Category: Politics

Is There An Ongoing Coup In America?

In 2015, I speculated that big data had predicted mass civil unrest in the U.S. and that the government thus implemented preventative countermeasures to stifle it. Specifically, what caught my attention was increased militarization of police forces, Pentagon funding of studies on how to handle mass civil unrest, increased domestic surveillance, and the legalization of propaganda. I felt the U.S. government was moving toward a Chinese-styled form of government, in which it uses big data and domestic surveillance to stifle descent.

The U.S. was accepting globalism at its own expense for the benefit of select nations and groups and slowly transforming into an authoritarian state based on big data and domestic surveillance. The only question was whether or not an internal group would retaliate against it. Of course, it was crazy to believe such a thing at the time but that appears to be what has happened.

Steve Pieczenik, a former U.S. Department of State official who has served under the presidential administrations of Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush, said this was going to happen. He predicted it in 2016, stating “Quite frankly, this is a second American Revolution”. He has also stated that the opposition we‘re seeing now is the “gurgling of a dying institution”, and that a silent and peaceful second American Revolution has occurred.

Of course, that opposition is underway, with media groups such as Vice in discussing a coup in America and Rolling Stones claiming mass disruption works, while a former official under Barack Obama is calling for a military coup against Donald Trump and Trump himself is blaming Obama for the leaks and protests against him. Some are already saying that Obama should be held accountable for the soft coup against Trump. This war in Washington extends to the deep state as well.

Julian Assange said that an “Amazing battle for dominance is playing out between the elected US govt & the IC who consider themselves to be the ‘permanent government’. Glenn Greenwald commented on the matter, saying that while he feels Trump’s administration is dangerous, supporting the deep state is worse and that people shouldn’t support the deep state in opposing Trump. Assange agreed, saying that Greenwald had “put it exactly right”.

In a recent Ron Paul Liberty Report, a former CIA intelligence officer stated that a lot of the anonymous source based media reports are false and that it is the politicized upper echelon of the intelligence community and not the base of it that’s working against Trump and causing the leaks. Another former CIA officer said there are spies plotting against Trump and that these people are treasonous.

It would appear that a silent coup and a counter-coup did occur as Pieczenik stated but it’s not over, apparently. In fact, it might have only just begun.

My Thoughts

First and foremost, if their plan is to create a military insurrection or violent coup through riots to remove Trump, I don’t think it will work. It’s important to understand that violence isn’t as effective for political change as people use to believe. There’s a good article from a political scientist who reveals that the data shows peaceful movements are more effective than violent movements.

I believe, for now, the opposition against Trump has largely drained their resources and funding. Hillary Clinton’s losing campaign cost 1.2 billion, George Soros lost nearly 1 billion after Trump won, David Brock wasted millions fighting Trump and is already preparing to flush $40 million down the drain, and donations to the Clinton Foundation are drying up. The real question is whether or not Barack Obama’s Organizing For Action will have enough funding to counter Trump, which it’s attempting to do.

If anything transpires, it will probably be down the road since it would take a lot of regrouping and funding to effectively oppose or impeach Trump. However, it isn’t out of the question for the opposition of Trump to go all in and if they’re going to do that, then they will very soon. Even if that happens, the fight to stop the rise of populism or ‘Trumpism’ is mute. With the recent Global Trends: Paradox of Progress report from the National Intelligence Council projecting the continued rise of populism and Generation Z being projected as the most conservative generation since World War II, the future is bleak for those wishing to oppose Trumpism and this rise of the so-called alternative right.

I don’t personally believe Trump will be impeached, as one professor predicts, but I do believe there will be a lot of disruption and chaos if those opposing Trump are able to effectively organize and fund their opposition if they haven’t already. This seems increasingly unlikely, as more and more people are waking up to this, with more and more people coming around to Trump and more light being shined on it. However, only time will tell.

Continue Reading

Trump & Bannon Are Right About The Media

There are countless examples that prove we cannot trust the notion of mainstream media as a non-partisan effort to objectively report the news. It is, therefore, important to question the motivations and biases of any given media institution and to never invoke a sense of incredulity. The following are just a handful of examples bolstering this truth.

Infiltration

In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency allegedly began Operation Mockingbird in an attempt to manipulate news media to seed propaganda and fund various cultural and student groups as organization fronts. Details of this operation are scarce and inconclusive. However, the operation was verified in the declassified CIA “Family Jewels” document.

In 1977, Carl Bernstein, a former journalist of the Washington Post, reported about the Central Intelligence Agency’s infiltration of the media. Bernstein revealed that more than 400 journalists had become an asset of the CIA. CIA assets were in The New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, Reuters, Time Inc, the Associated Press, etc.

“Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were Williarn Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Tirne Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the LouisviIle Courier‑Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune.” ( Carl Bernstein – The CIA and The Media

Politicization

In 2013, John Brennan became the director of the CIA under Barack Obama. In the same year, Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon, decided to buy the Washington Post. Later that year, Bezos secured a $600 million dollar contract with the CIA. This is an obvious conflict of interest and as many advocates of transparency and journalistic standards have requested, a disclaimer of this relationship should be provided.

In 2016, the Washington Post reported that a “secret CIA assessment” determined that Russia interfered with the 2016 Election in the hope of electing Donald Trump. This begged the question as to whether or not the CIA had become politicized under the leadership of John Brennan who has openly feuded with Trump on several occasions, especially considering that the narrative has dramatically shifted from the original assertion after statements from the Director of National Intelligence offered clarification. This is the perfect example of how a conflict of interest could create the potential for politicization.

Collusion 

In 2016, WikiLeaks revealed that numerous media outlets colluded with the Clinton campaign. Former U.S. Representative, Ron Paul, created a list that features those implicated in the media collusion.

Public Perception 

In 2016, Gallup revealed that American trust in media had fallen to an all-time low.

While it is clear Americans’ trust in the media has been eroding over time, the election campaign may be the reason that it has fallen so sharply this year. With many Republican leaders and conservative pundits saying Hillary Clinton has received overly positive media attention, while Donald Trump has been receiving unfair or negative attention, this may be the prime reason their relatively low trust in the media has evaporated even more. — Gallup

Through the ever-increasing access to information, even the average individual can determine fact from fiction. Reporting inaccurately, if not now, will sooner or later be equated to shooting one’s self in the foot, which is precisely what Buzzfeed and CNN did when they reported on Trump’s Dirty Dossier, a story that was obviously untrue, according to the Director of National Intelligence and according to common sense.

Conclusion 

The infiltration, politicization, collusion, and general recklessness of the mainstream media validates both Trump’s and Bannon’s assertions of media unfairness and bias. In fact, in regard to the infiltration of media, I found it unsurprising that Trump went straight to the CIA to put the media on blast. While to many, that made no sense, to those aware of the past relations between the media and CIA, it made perfect sense.

The media, as Steve Bannon stated, IS the opposition party. They are not accurately portraying reality and they’re doing a great injustice to the American people because perception informs reality and they are distorting that perception, thus distorting reality. This isn’t just about the leftist stranglehold over media, as Andrew Breitbart so brilliantly detailed in his 2011 book, Righteous Indignation, but about a much wider issue that transcends party affiliation.

Continue Reading

CFR Speaker Mentions Clinton Campaign McCarthyism

In a Council on Foreign Relations conference on The State of U.S.-Russia Relations, speaker Stephen Cohen warned of the McCarthyism of the Clinton campaign.

“For me, the most desultory recent development was the Clinton Administration’s decision to Kremlin bait Trump for saying that he thought it would be a good idea to cooperate with Putin and Russia. I add to that, I am not now nor have I ever been a Trump supporter but I have always been a supporter of day taunt and what the Clinton Administration has done… ( You’re talking about the Clinton campaign, the moderator corrects ) What has come out of the Clinton campaign and it comes every day to my computer. It’s McCarthyism. It’s something I’m old enough to remember the way it affected my professors. It is going to make, no matter who is president, any rational discourse about Russia in this country so much more difficult and it aggrieves me that the publications I have relied on all my life and the columnists I relied on all my life, are on board with this. They say it’s okay. It is not okay. It is bad for all of us and it needs to stop now or we’ll never get out of this new and worse Cold War with Russia.” — Stephen Cohen, American scholar and professor of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University

In retrospect, Stephen Cohen’s concerns have become validated, especially after the election. The Clinton campaign has spiraled into an endless blame game, from blaming the FBI to the Russian government, for Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump.

Continue Reading

The Preconditioning Of A Donald Trump Impeachment

 There was a great deal of ideological preconditioning before any official accusations of Russian interference with the 2016 election were made and today Barack Obama is set to announce retaliatory measures in response to the alleged cyber attacks.

Despite the preconditioning, 71% of Americans do NOT believe Russia was responsible for the alleged hackings of the DNC and John Podesta. However, the preconditioning for another radical ploy has begun, the preconditioning for the impeachment of Donald Trump.

(Democrats are paving the way to impeach Donald Trump)
(The Case for Donald Trump’s Impeachability)
(The Evidence To Impeach Donald Trump May Already Be Here)
(Professor who correctly forecast Trump’s victory predicts possible impeachment)
(Donald Trump could face ‘impeachment issues’ as soon as he becomes President, legal experts warn)

Since blaming Huma Abedin, blaming the FBI, blaming the Electoral College, blaming Russia, and blaming everything under the sun has failed, the next radical ploy is pushing for the impeachment of Donald Trump. It’s not even hard to imagine, a few months from now, the small talk becoming a major issue just as the Russian interference narrative began small and became a major issue.

It’s all about preconditioning, folks.

Continue Reading

Roger Stone’s Freudian Slip On Hillary Clinton Investigation?

In a recent Alex Jones video on potential inaugural disruption, Roger Stone appears to have a Freudian slip in regard to the investigation of Hillary Clinton. Of course, anyone who studies psychology understands that a Freudian slip may or may not even mean anything. Sometimes people simply make a mistake based on other conditioned patterns of thought, it doesn’t necessarily mean that what they accidentally say is their true intention. However, sometimes it really is. . .

At 3:46 of the video, Mr. Stone says “and you want to stand up for Donald Trump during these investi… during these protests to show that we have the proof.”

This apparent Freudian slip would imply that Donald Trump is going after Hillary Clinton after all but we shall see.

Continue Reading

Why Alternative Media Won’t Lose To Controlled Media

The Hill released an article reflecting the perspective I had taken seven days prior, in our article on “fake news” and internet censorship. I concluded the article stating that “Both sides are guilty of bias, both push false and misleading narratives, but only one side is calling for internet censorship, only one side has unveiled an incredibly deceitful and destructive agenda.” Of course, I’m referring to the agenda of controlled media to discredit the alternative media as “fake news”.

The war between alternative media and controlled media has become apparent but alternative media has already won this war before it began. The controlled media is acting in a reactionary way to that which it perceives as a threat to its legitimacy, whereas the alternative media has acted in a preemptive and prevailing which is more persuasive. For that reason, the alternative media will continue to prevail over the controlled media and the statistics back my perspective on this matter.

Trust in the media ( mainstream media ) has dropped to an all-time low.

“WASHINGTON, D.C. — Americans’ trust and confidence in the mass media “to report the news fully, accurately and fairly” has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.

Americans' Trust in the Mass Media

Gallup began asking this question in 1972, and on a yearly basis since 1997. Over the history of the entire trend, Americans’ trust and confidence hit its highest point in 1976, at 72%, in the wake of widely lauded examples of investigative journalism regarding Vietnam and the Watergate scandal. After staying in the low to mid-50s through the late 1990s and into the early years of the new century, Americans’ trust in the media has fallen slowly and steadily. It has consistently been below a majority level since 2007.

Republicans Fuel Drop in Media Trust

While it is clear Americans’ trust in the media has been eroding over time, the election campaign may be the reason that it has fallen so sharply this year. With many Republican leaders and conservative pundits saying Hillary Clinton has received overly positive media attention, while Donald Trump has been receiving unfair or negative attention, this may be the prime reason their relatively low trust in the media has evaporated even more. It is also possible that Republicans think less of the media as a result of Trump’s sharp criticisms of the press. Republicans who say they have trust in the media has plummeted to 14% from 32% a year ago. This is easily the lowest confidence among Republicans in 20 years.

Trust in Mass Media, by Party

Democrats’ and independents’ trust in the media has declined only marginally, with 51% of Democrats (compared with 55% last year) and 30% of independents (versus 33% last year) expressing trust. Over the past 20 years, Democrats have generally expressed more trust than Republicans in the media, although in 2000, the two parties were most closely aligned, with 53% of Democrats and 47% of Republicans professing trust.

Trust in Mass Media Falls Across Age Groups

Older Americans are more likely than younger Americans to say they trust the media, but trust has declined among both age groups this year. Currently, 26% of those aged 18 to 49 (down from 36% last year) and 38% of those aged 50 and older (down from 45%) say they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media.

Trust in Mass Media, by Age

In 2001, younger Americans (55%) were more likely than older Americans (50%) to express trust and confidence in mass media. This gap emerged again in 2005 when 53% of 18- to 49-year-olds had trust and 45% of those 50 and older expressed the same sentiment. Yet in the past decade, older Americans have mostly had more confidence than younger Americans, and this year, the gap between these age groups is 12 points. And 2016 marks the first time that confidence among older Americans has dropped below 40% in polling since 2001.” – Gallup

The democratization of information has lead to the democratization of truth, therein lying the distrust of controlled media among the youth of America. There is no reason to believe that this trend won’t continue, especially with the popularity of alternative media skyrocketing in contrast to controlled media, which is only experiencing temporary surges.

Controlled media has already lost the youth, which created the necessity for alternative media and that necessity will drive the future of media focus and that’s why alternative media is more likely, in the long-run, to overtake the controlled media. However, efforts are being made to curve this phenomenon. For example, CNN recently purchased the social media app Beme, to cultivate the millennial audience. I am predicting that these type of efforts will ultimately fail and will not curve this trend because it does not provide a solution to the problem that created this trend, to begin with.

At some point, controlled media and all media, for that matter, will have to submit to a more informed age of individuals, who will be more capable of deciphering fact from fiction for themselves.

Continue Reading

Washington Post’s Disgraceful Blacklist From a New, Hidden, and Very Shady Group

“THE WASHINGTON POST on Thursday night promoted the claims of a new, shadowy organization that smears dozens of U.S. news sites that are critical of U.S. foreign policy as being “routine peddlers of Russian propaganda.” The article by reporter Craig Timberg — headlined “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say” — cites a report by an anonymous website calling itself PropOrNot, which claims that millions of Americans have been deceived this year in a massive Russian “misinformation campaign.”

The group’s list of Russian disinformation outlets includes WikiLeaks and the Drudge Report, as well as Clinton-critical left-wing websites such as Truthout, Black Agenda Report, Truthdig, and Naked Capitalism, as well as libertarian venues such as Antiwar.com and the Ron Paul Institute.

This Post report was one of the most widely circulated political news articles on social media over the last 48 hours, with dozens, perhaps hundreds, of U.S. journalists and pundits with large platforms hailing it as an earth-shattering exposé. It was the most-read piece on the entire Post website on Friday after it was published.

Yet the article is rife with obviously reckless and unproven allegations, and fundamentally shaped by shoddy, slothful journalistic tactics. It was not surprising to learn that, as BuzzFeed’s Sheera Frenkel noted, “a lot of reporters passed on this story.” Its huge flaws are self-evident. But the Post gleefully ran with it and then promoted it aggressively, led by its Executive Editor Marty Baron:”

Read More: The Intercept 

Continue Reading

Reddit Forced to Ban PizzaGate Investigation By “Powerful Outside Influence”

Reddit has banned the PizzaGate subreddit, which was gaining thousands of subscribers a day, under the grounds that it has violated its terms of service agreement.

According to a moderator of r/uncensorednews and former moderator of r/PizzaGate, the PizzaGate subreddit was banned after outside influences forced the moderators of Reddit to shut down the PizzaGate investigation.

“As a previous moderator of /pizzagate, I’d like to say that we did absolutely everything we could to abide by the rules set forth on us by the admins.

No rules were intentionally broken nor did we try to ignore what they told us.

The pizzagate issue is a very sensitive topic and I don’t believe that this was not a clear conscious decision by the admins. After speaking with the rest of the pizzagate mod team, we strongly believe there was a very powerful outside influence which caused the subreddit to be shut down. We believe this due to some information we received outside of Reddit.”

According to another moderator, Reddit was pressured by external sources to shut the subreddit down.

“Amidst the cries of censorship, keep in mind that the admins are simply applying existing sitewide rules, and it’s more than likely that reddit (and its majority owner Avance Publications*) have been pressured from external sources, with threats of litigation, removal of advertising revenue, etc.”

If you do not know what PizzaGate is, do not Google it! You will be directed to completely biased sources that do not acknowledge key elements of the investigation and dismiss it as a conspiracy theory. Anyone in their right mind, who examines the evidence, couldn’t possibly conclude that these findings are normal and do not amount to a legitimate case for inquiry. That is not to say that the allegations are true but that they at least warrant investigation and that the findings are certainly abnormal.

You should research “PizzaGate” yourself before coming to any conclusions.

The PizzaGate investigation is migrating to Voat, a non-censorship alternative to Reddit.

Continue Reading

Internal Entities Exposing Hillary Clinton To Invoke Russian Conflict?

Hillary Clinton was listed as an insider threat in an Army training presentation on the best practices for handling classified material and maintaining operational security. According to officials, this was a mistake and the slide featuring Clinton was removed from the presentation. Interestingly, the others listed ( Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, David Petraeus, Nidal Hassan, Aaron Alexis ) are all identifiable as legitimate ‘insider threats’.

Was it a mistake? 

It’s been theorized that Hillary Clinton’s mishandlings of classified information are what inspired the slide featuring her as an insider threat. However, the first DNC email leaks exposing those mishandlings weren’t released until July 22, 2016, but the slide featuring Clinton was developed around seventeen months prior to those leaks.

If this wasn’t a mistake, what could have inspired the consideration of Hillary Clinton as an insider threat? Could it be because of Clinton’s various internal and international scandals or undisclosed association to the Russian Uranium Deal?

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.” – Read More: New York Times

If it was a mistake, what’s the deal with various reports that the DNC leaks were an inside job to expose Hillary Clinton? For example, CNN reported on Oliver Stone claiming the DNC leaks were an inside job according to numerous intelligence experts he’s spoken with. Stone has been communicating with Edward Snowden a lot, too, for his film “Snowden”, so he may very well be capable of obtaining such intelligence.

This raises the question of why such a thing would occur. The only answer that can be alluded to is to invoke a conflict with Russia based on the perception being pushed to the masses. For example, Hillary Clinton threatening war with Russia if any more hacks occur and Vladimir Putin responding, claiming that “If it’s Clinton, it’s war.” That’s not to mention the blame of the hacks and various Clinton scandals being blamed on Russia by the mainstream media, going so far as to suggest that Clinton was poisoned by Putin and-or Trump.

Regardless of how this situation is analyzed, the emerging conclusion seems to be the invocation of Russian conflict.

Bernie Sanders’ campaign was sabotaged by the DNC to get Trump in place to create the illusion of conflict between Trump and Clinton. There’s some evidence to suggest that the Clintons and Trump were previously on good terms, from the strange call between Bill Clinton and Trump to the fact that the Clintons attended Trump’s wedding. Jeb Bush alluded to a conspiracy to place Trump in as a Clinton oppositional puppet. As of now, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that Trump is a mere puppet for the Clintons but I wouldn’t rule it out as a possibility.

It ultimately appears as a duel conspiracy to expose Clinton and to invoke a Russian conflict. The culprit, as Oliver Stone alluded to, must be internal entities, most likely the military industrial complex or intelligence agencies, to create a Russian conflict.

They, these eternal entities, seem to want to invoke a Russian conflict by using Hillary Clinton as a pawn and Trump is possibly there to further escalate the matter. Whether or not Clinton is truly an insider threat or not to the military, may not even be true, but they appear to be using her to invoke this conflict regardless. The real question is whether or not Trump is an insider or actually who and what he is claiming to be. We shall see.

 

Continue Reading

Standing Presidents Have Lied About Their Health Before: There’s No Reason Hillary Clinton Wouldn’t

This isn’t the first time a high-profile politician has lied about their health issues. For example, a few standing presidents have lied about their health. Perhaps ‘Standing’ is an overstatement, though.

Woodrow Wilson’s Health Issues Were Kept Under Wraps 

“In 1919, President Woodrow Wilson suffered a severe stroke that left him incapacitated until the end of his presidency in 1921, an event that became one of the great crises in presidential succession. However, historian Edwin A. Weinstein notes that Wilson had a history of cerebrovascular disorders going back to 1896, sixteen years before his was elected president.” – Read More: Health Sciences Library 

John F. Kennedy Was Constantly Drugged To Avoid Exposing His Health Issues 

“President John F. Kennedy’s medical records reveal that he had suffered health problems since childhood, and used an arsenal of drugs, including painkillers and stimulants, to treat various medical conditions during his presidency.

A historian who examined his medical records was stunned at the extent of the health problems that the seemingly vigorous president dealt with.

“There was hardly a day that went by that he didn’t suffer terribly,” presidential historian Robert Dallek, a history professor at Boston University, told ABCNEWS” – Read More: ABCNEWS

Franklin D Roosevelt’s Health Issues Were Hidden

“In July 1944, the eminent surgeon Frank Lahey wrote a confidential memo expressing his concern that President Franklin D. Roosevelt could not survive four more years in the White House. The public never learned of his assessment, and in April 1945 Roosevelt succumbed to a stroke just three months into his fourth term. Lahey’s memo, which appears in full below, has just been released by the Lahey Clinic.” – Read More: History.com

Featured Image Credit: Getty Images: Justin Sullivan

Continue Reading
Skip to toolbar