Good work. You nailed it.

It is all old information. It would be a great post in October of 2016, but it is dated now.

This post is about establishment moves hes made since he got elected. Did he become anti establishment in the last few months or something?

The newest item linked was dated 3/27/2017

Really? "...he was selected years in advance..."

Yes, let's go back to talking about Hillary. Much more relevant. No conspiracy here, no sir. /s

If people would have kept quiet after Trump won, then things would be mich different. Instead, they attack and run their mouths, and they have the skeletons of children in their closets.

Trump and MI have all of this information.

I feel sorry for you. I honestly do.

I wrote this in another post, it seems relevant:

Still to this day I can't tell you what Hillarys political message was during the election. It was so vague, based on some sort of "I am the decent choice", which - and everybody could see it even then - was akin to saying "At least I am not as shitty as that guy".

Not a very strong message compared to Trumps demagogic approach that promised you the moon and a fantastical trip back to the 'good old days".

America have been bred, for more than three generations now, on a diet of fast food, political infused entertainment TV and poor education for the masses. That is a prime situation for a demagogue to enter the stage.

You can see it throughout history. Germany elected Hitler on the wild promise of ending a job recession gripping the whole world after World War I. He made some promises that the lesser educated people saw as true, ignoring the plethora of warnings.

Stalin rose to power with the promise of freeing the people from the hunger, while Mussolini took control with the empty promise of restoring a nationalistic Italy while going through a recession of their own.

Today we have leaders like Erdogan in Turkey, using the same strong man tactics as Putin, curbing democratic freedom and stomping on the press while promising a return to the glory days of old.

And people buy it. They buy it because they - on average - lack the education that enables them to think critically and objectively.

They even peddle the demagogue's promises as gospel to friends and family - with good intentions - because they have been fooled by a man with a far better education and with enough money to ensure you hear his messages loud and often.

It's easy to fool the uneducated. That's why you most often find dictatorships in countries that lack proper education for the poor.

A recent study concluded that the less you know about a complex problem, the more inclined you are to think you have the easy solution.

What is your point? It is Democrats versus Republicans?

Your failure to see the point kind of underscores it.

No, not really. I skimmed through what you wrote, and it is not very well researched. You are acting like it is...

The question is "Do I waste my time on this, or do I continue to research more important topics?" This is a reasonable question.

I will start here and see how intelligent your response is. Who put Hitler and Stalin into power? They did not acquire power based on their own merits. That is a fallacy. Hitler was a fascist and Stalin was a communist. The same group of people invented fascism and communism. Who are these people?

Daniel P. Sheehan Rulers of the Realm flowchart:

http://davidhazan.net/thirdparty/2016/9/29/daniel-sheehan-rulers-of-the-realm-flow-chart

WWI to WWII: Daniel Sheehan - 4-21-2016:

https://youtu.be/BDurYQ8xSv4?list=PLVza7sesLJh5ZR8exn0lKoCjC3ayShvdd

Daniel Sheehan

Ha ha ha! So you are using this guy as some sort of person we should take serious? The same guy who holds seminars on existence of UFO's?

The same guys who made this: Daniel Sheehan: UFOs and the Cosmic Perspective

Is that the guy you think would be able to refute my argument that too many Americans are too uneducated to discern facts from idiocy?

I digress... So, who is it that "invented" those darn communists and fascists? Can't wait to learn more about this.

Yes! He has a lot of experience when it comes to Constitutional Law. Just because he has unfounded beliefs in UFOs does not mean he is incompetent when it comes to Constitutional Law, right? Is this you logic? Someone is irrational in one area, therefor they are irrational in all areas?

"Is that the guy you think would be able to refute my argument that too many Americans are too uneducated to discern facts from idiocy?" Yes! One of many sources.

It is interesting that you attack the source of the information, but you are silent on the information itself. It is like you are more persuaded by the messenger than the message.

Did you watch the video and look at the flow chart?

Just because he has unfounded beliefs in UFOs does not mean he is incompetent when it comes to Constitutional Law, right? Is this your logic?

It would definitely not be my go-to guy, lol!

Can't you see how far out you are when you have to resort to people that hold seminars on fucking UFO's and cosmic energy?

I guess it's a complex problem and he has the easy solution to it, right?

It is interesting that you attack the source of the information, but you are silent on the information itself.

That is called critical thinking. I searched for his credentials and found him not particular worthy to spend my time on.

Did you watch the video and look at the flow chart?

I did not. I stopped taking you serious when you linked to that guy.

Maybe you could find a source, you said there were many, that doesn't go around spouting stuff about flying saucers... Then I'd be far more inclined to take you serious.

Posts like this were made back then, they just went unheeded.

The pizzagate people research Trump extensively. I am one of them. I was surprised we did not turn up more on him.

I mean this with complete neutrality: you all may be suffering from confirmation bias.

Saying "may be" does not help.

And what if I am not?

The truth is independent of what any of us "believe", right?

Is Trump a Luciferian or Satanist?

I'm just trying to respectfully offer a reason why your previous research did not turn up these findings, even though the information was available.

Not just my research. There is you, pizzagaters, the chans, the never Trumpers, the CIA, the FBI, Mossad, MI6, etc. it is not just me.

It the CIA, FBI, MI6, and Mossad had anything, then they would not be relying on the bullshit Russia excuse.

its going, it's going, it's gone! She knocked that one right out of the park!!!

North Korea!

That's the place run by the smart, tough guy who really loves his people, right?

Talented too.

They like him so much they stand and applaud!

It was run by the CIA.

Wow, the CIA managed to trick China and the USSR/Russia into giving them aid and propping them up in a puppet country right on their own borders for decades? That's slick.

You think that China and Russia did not know?

Of course they were in on it. It makes perfect sense.

Well, they do have their own deepstate. I mean, they did. The international bankers cannot control Putin, so they demonize him in the western media.

Hopefully, the Chinese have done the same. Look at the Chinese stock exchange building. It is an upside down cross. LOL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenzhen_Stock_Exchange#/media/File:Shenzhen_Stock_Exchange_2014.jpg

This must be the absolute strangest piece of magical thinking to emerge from the crowd at /rhalfbakering in the last little while.

Plausible

But I thought the silver-spoon-fed New York City billionaire with business ties all over the globe was totally going to fight globalism. Are you telling me that folks like Steve Bannon, a former Hollywood producer and Goldman Sachs banker also with international business ties, wasn't really a populist voice for the forgotten man?

New World Order globalism. Is that what you mean by globalism?

Lol right, the logic in his die hard supporters is hilarious. Yet scary how tribalistic humans can be.

No shit. As a non-American ot was painfully obvious that Trump had almost nothing in common with his base supporters.

Someone from his base simply can't become president as they don't have the cash. Sad state of affairs, but Trump had a 0,1% chance of actually being good for them, while Clinton had a 0% chance of going against the establishment.

And you can't blame people for taking a minuscule chance over no chance.

i mean is there a chance if all of the above is true? we already knew trump was from wallstreet. that he was broz with the clintons. how is there a chance he was going to do the right thing? plus lies on lies on lies, so obv nothing he said of substance was gonna happen.

He actually has followed through with a lot of his campaign promises, whether you agree with them or not is another story.

oh? which ones? wheres his wall? also, were those the original promises, or the ones where he flipped it twelve times? hes soooo bullshit cuz he can say: ive done all these things ive said i would do! well, what about the times where you said youd do the opposite of that?

Indeed.

And you can't blame people for taking a minuscule chance over no chance.

You can blame people for being gullible fools. Trump's voters suck it to elites -- stuck them with a gigantic tax cut to buy more mansions and yachts. All people had to do to make a reasonable decision was to go to both candidates web sites and read what their policies were.

The thing with Hillary is that we knew already that we couldn't even trust her to do what she ran on. It didn't matter what the Democratic platform was or what her website said.

You never hear Bernie Sanders saying any of that crap because he's not an idiot. If fact he's a pretty smart guy. You should listen to him.

Bernie Sanders: I happen to respect [Hillary] very much. And on our worst days, I think it is fair to say we are 100 times better than any Republican candidate.

Except if you look at the policies both of those politicians proposed.

Well, Trump promised a lot of anti-establishment stuff. Especially trade policy he's pushing is very anti-establishment.

Clinton tried promising some establishment stuff, but we all knew that was more for show anyway, even without details of her speeches in front of wall street leaking out.

Being anti-establishment is not good for Trump Supporters per se. For example, the recent trade wars are going to hurt low income consumers more than any other group. Similarly, the Clinton debt-free college plan would have been a boon to both the establishment and anyone looking to go to college.

For example, the recent trade wars are going to hurt low income consumers more than any other group.

Why would they get hit harder than the people actually doing the trade and profiting from it?

Similarly, the Clinton debt-free college plan would have been a boon to both the establishment and anyone looking to go to college.

While I agree that it would be a boon to the people, I don't think she would have been able, or even wanting, to actually implement that. If you want someone to push for this, I'd look towards someone with a more consistent voting record. I also don't agree that it's something the establishment would want, because it's mainly the establishment that benefits from having less competition (through less graduates) or from actually be on the recieving side of student debt and tuition money.

Why would they get hit harder than the people actually doing the trade and profiting from it?

In absolute terms, you are correct. However in reality the low income earner is hurt much worse because of the concept of marginal value. IE a dollar is not worth the same amount to you and me and it is to Jeff Bezos. So while Jeff may lose $100 Million from tariffs, that won't matter to him as much as the fact that you or I will have to pay an extra dollar here for good X, and an extra 3% here on good y. Because the total increase on you and I, even though it is MUCH lower in absolute terms, is far greater in terms of our relative wealth.

I'm not sure why you don't think a Dem President would pursue that, since the last 4 have.. also I'm not really sure what you are talking about re: Clinton's voting record on this particular?

https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton#.Wyu8iiAnaUk

The existing university system IS part of the establishment...

Because the total increase on you and I, even though it is MUCH lower in absolute terms, is far greater in terms of our relative wealth.

Fair enough, but don't we also have to take into account that low-income workers are more likely to be displaced because of trade with low-wage countries?

ABSOLUTELY NOT, because there is no empiric evidence this is the case. It is just something that makes sense when you hear it, and is parroted by certain politicians. Empirically though this is not the case. Here is an NPR article that discusses this in a (overly in my opinion) balanced way: https://www.npr.org/2017/08/04/541321716/fact-check-have-low-skilled-immigrants-taken-american-jobs

The link you post also offered this nugget:

It is true that wages for low-wage workers have declined — they fell 5 percent from 1979 to 2013. That may not seem like a huge drop, but during that same period, the hourly wages of high-wage workers rose 41 percent, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

However, economists disagree over whether an influx of immigrant labor caused or contributed to declining blue-collar jobs and wages.

In essence, the article you post describes that the debate is not settled yet. There are logical grounds behind the reasoning, and depending on how you measure it, empirically, you notice the effect or you don't.

Furthermore, there is very little research being done (surprisingly so) that specifically looks at the lower income workers that are in direct competition with the immigrants.

http://pcsi.pa.go.kr/files/w12956.pdf and https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.9.2.23 offer some data, but you can see an issue here. The effect on wages in the last 20 years or so is really depending on the education level of the individual. For High school graduates, wages have merely stagnated. For lower education than that (IE. the ones that would be in competition with unskilled labor) wage growth indeed has been negative. For higher education than that, immigration has indeed been a succes-story.

I don't think, by looking merely at the data, you can see what you are suggesting, though I do have to agree that the effect on wages is essentially the effect of globalization in general (of which immigration is only a part of the story).

The second paper puts the numbers at a 0-1% decrease in wages among low-skilled workers. That's still a standstill in times where average wage has been growing, but they don't explain why progress left them behind.

Righ that's why I said that NPR article goes too far in too seem balanced. Because if you click on those underlying studies what you see is one's claiming there is NO net effect, or ones claiming inconclusiveness, but NO studies actually claiming blue-collar jobs and wages are suppressed, thus the disagreement.

I am not agreeing with your 3rd 4th or last paragraphs, but there is no evidence to suggest that these effects are due to immigration or illegal immigration, there are however numerous Positive confirmed economics elements to immigration. Which is why I think it is hard to claim, from a economic policy making perspective, that restricting immigration makes sense.

Which is why I think it is hard to claim, from a economic policy making perspective, that restricting immigration makes sense

One of the articles which I link shows that it has a net negative effect on the poor. So in effect, if you want to combat inequality (by itself that makes economic sense), you need to 'direct' migration a little bit so as to not have a depressing effect on the lowest wages.

Which one of your studies say that? I read both as roundly rejecting that contention...

From the first study: To the contrary, as immigrants were imperfect substitutes for natives with similar education and age we find that they stimulated, rather than harmed, the demand and wages of most U.S. native workers

From the second: Even those natives who are the closest substitutes with immigrant labor do not suffer significantly as a result of increased immigration. There is no evidence of economically significant reductions in native employment.

Don't quote specific parts but look at the numbers. There are groups, at the lower end of the income distribution, that do suffer, at least according to the two studies I linked.

When I (and the writers of the articles for that matter) look at the numbers I don't see that, are there any particular numbers you'd like to pull out to show me?

The example you give proves the point perfectly. Median wage growth has grown by 4%, but we know higher educated workers have experienced wage growth that is easily triple to quadruple that. By necessity this means that either a majority of people had no real wage growth (IE 0 - 4%) or that a decent-sized minority have actually experienced wage decreases in said period.

But the stat I gave wasn't total median wages, it was wages adjusted by physical capital... Also I don't know that we "know" that higher educated wage growth is easily triple to quadruple that, I think that's just something you're saying...

I'm very confused by you. You are clearly thoughtful, what are you basing your thesis on? So far the only appeal to data you have provided literally lead to the antithesis of what you have been saying.

The fact that higher education wage growth is so much higher is literally in the paper.

No... but this is:

"even the least educated native workers gain 1.8% of their real wages and college dropouts gain 7.2%. These are remarkable gains. While in relative terms the group of native high school dropouts is still harmed by immigration, given wage boosts to higher educated workers of 4 to 7%the high complementarity between natives and immigrants and the large in flow of immigrants increased wages in real terms for all native groups."

But I don't understand, do you think the researchers that put these studies together misrepresented their conclusions hoping that you wouldn't be able to put together the truth?

Again is there any basis for your thesis? Since all of the data and facts we have gone over literally support the antithesis?

But I don't understand, do you think the researchers that put these studies together misrepresented their conclusions hoping that you wouldn't be able to put together the truth?

Not necessarily so. I simply notice that there is a gap between the data and what they claim, but I also know that the gap could be explained otherwise, even though they fail to do so.

If you want more detailed analysis, I suggest you read the papers more carefully. It contains a couple of gems like this:

Borjas, Freeman, and Katz (1992) use time-series data for the United States from 1967–1987. Their results suggest that immigration accounted for onequarter of the 10 percent decline in the relative earnings of high school dropouts from 1980–1988, a period when immigrants as a proportion of the labor force rose from 6.9 percent to 9.3 percent. This means a 1 percentage point increase in the proportion of immigrants reduces the absolute wage of dropouts by at most 1.2 percent, the same magnitude calculated by Altonji and Card.

So in effect we do know that unskilled immigrants exert a downward pressure on the wage level of unskilled workers. The papers conclude the effect is SMALL, but they don't say it is non-existent.

In effect, perception also matters, and when your wage is stable while everyone else's wage goes up, you will think you are worse off. So stagnant wage is already significant enough, IMHO, to require explanation.

I got to be honest man, it seems like you have entrenched yourself in a position and are unwilling to internalize the evidence you are reading...

Because even in that section the study goes on to talk about how that pressure is swallowed by the real wage gain of all native born workers.

Thanks for the discussion.

Because even in that section the study goes on to talk about how that pressure is swallowed by the real wage gain of all native born workers.

On average there's a wage gain yes. But as you see in the section, for some parts of the population there was a wage decline, which Borjas et al. attribute to different reasons, but also for a quarter to migration.

I think at this point, I'm not so entrenched, I just see the evidence applies to some part of the populations and you seem to stick to population-wide effects.

And as I said, the fact that, population-wide wages increase only makes the fact that SOME wages did decrease worse.

Well, Trump promised a lot of anti-establishment stuff.

Like giving Wall Street and the top 1% elites a gigantic tax cut? LOL

Clinton tried promising some anti-establishment stuff

She was going to raise taxes on the rich 6 different ways and had 3 different strategies for eliminating the GOP's Citizens United super PAC system.

but we all knew...

That some people are clueless. All you had to do was go to the candidate's web sites and check out what their policies were, and that would have told you 95% of what you needed to know.

Campaign promises =/= implemented policies.

It was clear to all of us, except the completely delusional, that Clinton would never pass her much needed left-wing agenda, while Trump had the benefit of the doubt.

while Trump had the benefit of the doubt.

WTF? Trump was the conservative GOP candidate, which everybody on the planet knows means right-wing agenda. He gave gigantic tax cuts to the top 1% elites, who gave him hundreds of millions of dollars to do so. Did you seriously not know Trump was going to reward Wall Street and billionaire elites with the gigantic tax cut he gave them? LOLOLOL.

And why would Trump ever get the 'benefit of the doubt'?

Trump's ghostwriter for 'Art of the Deal' who spent 18 months side by side with Trump and listened in on all his phone calls: Lying is second nature to him. He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.

that Clinton would never pass her much needed left-wing agenda,

Seriously, you're going to go with that? This is a ridiculous argument not to vote for someone. Because Clinton had a much better chance of passing her agenda than Bernie Sanders had of passing his (even better) more left-wing agenda.

Seriously, you're going to go with that? This is a ridiculous argument not to vote for someone. Because Clinton had a much better chance of passing her agenda than Bernie Sanders had of passing his (even better) more left-wing agenda

Yes, I'm going with that. Clinton never had the intention to pass her left-wing policies (as evidenced by her lack of conviction when speaking about them AND her speeches on wall street). Sanders had way, way more credibility here.

That makes no sense at all. If Dems controlled congress, there was a 100% chance her policies would pass. When GOP controlled congress, of course it was harder. But the GOP would have fought 3 times harder against Sander's more progressive policies than Clinton's policies. So even though Sander's policies were better, Clinton had a way higher chance of getting congress to pass her policies.

It came out before the election that Trump stole from kids with cancer to personally enrich himself. It's cute you think that he wasn't going to behave exactly that that during Th presidency.

Like giving Wall Street and the top 1% elites a gigantic tax cut? LOL

Wait, holy shit, what? Are you really gonna show everyone how little you understand economics while trying to be sarcastic? How did you even end up on /r/conspiracy if you don't even know what tax cuts are? What are you even doing here?

Sad state of affairs, but Trump had a 0,1% chance of actually being good for them,

0.0% He made it clear he was going to give a gigantic tax cut for the billionaire elites. Which is the elites 1st, 2nd, and 3rd priorities.

while Clinton had a 0% chance of going against the establishment.

Her chances were 100% because we already knew her policy positions. She was going to raise taxes on the top 1% 6 different ways and go after Citizens United 3 different ways.

Her chances were 100% because we already knew her policy positions.

Campaign promises =/= implemented policies.

So Bernie Sanders had no chance of getting his policies passed (because his were even more progressive than Clinton's) and therefore nobody should have considered him? We aren't supposed to vote for the candidate whose policies we like? That's like voting to become a loser.

Bernie Sanders: I happen to respect [Hillary] very much. And on our worst days, I think it is fair to say we are 100 times better than any Republican candidate.

My point is the Clinton never had the intention of passing those promises (neither does Trump, by the way, so don't make it into a partisan issue). Sanders at least believed what he was saying, and I'm sure would have at least tried implementing the policies he was campaigning on.

If Dems controlled congress, there was a 100% chance her policies (and probably Sanders too) would pass. You was expecting her not to propose her own policies? LOLOL. When the GOP controlled congress, of course it was harder. But the GOP would have fought 3 times harder against Sander's more progressive policies than Clinton's policies. So even though Sander's policies were better, Clinton had a way higher chance of getting congress to pass her policies.

You was expecting her not to propose her own policies

Yes.

So your advice is to not vote for politicians whose policies you support. LOL. There is no faster way to guarantee yourself to be a loser.

[Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 into law. This act created a 36 percent to 39.6 percent income tax for high-income individuals in the top 1.2% of wage earners. Businesses were given an income tax rate of 35%. The cap was repealed on Medicare. ]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Bill_Clinton_administration

No, my advice is to vote for politicians whose policies you support, but only if you think they'll actually push for them. No one benefits from voting hacks into power...

You don't even want to raise taxes on the rich and you aren't even a progressive. Why the hell would progressives take the advice of conservatives? If you want to tell people to vote against the policies they support, talk to conservatives. When President Clinton raised taxes on the rich in 1993 which produced a boom economy, it was fantastic for progressives and Americans.

[Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 into law. This act created a 36 percent to 39.6 percent income tax for high-income individuals in the top 1.2% of wage earners. Businesses were given an income tax rate of 35%. The cap was repealed on Medicare. ]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Bill_Clinton_administration

Nice way to estimate my political leanings. But you're wrong, as I'm a UBI proponent (which won't be possible without taxation of corporate profits), and was leaning towards Sanders.

Clinton did indeed raise taxes by a little bit, and it's what I would have expected Clinton to do as well, but it's simply not enough and is, at most, a measure to prevent REAL progressive policies from passing. Stuff like Tuition prices or universal healthcare, IE the real gamechangers, are simply impossible with a centrist democrat candidate, so tactically it's a lot better to punish the democrats for running with centrists (and indeed getting the opposite, at least for a while). Otherwise, us REAL progressives don't have ANY chance of shifting the overton window to the left (and boy, is it necessary).

Clinton did indeed raise taxes by a little bit, and it's what I would have expected Clinton to do as well,

So why did you lie and say Clinton wasn't going to follow through on campaign platform to raise taxes on the rich?

but it's simply not enough and is,

I never said Clinton's policies were as good as Sanders. But since Sanders was defeated in the primary, the options were Clinton or Trump. And Clinton's policies to raise taxes on the rich 6 different ways would have been a giant step forward IMO.

a measure to prevent REAL progressive policies from passing. Stuff like Tuition prices or universal healthcare, IE the real gamechangers,

Clinton raising taxes on the rich is going to make universal healthcare harder?? WTF? That makes no sense at all. Raising taxes on the rich would make it easier to do things like universal healthcare and fix tuition prices (which should be free).

are simply impossible with a centrist democrat candidate,

Hillary Clinton was the very first person in American history to push for a serious universal healthcare plan. The GOP called it 'HillaryCare' and it is why they started hating her.

so tactically it's a lot better to punish the democrats for running with centrists (and indeed getting the opposite, at least for a while). Otherwise, us REAL progressives don't have ANY chance of shifting the overton window to the left (and boy, is it necessary).

This is merely a quick way to guarantee that you become a lifetime loser. It is not the way politics works at all. The one and only chance of moving the overton window to the left is for Dems to win 3 elections is a row and/or win an election really big. Which means you work really hard in the primary to get good progressive candidates and then always work to get Dems to win big in the general election. Whenever Dems do not win elections both politicians and the media always assume it was because they aren't centrist enough.

As a non-American ot was painfully obvious that Trump had almost nothing in common with his base supporters.

It was obvious that whenever Trump looks out at the white faces in his rallies he is thinking "loser", "ugly", "old", etc.

And his die hard detractors

Terrifying. The cognitive dissonance is reaching astronomical levels.

TIL that the asshole who gave wall street and billionaire elites a gigantic tax cut was 'anti-establishent' LOL.

From who? I'd like to learn that too! I read the posts in this thread and I see nothing of the sort in the three comments above yours...

the guy who wont even pay his construction contractors was going to help out the little guys

Right. Trump is notorious for cheating (1) his customers (2) his employees/contractors, and (3) his investors.

(1) Trump sales manager testimony: I believe that Trump University was a fraudulent scheme and that it preyed upon the elderly and uneducated to separate them from their money.”

(2) USA TODAY: Hundreds of people, carpenters, dishwashers, painters, even his own lawyers, say Trump didn’t pay them for their work. "There’s tons of these stories out there"

(3) As its stock collapsed, Trump’s firm gave him huge bonuses and paid for his jet

He said the magic words that appealed his voting block's sensibilities, world views, and emotions. He said what they wanted to hear. That is literally all he had to do.

Of course, now he's actually following through on some of his promises ... which is unusual. Also pretty fucked up.

I agree with you guys, but I also see a problem here, because there was no alternative. You had a career politicians on the one side (definitely establishment) and someone from outside politics on the other side (likely establishment) who said some anti-establishment things.

I mean, I'm all for voting anti-establishment, but I can see why people gave Trump a chance.

Damn I guess those anti-tribalists should have voted for Clinton, or Jeb Bush!

its not really new tho. you see ppl fighting over "their" teams all the damn time. someone wins some game and everyone freaks out. riots in the streets, hooligans, etc etc.

How do we break the Trump base

i really dont think this is a great idea but i honestly cant help but do it when i see ridiculous and intellectually dishonest reasoning on why trump is perfect.

i think they would feel marginalized if they ever got out of their fox news echochambers

That causes entrenchment and we debase ourselves in the process. I only mock our officials not the supporters if i can help it.

they need to understand that they are hurt as a consequence of trumps actions (ie, tax bill, tradewars).

trump and the republicans will go extremely hard at a propaganda campaign trying to blame the fallout on democrats and immigrants and other countries. The tough part is that trump voters already want to believe in their bogeymen

So we take over fox news during Hannity or fox and friends and tell the truth

buying advertising would be funny

Bannon was a navy intel operative and making side deals which is why he was removed

First I've heard of that, I always thought it was infighting. Do you have a source?

https://youtu.be/3_3hFDsmkso

YouTube George Webb Steve bannon. You will get a bunch of info.

Bannon’ movie career was all money laundering

Bannon was doing a deal with a Asian man. Can’t remember his name. This was over a year ago.

ive never heard that before. im not trying to be a dick as some ppl do when asking/demanding proof, but is there any link to anything about this? ill even take a conspiracy site or something. just wanna know more.

https://youtu.be/3_3hFDsmkso

YouTube George Webb Steve bannon. You will get a bunch of info.

Bannon’ movie career was all money laundering

a former Hollywood producer and Goldman Sachs banker

I think you're thinking of Mnuchin.

The wording was poor, the Hollywood producer is a different person than the banker

Both bannon and munchin worked for gs. Bannon was using movie business to money launder for navy intelligence

LOL if Trump was a Rothschild "puppet" like /u/GreenIDLady claims, then why do the Rothschilds bash on Trump every day on Twitter?

Why does the MSM rail against him any chance they get?

The Rothschild Family wanted Hillary Clinton as President.

The de Rothschilds on Donald Trump, chocolate and being best friends with the Clintons

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/the-rothschilds-on-donald-trump-chocolate-and-being-best-friends-with-the-clintons-a3631926.html

http://stateofthenation2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-12-at-2.32.10-PM.png

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/07/29/article-0-1443B0B8000005DC-748_634x728.jpg

This entire post is moronic.

Removed. Rule 10. 1st warning.

Wait, you mean the guy who literally shits on a golden toilet isn't one of us?

the irony

shitting on a gold plated toiler while complaining about how unfair the 'elites' are to him

But I thought the silver-spoon-fed New York City billionaire with business ties all over the globe was totally going to fight globalism.

Yes, Trump has serious connections with the global elites. And you would expect him to support globalism.

Unless some part of the global elites might have decided against ‘One World Government’ type of globalism.

There are indications that some elitists are now trying to break the world into separate trading blocks. Perhaps a different type of globalism?

LOL if Trump was a Rothschild "puppet" like /u/GreenIDLady claims, then why do the Rothschilds bash on Trump every day on Twitter?

Why does the MSM rail against him any chance they get?

The Rothschild Family wanted Hillary Clinton as President.

The de Rothschilds on Donald Trump, chocolate and being best friends with the Clintons

As regards the American lunatic, he is dismayed by President Trump’s recent decision to overturn Barack Obama’s DACA act (the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), which protected the children of undocumented immigrants from deportation. “I mean, come on! America was created out of immigration. It’s racist. Isn’t it? I think he’s racist.

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/the-rothschilds-on-donald-trump-chocolate-and-being-best-friends-with-the-clintons-a3631926.html

http://stateofthenation2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-12-at-2.32.10-PM.png

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/07/29/article-0-1443B0B8000005DC-748_634x728.jpg

https://www.google.com/search?q=clinton+trump+wedding&client=firefox-b-1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjSq-zR6uXbAhUh04MKHSSwC2MQ_AUICigB&biw=1152&bih=699#imgrc=-_Hx35skWJrIkM:

https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+donald&client=firefox-b-1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZqIfJ6uXbAhVKyoMKHT6jDJUQ_AUICygC&biw=1152&bih=699#imgdii=-dgy0M5QHbMZ6M:&imgrc=x7frsic8vGW2XM:

The U.S. Military chose him because others were selling out the American people to the NWO globalists.

How is Jacob Rotheschild feeling these days?

This.

I'm leaning that direction

But you don't understand, globalists hate America are only pretending to use everything they got to stop Trump. /s

Weaponized the DOJ and the Media and the Unions and the BLM, and the Anti-fa, and the Pussy Hats, and MS-13, and most universities against him, and spied on his campaign, and tried to frame him for Russian collusion, sent Baracko around behind his back to try to undo every agreement he reaches. But I'm sure you think that's all a distraction.

They had the CIA and the FBI spy on him during an election. Along with all his associates. They used the NSA spying platform to give him a rectal exam. And that's just the beginning. /r/greatawakening.

I’d like to learn more about the rectal exam

Did they spy on him, or were they in on the game to make Trump the anti-establishment candidate? I think your statement actually helps prove OPs point.

If he just let it go, I would believe this. But he ain't, and the former admin is in a sheer panic. If he prosecutes the crimes of the former admin, puts career bureaucrats in jail for treason, etc, then we know he's the real deal.

It is virtually impossible to do it. The world is so much connected, not just economies and central banks but intelligence agencies coordinate so much, that assassinations would occur on a mass scale. You need to kick hundreds of agents from the subterranean agencies of the US government and you ain't starting yet. Economies can now be bankrupted at will as well.

So you'd probably have to do it in a way where most cannot perceive what you are up tom

How? All internet activities are recorded. Satellites watch all over us. Moreover, intelligence agencies have perfected the concept of infiltration and co-option. You would need something like a divine intervention. The more time passes, the less chance humanity has to rise up because technology is getting more and more advanced and is being weaponized and used against the mass populace.

You would need something like a divine intervention.

Yea, you would. You would need a small group of people to stand up for true justice and the rest of the world would follow suit.

Dont forget that whatever their tools, they still needed hordes of humans with guns to carry out their will. If those tasked ever woke up to the true blueprint they would rebel almost instantly...

Then it should have been revealed before the election, it wasn't.

Before I click on that sub I'm guessing it's about religious revival in America

It's about Qanon.

The Jedi?

Normies....

I think the tried and true here at r/conspiracy have known this all along.

It’s the TMOR contingent that have falsely propped up Trump in this sub as some sort of “savior” in an effort to ostracize conspiracy researchers. The incessant (and equally contrived) outcry against Trump is meant to be felt, on some level, by the user-ship here.

I’d say it’s working. My anti-state views are often conflated by my less conspiracy savvy friends, as unmitigated support for Trump.

The "conspiracy" world disagrees with itself more than anyone. It seems silly to claim "no true conspiracist" when there are plenty who actually support or supported Trump.

This.

That's really the whole gist of it. One attempt after another to pretend like people that support Trump aren't real people. When real people are shown they call them white supremacists, racists, nazis, etc.. All meant to dehumanize people and justify their violent fascist actions.

They claim Trump was voted in by Russia switching votes

They claim anyone on any forum that supports Trump is a Russian bot

They are now claiming Trump supporters are actually anti-Trump

The end goal is simply to give an impression that Trump isn't popular. It's some serious level of denial. They live in echo chambers where they have so isolated themselves from anyone with an opposing view that they simply can't fathom that there are people with opposing views. And they desperately attempt to turn every public space into their echo chambers to confirm their alternate reality.

To protect their echo chambers, they even toss out fellow democrats that don't toe the line on everything.

The liberal propaganda has gotten to a point where I can barely recognize when someone is truly ignorant or intentionally being dishonest.

When you see liberals defending things like what Peter Fonda said yesterday, it's hard to believe that they are just innocently ignorant.

I haven't seen a single person worth the air they breathe defend what that guy said. Don't focus on the fringe idiots on either side.

I haven't seen a single person worth the air they breathe defend what that guy said.

You're kidding right?

Well if it's so obvious I'm sure you'll have no problem producing the evidence.

We get that you love Trump. But what about the allegations raised in the original post?

We? Are you in a room full of people posting online?

A virtual room, but yes.

Ok. Are you coordinating with someone? "We" is a pretty weird thing to say. Are you a spokesman?

Am I to assume English isn't your native language? It's really the only excuse for you being so confused.

While this is true, massive support for any major political figure by a couple conspiracy community is suspect as far as I'm concerned.

I've been a member of conspiracy communities since back in the late 90s when we had the bbs in only a few places on the web, and I've never seen such full throated, foaming at the mouth blind loyalty for a president like we have here and other places for trump. It just doesn't happen. It's not natural for a conspiracy community to blindly support a president or any candidate who has so many shady ties.

The alternative was Hillary Clinton, though, so of course people believed in Trump.

I’m just saying, if you think you’re part of the base usership here, but you’re still supporting the oppressive state (regardless of which color puppet is currently dangled in front of you) then you still have a long way to go in figuring things out.

The very ethos of Government is immoral.

I don't think it's tmor. I'd say it's chans and the crossover from the Donald during pizzagate.

Don't forget the Qtards who think Trump is literally a god.

Can you eli5 this 'q'?

Somebody posting cryptic messages supposedly having access to top clearance intelligence, sharing tidbits such as:

• there is a large global group of Satanist paedophiles who hold positions of power in governments. Obama is a satanist pedo, clintons are all satanist pedos, the British royal family are satanist pedos, Merkel is a satanist pedo and also Hitler's grand daughter etc
• Satanist pedos are supported by the CIA and FBI
• military intelligence are working against CIA and FBI
• trump was planted by the military as part of an operation to rid the government of Satanist pedos
• trump is winning, despite anything you see on the media. The plan of trump and the military is working.

Communities have sprung up around following and deciphering these Q "drops". On one particular subreddit, doubting Q or Trump is against the rules and will get you banned.

By saying they are satanists, are you then inferring there is a god?

Absolutely - they're very much a fundamentalist Christian movement as well, that see Trump as God's chosen being on the planet. Lot of prayer, lot of scripture, lot of belief that this is ultimately God's plan.

but his main financiers and handlers are the Rothschild crew, literally the type of people who have earned the historical label of 'synagogue of satan'.

Also he hung it with Jeffery Epstein a known pedophile who solicited young girls for sex and said he’s a terrific guy even though he knew about it. Here’s a direct quote: “he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the young side.” Trump even had a woman claim that he and Epstein raped her when she was 13.

This went to court 3x! 3! It’s not nearly as contrived as the pizza restaurant with a second basement that is thoroughly documented to have no actual basement.

His quote is real. His attendance at Epstein sex parties is known. Epstein having back-rooms at these parties is known.

When ever I hear pizzagate attempts, I really take it as attempts to obfuscate the known and documented facts about the pedo-in-Chief.

What are you talking about. It’s obviously a hit job for political purposes. Now let’s get back to what really matters. Pizzagate.

yep, I've read quote. no way is Trump any kind of outsider to the pedo Satanist crew.

https://i.redd.it/tqw1qs4ux8511.jpg

You're suggesting that's entirely organic? I'm sure plenty of that the "meme magic" from r/the_donald and the chans you're thinking of has been influenced by astroturf. There's another reply mentioning Q, and I'd say that plenty of that is astroturf too.

I definitely don't think it's organic. I just don't think it's tmor.

It’s the TMOR contingent that have falsely propped up Trump in this sub as some sort of “savior” in an effort to ostracize conspiracy researchers

Really? you think his support here is false to make conspiracy loom bad? that's just ridiculous

It's not ridiculous at all when you realize that the same israeli PR company who runs the anti-conspiracy "tard" sub, started the TD sub and managed it through socks. You can google those handles back ten years. the breadcrumbs are easy to follow.

I’d have heard about that if the breadcrumbs are easy to follow. I call BS.

i just told you the source and i call BS on you not knowing how to google who started the TD sub. it's even on wikipedia.

Holy hell, that wiki page is cancer. Also, nowhere on there do they say anything about the creator of the sub being an Israeli PR company, or the sub being run by them.

Googling the user brought up some interesting things about how he left the mod team at T_D and deleted his account. A lot of accusations of him being transphobic too, and threatening to dox him. But nothing about a PR firm.

Got any links to that part? I have to agree, the fact that the same user that started T_D was also a top mod at /r/conspiratard is certainly interesting enough to pique my interest.

I've seen about 10 comments so far of people making that claim.

They are essentially trying to get /conspiracy members to attack right-wing members. Watch for it and you will see more and more people trying to spread this.

For real. Did anyone else notice how fucking packed his rally was today? He was filling parking garages with overflow. There were Q shirts everywhere and Q-related chants. Obviously there are a shit load of real people who are pro-Trump and into conspiracies.

God damn that was the most idiotic suggestion I've heard in a while. It's something that TMOR would say just to stir up shit here.

I think his support here is false because anyone who has spent any time here, with at least half a brain knows that everything, including the Whitehouse, is owned.

This isn’t our rich guy vs. their rich guys.

The very money system of money itself is owned by monolithic evil.

There will be no white knights rising up from inside this NWO beast system.

Sorry.

I just think there's a large overlap with suspicion of globalism the common factor.

I’ve been here for seven years and I support some of trumps policies.

If you’ve been here for 7 years and you support any type of government then you’re a slow learner.

I’m not an anarchist, that’s so sophomoric yet I’m the slow learner. Suck my dick

The truth that no one has a higher authority over your life than you is sophomoric?

Do you even realize how thorough and complete your indoctrination is?

Preach it comrade.

насколько актуальны

Goddamnit I thought TMOR was against Trump. I can't keep this shit straight

maybe because its all bs?

Boy it would sure be disheartening to conclude that HRC vs Trump was a false choice. What recourse is left if even a wildcard like Trump is some globalist puppet, not even capable of making his own bad decisions?

Not out of line from what many of us were saying pre election.

True. Blame the two-party system. When you are only presented with two valid choices in opposition to each other, chances are both of them could be bad.

Even if it's a five-party system. The problem is still the same.

yeah, if the man owns all the parties, is there really choice?

how do we fix that? extreme transparency? body cams on all politicians and ppl in govt service? treason and hanging if youre caught violating anything?

The problem is not the two party system. Instead, it's lack of voter involvement at low levels, especially in the primaries at state level. The conglomerated nature of media also plays a role.

Hard to point your finger at that, when the parties can determine their own representative outside of the primaries vote...

Looks at DNC in 2016

True at the National level in '68 and '16 and in between. But go back and review the history of the progressive party and how they got in fdr.

Libertarian.

We conscript Dan Carlin.

U dont think globalists have infiltrated that movement

How was another billionaire even a "wildcard" in the first place?

Like his interests are the same as the people who buy the politicians. It's just cutting out the middle man.

He’s not really a billionaire.

Good point actually, he even rang up Forbes using a fake name to try and get himself in the 500.

I wonder how much debt he's actually in too.

Actually he is. Forbes has published the fact that he is the first billionaire to become president, not that that is a good thing, but he actually was able to use this to his advantage in the campaign by making the argument that he was already rich so he could largely finance his campaign himself without being beholden to traditional campaign contributions from corporate donors. This was all conjecture though, as he has largely supported the same corporate masters Bush and Obama did and merely payed lipservice to common man causes. Remember how he made a big stink about prescription drug price gouging for like a day, and then we never heard about that again. That went away real quick.

Even in that article, his cash and personal assets are listed as $290,000,000.

Was Clinton going to be as pro-Israel as Trump is? If not, could there be two speedster factions trying to take the throne?

All good points and worth considering, but we should also take into account the fact that Lyndon Larouche and his Larouche PAC completely support Trump. And he is the one who has been leading the charge since the ‘60s against the Anglo-American banking establishment, so you’d think that he would know...

The Anglo-American banking establishment did stop lending money to the Trump Organization after its multiple bankruptcies, which is why he has had to rely on Russian and ex-Soviet financiers and investors for so many years, so that makes a lot of sense.

Trump is a jew. Water is also wet. Still better then any of the alternatives.

I’ve always thought he was some sort of double agent to keep Hillary out of office. Befriend the Clintons, learn everything about them and then beat her in an election. The Clintons might be establishment, but they’re hated by establishment

He was a time traveler preventing the fall of America by Hillary.

Nice post Jew

Forgive my ignorance but what do you mean by this

Anybody who criticizes Trump must be part of the Kabbalah. The fucking retard calling you a Jew is too stupid to realize we are all human, all races included, while also having the double standard of thinking someone could be the second coming of Christ, above all inspection.

He didn't call me a Jew, but yeah I know, I just wanted to see what he thought his reasons were

I actually can't believe he deleted his shit. Maybe there is some hope. Shame for what he did is a huge step in the right direction.

It’s a new account and probably just a burner... wouldn’t spend too long trying to figure him out. There’s one a little further down as well, but with a 137 day old account, but a whole bunch of nazi bullshit. 4Chan troll? Some neck beard? Actual Nazi? Who knows; who cares?

Rule #10

Trump is as political as it gets. He literally just told people what they wanted to hear, whether it was true or not. People were so used to crafty politicians that they fell for the simplist trick in the book.

He straight up told a crowd he says drain the swamp because the crowd likes to hear it. Bread and circuses.

9!

.

.

.

11.

That’s right! .... .. . The terrorists!!!

Even the whole build a wall thing was a suggestion from Sam Nunberg and Roger Stone, that Nunberg took to Steve Bannon -- they wanted some easily to remember, physical manifestation of 'immigration' that Trump could easily wheel out for the crowds (and to keep Trump himself on track, with his short attention span).

Trump was reluctant to say it, but he tried it out in Iowa, the crowds went crazy, and he improvised the whole "Nobody builds like Trump" at which point the crowd went even crazier, and Trump knew he was onto a winner.

It wasn't about actual policy, like you say... bread and circus.

Hmmm..interesting

Welcome me to politics: politicians telling ppl what they wanna hear

what

Who have you voted for before this election cycle that stuck to every one of their major campaign promises?

Can you give me an example of a single president in more modern history who has ran their initial campaign with less than 5 major flops on campaign promises?

Have you heard of the term wishy-washy before? Specifically regarding presidential candidates?

Welcome me to politics: politicians telling ppl what they wanna hear

What didn’t you understand

Welcome me to politics: politicians telling ppl what they wanna hear

?

People were going to be used by crafty politicians no matter what the result of that election was. Let's not pretend there were other options available

He literally told people that's exactly what he was doing during one of his rally speeches and his supporters thought it was a joke

you dont have to say literally, we know you aren't speaking in hypotheticals

you literally didn't have to say that

wow he really does love the uneducated and the feeling is mutual

I sadly overestimated America's resilience to blatant demagoguery.

we thought we were better than this

we arent

when Jordan peterson says things like 'if you lived in nazi germany in the 30s more likely than not, you would be a nazi', i feel like I have to believe hes right about most people. the support for demagoguery, scapegoating, and authoritarian power grabs makes me think that most people would, if he represented their tribe

Thank you! I’ve tried to explain this to my “woke” relatives who just blindly accepted Trump as their populist savior. His Rothschild connections go way back, Ivanka was even dating one for a while. He’s a New York con man with ties to the mafia, foreign banks and Oligarchs all over the globe. He’s as globalist as you can be. Look at how much unwavering loyalty people here have for the president and his administration. It’s fishy as hell and if the truth seekers are lining up to kiss his feet we are in big trouble.

These connections can just as easily be used to explain how he managed to understand the system well enough to beat them at their own game.

By giving them powerful cabinet positions?

Oh I missed the Rothschild in his cabinet. Which positions did he give to Rothschilds exactly?

Username checks out.

Oh, so sorry! I see it now! The furious downvotes, ridicule, and knee-jerk reactions were very effective to free me from my burden of wrongthink! I'm so grateful for your detailed and thoughtful responses!

My problem with that theory is that there is no evidence of him trying to beat them at their own game. And when I say this people always point to the number of child trafficking arrests as of trump had anything at all to do with them. They cite articles that don't mention trump even one time as proof trump is beating them. When I ask them to point out how trump made it happen they just say some prefabricated line about the deepstate or pg.

His rich buddies are making more money than ever. Corporate profits are skyhigh, while us commoners salaries have either dropped or only risen 2%. And people say he's "beating them at their own game". No. That's not what's happening here. You have to want it to be true to even think that.

that means he also might consider some of these people his peers... and how has he been treated by his peers?

Could he have some axes to grind? Does he know where the skeletons in the closet are to be found? Were they in some of his closets as an 'innkeeper' to the 1%? What kind of things did he have to 'clean up'?

There is no doubt that you don't get as successful or rich for as long as Trump has been without some sort of business acumen, which is to say that you know how to 'play the game'. It's not always pretty. However, sometimes at the end of one's life, people also re-evaluate what they want to do with their legacy and their position. Maybe Trump is here to sell out the USA, but I don't see that thus far. I see Trump jamming a giant stick in the spokes of the bike called American Politics, and it's pretty damn entertaining.

Oh he’s definitely shaken up the whole damn system and it’s created a whole new interest in politics and the function of government. I consider that a good thing, definitely. Apathy will be the death of democracy.

Ironic, I voted for Trump because I knew firsthand exactly how evil the democratic party had become. Frankly I am absolutely reviled with myself for having voting to elect a man capable of such evil deeds into office, but this goes to show why I renounced my belief in anything republican and refused to flip-flop once again, so I am back to my socialist views again. The Republicans literally have the power to, at any time, end this massive series of abuses going on at our border and specifically with immigrant children being mass-injected with psychiatric medications and toxic chemicals, also being seperated from their parents and sold off into child slavery by DynCorp. Now, people are walking out the door and letting it hit them on the way out. the cognitive dissonance is fucking massive, and frankly I am done with anything republican, democratic, or 2-party in the first place. While the Republican party continues to make excuses for it's inexcusable behavior, they have shown themselves to be as horrible as the democrats and socialist they demonize.

This was also the result of a massive religious experience, so it could be attributed to such a thing. However, it is better to be able to identify when one is in the wrong and appropriately respond, instead of making excuses for inexcusable behavior which inevitably is a horrible slipper slope to fascism itself.

There's a third option in r/libertarian

democrats have a lot of work to do for sure, but i am much more aligned with at least their intentions (if not their competence/trustworthiness) than republicans

the right wing is pretty gross to me right now, and their roger stone esque commitment to 'whatever shitty thing it takes' makes me sick

*russian mafia to be exact

what a coincidence

but remember guys, dont trust your eyes and ears, just keep your eyes on dear leaders twitter feed, he'll tell you what to believe

Most of the items on your list are pro-Israel. It should be obvious by now that Trump is entirely owned by the Zionist cause. I often find it amusing that globalist controlled media insists on claiming that Trump is controlled by Russian boogeymen when it's obvious Israel is pulling the strings.

Deflection by Israel.

Trump just had the US pull out of the UN Human Rights Council because they don't hold Israel to the same standards as the rest of the world. That seemed more anti-zionist than anything I've seen him do. That being said OP made a great post but it really makes me wonder what Trump's goals really align with.

How is that anti-Zionist??? That is the OPPOSITE of anti-Zionist. They pulled out because other countries weren’t being “fair” to Israel slaughtering Palestinians.

Woah my bad, you're right really read that wording wrong in the article.

It’s cool. Happens to the best of us

Ruined my Wednesday haha

Smoke and mirrors. With Americans, division and drama work best. Fake conspiracies put up as a distraction.

Even if I go along with your theory, it doesn’t necessarily mean that I agree that Trump is bad. The Russians are just trying to prevent a unipolar world. Studying big vs small systems shows that a 1 world government would be a disaster for the little guys!

As a Trump fan these are the sorts of conspiracy posts about him that I want.

Trump's son in law Kushner is in business with George Soros, the supposed nemesis of the alt-right. Apparently everything is a lie for Rothschild.

dont forget the hundreds of millions trump himself borrowed from soros...

nice http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-10-28/news/0410280265_1_donald-trump-soros-fund-management-blackacre-institutional-capital-management

I don't know many 'alt-right' Trump supports who genuinely like Kushner, in fact most seem to dislike him.

Well, yeah, he’s Jewish, so....

So u/d3rr is far off-base.

or the alt-right is Zionism masquerading as nationalism

Are you being anti-semitic?

nope just sharing some additional information. are you?

Just a dogwhistle from you anti-semitic bigots.

Check your privilege goy.

Sorry man, it's over, everyone knows even secular Jews in the US. Drop them bombs while you still can.

I was actually permanently banned from the_zionald for posting a news article which showed Soros doing business with Kushner. It was like 2 weeks after Trump 'won' the elections, too.

If he is Rothschild then what’s that make hillary

I believe Hillary was the initial choice but Wikileaks ruined it for her with the evidence of collusion against Bernie. When it became clear that Hillary would face enormous opposition from both sides they settled on Trump. They've successfully discredited their biggest critic in wikileaks. Convinced almost half the country that Trump is fighting the establishment. And punished the far left who didn't fall in line. Look at the way Hillary debated Bernie, she was her crafty self. But against Trump she completely bombed. Even went so far as to go on tv visibly sick and fainted. There's no way she wouldnt have gad a doctor give her something to hide her symptoms on tv if she was trying to win. Then of course she ignored strategic campaign stops in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

They've successfully discredited their biggest critic in wikileaks.

Bernie was a pied-pier. An intentionally player. He was brought in to draw in the ultra-left that wouldn't dream of voting for Hillary, got them engaged and then dropped out handing his voters over to Hillary and buying a nice mansion.

And you think this dude is anti-establishment?

Most Bernie bros woke up from this dream a long long time ago.

A lot of Bernie bros said fuck it and voted for Trump.

And a lot of us didn't

And you think this dude is anti-establishment?

Prior to 2016, his history clearly shows him as being this. He's been the most successful independent third party politician in national politics for decades. He's served as an independent in both the House of Reps and the Senate. Prior to 2016, he used this position as an independent politician to advocate for third parties, not that you would have heard about this since the corporate media would never give that kind of message any airtime. He's been extremely consistent on progressive policy throughout his career in politics, and he's been consistently considered generally decent, even by Republicans who he might disagree with politically.

I don't think Bernie intended to "draw in the ultra-left" and then tell them to fuck off. Bernie isn't even that far to the left, and if you talk to legitimate socialists, communists, etc., they'll tell you this even if they were willing to compromise and support Sanders against Clinton. I think what happened there was that he saw that Clinton was already set to be coronated, and he wanted to make sure that there was someone talking about popular "left" policies like universal healthcare and ending cannabis prohibition, just to ensure those topics got SOME attention during the primaries. The idea there would have been to encourage Clinton to take on better policy positions during the primary. I think he knew that he'd never have been allowed to win regardless of how many people liked and voted for him, and that is why he didn't even try to fight it when he got cheated, but I don't think he was deliberately trying to fuck over the "ultra-left". That's ridiculous to consider, because I'm sure he would realize that pissing off hardcore lefties would actually have a deleterious effect. Millions of lefties have left the Democratic Party following the fraud that was committed in 2016. I'd sooner think that he let himself get cheated to CAUSE those people to leave the corrupt party than to think that he was deliberately trying to fuck over the type of independent lefties who have been backing him for decades.

Also, the "mansion" you refer to is a vacation home worth $575,000. The guy has been making six figures as a member of Congress for over 2 decades. Why shouldn't he be "allowed" to own a home that has that value? What is he allowed to spend his acquired wealth on according to you? It's not even like that is an exorbitant amount for a house, and I believe I heard that they'd bought that new house after coming into a sum of inheritance money too. What is Bernie Sanders supposed to do? It's not like he's one of the politicians who somehow becomes a millionaire/billionaire through corruption, it's not like you're railing against someone like the Clintons who are enormously wealthy from taking literally hundreds of millions in bribes, you're basically just mad at a Senator for owning a decent home in rural Vermont that he can easily afford with his six figure salary as a senator.

Okay so the rigged primaries were planned to outrage his base and get them to vote for the person who pissed them off? Your theory makes zero sense

Umm, you weren't supposed to find out about the rigged primaries.

The DNC emails were not supposed to be leaked.

smacks forehead

Lol

Aren't we led to believe that Hillary's primary ambition in life is to be the first female president in US history? Why would she actively sabotage her own campaign and ambitions when publicly everyone was saying she was going to win?

Looking at her campaign even before the election I sometimes found it hard to believe that a two billion dollar campaign machine, the most expensive in history, could be as consistently inept and utterly tone deaf.

Everyone I asked leading up to the election what the bullet points of her campaign were, could not give me an answer. Whereas trumps were insane (wall, etc.) but everyone knew them.

She literally ran a campaign on hubris. Her slogan should have been 'Hillary Clinton: You're Welcome. She ran on the sole fact that she wasn't him. That was all she thought she would need, which happened to be true in the beginning. But a two billion dollar campaign that couldn't see in the last few months before the vote the way all of that was breaking down, then make some adjustments, is so baffling to me that I'm entertaining the idea of it being thrown.

Any other democratic candidate would have won that election.

This is very accurate. Still to this day I can't tell you what her political message was during the election. It was so vague, based on some sort of "I am the decent choice", which - and everybody could see it even then - was akin to saying "At least I am not as shitty as that guy".

Not a very strong message compared to Trumps demagogic approach that promised you the moon and a fantastical trip back to the 'good old days".

America have been bred, for more than three generations now, on a diet of fast food, political infused entertainment TV and poor education for the masses. That is a prime situation for a demagogue to enter the stage.

You can see it throughout history. Germany elected Hitler on the wild promise of ending a job recession gripping the whole world after World War I. He made some promises that the lesser educated people saw as true, ignoring the plethora of warnings.

Stalin rose to power with the promise of freeing the people from the hunger, while Mussolini took control with the empty promise of restoring a nationalistic Italy while going through a recession of their own.

Today we have leaders like Erdogan in Turkey, using the same strong man tactics as Putin, curbing democratic freedom and stomping on the press while promising a return to the glory days of old.

And people buy it. They buy it because they - on average - lack the education that enables them to think critically and objectively.

They even peddle the demagogue's promises as gospel to friends and family - with good intentions - because they have been fooled by a man with a far better education and with enough money to ensure you hear his messages loud and often.

It's easy to fool the uneducated. That's why you most often find dictatorships in countries that lack proper education for the poor.

A recent study concluded that the less you know about a complex problem, the more inclined you are to think you have the easy solution.

Is this a gaslighting attempt?

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

She had her platform defined and neatly layed out. No one cared though, since covering Trump's latest controversy got more views.

This is a good one. Thanks.

If you think Trump is a globalist or somehow working for the “establishment” then you haven’t been paying attention. You think the powers hat be like Rothchimds and Kissinger want trade wars with the world? I can’t argue the sexual accusations and lawsuit but a globalist or Rothchild supporter he is not.

he survived in business on Rothschild money and brought Wilbur Ross in to his cabinet and is a 100% Rothschild Zionism stooge. yes, he is completely owned by them.

I don't think they planned on him being a fake "anti establishment populist savior." I think they just set him up during Obama's administration as a political opponent in that specific regard. Trump had been a Democrat for years, friends with the Clintons and tied into that world, but when he opposed Obama, he did so from a position fully compatible with racist Democrats opposition to Obama. He attacked Obama over conspiracy theories regarding fake birth certificates, not really on specific policy. Probably because all of the terrible things Obama did as president, Trump has already shown to also do. E.g., bombing Syria without explicit Congressional authorization, something that Trump himself criticized Obama for doing. I have substantive policy disagreements with Obama, Trump just hated on him because Obama was allegedly born in Kenya or something. He took the "birther" angle that the 2008 Clinton campaign had started and drove it into the ground. If I'm taking a position that Trump has been a puppet all along, I think that's what they were using him for. He was forwarding the Clintonite attack against Obama that Clinton couldn't continue forwarding after she lost the 2008 primaries. I don't think the powers that be foresaw what might happen in 2016 when Trump started down that "birther" path almost a decade prior.

When it comes to 2016, I would also say that Trump wasn't meant to win. Whether he's been acting independently while being manipulated or as a fully controlled puppet all along, I think the powers that be put him into position as a "serious" candidate ONLY to be a pied piper, ONLY to give Clinton a horrible Republican opponent that she MIGHT actually be able to win against (she couldn't). Trump wasn't supposed to inspire anyone really, he was supposed to be controlled opposition who lost to Queen Hillary. Look at how much money each campaign spent, the Trump campaign spent about HALF of what the Clinton campaign did. The Clinton camp burned over 2 billion dollars propping up Hillary, why would they have done that if the powers that be intended on her losing to a fake puppet in Trump? Why spend more than any other campaign in history to lose on purpose? Trump forwarding the deep state's agenda for the most part as we've seen is almost definitely a non-ideal back-up plan. I can't say for certain whether he's completely controlled or if he's merely giving in to the heavy influence, but I do think it's clear that Trump forwarding that agenda isn't what they REALLY wanted to have happen in an ideal world.

Is r/conspiracy the new r/politics? Do you shillss get paid by the votes. views or posts?

When did questioning the government make you a shill? That’s the attitude this post is directly challenging.

Rule #10

To this you can add...

• His passing of a tax bill that was essentially drafted by the Heritage Foundation and supported by the vast majority of Republican reps, benefiting corporations and the extremely rich. The more I think about it, passing this bill may have been the reason he was allowed to become president. Hillary was garbage but she wasn't going to pass this thing.

• Absurd increase in our already absurd military budget, a huge gift to the MIC. See also his boundless support for US police and police unions, who continue to militarize via that same MIC. All armed authority in the US and abroad gets a big raise and constant support from him (unless the dept. happens to be investigating he and his cronies).

• Jeff Sessions (restoration of civil asset forfeiture, private prison industry, position on weed legalization under thumb of industry influence, a corporate stooge in every example. See the disaster capitalism-like response to the family separation policy and this sudden need for more mass incarceration.

• Regression to standard Neocon bullshit internationally, with the exception of North Korea (since threatening to totally destroy them). Hired scummy psychopath John Bolton as NSA, gave the CIA to Christian dominionist Mike Pompeio and then blacksite runner Gina Haspel.

• Filthy with influence and cabinet positions from Council for National Policy: the Mercers, the Devos family, Erik Prince. They are theocrats posing as maintainers of "traditional values."

• Neil Gorsuch is a hard conservative pick from a president who feigned appealing to people with all sorts of values.

these are the exact points that make me roll my eyes when trump supporters STILL try to act like he is anti establishment, anti deep state or whatever the fuck

its laughable. he did all the worst things in the most obvious way while simply SAYING what antiestablishment poor white people wanted to hear.

and they swallowed it

I'm as skeptical as they come but I can tell your political preferences are clouding your judgement.

Besides: Sessions, Devos, Bolton I give all of his selections an A+ rating. My personal favorites are Mattis and Gorsuch. I personally think he needed to get Bolton closer because he's such a wild card and confused the fuck out of the Norks.

Yes I'm more conservative leaning, no I don't think the Rothschilds wanted Trump after pouring a billion dollars into the Hillary campaign. How much the media and every actor/actress in Hollywood detests him is absolute proof of that.

Also, I'm saving like $200 every paycheck from his tax cuts so to claim it only helps the super rich is disingenuous. I personally feel like we have no control over anything the government does so to be thrown a bone for once was satisfying, even if the government as a whole is still completely fucked up.

I'm as skeptical as they come

Uh, no you're not.

Yes they poured millions into Hillary's campaign, but ask yourself what that says. Did they do it because they thought it would help her win? or to set themselves up in feigned opposition to the US for what they knew was coming for the next 8 years? Maybe they knew that the purpose of Hillary's campaign was never for her to be president, but to blue-ball the feminist left in the US after already blue-balling them with her loss to Obama in the 08 primaries, and divide this country along party lines in one of the most primal ways possible: by gender. This coming after 8 years of dividing this country by race, with radical racial ideologies pushed on the left and racist dog-whistling by politicians on the right. Maybe Trump is the wet dream of the powers that be, because now more than ever the country could permanently lose any semblance of real democracy, especially if democrats flop this midterm election which mark my words they fucking will, especially if Trump legalizes pot. The Republicans will be emboldened and they will not give a FLYING fuck what the media/coastal liberals say when they have it proven to them that their base will always outdo the apathetic liberals at the polls (that is if they don't decide to just start rigging like the Russians). The democrats provided controlled opposition to the creeping fascist takeover of this country since the days of Kennedy. These elections of this decade i predict will be their death blow, which is EXACTLY what the international banksters would love to see; and could lead to us being the new global bad guys in the next world war/cold war.

I'm no expert, but I have followed conspiracy theories since my childhood and I've never trusted either party. I'm telling you, Trump is where he is to distract us while we get fucked by the same people who fucked us under Bush.

Trumps son in law being such close buisness partners woth George soros should tell you something. Either you're not that skeptical or you're just intentionally blind.

what about flynn

what about giving kushner security clearance when he is clearly undeserving and only useful at working to increase the family fortune as a result of political power?

what about pruitt

what about mr exxon mobil?

His passing of a tax bill that was essentially drafted by the Heritage Foundation and supported by the vast majority of Republican reps, benefiting corporations and the extremely rich.

Say what you want, but I am lower-middle class and the extra money every month helps me support my family while also diverting cash to charities and ministries I can vet. The amount of taxes they siphon from the rich never seems to correlate with a reduction in poverty or homelessness, if California is any indication.

If you're lower-middle class, then whatever benefit you see from the tax cut has likely already been offset by rising gas prices and will be completely swamped by the increase in health insurance premiums due to the Republicans' sabotage of the ACA by removing the individual mandate. Besides which, your tax cut is temporary while the reduced corporate rates are permanent.

The tax scam doesn't help anyone but the already-rich and corporations, many of which were already recording record profits before the bill was signed. It's the same old trickle-down economics which has never worked before.

I had higher gas prices in 2012 and my insurance premiums got wrecked under the last administration. What are you even talking about ?

The tax scam doesn't help anyone

I just told you that it has been helping me out supporting my family, but of course me having more access to my labor while my wife finishes school is obviously a bad thing because it is temporary. 🤯

if its temporary doesnt that mean that eventually you will be subsidizing exxon mobil and goldman sachs and pfizers tax cuts?

will you still smile with that corporate dick up your butt?

will you still smile with that corporate dick up your butt?

As if both parties aren’t in corporate pockets 😂 I’ll take a pittance of actual relief where I can get it rather than entertaining the same old vapid platitudes that solve nothing.

the republicans are completely unashamed and want to deregulate

say what you want about the democrats, but at least they were trying to regulate industry with regards to the environment/finance/ethics

You want me to believe Hillary Clinton would have been tough on finance and ethics? Surely you must be joking. I don’t trust Trump and he is no saviour - I’m just simply making the point that this specific reform has helped me out, which is a welcome change from the constant reaming.

toughER? do you disagree? who in the democratic party was bitching about industry is overregulated? meanwhile, the kochs and mercers would love fully unregulated industry

Who cares about the Koch brothers when the CIA needs to be dismantled and the DOD needs to be audited? I’m more concerned about human trafficking and military waste than the normal things people bicker about, and at least this administration seems to be addressing them.

me. what kind of stupid thing is it to say 'forgive these evils and look over there'

wtf is it with the human trafficking? its been a focus of law enforcement for a while, everyone knows about it, there are constant busts going on. only since pizzagate have we people been saying 'ignore trumpy stuff, look at human trafficking'

I’m not saying ignore Trump. You think I want tax money going to his stupid “Space “Force”? I’m saying if we are going to work big to small, I’d put preventing children from being raped or tortured pretty high on my list of priorities.

yeah they should keep those families together

The president spoke at the CIA headquarters outside of Washington, D.C., where he arrived for a professional tour together with senior members of his administration. In an attempt to quell recent tensions between himself and the U.S. intelligence community over Russian interference in the election, Trump told the CIA officials who gathered to hear him - "I'm 1,000% behind you."

Trump literally just oversaw a 6 month $61 billion increase to military spending with a proposed increase to $710 billion next year.

Do you want to see how ridiculously bloated Space Force projects get? If you thought the F35 was expensive, you're in for a treat.

I’m down for any solutions to the CIA and military spending, but unfortunately no politician will run on that platform since they will just get bopped or smeared as unpatriotic. The Space Force is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of in government, and NASA should be dismantled for being incompetent and worthless.

Trump supported every war for the last forty years. Trump supports torture. Trump wanted to continue the growth of the military industrial complex. Trump is having a military parade for the first time since the end of the cold war.

He is ridiculously pro military.

I’m not anti military, just anti waste. The military industrial complex needs to be reigned in, but at the very least the DOD is being audited for the first time. They don’t need more funding though and we don’t need a space branch, but that is a minority view among conservatives.

Lol. You can't start by saying "say what you want..." and proceed with an opinion that is being regarded as a known fact/benefit. Democrats want their cut just like the Republicans. Try again.

what was the first move after trump became president?

repeal ethics overwatch. only their intense shame after being caught stopped the republicans.

Besides which, your tax cut is temporary while the reduced corporate rates are permanent.

seriously the most important part. this tells you everything you need to know about their motivations. why isnt it the other way around? Love to hear some redpilled truthseeker tell me why trump helping corporations is good. really want to hear about some 'trickling'

The tax bill removes the incentive for many people to donate to charity by encouraging them to take the standard deduction. You can't deduct giving under the standard deduction. It also raised the tax not for profits have to pay because they now have to pay tax on benefits they give to their employees.

The tax bill removes the incentive for many people to donate to charity by encouraging them to take the standard deduction.

Perhaps that is the case for some, but I donate to churches and charities regardless (I took the standard married deduction last year). If I am donating more this year than last year, and I took the deduction, why would other people start giving less just because they don’t see a specific effect on their tax form?

It also raised the tax not for profits have to pay because they now have to pay tax on benefits they give to their employees.

Do they pay less tax elsewhere?

"In The Washington Post’s article titled “Charitable Deduction Is Indispensable, But Shouldn’t Be Sole Motivation for Giving,” mentions the Dunham Company, a consulting firm for charitable organizations that compiled a survey regarding charitable giving.

According to the survey, people support the deduction, regardless of household income, education, age, race or gender. Thirty-three percent of donors in the survey said they “would reduce their giving if the charitable deduction didn’t exist.” When it came to the group between the ages of 40 and 59, 40 percent said they would reduce their giving."

No the tax bill was a tax increase for any not for profits that provide employee benefits.

No one makes it on the ticket unless they've been vetted. Your vote doesn't matter.

Absolutely agreed.

If Trump was a real threat / the mainstream media hated him as much as they claim to, they would have Ron Paul'ed his ass. Given him no coverage, no time to speak, no interviews, etc.

Definitely. Instead he got more coverage than any other politician in the race.

If Trump was a real threat

He is a real threat... just not to them

All the presidents are middle managers, they report to someone higher up.

100%.

Ron Paul was a threat to these people and they blacklisted him immediately. Just his comments about Federal Reserve were enough for them to act. The media was in total blackout about everything that Ron did. They would list names, like Obama first, someone else 3rd, someone else 4th and completely skip a position which Ron Paul held at that moment. The game is rigged beyond belief.

The blackout was crazy, I remember in the debate he got like 2 mins of screen time while the average was 10 or 20

Notice the crossposts

Apparently the richest people in the world don't know the difference between "populist" and "fascist".

Hmmmm.

lmao, Trump is whoring out America big time. Hold on boys, it's only gonna get rougher from now on and it is obvious that Americans won't do shit, they're obedient lil capitalist sluts who bend over every single time. The whole hurr durr guns to fight against the oppresshun of the state is absolute bollocks, nothing but LARPing from brain-washed individuals who see themselves in some retarded hollywood film where they're the hero that saves the day. Absolutely pathetic, the lot of you. You better lube up just to make it easier for yourselves, the capitalists are gonna want their money - like it or not.

gonna get rougher from now

No matter how rough it gets, it won't ever get worst than Romania, the fucking genetic trash of Europe. Go back to your gypsy tent and be quiet, child.

Romanian =/= Romani.

And to be fair, they do have a very high percentage of very good looking people (male and female). Which is something that surely can't be said about 'merica.

If you're paying attention, their mission is clear - sow the seeds of chaos and then profit from the fear. Trump is a penniless patsy buoyed up by deep pockets bent on destroying America. They know how much profit is in war and they want it. They legitimately want another world war.

Now apply this theory to Hilary. You’ll find more ties then with trump. I enjoyed the read thou

They both have ties because it is always a false choice in America. I don’t understand why people think all of a sudden we had a real chance at electing a true no-strings-attached outsider. There’s a lot of people that either haven’t been paying attention or are too young to realize what is going on.

Which one is President now?

I hate Hillary but why bring this shit into this thread

I think he explained that in his comment

Because in any conversation about how bad Trump is, it is usually an attempt to shame the people who voted for him. Hillary was the alternative. That comparison will be there until he has a new competition for the 2020 election.

but there were literally other people on the ballot. i didn't vote for either of the clowns.

Then it is appropriate, in my mind, for you to attack Trump voters. But most of the attacks seem to come from Hillary supporters.

Well deserved gold, I believe they know in advance who will be what. So it’s not a question of them grooming him to become president but instead knowing in advance that he will become president, and to align themselves with him and/or set him up for failure and be his hero by saving him like what Ross did.

Man these jews are devious. How the fuck could you arrange a man like Trump to be the President? 65 million people voted for him and yet here's you who knows better. It's laughable and weak and has no basis in reality whatsoever. Off course you won't see think i'm a shill or a jew or some such retarded shit because as conspiracy theorist you've an ego bigger than Mt Zion.

I’ll give you an alternate, they didn’t arrange for him to be pres but instead knew in advance he would and aligned themselves with him in various ways prior to his presidency.

how would they know? It's nonsense. This kind of bullshit is a deliberate attempt to make people who don't like the destruction of the planet and the economic slavery we have now look like bigots. All the jew hating in the world won't change a fucking thing. There is no one in control, it's chaos, always was always will be.

Akaschic records - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akashic_records

You did it again. Nice to hear like minded people. I am a pro Trumper but the way you think is exactly how under everything operating these days.

The rise of populism and the fracturing of the country. I saw this 4 years ago and I see it happening today, except it is now at the level where I can no longer actually sit here and willfully deny it. To see through the smoke and mirrors is frankly, mind blowing, but trump being the fall guy is a bit bad here. there needs to be a restructuring of government and frankly for every child that has been lost in the system, there needs to be appropiate charges levied! I mean, seriously, this is horrible! They are normalizing people being sold off into slavery by contractors, who have very little to no government oversight, and injecting them with 6-10 black-box warning psychotropic drugs that have very little to no effective use, especially in children, and most of them being mass-produced drugs from the fucking '50s. This is way worse than anything we did during the cold war. I'm pretty sure.

populism wouldn't rise if the establishment weren't actively trying to ruin our countries.

This seems likely. I find it hard to believe that any major player would back Donald Trump of all people when he had 15 other politicians to fight through before getting to the general. The odds just seemed really long at the time. Of course, I figured he would win at the time (for reasons similar to what Scott Adams proposed regarding persuasion, and for the unique nature of his campaign), so it’s possible TPTB did too.

How did they know he would win? Trump didn't even expect to win, as evidenced by having no staff or cabinet lined up and also the fact that he was still pursuing business beyond the campaign season.

Not True. He had an entire cabinet lined up. Some of the most powerful billionaires on the planet supported his candidacy, and together they all had a fully-formed cabinet ready to go.

I have you res'd a known soros sockpuppet - you are fake news, yet again.

Lol at the soros reference. Russian bot confirmed.

Well deserved gold, I believe they knew in advance he would eventually be president. So it’s not a question of them grooming him to become president but instead infiltrating him in various ways so that he feels indebted to them. I’m sure they were also the ones who made sure he went bankrupted 2 or 3 times so that they can step in and “save” him like Ross did.

My spidey sense is tingling.

I’m usually loathe to invoke a “No True Scotsman” fallacy but in my humble opinion...

No true Conspiracy sub member would ever gild a post

Reddit Gold is for normies, admins and artificially promoted content.

Scratch your balls, the tingle will go away

That is exactly how this all works. So glad someone else didn't stop at the first answer.

If you read the IG report on DOJ, you'd know this all bullshit. Not a chance he's establishment.

Right, that's why the FBI New York field office, the largest and most powerful FBI office, was rabidly pro Trump, because he's so "anti establishment".

So by your logic, that one fbi office overrides the corruptness exposed in the IG report? What sense does that make? None at all, fam. None at all.

If you didnt know, this thread is being brigaded..

Can't let the sheeple know that they have had this capability. To know someones destiny in advance is a huge tactical advantage for both offense and defense. Yet here lies the paradox, you no matter how much you disagree with someones destiny, which I'm sure they did with Trumps, you cannot do anything to change it as that is their destiny. If you were successful in changing their path, then they wouldn't have been destined in the first place.

Can't let the sheeple know that they have this capability. To know someones destiny in advance is a huge tactical advantage for both offense and defense. Yet here lies the paradox, no matter how much you disagree with someones destiny, which I'm sure they did with Trumps, you cannot do anything to change it as that is their destiny. If had you been successful in changing their path, then they wouldn't have been destined for it in the first place. All you can really do is try to nudge the subject a certain way so that their interests become aligned with your agenda. This is why you see Trump anti-establishment on lots of things except Israel, their precious baby.

What was the extent of the corruption exposed in the IG report? Am I incorrect in thinking it mostly referred to a handful of individuals? Honest question, happy to be shown to be incorrect, I have not dived into it as others have.

Fake news, Preet Bhahara begged Trump, begged him on his knees to stay on as US atty for the S district of Manhattan, and was told to take a hike, since he was a pocket asset of various FBI units in the NTC area whom trump had dealings with.

Within minutes of being relieved, Bhahara was tweeting very negative things about Trump.

This answer is ridiculous. If it "doesn't matter" who the elite/the black nobility/insert group here wanted to be the figurehead, they would propped someone who was not going to be a thorn in their side.

If the goal is open borders, why are the borders still shut? why are we placing tariff and import duties on foreign goods, when 99% of the shit being brought in is from a company owned by a billionaire?

You people need to stop posting soros talking points - nobody here believes any of your shit, mang.

Great info. I've never seen before. The only way he was "elected" president was due to the elites putting him there.

I mean it would be like Jesse "the body" Ventura being elected.

The media was still laughing at him and his chances of beating Hillary on election night. The best clip is of the Young Turks just melting down and about to cry.

It's painfully clear that a country that can manipulate other countries elections can definitely manipulate it's own. The U.S gov't is a master of propaganda, and misdirection.

People should've known the jig was up as soon as Trump chose Pence as his running mate.

why specifically?

I assumed that was an insurance against rabid liberals and moderates.

This submission is nuttier than the Q LARP.

I’ve said this since day one, Trump is going to be the “fall guy.” It’ll be a whole lot easier for the public to one day point the finger and say, “This was all the fault of Trump.” Something massive is going to happen and Trump will take the lick. This is the calm before the storm. Although, who’d you rather in office, Hillary or Trump? Such a crooked system we all live in.

Shut the fuck up

Removed. Rule 4.

overreaches of power and authoritarianism

wasn't his first major executive order today? He might be an authoritarian but he's probably the most lawful authoritarian the US has ever had as president.

Exactly, since when do authoritarians keep working to give up power in government?

How is unilaterally governing by executive order and completely ignoring bills passed by a super majority in Congress "giving up power"?

Are we talking about Obama or Trump?

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Nearly all EOs from Trump were to reverse Obama's EOs.

You are talking about Obama. That's the only way what you just said would make sense.

Idk where you’re getting the idea that this is his first executive order - he has signed over 40 thus far. Some highlights include the several iterations of the travel ban, tweaks to Obamacare, and amendments to a bunch of Obama’s previous executive orders. I guess you could argue that this was the first “major executive order against current law,” but given that several previous ones (like the travel ban) have controversial and challenged in court, I don’t see how you define this as the first major one. He has frequently bragged that his executive orders are among his major accomplishments.

Spot on, divide and conquer.

The GOP sort of laid out the plan for this a while back as well. All they needed was a useful puppet as a leader, going forward from Obama. It's hard to read this and not see a blueprint for the current leadership.

Grover Norquist at CPAC in 2012:

All we have to do is replace Obama. ... We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. ... We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don't need someone to think it up or design it. The leadership now for the modern conservative movement for the next 20 years will be coming out of the House and the Senate.

The requirement for president?

Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States. This is a change for Republicans: the House and Senate doing the work with the president signing bills. His job is to be captain of the team, to sign the legislation that has already been prepared.

They have been doing that for a long time. Almost every president plays his role in this long con game. They want to bring chaos and destruction to this word. They want to destroy western culture with immigrants. Want to destroy western families with feminist and woman rights movement. Wants everyone to discredit every theory against the government. Wants to brainwash people into thinking they have the free choice to choose a president. Wants the people to fight at each other and profit from them. Makes propaganda for gender less movement in order to establish the soon pedophile movement. Yea let's not talk about races... I can go on and on. The government and higher up knows they won the game. They are untouchable unless there is really a second coming of christ. They can now do whatever they want and people are too brainwashed to even think. Yes the peaceful society as we know is over. Now get real for the purge.

Finally somebody gets it. Great post, thank you for your research.

I feel like the rich all play the same game

This is an extremely weak list.

Thanks for that contribution

And your lack of points refuting them are somehow weaker.

I wasn’t refuting the points. Just saying the conclusion from this list is a little bit of a reach.

Again: not refuting your points just feel the list is weak and the conclusion you jump to is a big reach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P24htaJ1-MQ

I’m so glad that I can see posts like this get a positive response, people are starting to realize that Trump was nothing but smoke and mirrors.

We still need an alternative.

Hello share blue

Yup

I know its a tough pill to swallow, but follow the money.

Very plausible but why are they after him immediately after him taking office with so much investigations no president has gone through before?

Because it gives the "anti" crowd a carrot of hope they can patiently follow while keeping the nation increasingly more divided.

Suppose interrogations didn't happen. The anti-crowd would still opposing Trump trying to elect another one after 4 years. Trump is full of scandals, there will be divisions either way. Why go to such hassle?

several possible reasons: I predict that something reeeeallly bad is going to happen under his term, and he will be the 'fall guy' that the establishment can blame for decades.

Or, the intentional and painful collapse of the controlled opposition that is the democratic party, in such a way that leaves the liberals of america hopeless and angry, potentially violent (and disorganized) sufficient to bring in martial law in some cities (think Tienanmen square, but not nearly as deadly) This could put america poised to be the next global boogeyman to be warred against (cold or hot) by 'good guy china' along with the EU.

Lastly, You have to remember that the media is definitely controlled by TPTB, but they do this by hiring people with certain desired ideological leanings and giving them select information, so that their mouthpieces earnestly believe they are telling the truth. Any good conspiracy relies on most people not realizing they are in on it and doing the bidding of it unwittingly. I predict that VERY few news hosts are knowingly acting as shills (my guesses are Hannity, Anderson Cooper, and Alex Jones to name some). My guess is hosts like O'Rieley, Maddow, Larry King, etc don't know entirely what kind of agenda they are pushing, and certainly most low-level reporters have no idea and if they do they get shut up with financial, legal, and eventually physical threats.

When questioned why he helped him, Ross said; "the trump name is still very much a future asset for us"...

As in the Trump name is a good brand.

Why did trump meet in private, and visited the home of known globalist Henry Kissinger?

To talk.

Are you OK with this and why?
Yes. Freedom of association.

Trump often discussed his plan to defeat the "terrorism boogeyman" in ISIS, and

He already did.

Also, why after claiming terrorism was bad, and that Saudi Arabia was a known funder of terrorism (and potential 9/11 involvement), why did he do a multi million dollar arms deal with Them?

Because America sells weapons.

Why Is trump saying that the CIA is "great" and "terrific"? Why did he say that he was behind them "1000%"?

Because he is and they are.

Why was his Bombing of Syria a strategic move for the betterment of US citizens?

It was better for the world.

Also, after criticizing Obama's policies, how are the continued drone strikes helping make America great again?

By eliminating enemies.

Trump also has a slew of rape and sexual abuse allegations against him,

Why are you concerned with allegations?

How are these anti establishment policies?

How would the perks of being rich and being POTUS be anti establishment?

These questions should be very easy for Trump supporters to explain.

Was a breeze

If trump is establishment, why would the establishment lose their shit they way they have? Media still in meltdown mode two years after his election. Cmon, pay attention.

Not a chance of this being true. Also, weak evidence.

Then there's things like:

• this

• and this

• and this

• and this

• and this

• and this

Media is benefitting like crazy from covering him. You really think they are "melting down"? I think "meltdown" is just what gets the most viewers, just like any shitty reality show. The more off the wall crazy nonsense, the more ratings.

You couldn't be more wrong. No offense.

Cnn ratings are in the gutter. So are all others news networks except fox. Fox leads in every single category. In fact, it's not even close....

Because the media losing their shit brings in more views and clicks and more money. You don’t think they’d coordinate to make people riled up? The more emotional people are, the more they want to watch their station to get the news they like. And Trump is a news godsend for both sides. They’re all profiting off of keeping everyone divided.

https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/8smlqh/ive_compiled_a_list_of_donald_trumps_pro/e11oc77/

They get their orders from the state players, don't be fooled to thinking this is just a case of money and clicks for them. I'm surprised more ppl didn't see the significance of having it revealed that bbc's reporters were all vetted by mi6. Media exists to manufacture consent for wars and enrichment against our "enemies", so that no one ever asks why we don't redirect money from the military to Healthcare and infrastructure.

I mean, Puerto Rico is still without electricity, and flint is still without clean water, but our military budget was raises this year to make way for our space cadets.

If trump is establishment, why would the establishment lose their shit they way they have?

They aren't.

Media still in meltdown mode two years after his election.

Yeah, and it's a perfect way to keep people off his back over real issues.

do you have any idea how many views "news" organizations like cnn has lost since election day? They've damn near gone bankrupt. Get your head out of the clouds and pay attention to what's going on.

It's happening.

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/q1-2018-ratings-cnn-finishes-third-in-prime-time-but-posts-second-best-q1-this-decade/360859

CNN is owned by Time Warner, same company that owns HBO, WB, and a ton of other stuff. They're the second biggest media conglomerate behind Disney.

FOX is still number 1 for cable news which isn't surprising since their demographic age is higher and more likely to watch TV as opposed to younger people who get their news online.

I really don't feel like having to give you the entire backstory but FOX and the other major networks work in collusion. They're all corporate owned. They aren't left or right, they just pander to whichever target audience is dumb enough to watch their shit.

CNN tends to pander to the left, FOX panders to the right. At the executive level, the owners don't give a shit about any of the crap their employees are saying as long as it doesn't hurt them.

When Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olberman got into a fight, the networks loved it because it was great ratings. All until it got dirty and both guys started dishing dirt on each other's bosses. Their bosses got together and told them to quash it because they didn't want the heat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Olbermann#Feud_with_Bill_O'Reilly

Trump worked for NBC for 13 years. Keith Olbermann was like one the most left leaning talking heads next to Colbert & Stewart, and he was also on NBC.

You're nuts if you think that left vs right bullshit means anything to the networks. They're playing you guys like chumps.

| weak evidence

*posts 4 memes

good job!

And what does an in depth, measured look reveal? I don't care much for quick looks and conclusions.

To me, it seems as if the elite chose him as a populist to appeal to theorists and subvert our effectiveness as the truth movement.

Stopped reading there because the truth movement has never exhibited any level of effectiveness.

You all just talk about things on the internet. That's literally it.

It's the internet. I don't know what you expected.

I didn't expect anyone to believe that donald trump was chosen to be president years in advance just to stop people talking on the internet.

Wiki leaks would like to have a word with you.

And even if he is a complete puppet, he is still the best president in decades if not longer.

So what candidate in the future is for the people? How do we get at least one populist in the showdown?

Well, we had bernie. He was as populist as they come. But the fear and propaganda machine labeled him as a socialist and people bought into it. Not to mention they didn't even understand what socialism is, they just swallowed the machines version if what socialism is.

And he rolled over like a dog for Hillary and was caught on mic talking about lying and duping his followers. Bernie is nothing but a sell out fall man candidate.

Great post. So what do we do now that we all know we were duped for the infinite time?

Same thing we do everyday Pinky, try to take over the world.

Liberal nonsense.

This is a disinfo campaign to throw away allegiance to an actual anti establishment President.

Come on dude. Really? You still think Trump is anti establishment? As an outsider watching American politics, Bernie Sanders seems anti establishment. The most anti establishment politician you guys have had in a long time. Just cause trump hates PC culture doesn’t make him anti establishment. There’s more important threats to the world than political correctness.

I don't think Trump is some savior, but this reads like media matters dis-info.

This is literally what I said since he won the primaries. Glad someone agrees. I saw this coming a mile away.

When questioned why he helped him, Ross said; "the trump name is still very much a future asset for us"...

am I blind and missing the link to the source of this quote?

Solid work OP.

keep up the good work

The Austism is showing

Boooshit....just admit "your're with her"

Couldn't it be that Trump is an agent of a different faction and we can at least enjoy the appearance of some of them scrambling?

When the Trump Travel Ban list came out and it was the same as the 7 countries in 5 years mentioned by General Wesley Clark, I was out. He’s obviously not the savior we need.

Thanks for the post. The people on r/conspiracy who are supporting trump really need to remove head from ass. Post like this can help.

My question the love for trump here organic or is this a coordinated effort to ruin the truth seeking movement?

If you are a non robot and you support this presidency I question your intelligence.

So, would my intellect be in question if I just despised every person elected to the office of the President of the United States?

I loved Reagan. For a time, until GWB, I liked GHWB, but then I was old enough to understand they are both New World Order spooks. I know Clinton was a pos, and Obama was a coup attempt, so I disliked them.

I guess I feel like it is not your right to "question my intelligence" for thinking DJT is doing a great job. So, go back to the Rules for Radicals Cliff Notes and read page 2 and see what technique is next.

In some ways, I think you have to be, every president does. Even if he is pushed in directions by Mossad, or the WB or whomever else, at least he doesn't seem overtly blackmail-able. Lastly, I sincerely love this country; if I am going to be controlled, I'd prefer to be controlled with nationalism rather than shame (like Obama did to us). Americans are good people, why waste this potential?

I know this is a month old but I just wanted to say, thank you for making this post. This is the r/conspiracy I know and love. I stopped visiting this sub around election time because of how foolish this sub became. It was/still kinda is essentially the donald. But I just watched a documentary on the Rothschilds and I decided to see what new things this sub had on them. Which is how I found this month old post, lol. So yea, thanks for being part of the core of this sub!

It is almost like the findings of the OIG report are being slid...

Finally some critical thinking in this sub!

Trump prefers a power top

Why did most of the establishment Republicans i.e McCain, the Bush’s, many others, all refuse to support him then and actively work against him in many situations? This explanation doesn’t really hold much water when you look at how prominent republicans have treated him.

Unless they were playing the long game since they knew Hillary was an equally bad candidate and would lose?

4-D chess.

Obama was groomed since he was a kid. Looking into that was sickening.

Everything is planned decades before hand. And everyyone is eating the shit up like its some kind of new age BS.

Couple days ago i found myself right in the middle of a drunk guy defending these "kid camps". Ive never seen someone so angry over my opinion that stealing children was wrong. Just like ppl on reddit, he immediately asked me to provide resources for my rebuttal.

Even in face to face conversation, people ask you to provide all your own research then and there. In which i always reply with "provide me with all your research to prove me wrong.

He stood up and walked away when asked to do the same he asked of me.

/u/GreenIDLady lady spends all his time bashing Trump - this is more fake news- and it is easy to verify, that yet again, nothing posted by /u/GreenIDLady has any veracity to it.

I agree with your view but i think there is more to it as well.

In many ways Obama and Trump have the same role.

They are picking controversial presidents to create divide among the public.

These sorts of controversial figures are easy to create false narratives as to distract from what really matters.

They want people to think dumb shit like 'you oppose Obama you must be racist' ' You support trump you must be an idiot (or racist)'

It is all about divide and conquer and confusing/spreading misinformation.

Humans are tribal by nature and easy to manipulate.

Obama became president and the Right started to radicalize, Trump became president and the Left started to radicalize.

They want everyone to be forced into extremes.

Its all about dividing, distracting and hiding what really matters in plain sight.

Reeeee Rothschilds control the world reeeee

Only thing makes me think he's in some way legit is how hard the MSM tried to stop him and still is.

Unless, of course this was just part of the script, the media attacking him gives him credibility in the eyes of his base.

I have generally seen DJT's election as an indication that TPTB are getting very desperate. What's next? How more ridiculous can this get?

He is not proestablishment

North Korea!

what

Good point actually, he even rang up Forbes using a fake name to try and get himself in the 500.

I wonder how much debt he's actually in too.

Even if it's a five-party system. The problem is still the same.

Actually he is. Forbes has published the fact that he is the first billionaire to become president, not that that is a good thing, but he actually was able to use this to his advantage in the campaign by making the argument that he was already rich so he could largely finance his campaign himself without being beholden to traditional campaign contributions from corporate donors. This was all conjecture though, as he has largely supported the same corporate masters Bush and Obama did and merely payed lipservice to common man causes. Remember how he made a big stink about prescription drug price gouging for like a day, and then we never heard about that again. That went away real quick.

If you read the IG report on DOJ, you'd know this all bullshit. Not a chance he's establishment.

The problem is not the two party system. Instead, it's lack of voter involvement at low levels, especially in the primaries at state level. The conglomerated nature of media also plays a role.

How? All internet activities are recorded. Satellites watch all over us. Moreover, intelligence agencies have perfected the concept of infiltration and co-option. You would need something like a divine intervention. The more time passes, the less chance humanity has to rise up because technology is getting more and more advanced and is being weaponized and used against the mass populace.

The pizzagate people research Trump extensively. I am one of them. I was surprised we did not turn up more on him.

Hard to point your finger at that, when the parties can determine their own representative outside of the primaries vote...

Looks at DNC in 2016

I mean this with complete neutrality: you all may be suffering from confirmation bias.

Just a dogwhistle from you anti-semitic bigots.

Check your privilege goy.

That makes no sense at all. If Dems controlled congress, there was a 100% chance her policies would pass. When GOP controlled congress, of course it was harder. But the GOP would have fought 3 times harder against Sander's more progressive policies than Clinton's policies. So even though Sander's policies were better, Clinton had a way higher chance of getting congress to pass her policies.

The example you give proves the point perfectly. Median wage growth has grown by 4%, but we know higher educated workers have experienced wage growth that is easily triple to quadruple that. By necessity this means that either a majority of people had no real wage growth (IE 0 - 4%) or that a decent-sized minority have actually experienced wage decreases in said period.

I got to be honest man, it seems like you have entrenched yourself in a position and are unwilling to internalize the evidence you are reading...

Because even in that section the study goes on to talk about how that pressure is swallowed by the real wage gain of all native born workers.

Thanks for the discussion.

I’m not anti military, just anti waste. The military industrial complex needs to be reigned in, but at the very least the DOD is being audited for the first time. They don’t need more funding though and we don’t need a space branch, but that is a minority view among conservatives.