute, the GSA’s administrator has responsibility for ascertaining “the apparent successful candidates for the office of President and Vice President.”This crucial ascertainment sets the government’s support for the transition effort in motion.When Congress enacted the transition law and later amended it seven (7) times, it does not appear to have contemplated the risk that a partisan loyalist appointed by a corrupt president would refuse to fulfill this duty when the outcome of the election was clear. Enter GSA Administrator Emily Murphy.Murphy is refusing to ascertain the apparent winner of the 2020 election as the president who appointed her disputes the clear outcome. She has not been especially transparent about her rationale.A spokesperson for her agency unhelpfully said, “an ascertainment has not yet been made” and “[the] Administrator will continue to abide by, and fulfill, all requirements under the law.” Murphy, it seems, is putting her loyalty to Trump over her duty to the American people.Her ascertainment is the legally necessary precursor to the government’s assistance to the Biden-Harris Presidential Transition Team. It releases $6.3 million dollars to the team, which is funded by public and private money; a loan of expanded federal office space and equipment; access to government agencies that will begin sharing information and records about ongoing activities, plans and vulnerabilities; national security briefings for the president; and other support.The New York Times reports that “transition officials said her inaction was preventing Mr. Biden’s teams from moving into government offices, including SECURE FACILITIES where they can discuss CLASSIFIED information.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) recently confirmed that it is not providing national security briefings to the president-elect. The Defense Department has also reportedly indicated that it will not meet with the Biden-Harris transition team UNTIL Murphy formally affirms the apparent winner.Murphy’s refusal comes as great news to hostile foreign powers.Experts have cautioned that authoritarian governments see a benefit in having public confidence in democracy undermined.One of Trump’s own former national security experts, Fiona Hill, has warned:“The biggest risk to this election is not the Russians, it’s us.”Four former Secretaries of Homeland Security, Republican and Democratic (Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Janet Napolitano, and Jeh Johnson), have called on Murphy to issue the ascertainment of an apparent winner of the election, counseling: “At this period of heightened risk for our nation, we do not have a single day to spare to begin the transition. For the good of the nation, we must start now.”For the good of the nation, it was once done differently. I was present on November 5, 2008, the day after the election, when tired but elated Obama transition team members met with Bush administration officials at the headquarters of the GSA, which leads the transition for the government. Far from being sullen about their party’s loss, the Bush appointees greeted the Obama-Biden transition team warmly. They discussed the extensive preparations they had made under the leadership of the Executive Office of the President’s deputy director for management, Clay Johnson. They emphasized their commitment to ensuring the most effective transition in history. Then, one of them—I forget who—said something that would be unthinkable now in 2020: he said the Bush administration wanted to make it “the nicest transition in history.”

History does not happen in a vacuum. The ethos of the age in which one lives greatly shapes the behavior of oneself and others. For example, after 911 there was tremendous fear, panic, anger, and a need for security. I remember listening to an expert on NPR who talked about how Iraq was held together by Saddam Hussein’s willingness to use violence to keep his nation unified. Further, he was not an extremist or fundamentalist. The expert said that if we invaded Iraq that we wouldn’t be “greeted as liberators,” but rather, as an infidel bully hell bent on imposing its will on the Arab world to steal Iraq’s oil. Nevertheless, a huge part of the nation believed the lies that Saddam Hussein had “weapons of mass destruction” and that he was behind the 911 attacks. It was irrational, but the people were scared and wanted to “go get the bad guys.” Thus began in 2003 the Iraq War, one which left thousands of Americans dead and millions of Iraqi’s dead. It led to a bloody civil war in which different religious factions fought each other.Soviet workers voted for the Great PurgesJoseph Stalin lived in a broken nation that had just seen thousands of lives destroyed by the senselessness of WWI. It had seen the bloody carnage of the Russian Civil War, in which anti-Soviet forces, aided by 17 nations, sought to destroy the Soviet Union and restore Imperial Russia. Then, after the Civil War ended, there was a famine under Lenin which caused many deaths. Joseph Stalin lived in a world where if you weren’t careful you would be the next one killed. Add to this the preparation by Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany to attack the Soviet Union, which was relatively defenseless because it didn’t have the industrial ability to arm itself properly. He knew that his country faced an existential threat—the threat of annihilation of he couldn’t get the nation industrialized and armed, all within ten years. Stalin said:We are 50–100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they crush us.Alexander Finnegan's answer to Was Joseph Stalin a successful leader or an oppressive dictator?Soviet workers discover kulaks are hoarding grain to sell on the black market despite people starvingAlexander Finnegan's answer to How responsible were the Kulaks for the Holodomor?He faced violent resistance from right wingers, kulaks, and Trotskyists who were indeed plotting a coup. There was real evidence against several military officers who were considering overthrowing the government.[1] Further, after Kirov was killed there was an attempt on Stalin’s life.[2] There ended up being many attempts on Stalin’s life. Ultimately he was poisoned by his own officers. So was he paranoid? No. You aren’t paranoid if people actually are plotting to kill you. Did he want power? For what? He resigned 5 times but they begged him to stay. He lived the life of an ascetic, especially after his second wife killed herself.Chuck Garen's answer to Was Holodomor a Genocide or a crime against humanity?So what drove him? After the Soviet archives were opened it was found that he actually did believe in Marxism Leninism.[3] He was motivated by the desire to build socialism. That is it. Everything else was secondary to him. He didn’t care about riches. And it wasn’t about power in and of itself.Another View of Stalin by Ludo MartensAlexander Finnegan's answer to What don’t they tell you about Stalin?Alexander Finnegan's answer to Did Stalin enjoy a higher standard of living than the average Soviet citizen? If so, how did he justify it?Alexander Finnegan's answer to Were there any logical reasons for the Stalin's Great Purge or he was just paranoid?Next, some numbers:2.76 million. This list is here, with sources: death toll 2.pdfThis is the death toll of the actions of the USSR.The Holomodor was not intentional and should not be counted. Alexander Finnegan's answer to What is the history of famines and starvation in Russia 1850-present day?All the other numbers you are used to hearing have been shown to be inflated and exaggerated, many fabricated.This document is based on reliable research from respected authors and official figures.The Black Book of Communism has been shown to be a fraud. Alexander Finnegan's answer to What is the most biased book you’ve ever read?This includes the Great Purges, the NKVD Polish repressions, the transfer of various populations that resulted in death, the gulags, etc. Alexander Finnegan's answer to Why did Stalin kill the kulaks?Gulag numbers are here: number of gulag.pdf 1,053,829 died in the gulag. But it must also be remembered that this includes people who died from natural causes. The death toll went up during WWII because everyone in the nation was on food rations so there was no starvation, but sick people and older people sometimes succumbed out of the stress. There were also outbreaks of diseases that caused deaths. Solzehnitsyn Lied pdf.pdf,The Great Purges included 777, 975. But this includes a large number that were sentenced to execution but it was never carried out. The Great Purges were not as top down as one might guess. Alexander Finnegan's answer to Was Stalin central to the Great Purge of the 1930's?Yes, there were logical reasons.After the war with the White Army the country was destroyed. It was a bloody and vicious civil war. The people who were part of the White Army included Tsarists, kulaks, and rightist. These people did not magically disappear after they were defeated. Instead, they stayed.In the Soviet Union you had to be a member of the Party to get some types of jobs. Many of these people infiltrated the Party.These people rose up high in the ranks. For example, Stalin’s personal assistant, Boris Bazhanov said he infiltrated the ranks and planned to work with counter revolutionaries to overthrow Stalin.Members of the military were collaborating with foreign enemies to overthrow the government in a palace coup.[1]The British intelligence services propagandist Robert Conquest[2] wrote the original story of the Purges, and his version was that Stalin had absolute power and micromanaged everything. However, the historian Getty showed that it wasn’t like this at all. In fact, there was a lot of politics involved with the Purges. For example, local Party members had disputes with each other, and sometimes used blaming to off their enemies.The Old Bolsheviks were less educated and less sophisticated than the newer Party members, especially the engineers who were being promoted to work on industrialization. So there were disputes between these groups.The first person heading working on the Purges leading the NKVD (pre-KGB) was named Iagoda. Earlier the government did a sting operation called Operation Trust.[3] They set up a fake anti-Bolshevik organization for overthrowing the government to see whom they would catch. They ended up filling 37 volumes of names and connections and conspiracies.Iagoda did not seem to be finding the conspirators, so Ezhov was made head of the NKVD. However, he was actually part of the conspiracy. Under his reign of terror most of the executions took place. After the government and Stalin found out about the numbers killed he fired Ezhov and put him on trial. Ezhov confessed. The plan was to kill so many that it caused unrest within the Party and would make the planned coup more smooth.[4] The Germans also had “dirt” on Ezhov because he was bisexual and a heavy drinker and was caught in homosexual acts, which the Germans planned on using against him.The Purges started after a Party leader named Kirov was killed. Conquest claimed that Stalin had him killed to justify the beginning of the Purges. Historians have shown there is no evidence for this.[5] In fact, someone within the NKVD had reassigned Kirov’s bodyguard with an older guard. Later the assassin was caught. When interviewed and asked why he committed the murder he said “I was told to do it by another member of the NKVD.” He was then knocked to the ground by a member of the NKVD. So it was an inside job.[6]Later it was claimed that the Moscow Trials were “show trials.” They weren’t. What happened in reality was that they were the leaders of the conspiracy to overthrow the government and they were caught. [7] One week after Kirov was killed there was a failed assassination attempt on Stalin that nearly succeeded.[8]I find it fascinating that all throughout history and in Russia in particular there has been political intrigue and assassinations and attempts at coups. But somehow these things vanished during the time of the Soviet Union. Everybody just meekly followed Stalin after the bloodiest civil war in Russia.[9] This is ridiculous.There is evidence that Trotsky actually was working with Germany and Japan to overthrow the government in the Soviet Union.[10] The plan was for those military members and the traitors to cede land to Germany and Japan to avoid WWII. Of course this would have been a nightmare. Without Stalin collectivizing and the rapid industrialization they could not have had the tanks and arms needed to resist Hitler. Hitler admitted this in a recording.[11] And Hitler would have certainly invaded the Soviet Union anyway. But him winning the Soviet Union would have strengthened Germany enough to go and win all of Europe.Getty in his book “Origins of the Great Purges” showed the real nature of the Purges as not being a cynical power grab by Stalin but in fact were something far more nuanced. Later historians like James Harris looked at the documents released after 1991 and he could not find any evidence that Stalin was acting in a self serving or cynical manner in his book, The Great Fear. In fact his intelligence services were convinced of there being plots and the need for the Purges.Soviet workers vote for the Purges in 1937Excellent study of the PurgesGrover Furr:EzhovWe now have much more evidence about the role of NKVD chief Nikolai Ezhov than we had in 2005. Ezhov, head of the NKVD (People’s Commissar for Internal Affairs), had his own conspiracy against the Soviet government and Party leadership. Ezhov had also been recruited by German intelligence.Like the Rights and Trotskyites, Ezhov and his top NKVD men were counting on an invasion by Germany, Japan, or other major capitalist country. They tortured a great many innocent people into confessing to capital crimes so they would be shot. They executed a great many more on falsified grounds or no grounds at all.Ezhov hoped that this mass murder of innocent people would turn large parts of the Soviet population against the government. That would create the basis for internal rebellions against the Soviet government when Germany or Japan attacked.Ezhov lied to Stalin, the Party and government leaders about all this. The truly horrific mass executions of 1937-1938 of almost 680,000 people were in large part unjustifiable executions of innocent people carried out deliberately by Ezhov and his top men in order to sow discontent among the Soviet population.Although Ezhov executed a very large number of innocent people, it is clear from the evidence now available that there were also real conspiracies. The Russian government continues to keep all but a tiny amount of the investigative materials top-secret. We can’t know for sure exactly the dimensions of the real conspiracies without that evidence. Therefore, we don’t know how many of these 680,000 people were actual conspirators and how many were innocent victims.As I wrote in 2005, Stalin and the Party leadership began to suspect as early as October 1937 that some of the repression was done illegally. From early in 1938, when Pavel Postyshev was sharply criticized, then removed from the Central Committee, then expelled from the Party, tried and executed for mass unjustified repression, these suspicions grew.When Lavrentii Beria was appointed as Ezhov’s second-in-command Ezhov and his men understood that Stalin and the Party leadership no longer trusted them. They made one last plot to assassinate Stalin at the November 7, 1938 celebration of the 21st anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution. But Ezhov’s men were arrested in time.Ezhov was persuaded to resign. An intensive investigation was begun and a huge number of NKVD abuses were uncovered. A great many cases of those tried or punished under Ezhov were reviewed. Over 100,000 people were released from prison and camps. Many NKVD men were arrested, confessed to torturing innocent people, tried and executed. Many more NKVD men were sentenced to prison or dismissed.Under Beria the number of executions in 1938 and 1940 dropped to less than 1% of the number under Ezhov in 1937 and 1938, and many of those executed were NKVD men, including Ezhov himself, who were found guilty of massive unjustified repression and executions of innocent people.Some of the most dramatic evidence published since 2005 are confessions of Ezhov and Mikhail Frinovsky, Ezhov’s second-in-command. I have put some of these on the Internet in both the original Russian and in English translation. We also have a great many more confessions and interrogations, mostly partial, of Ezhov, in which he makes many more confessions. These were published in 2007 in a semi-official account by Aleksei Pavliukov.Anticommunist Scholars Hide the TruthAll "mainstream" – that is, anticommunist – and Trotskyist researchers falsely claim that there were no conspiracies. According to them, all the Moscow Trial defendants, all the military defendants, and all those tried and sentenced for espionage, conspiracy, sabotage, and other crimes, were innocent victims. Some claim that Stalin had planned to kill all these people because they might constitute a "Fifth Column" if the USSR were attacked. Other anticommunists prefer the explanation that Stalin just tried to terrorize the population into obedience.This is an ideological, anticommunist stance masquerading as an historical conclusion. It is not based upon the historical evidence and is inconsistent with that evidence. Anticommunist historians ignore the primary source evidence available. They even ignore evidence in collections of documents that they themselves cite in their own works.Why do the anticommunist "scholars", both in Russia and the West, ignore all this evidence? Why do they continue to promote the false notions that no conspiracies existed and that Stalin, not Ezhov, decided to execute hundreds of thousands of innocent people? The only possible explanation is that they do this for ideological reasons alone. The truth, as established by an examination of the primary source evidence, would make Stalin and the Bolsheviks "look good" to most people.Collectivization of Agriculture Saved The World from Nazis and Japanese…We have an example of this ideological bias in the way anticommunist scholars and writers treat the Bolshevik collectivization of agriculture. Anticommunists have long attacked it as immoral and unjustified. Yet collectivization provided the capital for the crash industrialization of the USSR. And only industrialization made a modern Red army possible.Without a technologically-advanced modern army the Nazis would have conquered the USSR. Then, with the resources and manpower of the USSR and the rest of Europe behind them, the Nazis could have invaded the British Isles. Nazi armies would have been a far more formidable foe against all Allied powers. Meanwhile the Japanese, strengthened by the petroleum of the Soviet Far East, would have been a far more formidable enemy for the USA in the Pacific war.Millions more Slavs and Jews – "Untermenschen" to the Nazis – and millions more Europeans and American soldiers – would have been killed. That this did not occur can be attributed, in large part, to the Soviet collectivization of agriculture. This is an obvious conclusion. There was simply no other way than by collectivizing agriculture that the USSR could have industrialized, and thus stood up to the Nazis and Japanese.The only alternative was the one promoted by the Right and Trotskyite conspirators: to make peace with the Germans and Japanese, even if that meant granting them huge trade and territorial concessions. That would have greatly strengthened the Axis powers in their war against the U.K. and the USA.For purely ideological reasons anticommunists cannot admit that collectivization made it possible for the Axis to be defeated.… And So Did The Defeat of the Conspirators in 1936-1938Whether they were able to seize political power through a "palace coup", or whether they would have to rely on a German and/or Japanese attack as they only way they might be able to overthrow the Stalin government, the Opposition conspirators were planning some kind of alliance with the Axis.In fact they would have had no choice, as they realized themselves. A USSR weakened by internal revolt, with or without an invasion from abroad, would have had to make trade, territorial, and ideological concessions to its major potential adversaries simply in order to avoid invasion and inevitable conquest.At a minimum, a USSR led by some combination of conspirators would have made treaties with Germany and Japan that would have provided the Axis powers with huge natural resources, possibly with manufactured goods as well. The military conspirators were contemplating going much farther than mere trade with the Axis. They were contemplating an outright military alliance with Germany. That would have meant millions more soldiers to fight alongside the German Wehrmacht.Therefore, in foiling the machinations of the Rights, Trotsky and his supporters, and the Military conspirators, Stalin saved Europe from Naziism – again!No doubt this is why anticommunist "scholars" insist, in the face of all the evidence, that there were no conspiracies in the USSR and no collaboration with the Germans and Japanese. Once again they refuse to admit these truths on purely ideological grounds because doing so would seem to justify Stalin’s actions.Bukharin, Not Stalin, To Blame for the Massive RepressionsOne interesting aspect of this is that Nikolai Bukharin, leading name among the Rightists and one of its leaders, knew about the "Ezhovshchina" as it was happening, and praised it in a letter to Stalin that he wrote from prison.It gets even better. Bukharin knew that Ezhov was a member of the Rightist conspiracy, as he himself was. No doubt that is why he welcomed Ezhov's appointment as head of the NKVD -- a view recorded by his widow in her memoirs.In his first confession, in his now-famous letter to Stalin of December 10, 1937, and at his trial in March 1938 Bukharin claimed he had completely "disarmed" and had told everything he knew. But now we can prove that this was a lie. Bukharin knew that Ezhov was a leading member of the Rightist conspiracy -- but did not inform on him. According to Mikhail Frinovsky, Ezhov's right-hand man, Ezhov probably promised to see that he would not be executed if he did not mention his own, Ezhov's, participation (see Frinovsky's confession of April 11, 1939).If Bukharin had told the truth -- if he had, in fact, informed on Ezhov -- Ezhov's mass murders could have been stopped in their tracks. The lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people could have been saved.But Bukharin remained true to his fellow conspirators. He went to execution -- an execution he swore he deserved "ten times over"* -- without revealing Ezhov's participation in the conspiracy.This point cannot be stressed too much: the blood of the hundreds of thousands of innocent persons slaughtered by Ezhov and his men during 1937-1938, are on Bukharin's hands.Objectivity and EvidenceI agree with historian Geoffrey Roberts when he says:In the last 15 years or so an enormous amount of new material on Stalin … has become available from Russian archives. I should make clear that as a historian I have a strong orientation to telling the truth about the past, no matter how uncomfortable or unpalatable the conclusions may be. … I don’t think there is a dilemma: you just tell the truth as you see it.("Stalin’s Wars", FPM February 12, 2007. At Geoffrey Roberts: Interviewed about Joseph Stalin, Warlord )The conclusions I have reached about the "Ezhovshchina" will be unacceptable to ideologically-motivated people. I have not reached these conclusions out of any desire to "apologize" for the policies of Stalin or the Soviet government. I believe these to be the only objective conclusions possible based on the available evidence.I make no claim that the Soviet leadership was free from error. Stalin’s vision of a socialism leading to communism was obviously faulty in that it did not come to pass. During Stalin’s time, as during the short period of Lenin’s leadership, the Soviets made a great many errors. Error is, of course, inevitable in all human endeavor. And since the Bolsheviks were the first communists to conquer and hold state power, they were in unknown waters. It was inevitable, therefore, that they would make a great many mistakes – and they did.However, any objective study of the evidence and the historical record shows that there was simply no alternative to forced collectivization and industrialization – except defeat at the hands of some combination of capitalist powers. Likewise, the fact that the Right, Trotskyite, and Military conspiracies really did exist but were snuffed out by the Soviet leadership, which managed to out-maneuver Ezhov and foil his conspiracy as well, proves that once again the USSR – "Stalin" – saved Europe from Naziism and all the Allies from an immense number of additional casualties at the hands of the Axis powers.* Bukharin's two appeals for clemency, both dated March 13, 1938, were reprinted in Izvestiia September 2, 1992, p. 3. They were rejected, and Bukharin was executed on March 15, 1938. I have put them online in English here.Additional BibliographyDocumentsEzhov’s interrogations: I have translated all of Ezhov’s interrogations available to me as of July 2010 and put them online here:http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur...(Russian original: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur... )Lubianka. Stalin I NKVD – NKGB – GUKR "SMERSH". 1939 – mart 1946. Moscow, 2006.Frinovsky confession of April 11, 1939, pp. 33-50. http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur...(Russian original here: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur... )Ezhov confession of April 26, 1939, pp. 52-72. http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur...(Russian original: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur... )Petrov, Nikita, Mark Jansen. "Stalinskii pitomets" – Nikolai Ezhov. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2008, pp. 367-379.Ezhov confession of August 4, 1939. http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur...(Russian original: http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur... )ArticlesFurr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, "Bukharin's Last Plea: Yet Another Anti-Stalin Falsification." http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur... - translation of Russian original published in Aktual’naia Istoriia for February 2009 at Гровер Ферр, проф. Монтклерского ун-та шт. Нью-Джерси, Владимир Бобров,; журналист, переводчик. "ПРЕДСМЕРТНОЕ ПИСЬМО БУХАРИНА" - ЕЩЁ ОДНА АНТИСТАЛИНСКАЯ ФАЛЬШИВКА.. Актуальная историяFurr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, "Nikolai Bukharin's First Statement of Confession in the Lubianka" in English translation, Cultural Logic 2007 - http://clogic.eserver.org/2007/F...Furr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, "Pervye priznatel'nye pokazaniia N.I. Bukharina na Lubianke." Klio No. 1 (2007). http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur...Furr, Grover and Vladimir L. Bobrov, eds. "Lichnye pokazaniia N. Bukharina." Klio (St. Petersburg), No. 1 (2007). http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur...Furr, Grover. "Evidence of Leon Trotsky's Collaboration with Germany and Japan." In Cultural Logic for 2009. http://clogic.eserver.org/2009/F...Holmstr�m, Sven-Eric. "New Evidence Concerning the 'Hotel Bristol' Question in the First Moscow Trial of 1936". Cultural Logic 2008. At http://clogic.eserver.org/2008/H...BooksFurr, Grover.Khrushchev Lied: The Evidence That Every "Revelation" of Stalin's (and Beria's) Crimes in Nikita Khrushchev's Infamous "Secret Speech" to the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on February 25, 1956, is Provably False. Kettering, OH: Erythros Press & Media LLC, 2011. At Online Shopping for Electronics, Apparel, Computers, Books, DVDs & more; at Erythros Press & Media: at AbeBooks | Shop for Books, Art & Collectibles; at AbeBooks | Shop for Books, Art & Collectables (United Kingdom)Furr (‘Ferr’), Grover Antistalinskaia podlost’ ("Anti-Stalin Villanies"). Moscow: Algoritm, 2007. Home page: http://www.algoritm-kniga.ru/fer... Brief summary in this interview: "The Sixty-One Untruths of Nikita Khrushchev" (Interview with Grover Furr). http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~fur... (original here: http://www.litrossia.ru/article.... )Pavliukov, Aleksei. Ezhov. Moscow: Zakharov, 2007.[12]Footnotes[1] another-view-of-stalin1.pdf[2] Foreign Office's covert propaganda, Guardian 27 Jan 1978[3] Operation Trust - Wikipedia[4] https://www.greanvillepost.com/s...[5] The Journal of modern history.[6] What the Evidence Shows[7] What the Evidence Shows[8] Nick Levin's answer to How many known assassination attempts were made on Stalin?[9] Operation Trust - Wikipedia[10] https://mltheory.files.wordpress...[11] Hitler Speaking Normally (Subtitles)[12] What the Evidence ShowsFootnotes[1] Chuck Garen's answer to Why did Stalin hate Tukhachevsky?[2] Alexander Finnegan's answer to Was there ever an attempt to kill Stalin during his reign?[3] New research reveals misconceptions about Joseph Stalin and his ‘Great Purge'

First, the question assumes the US deaths are independent of total population. That assumption leads to incorrect assumptions and leverages people’s meager ability to reason to draw conclusions.The US ranks 10th in Deaths per million, as of 26 April 2020Again 10th in Deaths per million, as of 26 April 2020.The US ranks 10th in SARS-CoV-2 infection deaths.Nation Deaths per million1. Belgium 605.582. Spain 490.163. Italy 436.64. France 337.595. United Kingdom 305.66. Netherlands 255.887. Ireland 219.028. Sweden 215.269. Switzerland 187.7510. United States 164.58Coronavirus deaths per million by country | StatistaNow people again have used illogic to claim the same assumptions leveraging people’s meager ability to reason to draw conclusions with-respect-to US healthcare.Again, let us open discussion on healthcare. As a European (that spends about equal time in Europe and the US) I am amazed that people have illogically related the 5% population and total deaths to healthcare.Here are the European Healthcare systems ranked with-respect-to the European Union (EU).Euro Health Consumer Index 2018Country by Overall ranking1. Switzerland2. Netherlands3. Norway4. Denmark5. Belgium6. Finland7. Luxembourg8. Sweden9. Austria10. Iceland11. FranceRankings before BritEx, UK ranks 16Source: Euro Health Consumer Index 2018" (PDF). Health Consumer Powerhouse.The nation with the highest deaths per million population is Belgium which ranks 5th in Euro Health the Consumer Index.Of the top 10 nations with deaths per million population greater than the US, Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden, they are ranked in the top 10 European Healthcare systems.So again, how is the US healthcare to blame?…despite being the richest nation on the planetThe US is not the richest nation on the planet.The US ranks 6th in billionaires per-capita behind Hong Kong, Switzerland, Singapore, Sweden, and Israel.Here is the conclusive list of the top fifty-five richest countries in the world, starting with the wealthiest country…Luxembourg (GDP per capita: $119,719)Norway (GDP per capita: $86,362)Switzerland (GDP per capita: $83,832)Ireland (GDP per capita: $81,477)Iceland (GDP per capita: $78,181)Qatar (GDP per capita: $65,062)The United States of America (GDP per capita: $64,906)Denmark (GDP per capita: $63,434)Singapore (GDP per capita: $62,690)Australia (GDP per capita: $58,824)Yes, The US is the most powerful nation in terms of military.In terms of international trade, no, the US has the largest trade deficit and has foolishly paid the highest trade tariffs.Top 20 countries with the largest deficitRank Country Year Deflect $US1 United States -466,2002 United Kingdom -106,7003 India -57,2004 Canada -49,260The US is a Debtor NationThe United States is the world's biggest debtor nation, with a trade deficit of more than $61 billion and total debt of trillions of dollars. The US lost its status in 2010 with decline for the next 6 years.The test kits would have save lives?The accuracy of the RT-PCR (Reverse Transcriptase-Polymerase Chain Reaction) test, 30% are false negatives. "False negatives" may believe they're not contagious and could infect others. This was a problem in New York were people that tested negative were allowed to enter the populous.The test kits are an important part of containment, they are an important part understanding prevalence, incidence, and morbidity; they are not the cure, they are a political-podium-pounding-point when a politician has nothing else to criticize.The Coronavirus ModelsMost models predicted US death numbers at 100,000 to 240,000, why is the US the only nation below predicted deaths?President Trump was the “first” Western-World Leader to take action, 31 January 2010, the day after the WHO Declares Coronavirus Outbreak a Global Health Emergency on 30 January 2020.Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus | The White HouseEurope, nothing.Then again President Trump was the “first” Western-World Leader to take action, 11 March 2020, the same day as the World Health Organization (WHO) Declared the Outbreak a Pandemic.President Donald J. Trump Has Taken Unprecedented Steps To Respond To The Coronavirus And Protect The Health And Safety Of Americans | The White HouseEurope, nothing.Your nation under President Trump.In the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and the Economist Intelligence Unit report the US is Number 1, up from Number 8 in 2016. Due to increased action against disease and threat from the US Southern Border.These are the countries best prepared for health emergenciesHow we see it in Europe.In January the WHO reports did not correlate with the Trump Administration findings. President Trump was called a germaphobe, a xenophobe, and anti-Chines, etc.Why did the Trump Administration findings conflict with the WHO?Now consider, most likely the reorganization by President Trump of the Global Health Security and Biodefense unit (the one that television and internet dullards assume he eliminated), tasked for with the responsible for pandemic preparedness, and creating the counterproliferation and biodefense directorate that determined the contradictions in WHO data and investigated the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This is the reason that the US was first to institute travel bans from China. Xenophobic, racist, now we know, NO. It save lives, or the US would have followed the models in deaths as other nations did.The President Trump’s US Counterproliferation and Biodefense units had the knowledge that US officials raised concerns about safety at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2018, two years before the novel coronavirus outbreak.After multiple visits to the lab from a US diplomat in Wuhan and a science diplomat at the US Embassy in Beijing in early 2018, the officials became concerned about the safety of the research and sent two "sensitive but unclassified" cables back to Washington, DC, asking for assistance to help the lab tighten its safety protocols.The Wuhan Institute of Virology was started in 2015 with the aid and under direction of the Obama administration and the US National Institute of Health. The Obama administration provided $3.7 million in research grants for scientific gain-of-function coronavirus experimentation on bats to the Lab.The WHO did not have knowledge or was hiding the fact that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was performing coronavirus testing on bats.It became clear that China and WHO was less than truthful about the origins, number of infected, number of deaths, and date of patient “zero”. At the time Italy had an epidemic; it was well know that over 100,000 Chinese were living in northern Italy where the epidemic was centred.Therefore, China had an epidemic and the WHO was either incompetent or protecting the Chinese, and second the common factor in the coronavirus was people from China.Acting to slow the spread coronavirus to the US President Trump was the first world leader (after China and North Korea) to institute a travel ban for Chinese entering the US. It took Europe a month longer and the results in Europe are disastrous.When it was clear that Europe was on the verge of an epidemic, President Trump on March 11, issued a proclamation under section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to restrict travel to the United States from foreign nationals who have recently been in certain European countries, European and other nations followed.ConclusionThe US ranks 10th in deaths per million, by all estimates and model factors it should be number one?The US has most international travelers than all others, the US is the most mobile nation, in Europe have low personal vehicle ownership and personal vehicle travel miles are low with respect to the US. This leads to a much smaller personal average travel radius (pATR), in the US on often drives 100km daily. In Europe we have a low retail personal interaction rate (PIR) as we have small retail shops, few large outlets as Walmart.Why is the US not number one?Yes, the implementation was not perfect, but he did make the call before any other leader, and the other leaders followed his methodology. We wished our leaders in Europe would have had the leadership and foresight not to trust the WHO and act at the time of President Trump. We would not hold the top nine spots on the death chart.Yes, there will be arm-chair quarterbacks that will find issues with a the first “Pathogen Travel Ban in 100 years”, since the 1919 Spanish flu pandemic, the mistakes of D-Day, Apollo 13, Libya, Egypt, Syria, you name it, someone can in retrospect do it better. The one that wins is not the one without error, it is the one that makes the least errors.In spite of the Liberal pro-Chines critics the US continues to lead global efforts. In early March, Trump signed a supplemental appropriations act that included $1.3 billion in additional U.S. foreign assistance for pandemic response. Most recently, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced an additional $274 million in emergency funding for at-risk countries. This aid does not come with the strings that China attaches to its aid.The USA has 5% of the world’s population, but about 30% of COVID-19 cases, despite being the richest nation on the planet. Where did it go wrong?The rest of the world leaders were convinced by the WHO that is was containable, and believed Communist China’s disinformation; the US did not, that is why the US is not number one in coronavirus deaths rate per million.The US was wrong to be the largest contributor to the pro-Chines WHO, paying about 15 percent of the organization’s budget—compared with China’s 0.21 percent.Yea, Yea, the New York Times, CNN, the internet said. I am sure that the US has thousands of coronavirus deaths President Trump is hiding in Trump Towers… I am sure to hear some real dingers in the comments.