The most disturbing feat of propaganda has been the transformation of common sense into fringe conspiracy theory. – Theodore Atkinson

I know I wrote in a Note that my next post would be about the Redneck Rebellion, but there continue to be certain points that feel like they need to be fleshed out as I’m not seeing them elsewhere. I am posting more frequently now not just because the Trump assassination attempt was shocking on its own terms, but because of what globohomo likely planned to do in response to it if it had succeeded. That will likely be my next post. My hope is then that things will calm down and my weekly posting routine can resume, but we’ll see; developments are coming very fast now.

One of the questions being asked about the attempted Trump assassination, such as by Jason Horsley in this extended exchange here, is if 20-year-old Thomas Crooks was part of a broader conspiracy, how was the conspiracy organized?

Now, I have no insider knowledge. The following is speculation based upon curious data points (which should all be looked at skeptically, given the amount of misinformation out there, whether intentional or not) and my own pretty consciously understood biases, discussed in the last post about grounding mechanisms.

• Crooks apparently had a “limited” online presence according to authorities. Sundance is correct that this is not really believable; the youth are pretty ubiquitously addicted to technology. Due to Total Information Awareness his internet presence is not wipeable regardless of whatever Crooks did or not do on his own. It would still be in the NSA search database. There are also no recent photos of Crooks that have been released; they’re going off his high school yearbook photo – why? I suspect it would have revealed him as a deranged far leftist Antifa type (one of his classmates said he was a known Trump-hater). According to an article his internet history apparently shows searches for both Trump and Biden rallies; how convenient… You can see Crooks in a video here making some juvenile remarks.
• The level of incompetence that the Secret Service displayed is mind-boggling. The Secret Service head Kimberly Cheatle refused to put a counter-sniper team on the roof of the below building which had direct line-of-access sight to Trump and was only 400 feet away; she claimed that it was because the building was “sloped”. The slope of the building was only 10 degrees, if that!The “sloped” buildingThe counter-sniper that eventually killed Crooks after he got off many shots was set up on a much more sloped building:Secret Service basic protocol is to secure all line-of-sight positions that could hit the defended target; according to this video by a Special Forces sniper the level of incompetence displayed here is too great not to be intentional. He posted this on TikTok and apparently was banned by the service after posting it.Now here’s the thing: because the Secret Service failed at a core, basic function of their job, Cheadle had to come up with an explanation, any explanation for the failure. The sloped roof comment is laughably flimsy (even Elon Musk mocked it). But Cheadle would rather have it thought that she and the Secret Service generally were incompetent (which is not totally implausible given she had a DEI goal of 30% of Secret Service agents be women by 2030) versus the attack was an intentional conspiracy, but it’s not working well due to the amount of evidence which is becoming too overwhelming to attribute properly to incompetence.1 Her superiors – the Biden Administration and criminal traitor DHS head Alejandro Mayorkas, who opened the southern border to 20 million illegal Democrat voters in the past four years alone – are backing her and she is not being forced to resign so far (because it is likely she was just following orders).
• Crooks apparently wandered the rally for at least an hour before the attack, he was on the roof for half an hour, spotted by the counter-sniper team and tagged multiple times, Crooks used a range-finder to calculate distances to Trump which was observed by the public, he may have brought his own ladder to reach the roof, the crowd outside the rally pointed out his sniper position at least two minutes before the attack, a police officer climbed the ladder and Crooks’ gun was pointed at his head and the officer climbed back down, and apparently the Secret Service had orders not to take out an assassin until the assassin fired first, which is beyond insane. Take one of these facts in isolation and okay, maybe it was incompetence; but add them all up – again, assuming they are accurate – and the picture is very clearly one of intentional malice on the part of the Secret Service.
• Apparently – if the below links are accurate – there may have been a large and highly unusual financial short put on Truth Social the day before the attempted assassination. Link 1, 2, 3. If Trump had been successfully assassinated, one would expect Truth Social to immediately implode, as the entire site revolves around access to Trump’s opinions. This reminds me of the shorts placed on airline stocks a day or two before 9/11.

Crooks’ barely missed shot, which has a great visual explanation here, reminds me of the final scene in the wonderful movie Day of the Jackal. The assassin did not anticipate de Gaulle leaning in at the last second:

Okay, so there’s a malicious Secret Service and a 20-year-old attempted assassin. What’s the connection between the two? The Secret Service doesn’t go out and solicit deranged leftist attackers. The likely scenario is that the FBI groomed Crooks from orders-on-high2 and, when certain he would make an attempt, informed the higher-ups who then leaned on the Secret Service to allow the attempt to happen. The motives for this were discussed in the first post on this topic: to create enormous Republican chaos before Trump had announced a Vice President (and there was no clear successor or front-runner to take the helm), as well as possibly to instigate the fabled Redneck Rebellion in order to then brutally crush it to formally usher in a hypercharged surveillance state, which will be discussed in perhaps my next post.

---

How FBI grooming works

How does the government groom terrorists online work? Well, there’s no online manual, but from studying clues from publicly released information on a lot of these young terrorists the pattern seems to be like this:

The FBI does it on Reddit and a bunch of other places like Discord and Telegram. They strike up friendships with weird loners saying obnoxious stuff. They form parasocial relationships and text with them on Signal or Whatsapp. Then the FBI agent slowly encourages the target to turn violent. The mentality of the FBI agents doing this is not that they are directing terror attacks, but rather they are identifying latent threats before they manifested — they are being proactive instead of reactive — and the proof is that these guys become willing to go along with the incitement to violence, which both allows them to prosecute the target and stop a threat to the community. Of course, very few if any of these loners had the motive, means or opportunity to actually carry out an attack without the active support of the agents themselves. And any organization always feels big pressure to justify their budgets so they can grow in size, so the FBI has an insatiable appetite for so-called “terrorists”…

“I don’t think anyone fully appreciates how demoralizing it is to be sitting across the table from a peace-loving man or woman from a foreign country, insinuating all kinds of baseless BS, attempting to coerce them to spy on their equally peaceful community,” Terry Albury, a disillusioned former FBI agent who was convicted of leaking classified documents, told The New York Times, “but it was also my job.” Read here if you want more details on this process.

After the target commits the terror attack, the FBI conducts an “investigation” into the shooter and attempts to scrub any incriminatory information.

There are numerous examples of this one can point to:

1. One example of this was probably Omar Mateen, the Muslim shooter of the Florida gay club whose father was an FBI informant.
2. Another was the Curtis Culwell Center attack in Texas which was well documented.
3. Another was the so-called Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot. See here for a great write-up on the details.
4. The case of the Liberty City Seven. “The Liberty City Seven case was a mess. It took three trials to convict five of the seven defendants. But it was still proof of concept for the government’s new strategy of using informant-led stings and preemptive prosecutions to root out radicals with violent leanings.”
5. The case of Eric McDavid, convicted of plotting terrorism but he was really trying to impress a female undercover agent and the FBI withheld exculpatory information.
6. There’s the infamous FBI agent Ray Epps funneling people into the Capitol on 1/6.

One may also note that these “terror attacks” come in waves – in the late 80s and early 90s the “terrorists” were the rural patriot movement; then it shifted to become Islamic terror after 9/11, where there were dozens of Islamic attacks — then after Trump won in 2016, they almost universally dried up. Did they dry up because Trump was such a scary law-and-order guy that Muslim terrorists were no longer willing to commit attacks? This seems ridiculous; rather, the more obvious explanation is that the FBI which pushed particular types of attacks onto weak-minded, isolated losers changed their priority and focus.

There are likely a lot of others such as the 2023 Nashville school shooting by the tranny (where the FBI covered it up and wouldn’t release the terrorist’s manifesto), and also probably Crooks. They likely groomed him online like they’ve done to quite a few other terrorists then, when he was ready to go, they paved the way in gold for him to get his shots off, then they scrubbed his online presence and whitewashed it. The FBI investigators into the attack are the very same organization that likely MK-ultra’d this kid into being their mentally ill attempted assassin.

Plenty of plausible deniability for the authorities.

Now, to reiterate this is just a theory – a working, plausible theory that ties together the disparate elements of this attempted assassination, but there is no smoking gun for it at this time, nor do I expect there to be one publicly released.

By the way, it was difficult to do research for this post because both Bing and Google are heavily censoring search results. If you Bing images “Thomas Crooks” for example, nothing relevant comes up. They’re only getting better and better at censorship as the AI improves; eventually we will hit a point where globohomo will have total information control and we will not be able to find evidence supporting things we know to be true, or past events.

Lastly, if one accepts that this was a conspiracy, it looks like they very may well try again as a Plan B, possibly using an explosion by “Iran” as “revenge” for the murder of Soleimani in order to both eliminate Trump, push the U.S. into another Middle Eastern war on behalf of Israel, and use it as an excuse to clamp down on free speech on the internet.3

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 Putin, who runs the Russia branch on behalf of the central bank owners, runs incompetence shtick all the time regarding how he keeps getting fooled by his Western “partners”, to great effect. “Oh, I got fooled again, I’ll wake up and do better next time!” He’s really the master at this shtick. Rurik Skywalker covers this all the time at his excellent blog, the only one, along with Edward Slavsquat, to provide English language dissident analysis of what is occurring within Russia itself.

The target of incompetence shtick is preying on Christian notions of forgiveness.

2 Yes, Christopher Wray is a Trump appointee. However, any Trump cabinet appointees had to be approved by a razor-slim margin Republican Senate, and globohomo stooge Mitch McConnell controlled at least a third of the Republicans in the Senate. In other words, the only individuals who could get past Senate confirmation were compromised globalist ideologues. Trump’s hands were tied on this. And the Republican/Democrat distinction has no meaning — James Comey was a registered Republican — what matters is one’s ideological outlook, i.e. oligarchical globalist vs. populist nationalist.

3 Although Israel seems to be in control of both parties per last night at the RNC.

This is a post which investigates how people process information, whether it is by their intuition, their reliance on official expertise or otherwise. It argues that that no one can decide what you should believe for you, that you must rely on your own judgment and expertise – but if you don’t have a feedback mechanism to provide more objective feedback to your approach then it is very easy to become divorced from reality.

In 2008 highly influential arch-liberal Cass Sunstein articulated a strategy called cognitive infiltration in an article titled “Conspiracy Theories” for the Journal of Political Philosophy. In it he made a radical proposal: “Our main policy claim here is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories.” He defined “cognitive infiltration” as a program “whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups.” See here and here if you want the details on this. Globohomo picked it up and ran with it, and its effects can be seen everywhere today. Cognitive infiltration on social media is heavily boosted via paid agents, “influencers” and bots who push arguments about, for example, the glass dome and the firmament (flat earth arguments) to distract people and lead them into harmless political dead ends.

I think of this cognitive infiltration strategy when I look at the online reaction to the attempted Trump assassination. There were all sorts of theories immediately thrown out: it was a psychological operation and Trump used a squib on his ear or the shooter aimed for his ear; schizophrenic Andrew Anglin has been quasi-pushing this one. Or no one was actually shot. Trump did it to boost his popularity. The FBI/CIA would never use an incompetent to try to assassinate Trump and they never miss their targets when they try to kill them. The deep state wants Trump to win so that he starts World War 3 and whites will join to eagerly fight.

My response was that these lines of argument were untenable for a variety of reasons: the bullets were real given the wounded/dead behind Trump and which missed killing Trump by a fraction of an inch, Trump is too incompetent to employ an expert level assassin for such an attempt even if he wanted to, if one asks cui bono? (who benefits from such an attempt) Trump didn’t need a popularity boost given he was leading Biden by multiple points, among other reasons. Here’s how close the shooter came to killing him:

J. Daniel Sawyer does an excellent detailed forensic deep dive based upon the released video evidence if you really want to get into the weeds of how close this was.

Regarding that iconic photo that was taken (“ohmigod it’s a false flag it looks just like Iwo Jima”), you can see how that photo was taken in this video here.

Michael Dansbury correctly mocks the psyop crowd by summarizing their position on what would have to be Trump’s mentality to institute a false flag here:

“I am four months away from an election in which I am already doing pretty well and even my enemies have to agree that I am a serious challenger. My opponent is clearly infirm and his party are now bitterly divided as to whether he should even stand. I will however ask a gunman to shoot at my head with the infinitesimal chance of hitting my ear, kill an innocent bystander and then in turn have him assassinated. This will lead to a theoretical number of people to vote for me four months from now.”

Librarian of Celaeno, who I have been clashing with more regularly because of our differing perception styles and core values, but hopefully in a constructive and respectful way because I enjoy it – I prefer reasoned criticism than having yes-men because grappling with the pushback is what ultimately strengthens one’s own arguments – and he articulated his disagreement as follows:

Working backwards from cui bono gets you exactly the kind of reasoning you’re talking about here, because you’re assuming an entire chain of actions from an endpoint that could have been radically different under slightly modified conditions.

• Donald Trump got shot at- it must have been the Deep State; they serve to benefit, and everyone know they lie.
• Donald Trump got shot at- it must have been Trump; he will now get a boost in popularity, and everyone knows he lies.
• Donald Trump gets shot- the media was in on it; they all refused to call it an assassination, and everyone knows they lie. They’re working with the deep state.
• Donald Trump gets shot- the media is now reporting it as an assassination attempt; they are working with Trump because he’s click worthy.

All of these scenarios are spun from pre-existing assumptions and the facts are shoved in in ways that rationalize them. Letting the evidence lead the way means taking a step back and asking hard questions not only about what happened, but about what I believe.

I agree with the part in bold – except what evidence and facts is Librarian waiting for exactly? The videos have been released and the location of the shooter’s position was known very quickly. Some clarifying information was known later, yes, like the shooter being on the roof for over twenty minutes before he took his shot (!). Perhaps Librarian has made up his mind now, I’m not sure. Perhaps he wants to wait for a corrupt and whitewashing FBI to release official finding who knows when? What qualifies as “letting the evidence leading the way”? I argued instead that one should place emphasis on contemporaneous evidence – video and witness statements primarily – before they get scrubbed from the internet, which has happened regularly over the years to bolster establishment narratives.

I also agree with Librarian that one needs to know and understand one’s own biases and assumptions. One can take ANY piece of evidence, no matter how clear-cut, and people will not agree on it. I went into this on a prior post where a liberal friend (at the time) and I viewed an extremely clear-cut video and walked away with entirely different interpretations of what we watched; this event shook me and I re-evaluated how perception works after this event. And even if one is correct on a particular level of analysis, that doesn’t mean one is correct on other levels of analysis; we are all finite, limited beings and our perceptions are flawed and limited, so it is always good to retain a degree of radical skepticism and doubt even over one’s own opinions.

Christopher Cook had a great post about understanding one’s own biases, where he wrote (quoting at length):

In another sense, however, I am just like everyone else, insofar as my personal predispositions cause me to suspect some things more than others. So let’s look at those predispositions.

First, I do not trust the state. Government is a criminal racket. Even the best-designed systems inevitably devolve into criminal rackets. So I don’t trust much that is said or done by any agent or agency of any government.

Second, I do not trust the state no matter whose hands it is in, but when it comes to the left-right paradigm, I trust the left far, far less.

Leftism is the worst mass ideology ever to ooze forth from the twisted mind of man. It is devious, dangerous, and deadly. Every single time it reaches its fullest bloom, it produces nothing but failure, oppression, and rivers of blood.

Leftists managed to slaughter and starve 150 million people in a single century, and to oppress many millions more in soul-crushing totalitarian mega-states. Leftism really is a “boot stamping on a human face forever.” Denial of that is denial of history.

Of course, non-leftist states have perpetrated their own slaughters—from ancient conquerors to modern colonialism to every other form of barbarism. I oppose them all. But right here, right now, for the last hundred-plus years, leftism is far and away the biggest threat.

The right, properly defined, refers to Anglophone-style conservatives, (non-left) libertarians, and (non-left) anarchists. All of these ideologies share a core classical-liberal provenance in common. As such, they are not generally seeking power for its own sake. They have few objectives. Mostly, they just want to be left alone.

Yes, I know that conservatives have more of a busybody streak than their libertarian cousins. But none of that comes anywhere close to the “Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state” ethos to which every leftist is constantly straining (whether they recognize it consciously or not).

Third, I have very little normalcy bias. I do not assume that things will remain as they are. I do assume that it is only a matter of time before really big, messed-up things happen. (This attitude actually served me well during covid. Yes, the situation was upsetting and even carried some psychological impact, but the lack of surprise made it easier for me to bear.) Thus, I have no difficulty imagining that any one particular event might be the spark of something big.

Fourth, I am not a “conspiracy theorist,” but I am also not not a conspiracy theorist. I am willing to entertain just about any possibility. I am not tyrannized or constrained by Ocham’s Razor or Hanlon’s Razor (I definitely do not believe that either of those is always correct).

Fifth, I am also about as far from mass-formation as you can get. I am generally anti-authority, and I am far less likely to trust mass narratives than most people.

And finally, I am more comfortable than most with the fact that there are a lot of things for which there is no dispositive answer. I am willing to look at a question and consider a range of possible answers without actually setting on one.

For better or worse, that is who I am. And so all of that contributes to any theories I might be more predisposed to consider.

I share many of these same biases; I am naturally anti-groupthink, distrust the motivations of the left, have little normalcy bias and disbelieve official propaganda. But as I’ve written about extensively on this Substack, I also believe that this world is controlled by a small number of central bank owning families who have very specific and very nefarious long-term goals, that they are parasitizing off the masses whose core values are Christian-derived egalitarianism which allowed this financial system to come into place, and that behind this system is the possibility of an extremely malevolent Demiurge whose goal is to prevent the God-souls within each of us from achieving gnosis and ascending beyond the petty flawed materialism of this world. These are my biases, and I will assess new events through this prism unless my prism later updates, which it may.

As attractive as it is to try to adopt simple black-and-white rules for the world about whether something is always or never a psyop or false flag, it doesn’t work that way. As the wonderful and erudite L.P. Koch states,

It amazes me how many on the “real left”, who otherwise see clearly that our democracy is a joke and that we’re ruled by war-profiteering oligarchs, still can’t get out of the “Trump is an evil fascist” talking point, incapable of looking any further, even of just trying on a different angle for a change.

Equally startling is the “everything is a psyop” gang, who live in a world (or rather up their arse) in which all is “staged” and scripted: the mirror-image of leftist subjectivism & schizo-level relativism where nothing really exists except what’s floating in their own heads (the unappetizing float-in-itself).

There are many ways to make people believe 2+2=5.

In other words, while it may be attractive for some to assume either everything or nothing is a psyop1, that’s clearly wrong, and one must use one’s discernment and judgment when approaching any particular issue. Oh no, use one’s own discernment and judgment, how scary! And at the same time retain flexibility to avoid dogma and consciously acknowledge that one may be wrong, that there are multiple levels of truth and we are finite, limited and subjective – oh no, radical uncertainty!

This brings me back to an old favorite quote of mine by Maurice Samuel in his otherwise insane You Gentiles about how one cannot ultimately rely on anyone’s analysis or judgment other than yourself. Certainly don’t rely on mine:

There is no test or guarantee of a man’s wisdom or his reliability beyond what he says about life itself. Life is the touchstone: books must be read and understood in order that we may compare our experience in life with the sincere report of the experience of others. But such a one, who has read all the books extant on history and art, is of no consequence unless they are an indirect commentary on what he feels around him.

Hence, if I have drawn chiefly on experience and contemplation and little on books – which others will discovery without my admission – this does not affect my competency, which must be judged by standards infinitely more difficult of application. Life is not so simple that you can test a man’s nearness to truth by giving him a college examination.

Such examinations are mere games – they have no relation to reality. You may desire some such easy standard by which you can judge whether or not a man is reliable: Does he know much history? Much biology? Much psychology? If not, he is not worth listening to. But it is part of the frivolity of our outlook to reduce life to a set of rules, and thus save ourselves the agony of constant references to first principles. No: standardized knowledge is no guarantee of truth. Put down a simple question – a living question, like this: “Should A. have killed B.?” Ask it of ten fools: five will say “Yes”, five will say “No.” Ask it of ten intelligent men: five will say “Yes,” five will say “No.” Ask it of ten scholars: five will say “Yes,” five will say “No.” The fools will have no reasons for their decisions: the intelligent men will have a few reasons for and as many against; the scholars will have more reasons for and against. But where does the truth lie?

What, then, should be the criterion of a man’s reliability?

There is none. You cannot evade your responsibility thus by entrusting your salvation into the hands of a priest-specialist. A simpleton may bring you salvation and a great philosopher may confound you.

And so to life, as I have seen it working in others and felt it within myself, I refer the truth of what I say. And to books I refer only in so far as they are manifestations of life.

And this leads us into the question: if one is aware of their biases and outlook, exactly how should one assess new information?

---

Grounding mechanisms

It is important for one to have a grounding mechanism by which one analyzes new information. A grounding mechanism is a way to take in outside feedback and check it against one’s existing beliefs to see if the beliefs are correct or need updating. There are at least two grounding mechanisms, although there are likely others:

1. the traditional scientific method where independent third parties can try to repeat experiments to judge the veracity of the theory (the scientific method has been corrupted in the modern era, unfortunately, via a focus on “scientific consensus” and perverse funding incentives which corrupt experiment results), and
2. a focus on recursive prediction, i.e. if one’s worldview predicts certain things in the future and if those things don’t come to pass, then that means that one’s worldview is wrong to a certain extent and should be updated.

A weaker grounding mechanism is to ask cui bono? – who benefits from an action? It is weaker because one can often craft arguments for multiple sides about who benefits, as we see with Librarian’s pushback above.

If you do not have a grounding mechanism for which you can recursively update your beliefs, then you may easily get sucked into and believing unprovable, unfalsifiable theories that will lead you in wrong directions. For example, I generally stay away from ideas like UFOs because there is no way to verify whether the theories being promoted are correct or not.

There is no authority or expert coming to save you on this, not me, not anyone else: you need your own grounding mechanism.

This is also why I knew very quickly that the Q movement was a psyop based on the Soviet’s Operation Trust. Q promised results (with always moving targets) based on innuendo and never explained the logic behind his arguments or predictions. An irreparable red flag. It’s also why Simplicius’s followers are hopeless; he’s been promising Total Russian Victory for 2.5 years now with nothing to show for it yet retains a mass following. Endless hopium is always popular.

One could always just discard a focus on ascertaining truth entirely – no grounding mechanism needed – and go off Carl Schmitt’s friend/enemy distinction. In other words, one could look at the Trump assassination attempt from a dissident perspective and simply argue that the anti-white, pro-globalist FBI and CIA must be behind it because they are middle America’s enemies; therefore doing whatever one can to smear those enemies can only be good. There’s an impulse and an attraction to that, but ultimately that approach is wrong because the right and the left have fundamentally different propagation strategies, and one cannot use the other’s strategies and be effective. The right’s fundamental impulse is one of law and order, transparency and strong and immediate justice; to fall into the left’s impulse of oligarchy, deceit, lies and drawn-out chaos is not an effective strategy, in my opinion.

One may note that this analysis is not meant for the masses who are incapable of independent analysis.2 It is meant for ideological dissidents who are trying to escape from the propaganda that has been force-fed to them all their lives, or perhaps even only a subset of them. Most people (NPCs/hylics) are meant to be led by a strong ruler and without it they can go insane. What we’re seeing from the masses is that they’re losing their trust in the media which has been their de-facto strong ruler and they don’t know what do. A grounding mechanism cannot help them because they cannot think for themselves. If you walk these people through a step-by-step reasoning process they will follow along, maybe nod their head in understanding, then promptly forget everything you told them. This is because it is ultimately about a thought process and not one specific line of argument. I still empathize with the masses, though.

---

Putting it together

Based on the overwhelming evidence this was simply an extremely close assassination attempt, not a false flag or psyop. It missed by the width of a hair. It is debatable whether the attempted assassin was MK-Ultra groomed by globohomo and then given access to the rooftop, or whether the attempted assassin was simply a mentally ill shitlib who was spurred to action by globohomo’s incessant “Trump = Hitler” propaganda. Multiple nationalist politicians worldwide have recently been murdered (Shinzo Abe), attempted murdered (Bolsonaro), imprisoned (Khan in Pakistan), or face imprisonment (Matteo Salvini) even though globalist politicians have not faced any real serious attempts against their lives and which is another curious data point. It is an open question whether the Secret Service is simply incompetent now due to DEI or whether this opening for the attack was planned in advance, although the evidence points toward the latter. There’s plenty to debate over which will likely never be resolved – especially by the corrupt FBI’s investigation. But the attack did happen and it wasn’t a false flag nor a psyop to boost Trump’s popularity; they wanted him dead.

Lastly, please don’t take this post as a ringing Trump endorsement. I’ve made my feelings about the man known as he is a very flawed individual and no politician is coming to save you. Even if he was a Superman, there are certain structure issues that no one, Trump or anyone else, will be able to fix even if he wins the upcoming election (assuming the election happens): a $32 trillion national debt with a $2 trillion a year deficit, 30% of U.S. tax receipts going toward debt interest payments alone, and 20 million illegal Democrat voters let into the country in just the past 4 years.

In a sense this is all meaningless kayfabe to titilate the public as the country continues to fall off the cliff.

Good entertainment, though. Very exciting.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 Note that the term psyop is an imprecise one and I don’t like it because it contains two quite different meanings within it: (1) military operations usually aimed at influencing the enemy’s state of mind through noncombative means, (2) government use of a person or phenomenon to influence a population’s opinions and attitudes

2 Most people do not have internal dialogues according to a 2007 University of Nevada Department of Psychology study on college students.  Per the study, regarding the frequency of common phenomena of inner experience (inner speech, inner seeing (aka images), unsymbolized thinking, feeling, and sensory awareness), only between 22% to 34% of the individuals studied had frequent internal dialogues: 

If this study is accurate, most people may simply be meat robots, lacking thoughts inside their heads, and they react to stimuli as they experience it.

I usually try to stick to a specific writing schedule, with many future posts written weeks or months in advance. However, sometimes there is a political or cultural development which upends those plans. The last two times this happened was my 10/9/2023 concern that the October 7 Hamas attack could lead to a much-expanded regional war (which has not developed so far) and prior to that 8/24/23 commentary on Prigozhin and Wagner’s leadership’s assassination by the Russian deep state by blowing their plane out of the air.

This is a post with some preliminary analysis on the Trump assassination attempt. It is preliminary and future information may come out and contradict this. There are a couple of points to make first though:

1. I previously argued on July 7, 2023 that the establishment would attempt to imprison and/or murder Trump as a symbol of white middle America, regardless of whether he cucked on policy moving forward. I compared him to what the Bolsheviks did to the Romanov’s.
2. In Part 3 of my recent history of Trump’s presidency, I backed off this prediction a bit, noting that most of Trump’s criminal trials had been pushed back past the election, that Trump caved on the $95 billion Ukraine aid bill that contained provisions that would trigger automatic impeachment if Trump became president again and tried to withdraw from Ukraine, and that globohomo was taking defensive steps in case Trump did win. In other words, it increasingly looked like Trump had been skin-suited through backroom deals/pressure and, if he won, he would govern like a Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio.
3. The way people view new events, especially televised events, is always curious to watch. I discussed here how I and a liberal friend back in 2015 viewed a short video and came away with entirely different interpretations, even though whatever information was needed to assess the video was contained within the video itself. What hope is there of agreement on interpretation when what seems like a black and white situation is still disputed?
4. For less clear-cut videos, ones which require interpretation beyond the corners of the video itself, on what basis should one assess information? One requires a grounding mechanism that ties theory to reality, or else it becomes too easy to believe one’s subjective whims. Traditional grounding mechanisms include (1) the scientific method (which has since been corrupted by scientism) and (2) making predictions about the future, and if they’re wrong one updates in a recursive manner one’s worldview. For specific political events, where there is a lot of conflicting information and one cannot expect truth or veracity from the authorities such as the FBI, DOJ, or media, a good rule of thumb fallback is to ask cui bono? – who benefits?

It is on this basis that I am approaching the Trump assassination attempt today. Because the FBI and DOJ are utterly corrupt I do not expect an honest investigation from them, and not from the media either. The best information to review is video information that is released contemporaneously or close to it with the event, always with the caveat that it could be superseded by subsequently released information. As mentioned, facts are subject to change, but I note the following so far:

1. An eyewitness reported that he told the police and Secret Service that the shooter was climbing onto the roof and crawling 5-7 minutes before the shooting and they did nothing.
2. Note the shooter position vs Trump position. The distance is only 125m / 400 feet. That there was not a Secret Service team on this roof is inexcusable.
3. The counter-sniper teams saw the shooter and let him get off multiple shots before he was killed, which grazed Trump’s ear, killed a bystander behind Trump and seriously wounded another. The video of the counter-sniper team is here. This photo is amazing:
4. The Trump team had in the past three weeks requested additional security from the Department of Homeland Security which the Biden administration turned down: “A source familiar with Trump’s security detail tells Federalist that the former and future president’s detail has been asking for beefed up protection and resources for weeks, but has been rebuffed time and again by Biden’s DHS.”
5. Biden recently told donors, “It’s time to put Trump in the bullseye.” Now, this quote may be taken out of context, but the general principle still holds: the media’s demonization of Trump since 2016 has been extremely intense, consistently calling Trump Hitler 2.0. The New Republic just did it recently:
6. The globohomo media within hours released its talking points, which were to downplay the assassination attempt to the maximum extent possible: Don’t say there was a shooting “targeting Trump”, don’t call it an “assassination attempt”, don’t have “serious” body language or use “color”, don’t say it was “scary” or dramaticize, don’t bring in guests to condemn the attack.
7. Various liberals on social media initially stated the blood was a squib and/or Trump was targeted with a BB gun. Both were false. They also immediately  it was a false flag to improve his popularity, and that no one other than Trump was injured or died (someone right behind Trump died and another was seriously injured).
8. Deep state actor Elon Musk endorsed Trump right after the shooting.

Here and here are two videos of the assassination attempt. Trump displayed remarkable fortitude when he rose, which you can see in the second video and is quite iconic (after his security detail were very slow in responding; one may note that he had multiple women on his security team, a terrible sign for readiness and competence). Here’s an image of it, which is iconic and will be remembered:

Here’s a photo of the dead shooter (warning: graphic), also see here for less graphic video.

One may note that the shooting distance was 125 meters / 400 feet and it was against a stationary target. This is a very easy shot for someone in a prone position with a tripod, perhaps a scope and in clear weather which even beginner shooters could pretty easily hit. It’s a miracle Trump survived. For comparison, Oswald’s assassination of Kennedy occurred from 265 feet, which was much closer, but was against a moving target. Oswald was documented taking 200-500 yard shots in the USMC against stationary targets.

---

Analysis

Okay, so let’s put this together. You have a shooter shooting from an outside roof close to where Trump was speaking which should have had Secret Service protection on due to it’s proximity. There is zero excuse for this failure. You had a bystander who warned the police and Secret Service detail 5-7 minutes before the shooting that the shooter was crawling onto the roof and they did nothing. You have counter-snipers who saw the individual but did not engage until after the shooter got off multiple shots. You have the Biden Administration which denied Trump greater protection and Biden said Trump was in the “crosshairs.”

Worse is the political situation. The Democrats can’t collectively decide whether to dump Biden and the polls all show he will lose badly against Trump, and their backup Kamala does not poll much better. There are only a couple months until the election and they cannot easily choose someone other than Kamala. The lawfare against Trump has been pushed back past the election and it’s unclear if the far-leftist judge in New York will be willing to jail the national front-runner for a so-called crime no one understands. Also, Trump has not yet announced his Vice President and there is no backup politician who has the depth and intensity of the support that Trump has.

It is literally a miracle that Trump is not dead now given how close the shooter was.

Some like Librarian of Celaeno suggest we should withhold our judgment until more facts come out and there is an investigation. I pushed back on this, stating yes, we should wait for more facts, but based on a long history of whitewashing that I have no faith in an official investigation to reveal the truth of what’s happened here. Rather, the best evidence is video evidence released contemporaneously with the event, or soon after the event, before it gets scrubbed by censors. I’m a little surprised Librarian is still willing to give the benefit of the doubt to our skinsuited, horrendous institutions even after eight years of in-your-face lies. He also suggests praying for the shooter and his backers, an attitude which is antithetical to my own.

So let’s ask cui bono – who benefits if Trump had been killed? Some really unfortunate people suggested that the intention of the shooter was simply to wound Trump in order to boost his popularity – listen, you get off a shot at 400 feet against a moving target and try to wound the guy’s ear. This might be the most stupid line of argument I’ve heard in a long time. Also, does Trump need a boost in popularity? He’s polling multiple points higher than Biden, who is currently in a political struggle for his life. Trump does not need another boost from an attempted assassination. And even if he did, is there anything to demonstrate Trump has someone on his team who would be willing and able to take a shot against him to merely graze his ear and then keep quiet about it for all eternity, assuming the shooter survives? Trump’s governing incompetence is legendary. The level of schizophrenia needed for this position is remarkably high.

So the shooter cleary intended to kill Trump. Well, why now? Well, it’s before the Republican National Convention and Trump hasn’t announced his Vice President yet. If he was killed it would create huge chaos with no clear front-runner; the Republicans would be in an even worse situation compared to the Democrats. In other words, the motivation for this shooter to be backed by globohomo institutions is extremely strong. Additionally, if Trump was killed despite being the national frontrunner and in such a public way, in front of tens of thousands of people, that could indeed trigger the fabled Redneck Rebellion (either a real one or sponsored by FBI agents like Ray Epps) which would then give globohomo a 1/6 style rationale to brutally crack down on middle America and possibly cancel elections. Now THAT would have been an excellent result for globohomo — and it was missed by an inch or two. Instead, this is a terrible result: a barely wounded Trump with a big upshot in popularity, motivation for revenge, but no triggered redneck rebellion or RNC chaos.

Based on this analysis of who benefits, as well as the information available on the shooting at this time, and it seems likely to me that this shooter, regardless of whatever information comes out about him being a “loner” or “crazy” or whatever, was likely clandestinely supported by the FBI and/or CIA. I was hoping he would be taken alive to be questioned, but unfortunately not even an Oswald scenario for him where we could get a glimpse…

Keep in mind, again, that this is my working theory based on my gut feel and review of available information so far as well as my background understanding of globohomo and is subject to change.

Alex Jones (who is not reliable but still has interesting points every now and then) suggests that globohomo will next try to poison Trump (they also have a readily accessible CIA heart attack gun) and/or kill Biden, possibly by a false-flag Trump supporter.

I hope that Trump views this extremely close call as a wake up call that he can’t negotiate or bargain with globohomo – they want him dead, even if he’s partially skinsuited himself to them – he still symbolizes white middle America and they hate him and want him destroyed. His first term was disappointing the way he bent over backwards to accommodate them, even if certain legal and political realities forced him to. I have also suggested on multiple occasions that Trump needs to pick a Vice President further to the right than he is in order to discourage assassination attempts – Vance, Rubio and the other globohomo guy simply don’t cut it. I suggest Mike Flynn (even though he has some weird beliefs and was possibly compromised in Turkey) or Rand Paul (which I know is a weird and funny pick, but he has the best dissident voting record in the Senate and globohomo both tried to murder him and one of his aides in the past couple years). There are other possibilities – someone suggested to me Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater, but I havn’t looked into him, or Thomas Massie – but the finalists that have been announced are all mediocre at best. Rubio is a closeted homosexual deep state puppet and Vance was a never-Trumper through the 2016 election and wrote a book which the NYT loved bashing middle America hillbillies. Pass. Vivek is a scam artist. Another hard pass is Tucker Carlson, who is a CIA agent pretending to be a populist and who I covered in the past.

Globohomo very likely has to double down after this; if this very close call shook Trump, he will be more determined to root out their filth and corruption. How they choose to double down at this point is unclear, but there’s only a couple months until the election. Choose well, Donald.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

This is a post about how recent events and expected future events means that sitting on the sidelines is no longer possible. It argues that the best strategy against our overlords is one of narrative delegitimization – but if one focuses on unimportant layers of the global control pyramid then one’s efforts will be misdirected at best or play into their hands at worst. I hope my American readers had a Happy 4th of July.

John Carter had a recent post about the nature of fear, both our own and of our overlords. It’s a good post and worth reading, and I agree with much of it. There’s a couple points he makes which deserve elaboration on and some pushback, though, with the hope that it may offer some clarity to readers because these issues are complicated and confusing.

John wrote:

I don’t think anyone’s more terrified right now than Western elites. They know they’ve fumbled the ball, that they’ve lost their footing, and they’re flailing around weightlessly as they try to catch it without faceplanting. None of their plans are really working. None of their usual levers of control are as effective as they used to be; some, such as the media, have almost stopped responding altogether. Their people are turning against them for a dozen different reasons, all of them excellent. Their great economic machine is sluggish, its components grinding together and seizing up. Their enemies abroad are on the march, or mobilizing. It’s all coming for them at once, and they don’t appear to have any idea what to do. You’re seeing that deer in the headlights look a lot now from prime ministers and presidents, and it isn’t always because of dementia. They’re in over their heads. Children, playing a game that became all too real when they weren’t paying attention.

A discussion of fear depends on what level of our elites we are discussing: do the unelected civil service who make up the great Washington D.C. bureaucracy hate and fear Middle America? Of course. Does the media fear the masses over whom they spout their endless lies? Yes. What about our elected politicians? Definitely. But it is important to keep in mind that nation-states are fairly low on the totem pole of the One World hierarchy, which I discussed previously here. As Iain Davis explained,

Agreement on the pillars [of world governance] does not suggest all national governments are of one, single hive mind. It suggests that governments do not control the global governance system. They are subject to it, just like the rest of us. The best they can achieve is “partner” status. And they are not senior partners.

The pillars did not originate with national governments. The pillars were mapped out by public-private globalist think tanks and international organisations that serve the interests of oligarchs.

The pyramid of world control is mapped as follows, although it is the owners of the world central banks at the highest layer:

I believe the higher levels felt fear at Trump’s unexpected 2016 win which explains their over-the-top reaction — it was a major wrench in their long-term plans — although Trump has since been absorbed into the system and our upper-level elites no longer fear him winning in 2024. Nor do they fear a transition from a unipolar to a multi-polar world. Indeed, they gloat about it. Here are a couple examples.

This was almost ten years ago:

Alex Soros: “The question is, which of these flags will fall first?” and includes the American flag. It sure sounds like an implosion of the country will hurt him!

Here you have the WEF predicting that the world will be multi-polar by 2030 in a since-deleted 2016 article called “8 predictions for the world in 2030”:

A multi-polar world transition must really be a devastating blow to our elites – they’re so scared they’re both predicting it and taking the steps needed to make it happen!

And here you have WEF head Klaus Schwab warn his fellow elites to be prepared for an “angrier world” (because they will be intentionally dynamiting the economy and opening the West’s borders).

So yeah, you can see fear from our lower and mid-level elites, but also rapacious greed; the level of blatant theft occurring now with trillions being publicly stolen feels like a mafia bust-out before the country implodes. Meanwhile the upper level elites look to be firmly in control and a switch from a unipolar to a multi-polar world will result in a tremendous amount of pain for those in America, but not for them. This perspective is important to understand as it is easy to get lost in the endless web of narrative (including alternative narrative) lies and misdirections. If you want to end this system, nothing less than a dismantling of or at least a full nationalization of the world’s central banks, along with corresponding extremely intensive audits, plus an end of fractional reserve banking will suffice, along with the end of globalist entities like the UN, WHO, World Bank, etc. Take your eye off this ball and you’ll end up suckered by unimportant distractions like which controlled party will win the UK or French elections (or see Brexit: what amazing, incredible changes ever came of that? Did it result in decreased immigration to England or greater domestic production?). Kynosargas was right about the lack of impact of elections…

Our overlords are not invincible and the more people who understand the structure of the modern world the weaker they will be.

John also writes:

After all, why do we endure all of this? Why do we practice tolerance? It is certainly not because we value tolerance, as we are endlessly instructed we must, by people whom we despise, and whose false values we repudiate.

We obey because we are afraid of losing what little we have. Our meagre savings. Our 401Ks and RRSPs. Our bullshit email jobs. Our mortgaged houses. Our ten-year-old used Hondas, driven on a lease-to-own basis. We are still just comfortable enough that we fear being uncomfortable, and we fear that open defiance of the regime will lead it to turn its beady eyes upon us – fire us from our jobs, kick us out of school, kick us off of social media, incite our friends and family and professional colleagues to ostracize us, put us on no-fly lists, and freeze our bank accounts….

I do not exempt myself from this judgment. Like most, I keep my head down, within reason, for instance by writing under a pseudonym. And although I do essentially nothing but write, which is to say complain impotently about things on the Internet, still I experience the occasional frisson of paranoia whenever I go through an airport, for example. Will this be the day that I find I’ve been added to a no-fly list? Or the day the knock on the door comes from the police, to deliver charges for violation of some new hate speech statute? Or the day I get doxxed? Or … well, you get the idea.

This brings to mind a quote from Julian Assange, who I covered here. According to Assange, we aren’t able to sit out of this fight. Either we are a participant of history or a victim of it:

I think first it’s necessary to have an understanding that one is either a participant in history or a victim of it, and that there is no other option. It is actually not possible to remove oneself from history, because of the nature of economic…and intellectual interaction. Hence, it is not possible to break oneself off….Because no one wants to be a victim, one must therefore be a participant, and in being a participant, the most important thing to understand is that your behavior affects other people’s behavior, and your courage will inspire actions. On the other hand, a lack of courage will suppress them.

And:

Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love. In a modern economy it is impossible to seal oneself off from injustice. If we have brains or courage, then we are blessed and called on not to frit these qualities away, standing agape at the ideas of others, winning pissing contests, improving the efficiencies of the neocorporate state, or immersing ourselves in obscuranta, but rather to prove the vigor of our talents against the strongest opponents of love we can find.

Look. According to public 2017 statements by the WEF (revelation of the method), by 2030 you will have a social credit score assigned to you just like China. They boast: “By 2030, we’ll see, for example, credit scoring expanding into ‘life scoring’. Identity and reputation will be digitised and analysed in minute detail, shaping a future where a personal ‘trust score’ will be the norm, with all the benefits and drawbacks that might bring.” How will a social credit score be implemented? They will have a woke AI scan all of your internet, phone, search, and text records in order to do it. Have a bad score? No loan for you, no credit card for you, no bank account funds for you. Cut out from society with your funds stolen. This is the primary purpose of AI – not ChatGPT or Claude! And it doesn’t take a high level of AI sophistication to do it. They simply needed the right level of infrastructure (5G rollout to absorb massive amounts of data) and political environment to move it forward.

Combining this with the upcoming rolling of programmable CBDCs — which are right around the corner worldwide per the Atlantic Council, either released slowly like the War on Cash or via an acute artificial crisis via a stock market crash, World War 3, or a false-flag like Cyber Polygon — the digital currencies will be programmed to allow you access to your funds only if you are fully up-to-date with dangerous mRNA vaccines and many other requirements. Even then they will limit your consumption: you will only have the privilege of buying meat once a week, or you can only travel more than 15 miles from where you live occasionally. Not to mention you will “own nothing and be happy” as we are seeing with endlessly increasing housing, car and food prices. This is neoliberal feudal hell in action and, if fully implemented, will result in a micro-managed level of control which will be the greatest loss of freedom in human history.

This leads to a couple conclusions:

1. If one assumes globohomo is going to institute a permanent control grid via social credit scores, CBDCs and patrolled by a woke AI, most people not just writing but also reading dissident Substackers are going to end up cut out of the system sooner or later (i.e. you).
2. Who wants to live in a worldwide prison? What kind of world is that to leave for future generations? It is extremely dark, evil and depressing if one does not actively oppose it.
3. As shown by the COVID heart attack jabs unleashed worldwide, there is nowhere to hide and nowhere to run. Either oppose this evil to the extent that you can or be consumed by it.

Now, I can only really speak for myself here. One cannot enter the arena of something one does not understand, and I did not understand the picture of the modern world really until (1) the Trump presidency years revealed the “deep state” beyond a shadow of a doubt and (2) the worldwide unified COVID response revealed the higher layers of One World government beyond a shadow of a doubt. Combined with both of these reveals was, unfortunately, an unbelievable dawning understanding of the NPC mind — a mind that refuses to think for itself and blindly follows authority no matter what (to the point of screaming at the top of their lungs “Orange Man Bad” for four years, accepting ultra-dangerous mRNA vaccines into their own bodies and shutting down the world out of fear). This had to be seen to be believed; it is still insane to me the way most people think.

Sophisticated modern propaganda has hacked and corrupted mankind’s natural inclination to believe authority figures — religious authority figures, technical authority figures, scientific authority figures — to further our elite’s own objectives at the expense of the masses. If there is ever to be amelioration of this situation the masses must ultimately evolve to discard official propaganda in whatever form it takes in favor of one’s own critical thinking skills and self-assessment. No one else will do it for you; but if you do this very difficult but rewarding work you will have an effect on everyone else. Changes to society start from changes to individuals; stop hoping for a political leader to save you.

Of course, it was easier to avoid these now pressing trends prior to the Trump era. Prior to Trump and COVID it was easy to separate the personal from the political; the relative economic prosperity and social stability induced an artificial, shallow mass blindness. It is only in a period of no threats and unprecedented prosperity, to a level never seen before historically, that one could afford to make such a distinction. But these times are over and the personal has become the political again. Reading about how historical conflicts resulted in families torn apart, brother on brother violence like in the U.S. Civil War wasn’t really understandable during modern periods of opulence; it’s becoming more understandable now…

After internalizing these ideas and seeing where our upper level overlords are directing the world, it became impossible to sit on the sidelines: one becomes, as Assange said, either a participant or a victim in this story. If one decides to participate, what would be the best way to oppose globohomo at this time? They control the money supply, they control the media, they control the security apparatus, they control all major institutions not just within the U.S. but worldwide, if there is a Redneck Rebellion they will likely control that too via CIA and FBI plants (see Ray Epps); what they are desperate to control, though, are people’s perceptions. It is far more costly to rule over a population via hard power than using soft power.

The correct attack, then, is an attack of delegitimization. Hence, this little writing hobby. This isn’t to argue that my effect is large or even moderate (it’s aeasy trap to fall into to inflate one’s ego about an enlarged impact one is having), but no matter; I believe this is the best use of my time to combat this nightmare horror show, even though there are dangers involved in doing so.

As Mattias Desmet states:

We must focus our attention on this: The art of good speaking forms the logical remedy for a society sick with that new kind of lie that we call propaganda. We are going through a metaphysical revolution, comparable to the metaphysical revolution that led to the Enlightenment. This revolution essentially boils down to this: a society led by a propagandized mass is replaced by a society led by a group of people connected through sincere speaking.

In a sense, this revolution also transforms the imbalances created by rationalism; it turns them back into relationships. Sincere speaking is resonant speaking – it connects the Soul of man with the outside world; it restores the connection with fellow humans, one’s own body, one’s own drives, society, and nature.

The alternative to opposing this system is to lose the basic autonomy and dignity needed to be human. It would be hell on earth, a worse form of slavery than has ever existed in human history. Everyone has an incentive to vigorously oppose this other than the central bank owners and their top lackeys, so the issue is one of populism vs. upper level elites and their minions, along with the vast NPC hordes who blindly believe whatever they are told, not ultimately one of race, gender, sexual orientation.

It is likely that little will ultimately come of these writings – 20 million illegals have streamed into the U.S. in the past four years alone, the monetary printer is printing $2 trillion+ a year, Trump has been absorbed, woke AI and CBDCs are ready for deployment and almost everyone, while getting angrier at their declining quality of life, remains clueless – but no matter. There is a spiritual component involved. As Ernst Junger wrote, “You may then wonder what the goal of writing is assuming it has a goal. It is the creative instant itself, in which something timeless is produced, something that cannot be wiped out. The universe has affirmed itself in the individual, and that must suffice, whether or not anyone else notices it. In 1942, when I visited Picasso on Rue des Grands-Augustins, he said to me: “Look, this painting, which I have just completed, is going to have a certain effect; but this effect would be exactly the same, metaphysically speaking, if I wrapped the painting up in paper and cosigned it to a corner. It would be exactly the same thing as if ten thousand people had admired it.””

I hope you found this post helpful in some manner.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

This post looks at the nature of fractional reserve banking, concluding it is fundamentally set up to fail. In order to survive it requires endless bailouts by you, the public, paid for via a combination of increased taxation, debt and inflation.

“[The Rothschild dynasty] had conquered the world more thoroughly, more cunningly, and much more lastingly than all the Caesars before or all the Hitlers after them.” – Frederic Morton, The Rothschilds: A Family Portrait, p. 14

“The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks.” – Lord Acton

G. Edward Griffin’s The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve (“Jekyll Island”) has an interesting history. Originally published in 1994, it swept through the libertarian movement and inspired the “End the Fed” slogans of Ron Paul, who based a chapter in his 2009 book of the same name on it. Jekyll Island was a best-seller at the time and has been continuously updated with new editions, and it almost single-handedly popularized the notion of a cartel conspiracy (at the eponymous island) to establish the Federal Reserve. It is written in clear prose, is well sourced and I highly recommend it, although one may need to reach a certain level of emotional and spiritual development in order to appreciate it.1

Griffin’s Wiki is here, although it’s been so distorted by CIA agents and establishment apparatchiks as to render him into a silly, inconsequential wackjob caricature (and hey, maybe he is in other areas, but Jekyll Island’s sourcing and arguments were strong). Other writers have covered the book such as Frederick R. Smith here and Pepe Lives Matter here.

The book’s core argument should be familiar to regular readers of this blog: the Rothschilds, Warburgs, Rockefellers and other top financiers banded together in a conspiracy to establish a banking cartel, based on the model of the corrupt Bank of England, that would allow them to print unlimited fiat currency and loan it at interest to the federal government. Griffin traces the first few attempts at forming a national bank:

1. the Bank of North America and the First Bank of the United States, both of which failed2, spurred on by a bitter rivalry between pro-centralization Federalism led by Alexander Hamilton and de-centralized anti-Federalism led by Thomas Jefferson; and
2. the Second Bank of the United States, upheld by the Supreme Court in McCulloch v. Maryland which turned the Constitution inside-out3 and which was shuttered in a nail-bitingly close political contest thanks almost entirely to the heroics of Andrew Jackson, who barely avoided assassination and who considered its shuttering to be his greatest accomplishment.4

One thing to keep in mind from this is that Nicholas Biddle, the head of the Second Bank, deliberately crashed the U.S. economy when the Second Bank was threatened in order to blame the country’s instability on Jackson (who was then censured by Congress, the censuring of which was ultimately reversed) — these are the kinds of games these parasitical banking scumbags play. Don’t for a second think that if the Federal Reserve is ever threatened that they wouldn’t crash the economy and blame it on their enemies as well.

After the Second Bank ended the U.S. went on to a long period of economic prosperity.

During this struggle Jackson is quoted as having said, “Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out.”5 This quote is quite reminiscent of Jesus’s interaction with the money changers.

I’ll cover the Bank War in a future post, but needless to say the country would have been much further on the path toward ruin and much sooner without Jackson’s efforts.

This post isn’t intended do a deep dive into Jekyll which could easily cover a dozen posts, but rather to highlight a core aspect of it: how the fractional reserve system multiplies the money supply and requires endless public bailouts to keep banks from failing. This structure encourages both lending recklessness and endless monetary expansion, as well as perpetual increases of both public and private debt, and the public pays for this primarily through inflation which they don’t understand.

Let’s delve into this.

---

The fractional reserve banking system

Fractional reserve banking is the basis for the modern monetary system and it started in the 17th century. Under this system the public gives their earnings for safekeeping to a bank, and the bank then turns around and lends most of those funds out to others, leaving minimal reserves in its vaults, called the reserve ratio. These lended funds stay in the bank as new deposits by the lendee (which the bank then lends out again, with the process repeating itself multiple times). This process repeats itself and results in massive monetary creation and expansion even without a national bank printing money. Adair Turner, former chief financial regulator of the United Kingdom, stated that banks “create credit and money ex nihilo – extending a loan to the borrower and simultaneously crediting the borrower’s money account”.

The lower the reserve ratio a bank has, the more money they lend out and the higher both the monetary creation and their profits are — but also, the closer to the edge of collapse they become.

A bank run happens if too many of the depositors come to understand the bank does not have sufficient funds on hand for withdrawals, which results in the collapse of the bank. Eventually bank runs under this setup are guaranteed because banks hold themselves out as a prudent, responsible recipient of the public’s wealth while simultaneously recklessly engaging in over-leveraged gambling with those funds. After a bank collapses, the public – which doesn’t understand how this system works – then deposits their funds in the next bank and the process repeats itself. Austrian School economists such as Jesús Huerta de Soto and Murray Rothbard have strongly criticized fractional-reserve banking, calling for it to be outlawed and criminalized.

Fractional-reserve banks always fail under this system because it is fundamentally fraudulent. People would not keep their funds in institutions that they believed were at risk, but all of them are. This has happening with commercial banks throughout American history, using boom-and-bust cycles and reckless bank speculation to maximize private profits (see the so-called panics of 1873, 1884, 1893 and 1907). There is only one way to prevent the collapse: via public bailout. The way to ensure public bailout is with a central bank, which can print funds and shore up the fractional-reserve system and which the public mostly pays for, unwittingly, in the form of inflation. This is why even after being shuttered multiple times the central bank concept always returned, finally assuming its final monstrous form in the Federal Reserve.

---

The creation of the Federal Reserve

The meeting at Jekyll Island in 1913 took place under the greatest secrecy. The attendees arrived in secret, referred to each other only by their first name or even by code names, and employed only the most trusted servants and personnel. If the public found out about the meeting the cartel they were trying to establish their objective would have been ruined. The attendees included representatives of the greatest wealth on the planet:

1. Nelson Aldrich, Republican “whip” in the Senate;
2. Abraham Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury;
3. Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York, the most powerful bank at the time representing the Rockefellers and the international investment banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company;
4. Henry P. Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan;
5. Benjamin Strong, head of J.P. Morgan’s Bankers Trust Company; and
6. Paul Warburg, partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company, a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty and brother to Max Warburg who was head of the Warburg banking consortium in Germany and the Netherlands.

An article appeared in the New York Times on May 3, 1932 which stated “One-sixth of the total wealth of the world was represented by members of the Jekyll Island Club.” The reference was to the Morgan group, not the Rockefellers or the European financiers (although there is substantial evidence that Morgan was a fake anti-semite who was also funded and controlled by the Rothschilds6); combining them all and one fourth of the world’s wealth would be conservative.

There were a number of problems that this group wanted to address, per Griffin:

1. How to stop the growing influence of small, rival banks which were proliferating in the South and West and to insure that control over the nation’s financial resources would remain in the hands of those present (by 1913 the number of regional and local banks had grown to 71% holding 57% of the nation’s deposits, a trend that was accelerating);
2. How to make the money supply more elastic in order to reverse the trend of private capital formation and to recapture the industrial loan market (in other words, to stop companies from funding capital expansion with profits instead of with bank loans7);
3. How to pool the meager reserves of the nation’s banks into one large reserve so that all banks would be motivated to follow the same loan-to-deposit ratios. This would protect at least some of them from currency drains and bank runs (in other words, in times of crisis the public shifted their funds from banks with low reserve ratios to those with high reserve ratios; if banks all had the same reserve ratios this wouldn’t happen as much); and
4. Should this lead eventually to the collapse of the whole banking system, then how to shift the losses from the owners of the banks to the taxpayers.

They knew the way to do this would be with a cartel mechanism: a central bank. It would have to be modeled like the Bank of England, which was privately owned and printed money from nothing to loan to the government at interest. Henry P. Davison, who as a Morgan partner, told a Congressional committee in 1912: “I would rather have regulation and control than free competition.” John D. Rockefeller was even blunter: “Competition is a sin.”

But prior central banks had failed and the public was leery of them; how to get around that? Paul Warburg was the genius who the others relied on: he had the most experience with understanding the structure of the Bank of England, and he had keen psychological insights as well. John Kenneth Galbraith explained, “…Warburg has, with some justice, been called the father of the system.” Professor Edwin Seligman, a member of the international banking family of J. & W. Seligman, writes that “…in its fundamental features, the Federal Reserve Act is the work of Mr. Warburg more than any other man in the country.”

Warburg’s answer was simple: don’t call it a central bank and make it sound like it’s both government controlled and stable, even though it would be neither. Hence “Federal” and “Reserve”, even though the Federal Reserve would be a privately owned central bank with no reserves. Additionally, to hide that it was centralized they would create a system of regional banks that would make the bank appear decentralized, even though the powers of the bank were fully centralized and hidden.8 Furthermore, the bill to be passed would both be written to be as complex as possible9 and to keep much of the controversial provisions vague; the important thing was to get the Federal Reserve passed, and later revisions would clarify the extent of the Fed’s powers when the public was not paying attention. Indeed, there would be 195 future amendments to the Act (so far). Another strategy was that the big banks would pretend to be against the bill in public; this way the masses, who hated the bankers, would be inclined to like it. Various politicians, academics and the media would be paid off to support the bill, extolling its virtues of providing a stability mechanism for existing banks that would protect the consumer; true opponents of the central bank such as wonderful Charles Lindbergh Sr. and the smaller regional bank heads would be ignored and not invited to speak before congress or invited to key events.10 The bill would be jammed through as quickly as possible.

This strategy was as brilliant as it was devious, and it worked. An earlier bill sponsored by Senator Aldrich — who was a known big banking shill — failed, so some of its cosmetic features were changed while the core features remained the same and the new bill, which Aldrich pretended to oppose, emerged triumphantly.

The monstrous system of perpetual debt slavery, endless corruption and infinite inflation had won and the public of both America and the world had lost.

---

The results

With the public now the backstop for the big banks, the objective for the banks became to be as reckless as possible in order to drive up short term profits and then have the public bail them out using the Federal Reserve (but only the best-connected banks that became labelled “too big to fail”; the less-connected banks, which changed over time, were always ripe for elimination or takeover).11 How the fractional reserve system results in inflation and impoverishment for the masses is too confusing and complicated for the public to understand; they understand direct taxation and may protest about it, but they do not understand inflation so they remain quiet about it.

The Federal Reserve owners also wanted and continue to want to drive up public, private and corporate debt to the maximum extent possible in order to maximize interest payments from the public to the Federal Reserve owners. The best way to do this was and remains via a combination of entitlement spending, wars12, and endless “foreign aid” to underdeveloped nations who had no hope of ever paying the money back (which is fine, as the goal is not to be paid back but to establish a system of perpetually growing interest payments). They want the loan balance to grow in perpetuity so that the interest owed grows more and more until they own everything. Being paid back would mean the interest on their loans stops until they can loan them out again, which is bad. As a result the U.S. national debt has exploded and gone parabolic. It will not have a good end.

Between 1913 and 2013 the dollar has lost 95% of its value via inflation from monetary printing. This served as a hidden tax which disproportionately impacts the poor as a regressive tax:

The Federal Reserve also put Andrew Jackson on their unbacked fiat was a thinly veiled “fuck you” to his legacy, who would have hated everything they represent:

Driving up consumer and government debt by the central bank owners remains entirely intentional. In 2010 interest on the national debt was already consuming 44% of all the revenue collected by personal income taxes, a percent which is much higher today:

It is a fraud perpetuated on the public who does not understand how the system works.

---

Griffin’s Prediction

The following is the summary of a “pessimistic scenario” prediction Griffin made in 1994, which by its broad strokes seems pretty accurate as to the future which has and is developing:

A pessimistic scenario of future events includes a banking crisis, followed by a government bailout and the eventual nationalization of all banks. The final cost is staggering and is paid with money created by the Federal Reserve. It is passed on to the public in the form of inflation.

Further inflation is caused by the continual expansion of welfare programs, socialized medicine, entitlement programs, and interest on the national debt. The dollar is finally abandoned as the de facto currency of the world. Trillions of dollars are sent back to the United States by foreign investors to be converted as quickly as possible into tangible assets. That causes even greater inflation than before. So massive is the inflationary pressure that industry and commerce come to a halt. Barter becomes the means of exchange. America takes her place among the depressed nations of South America, Africa, and Asia – mired together in economic equality.

Politicians seize upon the opportunity and offer bold reforms. The reforms are more of exactly what created the problem in the first place: expanded governmental power, new regulatory agencies, and more restrictions on freedom. But this time, the programs begin to take on an international flavor. The American dollar is replaced by a new UN money, and the Federal Reserve System becomes a branch operation of the IMF/World Bank.

Electronic transfers gradually replace cash and checking accounts. This permits UN agencies to monitor the financial activities of every person. A machine-readable ID card is used for that purpose. If an individual is red flagged by any government agency, the card does not clear, and he is cut off from all economic transactions and travel. It is the ultimate control.

Increasing violence in the streets from revolutionary movements and ethnic clashes provide an excuse for martial law. The public is happy to see UN soldiers checking ID cards. The police-state arrives in the name of public safety.

Eventually all private dwellings are taken over by the government as a result of bailing out the home-mortgage industry. Rental property is also taken, as former landlords are unable to pay property taxes. People are allowed to live in these dwellings at reasonable cost, or no cost at all. It gradually becomes clear, however, that the government is now the owner of all homes and apartments. People are living in them only at the pleasure of the government. They can be reassigned at any time.

Wages and prices are controlled. Dissidents are placed into work armies. There are no more autos except for the ruling elite. Public transportation is provided for the masses, and those with limited skills live in government housing within walking distance of their assigned jobs. Men have been reduced to the level of serfs who are subservient to their masters. Their condition of life can only be described as high-tech feudalism.

---

Conclusion

Interestingly, Jekyll Island remains available to purchase on Amazon, while its later successor and close cousin (in terms of material) A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind by former South African central banker Stephen Mitford Goodson is banned (but available for free here). I’m always curious about banned books as it shows an area of wrong-think that the establishment is scared of. Perhaps it is because of the latter’s legitimacy at having worked inside the system, or perhaps it is because Griffin has some significant blind spots regarding his libertarian leanings that ultimately render his positions, like Ron Paul’s (who I will also cover more in a future post) relatively toothless and harmless.13 Goodson was more of a dissident in this respect than Griffin; the latter wanted to end the Federal Reserve and return to gold and silver-backed currency (a romantic ideal) while the former wanted to nationalize the Fed and end the practice of allowing private parties to parasite off lending (because the privately owned Fed prints money and loans it at interest to the U.S. Treasury). Goodson’s approach is more realistic because governments will not limit their lending practices in the long-term unless perhaps forced to by religious dictates such as in Islam, but they could certainly take away the benefits of interest accruing to private parties.

Ultimately, Griffin fails to ask the toughest question of all: what is it about Western civilization that allowed the Rothschilds and their allies and agents to take such advantage over the majority population in the first place? It is not enough to blame greed and speculators because such a nightmarish fractional reserve system, the peak of usury, never evolved in the Islamic world or elsewhere. Yes, most nations historically engaged in currency depreciation and other monetary games, but this is on an entirely different level. How can the core of a problem be solved unless its root causes are understood? The national bank had been killed three times before the Federal Reserve but kept coming back; eventually its horrible proponents would get lucky or skillful enough to pull off the victory, and this is what happened.

My answer to this question is that the egalitarian ratchet effect deriving from Pauline Christianity resulted in Ashkenazi Jews possessing an exclusive money lending role during the Middle Ages which strengthened and evolved14 as Western Christianity fell into nihilism from the Nietzschian Death of God (killed by Aquinas accommodating Aristotelean logic; Orthodoxy was not impacted by this process). Christianity also encouraged a separation of Church and State which ultimately allowed oligarchical power centers, especially financial power centers, to develop. As I have written elsewhere, only a strong monarch, king or dictator has the power to keep oligarchical monopoly formation in check. This was anathema to other religions like Islam, which served as an all-encompassing system with power centered in monarchy and which never allowed oligarchy to develop, which will be discussed in another post.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 When I tried reading it a decade ago, not understanding enough about how the world worked, my eyes glazed over and I was not able to finish it.

2 The First Bank of the United State’s charter wasn’t renewed on the basis of a single vote, cast by Vice President George Clinton to break the tie.

3 This shows how the Constitution is a piece of paper meant to mollify the masses into complacency; unless power rests in a king, emperor, or dictator who will keep other power centers in line, power will inevitably flow into oligarchy regardless of any safeguards built into the system. It is one or the other; there is no third option.

4 When asked what his greatest accomplishment had been during his two terms as President, Andrew Jackson replied “I killed the Bank.”

5 See The Minds of Men: An American Intelligence Brief by Eric Sanders, AuthorHouse, 2014. pp. 27-28.

6 Griffin, p. 415: “John Moody answers: “The Rothschilds were content to remain a close ally of Morgan rather than a competitor as far as the American field was concerned.” Gabriel Kolko says: “Morgan’s activities in 1895-1896 in selling U.S. gold bonds in Europe were based on his alliance with the House of Rothschild.” Sereno Pratt says: “These houses may, like J.P. Morgan & Company…represent here the great firms and institutions of Europe, just as August Belmont & Company have long represented the Rothschilds.” And George Wheeler writes: “Part of the reality of the day was an ugly resurgence of anti-Semitism…Someone was needed as a cover. Who better than J. Pierpont Morgan, a solid, Protestant exemplar of capitalism able to trace his family back to pre-Revolutionary times?” Morgan also died with a relatively tiny fortune, indicating that he was merely the front-man for much richer and more powerful powers.

7 This is why globohomo later destroyed Michael Milken: the proliferation of junk bonds outside the control of the existing system which allowed corporations to raise funds directly from the public, cutting out intermediaries, threatened their control. After Milken was destroyed the system absorbed the junk bond system and adapted it to their use.

8 Frank Vanderlip said: “The law as enacted provided for twelve banks instead of one…but the intent of the law was to coordinate the twelve through the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, so that in effect they would operate as a central bank.”

9 Antony Sutton writes: “Warburg’s revolutionary plan to get American Society to go to work for Wall Street was astonishingly simple. Even today, …academic theoreticians cover their blackboards with meaningless equations, and the general public struggles in bewildered confusion with inflation and the coming credit collapse, while the quite simple explanation of the problem goes undiscussed and almost entirely uncomprehended. The Federal Reserve System is a legal private monopoly of the money supply operated for the benefit of the few under the guise of protecting and promoting the public interest.”

10 Lindbergh explained: “Ever since the Civil War, Congress has allowed the bankers to completely control financial legislation. The membership of the Finance Committee in the Senate and the Committee on Banking and Currency in the House has been made up of bankers, their agents and attorneys. These committees have controlled the nature of the bills to be reported, the extent of them, and the debates that were to be held in them when they were being considered in the Senate and the House. No one, not on the committee, is recognized…unless someone favorable to the committee has been arranged for.”

11 Congressman Louis T. McFadden repeatedly attacked the Federal Reserve in a series of 1934 speeches, which can be viewed here. He served as Chairman of the United States House Committee on Banking and Currency during the Sixty-sixth through Seventy-first Congresses, or 1920-1931 so he was eminently qualified on this issue. In 1933 he had introduced House Resolution No. 158, which included articles of impeachment for the Secretary of the Treasury, two assistant Secretaries of the Treasury, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, and the officers and directors of its twelve regional banks. McFadden was apparently murdered on behalf of the Federal Reserve owners in 1936.

12 I have discussed the mind of the central bank owners previously, but Griffin has an interesting and apt description of it as well:

They were not necessarily evil in a moral sense. What preoccupied their minds were not questions of right or wrong but of profit and loss. This analytical indifference to human suffering was aptly described by one Rothschild when he said: “When the streets of Paris are running with blood, I buy.” They may have held citizenship in the country of their residence, but patriotism was beyond their comprehension. They were also very bright, if not cunning, and these combined traits made them the role model of the cool pragmatists who dominate the political and financial world of today….
…A study…reveals a personality profile, not just of the Rothschilds, but of that special breed of international financiers whose success typically is built upon certain character traits. Those include cold objectivity, immunity to patriotism, and indifference to the human condition. That profile is the basis for proposing a theoretical strategy, called the Rothschild Formula, which motivates such men to propel governments into war for the profits they yield. This formula most likely has never been consciously phrased as it appears here, but subconscious motivations and personality traits work together to implement it nonetheless. As long as the mechanism of central banking exists, it will be to such men an irresistible temptation to convert debt into perpetual war and war into perpetual debt.”

13 An example is on p. 334, where Griffin states: “If the free market had been left to operate, it is certain that, before long, one or more banks would gain a deserved reputation for honesty and full faith with their depositors. They would become the most popular banks and, therefore, the most prosperous.” This is WRONG! Per Peter Thiel in “From Zero to One”, any corporation seeks to become a monopoly because corporations seek to maximize their profits and free market capitalism drives profits down. Therefore, unless there is an external limiting influence — such as a king or monarch enforcing the free competition — free market capitalism will always devolve to monopoly, every time. If Griffin applied this principle properly, his conclusions would be quite different.

14 These money lenders pursued profit despite extreme negative effects on society; one can’t help but see Jewish extreme antipathy toward the majority Christian population playing a role in this (see the bottom section here).

This is Part 3 of 3 of a series looking back at the campaign and presidency of Donald Trump from a dissident perspective. Part 1 dealt with the Trump 2015-2016 campaign, Part 2 looked at Trump’s presidency, and here we will review COVID and the 2020 election.

Welcome back. To recap Part 2, the establishment decided to break a lot of societal norms in order to render ineffective Trump’s presidency. They successfully accomplished this through intense and sustained media hysteria, forcing social media companies to crack down hard on free speech on the internet, the Crossfire Hurricane and Mueller investigations, utilizing Bill Barr to sweep the underlying criminal FBI and DOJ activities under the rug, followed by a new 2019 Congress with a Democrat House that would impeach Trump twice. The cost that the establishment paid for these efforts was that the coordinated efforts of the “deep state” was revealed to the public as a very real thing, which decreased the legitimacy of the ruling class to the point where they would have to increasingly rely on hard power as opposed to soft power to continue to rule (and hard power is much more expensive than soft power). Was this strategy forced onto the establishment where they lacked alternative options, or could they have co-opted Trump instead and turned him willingly into Jeb 2.0 without severely impacting their credibility? Had they lost their capacity for higher judgment from being unchallenged for so long? The answer is unclear…

Regardless, they went all out and successfully defanged Trump to the point of near-complete toothlessness. Even with this secured, though, they still faced multiple problems heading into 2020 – and they were nervous. The economy was running fairly strong, the intense, sustained media hysteria calling Trump the equivalent of Hitler over and over again was having less and less of an effect, Trump was polling decently and his approval rating was consistently around 45% (not great but not terrible), Trump was now a known commodity and had an incumbency advantage, and it seemed difficult for the FBI and CIA agents typically in charge of the rigging process to get Biden over these hurdles, not to mention the Mueller lawfare effort – fraudulent from the get-go – had nominally failed. Their preferred candidate was already decided on behind closed doors as Joe Biden1 but he was old, unpopular, and had an uncertain degree of dementia. Trump was also becoming a bit more savvy about how the political process worked and he would be able to govern more effectively and therefore perhaps more dangerously if he won a second term. For example, Stephen Miller said that if Trump were reelected the administration would seek to limit asylum, target sanctuary city policies, expand the “travel ban” and cut work visas. Additionally, Trump was increasingly seeking to target the unelected D.C.-based civil service: an executive order from Trump in 2020 re-designated 20,000 civil servants in policy-related positions as “Schedule F” employees, thereby allowing them to be fired with much greater ease (which his administration was unable to do previously given extreme D.C. civil service protections). If he was re-elected he could expand those re-designations substantially which could be a huge threat to the administrative state. There are parallels of Trump to the Gracchi brothers who threatened the wealth and power disparities favoring the ruling elite by giving voice to the anguished plebs.

There were other problems for the establishment: free speech on the internet was increasingly favoring populists not just in America but worldwide — see Bolsonaro in Brazil and Orban in Hungary as examples, or Brexit in Britain, but they couldn’t simply ban such speech due to the First Amendment. The question became how could the establishment regain firm control over the election process again? And to do it not just for one cycle but permanently moving forward? Were there ways of regaining that control while at the same time punishing regime opponents for having the temerity to elect Trump, but to do it in such a way that the punished opponents would not be able to claim the persecution was politically motivated and thereby seek revenge? Tricky, tricky.

Enter COVID.

While Part 1 of this series mixed narrative with facts and Part 2 was detail-oriented, what we will discuss herein is more theoretical and conspiracy-laden, which is necessary as explanatory framing for both COVID and the 2020 election. In other words, the actions taken by the establishment in 2020 are not understandable from a normal perspective and only become rational under an alternative framework. The framework needs to be explained first before we can review what occurred.

The argument will be made that just as the first couple years of Trump’s presidency inadvertently revealed the nature of the deep state to the masses, the global, coordinated nature of the COVID “pandemic”, where almost every country on the planet2 abided by the same required masks, lockdowns, monetary printing, media hysteria and forced COVID vaccinations, would show those discerning enough to see that there was a global order of control above that of the nation state.

The argument made here describes the pyramid-structure organization chart for how the world is actually governed. Basically, the owners of the world central banks, coordinated by the Bank for International Settlements, is at the top of the power structure, followed by the policy makers (WEF, CFR, Club of Rome, etc.), then the policy distributors (UN, IMF, IPCC, World Bank, WHO, global corporations, NGOs), then the policy enforcers (including nation states and scientific authorities), then the policy propagandists (MSM, “fact checkers”, social media influencers, etc.) collectively serving as parasites and enemies of the general public over which it rules. As Iain Davis explains, “[Nation states] are subject to [the global governance system], just like the rest of us. The best they can achieve is “partner” status. And they are not senior partners.” If there wasn’t such a pyramid of control then the worldwide response to COVID would not have been uniform but highly varied and differentiated, but that is not what we saw with the events that transpired.

---

The objectives

While the establishment hated Trump as a symbol of white middle America’s rejection of the globalist vision, they generally preferred to pursue actions that served multiple goals at once, and unleashing COVID was no different. As FDR famously stated, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” Therefore if one action fulfills a check-box list of objectives for the establishment, “you can bet it was planned that way.”

These goals included:

1. To institute permanent vote-by-mail, which would make manipulating elections moving forward trivial for them;
2. To institute compliance tests of mask use, social distancing, lockdowns and vaccines where the independently minded, non-compliant would lose their jobs;
3. To test to see how resistant and freedom-loving populations would be to lockdowns – would they become violent? Would they resist? Would they speak out? The data would be quite important as their long-term agenda progressed;
4. To target small and medium size businesses which are traditionally more conservative and independent for shutdown while exempting big businesses;
5. To mass test untested, unproven mRNA vaccines on the population who had little use in a post-scarcity environment, using a range from placebos to lethal doses where the lethal doses would be primarily targeted to middle America Republican-leaning areas;
6. To set the legal and administrative groundwork for future vaccine passports if there became too much pushback this time around;
7. To overthrow Trump. He would be in a Catch 22 situation: go along with the over-arching narrative and be destroyed by the permanent vote-by-mail consequences, or resist the narrative and be blamed for the “pandemic”; and
8. To print $11 trillion dollars, the vast majority which would be funneled back into the hands of the transnational security state, and the inflation caused by it would further the Agenda 2030 goals for lowering quality of life in first world countries and get back on track toward instituting permanent neoliberal feudalism that had been somewhat sidelined by Trump’s surprise election win.

There was also an argument made by Italian professor Fabio Vighi that the Ponzi crony-capitalist system was on the verge of collapse in 2019 and that it desperately needed huge monetary transfusions for survival.

How would Trump deal with this coordinated worldwide plan to change the entire social order? Let’s find out…

---

The beginning of COVID hysteria

The earliest signs of COVID were sudden internet videos in January 2020 of random Chinese men abruptly collapsing like out of a zombie movie. These videos would later be suppressed almost entirely on the internet and forgotten about because they didn’t fit into what came to become the accepted symptoms of COVID, but they likely led the start of the operation because of shock value. After extensive searching I found a Dailymail article from January 25, 2020 with some of the videos of the “collapses”. Click the link if you want to see it and scroll down a bit for the embedded videos. It’s quite stupid and it may give anyone who still believes in the official narrative of COVID pause for thought.

Here’s also a propaganda video from the South China Morning Post on January 4, 2020 laying the predicate for the future “lab leak theory” seized on by some on the right and which I remain quite suspicious of3:

Due to the rising public concern Trump instituted a nationwide travel ban from China on January 31, 2020 at a time with only a few confirmed cases in the United States. This ban was only for non-U.S. citizens who had been in China within the last 14 days and were not the immediate family member of citizens or/and permanent residents. Liberals did not like the travel ban as they reflexively hated anything Trump did, equating him due to unrelenting media propaganda with Hitler. The day after Trump announced the travel restrictions on China, Biden tweeted that “We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus. We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency.” Pelosi and other top Democrats piled on as well. You can see examples of liberal institutions such as the New York Times pile on as well.

How deadly was the COVID virus? Authorities in February isolated the Diamond Princess cruise ship in February 2020 – i.e. before any lockdowns – where COVID apparently had been discovered and prevented anyone from disembarking. Of the 3,711 people on board the ship at least 705 tested positive for the virus and 7 died, all of whom were more than 70 years old. Left-wing Slate reported this information, although they later tried to hedge to fit in with rising hysteria. To quote:

On the Diamond Princess, seven deaths have occurred among the passengers, constituting a case fatality rate of 0.99 percent. Unlike the data from China and elsewhere, where sorting out why a patient died is extremely difficult, we can assume that these are excess fatalities—they wouldn’t have occurred but for SARS-CoV-2. The most important insight is that all seven fatalities occurred in patients who are more than 70 years old. Not a single Diamond Princess patient under age 70 has died. If the numbers from reports out of China had held, the expected number of deaths in those under 70 should have been around four….

This all suggests that COVID-19 is a relatively benign disease for most young people, and a potentially devastating one for the old and chronically ill, albeit not nearly as risky as reported. Given the low mortality rate among younger patients with coronavirus—zero in children 10 or younger among hundreds of cases in China, and 0.2-0.4 percent in most healthy nongeriatric adults (and this is still before accounting for what is likely to be a high number of undetected asymptomatic cases)—we need to divert our focus away from worrying about preventing systemic spread among healthy people—which is likely either inevitable, or out of our control—and commit most if not all of our resources toward protecting those truly at risk of developing critical illness and even death: everyone over 70, and people who are already at higher risk from this kind of virus.

This still largely comes down to hygiene and isolation. But in particular, we need to focus on the right people and the right places. Nursing homes, not schools. Hospitals, not planes. We need to up the hygienic and isolation ante primarily around the subset of people who can’t simply contract SARS-CoV-2 and ride it out the way healthy people should be able to.

Stanford physician-scientist John Ioannidis warned in March 2020 about the lack of evidence for the dangerousness of COVID, calling it (correctly) a fiasco in the making and that COVID mortality could be less than that of seasonal flu based upon the cruise ship data.

Despite the available February data that COVID was minimally dangerous to non-olds, the WHO intentionally and maliciously estimated in March that worldwide mortality from COVID was 3.4%. By April 2020, about half of the world’s population was under some form of lockdown, with more than 3.9 billion people in more than 90 countries having been asked or ordered to stay at home by their governments.

How did people know about the spread of this new strain of COVID? Enter the “gold standard” of COVID detection, the PCR test. According to Kary Mullis, the creator of the test who coincidentally died right before the start of the so-called “pandemic” in August 2019, “Anyone can test positive for practically anything with a PCR test, if you run it long enough with PCR if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick.” And: “If they could find this virus in you at all, and with the PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody,” Mullis said. “It starts to get you to believe in some kind of Buddhist notion, where everything is contained there and everything in between.” The way it works is as follows: the PCR test uses what is called a “cycle rate” to determine whether someone is infected – the higher the cycle rate is, the more “sensitive” the test is and the higher the odds are that it tests positive for anything. As the WHO stated in May 2020, “the cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load.” False positives are high at 25x amplification (a study from the Infectious Diseases Society of America, found that at 25 cycles of amplification, 70% of PCR test “positives” are not “cases” since the virus cannot be cultured, it’s dead) , but false positive are extremely high at cycle rates of 40x which many places such as MIT used: “Most tests, like the Broad Institute test used by MIT, use a 40-cycle protocol.”

In other words, whether a person has COVID when tested via the “gold standard” PCR test depends on the amplification rate. Lower the amplification rate, lower the supposed infection rate; raise the amplification rate, raise the supposed infection rate. The wonderful thing about the PCR test and “COVID” is that infection rates could be increased or decreased depending on political necessity by adjusting the cycle rate maximums. Indeed, the CDC lowered the amplification rate maximum right after Biden “won” the 2020 election.

However, it gets worse: the PCR test only tests for the general flu category, not specifically for COVID-19: “it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues…” The CDC itself acknowledged that the PCR test cannot tell the difference between cold/flu and COVID-19: “CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.”

Let’s summarize this. The gold standard of COVID testing cannot tell the difference between cold/flu and COVID-19. Infection rates can be increased or decreased pursuant to political necessity depending on amplification rates. Interestingly, the number of simple flu deaths – which typically averages 5,000-50,000 deaths in the U.S. alone each year, with 80,000 dead in 2017 – was zero in 2020. And according to a later suppressed John Hopkins analysis, total mortality in 2020 was flat.

Therefore, it is fair to say that the entire COVID pandemic hysteria was a ginned up and fake process by the establishment. Curiously or not so curiously, the so-called pandemic was war-gamed in October 2019 with Event 201, a pandemic simulation event conducted by Johns Hopkins, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation just months before the outbreak of COVID and mirroring the COVID scenario in many respects.  A 2010 Rockefeller Foundation document envisioned a worldwide pandemic followed by the creation of a technocratic police state and its details also closely track how COVID-19 has played out.

I’m not going to focus too much on the government response to COVID here – with Anthony Fauci changed his messaging on the so-called “pandemic” every week or two depending on political necessity and who laughed at how easy it was to fool the public4, or how a vast censorship apparatus established quietly after Trump’s 2016 win was utilized to stifle free speech criticizing non-establishment takes on the virus, or how hospitals were paid enormous amounts of money to label deaths as COVID deaths in order to juice societal fear, or the so-called overworked hospital workers were performing elaborate Tiktok dancing videos because hospitals were empty, or the rigidly enforced ubiquitous mask wearing and social distancing, or COVID emergency payments from the government not to work, or a tremendous loss of private-sector jobs, or the closure of small and mid-sized businesses while large businesses remained open, etc. Some of these were points discussed in detail here. Nor am I going to focus on the deadliness of the untested, experimental mRNA vaccines which 81% of the U.S. population got at least one dose and apparently 70% received boosters5, which have killed and maimed a tremendous number of people and which has been deliberately suppressed by the establishment to try to preserve their credibility; these arguments have been made persuasively by others elsewhere. Grant Smith has correctly called it a violation of the Nuremberg code around medical experimentation.

Of note is that COVID provided the justification for near-universal mail-in voting:

Trump correctly stated on April 7:

Now, mail ballots — they cheat.  Okay?  People cheat.  Mail ballots are a very dangerous thing for this country, because they’re cheaters.  They go and collect them.  They’re fraudulent in many cases.  You got to vote.  And they should have voter ID, by the way.  If you want to really do it right, you have voter ID. …

These mailed ballots come in.  The mailed ballots are corrupt, in my opinion.  And they collect them, and they get people to go in and sign them.  And then they — they’re forgeries in many cases.  It’s a horrible thing.

A whole slew of mainstream media articles attacked Trump for this, but he was correct. If vote-by-mail did not accord a giant advantage to Democrats – and not just by expanding voter access, but by allowing massive unsupervised ballot stuffing – they would not have pushed so incredibly hard for it. Trump suggested in July postponing the elections as a result but was ignored. In 2022 Democrat operative Marc Elias would gloat that the postal service opened a permanent political division dedicated to the delivery of mail-in voting. Ballot harvesting is also now legal (especially the practice of mailing ballots unsolicited to all registered voters) and recent Republican attempt to “ballot harvest back” is quite stupid because the vast majority of Republicans already vote in person while a huge number of Democrats – low IQ and low time-horizon – don’t vote at all except via this method, and also post office workers may mishandle Republican-voting ballots (so if you vote, go vote in person). “Republicans” are Orwell’s Outer Party and they exist to intentionally lose.

The point is to point out that the commonly understood history surrounding the rise of COVID itself is false, it was entirely a creation of the transnational security state in league with the owners of the media, and it was essentially the launch of the establishment coup against Trump’s presidency that would lead into the 2020 election and create negative reverberations on all national elections moving forward.

---

The rigged Democrat primaries

As mentioned earlier in the essay, Joe Biden was picked to be the Democrat nominee for 2020 by the DNC behind the scenes as a continuation of Obama’s presidency. He would do whatever he was told. The primaries began in February 2020. He was up against Bernie Sanders, who was sidelined in the 2016 primaries by the DNC using underhanded and duplicitous tactics that angered many left-populists, tactics the DNC hoped to avoid this time around; Elizabeth Warren, who faked her Native American history and was dubbed “Pocahantas” by Trump; 5’5” Michael Bloomberg who ran as a vanity project and threw large sums of money around casually; and Pete Buttigieg, a homosexual CIA agent who hated white, heterosexual Middle America with a passion. Here were the results for the first three states:

While there are strategies to running for president in these primaries, note how Biden curiously came in a distant fourth place in Iowa, fifth place in New Hampshire, and barely second place in Nevada, with leftist-populist Bernie Sanders convincingly winning the states. These are not the results of a popular candidate. The fix was in, though, and the Super Tuesday results overwhelmingly placed him as the front-runner. Sanders, who was willing to play left-populist but was ultimately answerable to the DNC, allowed himself to be bought off with more vacation homes (he owned three homes as of 2019) and he “united the party” and supported Biden. Good boy.

---

The lead-up to the general election

Trump’s 2020 election strategy was quite different from 2016. In 2016 the media covered him as a clown buffoon figure who was destined to lose and ruin the Republican party so there was lots of attention on his endless, well populated rallies. In 2020 due to COVID he couldn’t hold rallies – which were his greatest strength – and the media would not cover his campaign appearances. His campaign manager Brad Parscale who participated in the 2016 campaign was removed in July and then arrested for being suicidal in September. He downplayed his support for white Middle America and tried hard to bolster his support among black Americans. In general, as opposed to the bombast rebel shooting from the hip in 2016, in 2020 he wanted to appear presidential and safe to attract those who had been turned off by his presentation and style previously.

Because of three years of the media screeching at a 24/7/365 fever-pitch that Trump was the modern equivalent of Hitler, though, he was not a very popular president. In part the perceived strength of the economy (held up by ultra-low rates and unlimited printed Federal Reserve debt) put a floor to his support which never dropped below mid to low 40%. Biden, heavily supported by the media as the “alternative to Trump”, even though he curiously lacked any specifics on how he would govern, started out 2020 polling strongly in the 50%’s. Here’s a chart of relative support throughout 2020 along with key events:

Biden maintained a relatively strong lead in polling which was bolstered by Trump’s impeachment, COVID hysteria, and the FBI/CIA-sponsored antifa riots where they burned down small and mid-sized businesses in large crowds even though the rest of the country was forcibly locked down. However, one may note that it required constant effort to keep Trump’s popularity suppressed, and the betting market odds at times still favored Trump because of the enthusiasm of his base support and there being no enthusiasm for the propped-up “anti-Trump” candidate:

The October surprise of Hunter Biden’s laptop documents containing incriminating evidence of Joe Biden’s corruption such as an email containing “10 [percent of a corrupt business deal] for the big guy [i.e. Biden]” was completely ignored by the media (including by Fox) and hence made very little impact. Fifty-one high level intelligence agents publicly, knowingly and falsely claimed that the laptop was fake.

There were two debates between Trump and Biden which were both forgettable. The expectations for Biden were manipulated by the media to be rock-bottom ahead of time by focusing on his poor mental health so that when he beat those low expectations while hopped on a very powerful but unknown drug cocktail the media proclaimed him the victor of the debates. They’re doing that again now.

---

The election

Just like for the 2016 election I and millions of other Americans stayed up all night watching the election results in real time, which provided a benefit to such observers as the record was quickly distorted in the “historical record.” Of course, this time the New York Times had learned its lesson and did not offer the wonderful live meter that it had offered in 2016 except to a limited extent for three swing states, where they had Trump winning by a wide degree before the vote count was stopped.

What happened was this: Trump won every bellwether county. The bellwether counties are those that historically predicted who would win the election. From 1980 to 2016, 19 counties voted for the winner of the presidential election every single time. The most impressive of those was Valencia County, New Mexico, which voted for the victor in every presidential election from 1952 to 2016. But in 2020, 18 of these 19 “bellwether counties” voted for Donald Trump. Just one — Clallam County, Washington — voted for Joe Biden. Trump won Florida by 3.5% versus having won it by a razor thin margin in 2016, as an example. He was cruising to victory.

But then deep in the night multiple critical swing states stopped counting results for a period of about four hours. At hearings on 2020 election irregularities in Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, many GOP poll observers testified about being harassed, blocked, or even removed from the counting facilities, and many witnessed irregular and suspicious activities.  There was a claim of a burst water pipe at a ballot processing site in Georgia’s Fulton County, where Republican election observers had to leave the site while Democrat vote counters stayed behind and boarded up the windows – it later turned out that there was no broken water pipe.

After a long delay, votes in these critical states started up again, but the results were entirely different from what came previously. This came to be known as the infamous hockey stick graph:

When Georgia Governor Kemp wavered about investigating voter fraud with signature audits, the car of his daughter’s boyfriend was blown up and the boyfriend killed as a warning to Kemp – he backed down immediately thereafter.

According to this now defunct but wonderful “elections irregularity” website, Biden got nearly 12 million more votes than President Obama did in 2008, yet he had fewer votes than Obama in 70.7% of counties (2,228 out of 3,152).  Additionally “Republican House candidates won 27 out of the 27 races that were considered “toss-ups” by the New York Times, and it is extremely rare for an incumbent president to win seats in the house and lose re-election. No presidential incumbent in the past 100 years has increased his vote and lost re-election. No incumbent that has won over 75% of the primary vote (Trump received 94%) has ever lost re-election.” Ben Turner, a fraud analyst also found that there was an average 2-3% shift for Biden in counties that used Dominion electronic voting software. There are more details here. There was also massive irregularities with mail-in voting.

Regardless, Fox News on Rupert Murdoch’s order was the first one to stick the shiv in and declare that the swing state of Arizona was a Biden victory, shifting momentum at a critical time even though it was far too soon to make that call. The furthest right figure allowed on media at the time, CIA asset Tucker Carlson, was ordered not to claim election fraud and he sat there silently and obeyed like a good boy. Fox was still sued into oblivion and coughed up almost a billion dollars to the establishment because a couple of its other media personalities commented on election fraud.

To sum it up: the bellwether counties and the early election results demonstrate that Trump won the 2020 election. The four hour pause to ballot stuff combined with electronic voting manipulation and mail-in ballot fraud turned the tide resulting in the hockey stick on the above chart. This was a successful coup pulled off by the establishment against Trump, utilizing a combination of the FBI, CIA, mainstream media owners, and key personnel within the CDC, Dominion, the post office and various lower-level personnel in critical swing states. Then they sued anyone that pointed it out (not just Fox but many prominent media personalities).

One may also note that Pfizer and its collaborator BioNTech withheld early study results indicating that their COVID-19 vaccine prevented more than 90% of infections until right after the 11/9 election for political reasons. These study results were a blatant lie, of course, and were subsequently repeatedly revised downwards, but such “positive” news would have given Trump a boost if released before the election.6

---

The aftermath

After the in-your-face election fraud Trump cried foul and arranged an election protest at the capitol on January 6, 2021. After various speeches – including where Trump told the crowd to remain peaceful – deep state agent Mike Pence refused to assist Trump’s efforts, part of the crowd was led to the capitol building where it was opened up by the police and some portion entered (encouraged by FBI agent Ray Epps along with FBI asset and likely homosexual Nick Fuentes (on video here) who has not been charged), toured the capitol and then left with very little property damage. The FBI had prepared a fake pipe bomb plot as a backup to use in case the crowd would not fall into the trap but they did not have to use it.

During the day only one person was killed – Ashli Babbitt, a Trump supporter killed by an officer within the capitol itself. This was a minor loss for the establishment as they hope to have these type of key events consecrated in the blood of at least one of the intended victims (the intended victims being the D.C. establishment itself), which must be an occult practice. They had the media blast for awhile that four or five capitol officers died during 1/6, but it turns out none of them did; the closest they could get was one who died of an unrelated medical issue a day or two later.

Anyway, the crowds disbursed and January 6 was used to impeach Trump a second time (which also failed), and then the establishment slowly and then methodically started arrested January 6 attendees and throwing them into prison with show trials. These efforts have only sped up into 2024 with plans to indict a total of 2,000-2,500 people. Those who participated in Trump’s claims of election fraud have been litigated into oblivion such as Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Alex Jones and many others. Trump’s voice was silenced on January 7, 2021 on Twitter – the primary method he used to speak to the public without intermediaries – and he remained suspended until he launched Truth Social, a strange social media project headed by Devin Nunes which almost no one uses and likely brings in very little revenue but which is apparently and suspiciously worth billions of dollars on the stock market.7

Trump issued various pardons on his way out of office such as to Jared Kushner’s father, the Israeli handler of Jonathan Pollard, Sholom Rubashkin, and also to Steve Bannon, although he failed to pardon either Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Ross Ulbricht or many of his supporters including his 1/6 supporters. Apparently he was told behind closed doors that if he pardoned Assange he would be convicted by the Republican Senate in the second impeachment.

---

Summing it up

After the election Time Magazine came out with a gloating victory lap article where various establishment figures bragged about how they “fortified” the election against democracy. The article states: “That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.” In a real sense the hoopla around January 6 was intended to deflect and obscure the Color Revolution coup which was enacted against America, and it was successful in doing so.

Here’s the thing about power: first you get it, then you use it. That’s how it works. You win and then write the history books portraying yourself as moral and your enemies as evil. The establishment knows how to keep and use power and Trump, who floundered around and wasted – only to a limited extent his own fault given how entrenched his opponents were – his own opportunities. His mentality was too civic nationalist, it was too trusting of existing institutions (he loved reading the New York Times, watching Fox News, and feuding with Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough, for example), it was too set in the past. But this was to some extent to his favor – he was law abiding, where he never took any of the countless opportunities to twist or break the law for short-term advantage which could then really be used to crucify him. He was the opposite of the modern-day Hitler the media portrayed him as at maximum volume endlessly for four years; he was philo-semitic, pro-law and order, and merely wanted to reform institutions as opposed to any radicalism. He even tried to take credit for the horrific COVID vaccines rolled out in 2021 via the insane Operation Warp Speed, which his base constantly boo’d him over in rallies until he stopped talking about it. Because of this dichotomy his “deep state” enemies ultimately revealed themselves from the shadows for all the world to see.

And this reveal has forced the “deep state” to continue to morph from a soft power to a hard power mode of governance. Biden’s presidency is really quite boring in its evil, where his handlers (as he himself is a puppet) started the new forever-war of Ukraine (which may intentionally spiral into World War 3) and snuck a mandatory draft registration into the National Defense Authorization Act, they tried to force-vaccinate experimental, dangerous mRNA vaccines onto the entire U.S. population under threat of job loss while trying to institute permanent vaccine passports, they made the civil service in D.C. essentially impossible to fire, they opened the southern borders and let in roughly 20 million Democrat-leaning future voters as they try to turn the country into a one-party state based on the California model, they solidified permanent fraudulent vote-by mail, his administration continued ramping up spying on and prosecuting their political enemies (including Douglass Mackey for shitposting), they are imprisoning their political opposition (Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort) and otherwise trying to bankrupt them via lawfare (Mike Flynn), their allies intentionally inflamed race relations, the online censorship has only gotten worse and worse, they continue to appoint venomous non-white judicial commissars, trillions of funds continued to be printed and wasted which are used to ramp up food and housing inflation while propping up a fraudulent stock market and pushing the country toward “net zero” emissions by 2050. I have no intention to cover this in depth as it really is just a continuation of the globohomo trend toward neoliberal feudalism that has been partaken in by Obama, George W. Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr., and every other modern-era president. As Trump said soon after he took office “I’m a nationalist and a globalist – I’m both.” Being “both” separated him from everyone else in power in the West in the modern era, even though being “both” was always insufficient.

I wrote previously in July 2023 how I expected Trump to ultimately be imprisoned, likely for life from one or multiple trials as revenge for bucking the establishment and also to be smashed as the symbol of white middle class populism.8 His recent conviction for campaign finance violations (I guess? No one knows what he was convicted for) regarding Stormy Daniels was nonsensical and a continuation of the twisting and destruction of the rule of law and, in addition to the threat of imprisonment (not to mention multiple future trials), it may hurt him among some undecided independent voters. There are also unpopular potential abortion restriction measures on the ballots of multiple swing states including Pennsylvania, Arizona and Nevada that will be beneficial to Biden and detrimental to Trump (indeed, the timing of overturning Roe v. Wade right before the 2022 elections was seemingly designed to prevent a red wave). That said, there are also a number of signs that the establishment may allow Trump to win in 2024 and govern as a sick facsimile of himself, a kind of skin-suited Jeb Bush type, or to crash the economy around him9 and blame him and populism for the failure of the existing system. These signs include:

1. Trump’s other trials have been pushed out past the election instead of cascading;
2. Trump caved entirely on the fraud $95 billion Ukraine/Israel/Taiwan “aid” bill, suggesting a backroom deal may have been worked out;
3. Within the “aid” bill was a provision triggering automatic impeachment if Trump tries to pull out of Ukraine;
4. Biden passed an executive order that will make it essentially impossible to fire any of the establishment civil service workers in DC10; and
5. Trump stated that never-Trump Nikki Haley will have a role in his administration again.

In this manner the establishment is back to its usual pattern of playing both sides so they win regardless of whatever the population chooses. They seem to no longer see Trump as much of a threat, if any; he has been absorbed. Can you see Trump evicting even a significant portion of the twenty million illegals that Biden’s administration has let in over the past four years? I think the answer is a clear no.

The Trump phenomenon showed that the support for civic nationalism and populism is broad-based but also shallow: the American population is fat, lazy, entitled, and completely addicted to its creature comforts. The four years of the establishment illegally stymying Trump, the false COVID narrative and the stolen 2020 election showed that the vast majority of people will put up with whatever the establishment decides. The right is too weak to be a physical threat and the establishment does not seem to care about being seen as lacking legitimacy. So what if it’s more costly to govern under a boots-on-face model instead of soft power? Plenty of regimes have lasted this way for decades or centuries. And with woke AI coming online, CBDCs and social credit scores, dissidents can and will simply be cut out from participating in society much as the Chinese do. Regular steps are being made on this front constantly and quietly, such as the Biden administration announcing that they want to scan your phone using AI. This will continue regardless of who is president.

Ultimately, Trump may have simply come too late. His instincts were in the right place, much like his hero Andrew Jackson, but the intense hostility of the FBI, CIA, DOJ, both houses of Congress, the Judiciary, the Federal Reserve, combined with the declining morals of the general population, a huge national deficit and debt, as well as the globalized structure of the modern world was likely too much of an obstacle for any one man to overcome even if Trump had better political and administrative abilities. He reminds me of Julian the Apostate who I wrote about previously, the last Hellenist emperor who tried to stem the tide of rising Christianity — but he had come too late. Perhaps if Julian had come fifty or a hundred years earlier he very well could have succeeded, but the forces had advanced far past the point of no return. What comes next seems like it will be either intensified Rothschild-fueled neoliberal feudalism and far diminished quality of life for those in the West (perhaps involving a planned regional or global war, perhaps not), or it could be that based on demographic and immigration trends Islam may have the final laugh — unless something radical changes among the general population to bring about a transvaluation of values away from egalitarianism.

The upcoming 2024 election is ultimately a binary choice: do you choose to vote? If you vote, who will you vote for? Personally, I will likely vote for Trump (unless he substantially cucks out further before the election11), although my expectations will be very low. I understand those who feel embittered and betrayed by his rapid half-hearted globalist turn after using intense populist rhetoric during his 2015-2016 campaign, a sentiment often expressed by Morgthorak the Undead, and his repeated shilling of the ultra-dangerous COVID vaccine which was and is indefensible as aux playing@radio phanærozoic points out. There’s a chance, however small, that Trump holds a grudge over how he was treated since 2016 and that he’s learned something useful from it, and it also still feels like a bit of a protest vote against the system given the ongoing attempts to imprison him. The alternatives – don’t vote, vote for Biden for “acceleration” or RFK for his COVID position (even though he’s otherwise a standard liberal and has no chance of winning) – all seem poor to me. But yes, there’s a very real chance that if he wins that he will govern like Jeb Bush.

Still, in a way Trump’s actions as president were masterful — the deck was stacked against him with an establishment united in its desire to destroy him, and he couldn’t push back effectively against them even if he wanted to because the population was not ready for it; Americans have been quite effectively propagandized based on its history and culture to abhor the idea of a strongman “dictator” or “king”. Sitting there and absorbing endless abuse had its own strange effect, though. People didn’t know about or accept the notion of the “deep state” until deep into his presidency as he got used and abused like a punching bag. A segment of the population is more ready today for radical action, I think, although it is still far from understanding the central bank parasitic structure overlaying the West’s core belief in egalitarianism which is necessary for fundamental change.

As I wrap this up, a few words. Ultimately I believe that narratives are more persuasive than facts, that people prefer to think in terms of good guys and bad guys even though reality contains shades of gray, and I hope I’ve painted a countervailing narrative diametrically at odds with the official story. It is by presenting an alternative morality, not facts, that has the most potential to undermine the establishment’s promotion of neoliberal feudalism. If you can’t beat them in the short-term on the battlefield or in the voting booth, you can at least focus longer-term on undermining their credibility. And keep in mind that just as humanity tried to build the mythical Tower of Babel, it eventually collapsed and resulted in a dispersion of mankind and a confusion of tongues; this one-world government will too eventually collapse sooner or later.

If you’ve made to the end of this series, thanks for reading. It is through mutual respect, friendship, and a shared vision far outside that of existing power structures and establishment morality where a future has to be forged, and I hope this series made a small contribution toward that endeavor.

See you at the next post, which will likely be in two weeks.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 He represented the Obama wing and he would eagerly do whatever he was told, lacking internal beliefs while loving graft and weirdly sexualizing very young girls, including his own daughter.

2 Sweden to a small degree, Africa, Belarus and North Korea, basically; so-called Western hating countries such as China, Russia and Iran were fully onboard with the global agenda.

3 It’s unclear whether “COVID-19” as a unique strain of cold/flu has ever been isolated, and given the problems identified in this article about the PCR tests both identifying COVID-19 as well as how easy it was to politically manipulate the numbers of cases depending on the number of cycles used, and also given how the establishment likes to control the dialectic on both sides of a conversation, I am highly suspicious of the so-called “lab leak” theory and lean toward believing “COVID-19” was simply rebranded flu.

4 Trump correctly thought Fauci was intentionally trying to damage his presidency for political reasons; Trump likely planned to fire him if he won the 2020 election, being unable to do so due to political considerations prior to it.

5 This was likely significantly inflated in order to trigger herd instinct compliance. I did not receive any COVID vaccine.

6 Pfizer was granted immunity from liability for releasing an ultra-dangerous and untested “experimental” mRNA poison, but if the news had been released prior to the election it likely would have tipped some undecided voters toward Trump. Pfizer publicly announced that politics wasn’t the reason for the timing of the announcement, that November 9 is just when they had the data available, what a coincidence, which was echoed and boosted by so-called “fact checkers” to the public, but this was an obvious lie.

7 Why didn’t Trump establish an alternate platform before? It was well known how far leftist Twitter was and controlled by FBI and CIA agents. He could have done weekly fireside chats over the radio or television, or moved forward with Lewandowski’s proposed media room operation. He had a lot of options, none pursued at the time. But why did the establishment later let him raise such huge amounts of money? This is a good piece of evidence that he is controlled and perhaps has been controlled for at least a number of years; some like Bacon Commander believes he has been controlled from the start.

8 A Trump imprisonment may be used by the FBI to institute false-flag “right wing terror attacks” in order to then crack down much more heavily on white right wing populism and/or as an excuse to postpone the 2024 elections.

With that said, politics is downstream of culture which is downstream of metaphysical beliefs, and the lower one goes on that scale toward shorter-term politics the harder it becomes to predict specific outcomes. My general 2024 predictions were made at the end of 2023 here.

9 See this post by Peter St Onge about consumers being financially tapped out or here how the New York Fed claims “Americans” expect mortgage rates to rise to 10%, which I read as predictive programming.

10 As we saw with executive orders under Trump, while one may theoretically rescind an executive order with another one the establishment judiciary is eagerly willing to block such rescissions.

11 For example, his short-list of VP candidates is pretty bad, and if he picks a really bad VP that may have some impact on my decision-making process. There are three factors important in a VP: loyalty, ideological commonality and boost to odds of winning. Aside from the no-name recognition guys who I havn’t looked into (Doug Burgum and Byron Donalds), Ben Carson would be loyal but he is not very high IQ and J.D. Vance has some ideological commonality with populists (which is questionable), but the others seem to bring nothing to the table. Personally I think Rand Paul would be the best choice due to his excellent voting record in the Senate; Mike Flynn would also be a good choice.

This is part 2 of 3 of a series looking back at the campaign and presidency of Donald Trump from a dissident perspective. Part 1 dealt with the Trump 2015-2016 campaign, this part will look at Trump’s presidency, and Part 3 will review COVID and the 2020 election.

Welcome back. In Part 1 we examined the history of Trump’s 2015-2016 presidential campaign from its humble beginning through the primaries where, via a combination of Trump’s excellent Twitter and debate skills, his ability to brand his opponents using fun and derogative labels, heavy media attention, sophisticated targeted social media advertisements, along with his ability to nimbly switch campaign managers to cater to the requirements of the moment, he won the nomination and then went on to defeat Hillary Clinton in the general election by razor thin margins against almost insurmountable odds. Very few people thought he would win, although Steve Bannon ridiculously said Trump had 100% chance of winning. Even Trump didn’t think he would win and was shocked and perhaps horrified that he did. It was a true feel-good Rocky Balboa moment, a great David-and-Goliath story, but in Part 2 the “Trump Train” gets derailed – and we will look at why. This section is fairly technical as the maneuvers used against Trump were legalistic, obfuscating, indirect, and with plausible deniability for each act to the maximum extent possible; this is why both James Comey (FBI head), Andy McCabe (acting FBI head after Comey was fired), Bill Priestap (who worked under McCabe), Lisa Page (who conspired with Peter Strzok to overthrow Trump) were all attorneys. So bring your big-boy hat for this part; Part 3 will be easier to read.

Before getting into the details of Trump’s presidency, though, let’s set the stage.

Trump’s shock win created a number of problems for multiple parties. Trump hadn’t thought of the day after the election; his energy and resources went into the campaign and he had insufficient staff prepared to transition to the presidency. Not only that, but the Republicans with government experience were almost all never-Trumpers: to get a sense of it, former president George W. Bush (2000-2008), 2008 Republican nominee John McCain and 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney all hated Trump and did not vote for him. Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell and Republican House leader Paul Ryan both hated Trump. And this feeling extended down to the staff and personnel level. Although Trump’s heart was at least somewhat geared toward populism, there was simply almost no existing bench of populists to draw from who had prior government experience. He was about to enter shark infested waters unarmed and dressed in bright yum-yum yellow shorts, covered in plankton.

There were different problems for the establishment. Although it had prepared the Steele Dossier as what Peter Strzok would call an “insurance policy” against Trump’s possible win, it was caught flat-footed. The security state had been on top for too long; they had gotten a bit soft and complacent, and given Trump was seen as such a clown figure who was so far behind in the polls they didn’t prepare more for his possible win. There were certain macro plans concealed from the managerial overclass in D.C. that voted overwhelmingly Democrat (90.86% for Hillary and 4.09% for Trump) pertaining to Agenda 2030 and beyond to dramatically lower the quality of life for those living in the West – how would these plans be affected by a bombastic populist in the White House? What if Trump was effective in pursuing his agenda?

Worse than stymying the globalist proactive agenda, though, there were very significant defensive concerns as well: the FBI had been spying on Trump’s entire campaign using the NSA search databases, and before that the spying apparatus had been weaponized by Obama and Eric Holder after Obama’s 2012 election win. The intensity and depth of the spying made Watergate look like a walk in the park. If Trump’s administration somehow managed to prove criminality on this front, it could not only set back the globalist plan but ran an unknown risk of dismantling it entirely. On top of that, as an outsider without blackmail hanging over his head like for every officially approved politician Trump threatened the sinecures of the Washington establishment; the unelected civil service sucked down massive taxpayer funds and benefits while doing very little actually work, and if he managed to figure out the labyrinth D.C. system it could be a threat to their livelihoods.

It was unacceptable. Trump had to be stopped; his agenda, his personnel, his vision. Eradicated. Smart, ambitious people had to become fearful that if they worked with Trump the media would brand them the Devil, their careers would be destroyed and they would run the risk of imprisonment. David Plouffe, Obama’s 2008 campaign manager, summed up the sentiment: “It is not enough to simply beat Trump. He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.” “His kind” meant non-controlled populists from outside the system. They would do whatever it took: twist and break any law, turn the media’s hysteria up to maximum for years to rile up the general population, especially women and non-whites, and engage in lawfare practices and smears. As political theorist Carl Schmitt famously said, “Sovereign is he who decides on the exception.” A lot of exceptions were about to be made – but, as we will see, at a significant cost (whether intentional or unintentional).

The basics should be mentioned. There are three branches of government which are meant to serve as checks and balances on each other: the Executive branch headed by the President (in charge of the Department of Justice, the FBI and other government departments, along with serving as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces), the Legislative branch (Senate and House), and the Judicial branch. Both the Legislative and Judicial branches were utterly hostile to Trump, and as we will see he was unable to gain control over the Executive branch which initiated a slow-moving coup attempt against him through the DOJ and FBI.

There are three intertwined topics discussed herein: (1) the establishment’s attempts to stymie Trump from accomplishing anything (via the counter-intelligence operation, lawfare, and extreme media hysteria); (2) Trump’s attempts at effectuating policy changes, both via executive action and in his interactions with the House and Senate; and (3) Trump’s personnel choices. I considered offering a simple chronological timeline herein, but because of the complexities of the issues separating it by category makes for a better read.

Let’s continue.

---

The Counter-intelligence operation

The Washington establishment attempted to paralyze the Trump administration from the get-go using a counter-intelligence investigation into Trump himself. These attempts would lead to the appointment of a Special Counsel who would prevent Trump from uncovering prior wrongdoing under the shield of “active investigations” (because if Trump declassified information subject to that investigation it would be branded as obstruction of justice and result in impeachment and criminal charges) and to put him on the defensive so he would waste time and energy, also hurting his ability to fire unelected civil service enemies or to advance his agenda.

The counter-intelligence operation was officially opened on July 31, 2016. The FBI used the Clinton-funded Steele Dossier (through Fusion GPS intermediary, working ironically with Russians like Igor Danchenko) as a significant part of its basis for opening its counter-intelligence operation against Carter Page, a low level Trump staffer and FBI informant (“operational contact”) in order to “legally” spy on the Trump campaign. Why did it matter that the FBI spied on Page? Because the FBI could legally spy on anyone within two-steps of a counter-intelligence target, i.e. any of Carter Page’s contacts and any of the contacts of his contacts. That meant anyone in the campaign. The Nunes memo in 2018 corroborated these allegations.

Additionally intelligence agent Stefan Halper was used to claim on September 19, 2016 that another very low level Trump staffer George Papadopoulos was a Russian spy, enabling the first FISA FBI warrant. James Comey did not inform congressional oversight (the “Gang of Eight”) of this counter-intelligence operation against Trump despite being legally required to do so because of its inherently fraudulent, criminal nature and when called out on it in March 2017 by Elise Stefanik he blamed one of his subordinates, Bill Priestap. You can see how flat footed he is caught with the line of questioning in the first three minutes of this video:

To be clear, this wasn’t the start of FBI spying on Trump or his campaign, which started as soon as he began running. Spying in this context means use of the NSA search databases which suck up all electronic data and which has everyone’s phone, internet, and email records, along with access to your various cameras and microphones via Total Information Awareness. The FBI had access to this database which they routinely abuse, and they even installed a terminal within the D.C. office of Perkins Coie, the law firm Hillary used, to make the process even easier and to create a legal privilege shield. A declassified FISA report stated that the FBI ran 3.1 million illegal FISA searches on American citizens in 2017 alone, compared to 7,500 combined searches by the NSA and CIA in the same year. In 2023 the DOJ Inspector General revealed that more than 10,000 federal employees have access to the NSA database for surveillance inquiries, more than 3.4 million search queries were ran between 12/1/2020 and 11/30/2021, and approximately 30% were outside the rules and regulations that govern warrantless search, showing the pattern of illegal governmental behavior had only expanded – but keep in mind that the epicenter of the criminal activity is the National Security Division within the DOJ and it is exempt from any Inspector General oversight.  Anyway, the FBI can as of 2020 look at your web browsing history, emails, anything you have ever typed on your phone or computer and any audio you have made in the vicinity of your digital devices legally without a warrant.  Then they use parallel construction to prosecute, i.e. constructing a legal basis not based upon the spying, a strategy used for a long time now.  See also the Room 641A controversy, a telecom interception facility operated by AT&T for the NSA as part of its warrantless surveillance program as far back as 2003 and a facility that is likely copied throughout the country. This setup, i.e. legalized ubiquitous spying by the intelligence apparatus combined with woke AI and CBDCs, will eventually form the basis of assigning Chinese-style social credit scores to everyone in the country, cutting out dissidents from the system entirely and stealing their wealth.

Anyway the head of the NSA, Michael Rogers, was aware of the spying on the Trump transition team and went to go meet with them without approval from higher ups on November 17, 2016. He was not part of the Obama-team criminal enterprise and because of this the criminals wanted him removed from his post as reported by the Washington Post the very next day (falsely claiming it was a recommendation from October). It’s likely he informed the transition team that there was an improper FISA warrant focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks (and which found nothing, but the spying continued), and as a result of informing them the transition team immediately switched out of Trump Tower.

The goal of the FBI running this operation, later dubbed “Spygate”, was to initiate what became the Trump-Russian collusion scam. By claiming Trump was an agent of or working in direct collusion with Russia he would not be able to implement his agenda with that cloud hanging over him, while giving Republican “decepticons” in Congress, led by Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, an excuse not to cooperate with him on his agenda.

The leaked texts by FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page showed the typical elite perspective: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy [McCabe]’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40” and, in one particular message when Page asked if Trump would ever become president, Strzok reportedly replied, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.” Strzok was the #2 counter-intelligence officer and he stated “The [Obama] White House is running this”. There was a cover story that Strzok and Page were having an affair to explain their 50,000 text messages over the course of a year – most of which have not been released and were permanently wiped, and most of the limited released texts were redacted – but that was likely a lie and their communications were simply about undermining and overthrowing Trump. Both Strzok and Page were married and remained married despite the alleged “cheating”. Lying constantly to the public for ulterior motives was and remains par for the course; why would it be any different here? Strzok and Page were later fired after these text messages came out and Strzok gave incredibly smug and strange Congressional testimony. Look at his movements and physiognomy to get an understanding of this kind of individual:

Trump fired FBI head James Comey, who gave critical support for this operation, on May 9, 2017 acting on the recommendation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for a series of insubordinate actions.1 This wasn’t really a problem for the team acting under Comey as acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe was fully onboard with the agenda of Spygate. Indeed, in some ways it was a good thing as it could be used as the predicate to paralyze Trump’s administration through the appointment of a Special Counsel; with National Security Advisor Mike Flynn out of the way and globalists who replaced him installed in the NSC (discussed in the personnel section below) there were no expected problems from that angle. A Special Counsel had to be appointed by the head of the Department of Justice, though, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions was perceived as a Trump loyalist (52-47 Senate confirmation vote, showing he wasn’t very well liked by the establishment despite decades as a Senator), while his deputy Rod Rosenstein would do what he was told (sworn in on a 94-6 Senate vote, showing his globalist loyalties). It’s curious why Sessions picked Rosenstein as his deputy; perhaps he had to in order to get Senate approval.

Department of Justice officials came to Sessions and told him that he had a conflict of interest as an early Trump supporter and because of two incidental, forgettable interactions with the Ambassador from Russia which he had forgotten about when asked about it at his confirmation hearing. He was advised to recuse himself from any investigation into Trump by the Department of Justice. Meanwhile another point of leverage was pursued: in March 2017, Senators asked the FBI to conduct a criminal perjury investigation into Sessions based on these two brief, forgettable interactions. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe assigned FBI agents to investigate. (McCabe was later fired for lying under oath with a mountain of evidence about leaking spun narratives damaging to Trump. Because of the sympathy in D.C. for his criminal actions, his firing was later reversed and his legal fees paid for by the government.)

Sessions acquiesced to the demands of the DOJ officials and recused himself from their investigation into Trump’s Russia connections. If he hadn’t have done this the perjury investigation would have been used to force him out; one way or another he would have been made to recuse. Trump was furious, rightly considering this an act of deep betrayal by Sessions; he would never have appointed a man as head of the Department of Justice if he had known he would be so willing to roll over for one’s enemies. Sessions would later lose his attempt to run again for Senate because of his lack of support from the Republican base which turned on him due to his betrayal.

On May 17, 2017 Rod Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate links between the Trump administration and Russia. Mueller was just a figurehead, though, and the same operatives in charge of the counter-intelligence operation against Trump continued their work under Mueller. To a significant extent the process was the punishment as the investigation snared a large number of Trump allies who had to spend extreme amounts of time and money trying to defend themselves.

The investigation would go on until March 2019 when newly appointed Attorney General and establishment lackey William Barr would wrap it up, prepared to move on to the next step of the establishment narrative. This will be discussed further in the personnel section, but keep in mind that any cabinet post must be approved by the Senate and roughly a third of the Republican Senate is directly controlled by arch-globalist Mitch McConnell, while most of the others are milquetoast. Therefore the only confirmable personnel would be disloyal globalists. Barr would prevent sunlight from being cast on undesirable establishment activities, fail to prosecute criminal misdeeds and work to undermine Trump at key opportune moments such as his total unwillingness to investigate 2020 election fraud.

Mueller ultimately found no actionable charges against Trump and he came across as a doddering, forgetful fool in his testimony to Congress, but his objective had been accomplished: to paralyze the Trump administration and run out the clock on the 115th heavily Republican majority Congress – the newly installed 116th Congress had a Democrat House and only a razor-thin Republican Senate – and prevent sunlight being shone on the FBI’s extreme criminal activity by hiding it under the guise of an “active investigation.” Later on in 2022 the FBI would raid Mar-a-lago to get back the physical copies of the documents that proved FBI/DOJ criminality from Trump, which he had held on to but was unable to release due to the “active investigation”, a motive that was never explained to the clueless public.

Note that more than two dozen phones belonging to members of Mueller’s team were wiped clean of data before the Justice Department’s inspector general could review them. Andrew Weismann, a hateful and deranged top prosecutor on Mueller’s team, “accidentally wiped” his cell phone, causing the data to be lost. The cell phone of FBI lawyer Lisa Page was misplaced by the special counsel’s office. When it was eventually obtained by the DOJ inspector general the phone had been restored to its factory settings, wiped of all data. The phone of FBI agent Peter Strzok was also obtained by the inspector general’s office which found “no substantive texts, notes or reminders” on it. The DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz would go on to whitewash the illegal Crossfire Hurricane investigation by claiming that their actions were negligent and not based on “political bias or improper motivation influenced”.

The Democrat-controlled House in 2019 ensured that Trump would not be able to pass meaningful legislation and hobbled him with two House initiated impeachment votes. The first one was for looking to investigate Biden’s publicly stated corruption within Ukraine: he bragged about forcing Ukraine to fire its anti-corruption prosecutor or lose $1 billion dollars of aid (“If the prosecutor’s not fired you’re not getting the money [$1 billion]. Well son of a bitch, he got fired, and they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”) Here’s the video:

An investigation into establishment corruption could have put a major dent in their longer-term plans for Ukraine. The country had undergone a color revolution by the CIA in 2014 and the establishment was preparing for a transition away from the 20-year Afghanistan war, which nimbly transitioned into the endless Ukraine/Russia war where many tens or hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars are being funneled through Ukraine back into the hands of the transnational security elite. It would have been wholly inappropriate in their eyes to let Trump spoil the upcoming party or to reveal their activities. Many establishment Republicans were in on the charade including Mitt Romney. One may note with curiosity that liberal operative Norm Eisen drafted 10 articles of impeachment for the Democrats a full month before President Trump ever called the Ukraine President in 2018 and who personally served as special counsel litigating the Ukraine impeachment.

The second impeachment was for January 6, launched one week before his term expired and which will be discussed further in Part 3.

---

Utilizing the House and Senate to undermine the populist agenda

As mentioned in Part 1, the expected outcome of the 2016 elections was that the Republicans would control the House and Senate by a decent margin and Hillary would win the presidency. This gridlock would ensure business-as-usual for the uniparty and both the Republicans and Democrats could use the gridlock as an excuse for why they were unable to fulfill their respective agendas. While not a top priority, the establishment preferred to maintain the illusion of a two-party system when doing so would not conflict with larger goals.

Trump’s highly unexpected victory threw a wrench into these plans. The Republicans controlled the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, so they would have no excuse for not passing their stated agenda. This was a problem because they really did not want to pass any portion of Trump’s agenda to re-negotiate trade deals, to close the southern border, to get rid of DACA or to overturn Obamacare. McConnell had played a major role in destroying the Tea Party movement by behind-the-scenes maneuvers such as backing establishment candidates and withholding funds from populist candidates, and there was no way he was going to let populists fulfill their agenda here. He controlled roughly 1/3 of the Republican senators and he would strongly prefer to work with Democrats to undermine Trump. This post analyzed the voting record of the Republican senators and which concluded they were almost universally establishment-oriented and weak. On the House side Paul Ryan despised Trump although he was willing to work with him on certain issues like tax cuts for the ultra rich (Trump endorsed Paul Ryan to try to get into his good graces; Ryan would repay him by doing everything he could to impeach him).

McConnell prevented Trump from making any recess appointments, a highly unusual move showing beyond doubt how much he despised Republican populism. Also see here for more information.

McConnell also refused to change the legislative filibuster requirements to a simple majority instead of requiring 60 votes to overcome it, ignoring Trump’s request here and here to change the rules because otherwise Congress would remain paralyzed. This specific filibuster still stands today – and gridlock is not necessarily a bad thing, requiring a significant majority for major legislation can be good, but anyone with a brain knows it will be removed by Democrats as soon as it is politically expedient. Liberals play for keeps; decepticon Republicans fiddle weakly while Rome burns.

What did the Republican-dominated Congress deliver? With Trump’s approval it passed tax cuts for the ultra rich (and refused to remove the hedge fund carried interest tax loophole despite Trump promising to do so) and passed a bipartisan First Step Act to let felons out of prison. They failed to kill the bloated mess of Obamacare which drastically increased medical insurance prices for most citizens. John McCain cast the deciding vote as he was dying of brain cancer:

When McCain died the whole political establishment turned out to his funeral: Bush, Obama, Clinton, Cheney, Gore, the whole gamut. Only Trump was excluded as a political outsider. McCain embodied among the worst of globalist values: an endless appetite for war, corruption, graft, and lies.

Congress also passed cosmetic changes to NAFTA despite Trump’s campaign for radical reform, and Trump attempted a weak bit of a trade war with China with some Congressional support and which failed. The Republican controlled Congress was unwilling to pass funds for border security by building the wall, to deal with illegal aliens, or to pass a infrastructure bill – McConnell hated anything to do with American populism and he would ally with the Democrats to prevent it from happening although, as a very seasoned and skillful politician, he made sure to enact his moves behind closed doors. Maintaining institutional credibility in the eyes of the public for the Uniparty remained a priority – although not a top priority – for McConnell.

One accomplishment was that Trump worked with the Senate to appoint three Supreme Court justices. If Hillary had won the Court could have taken an alarming far-leftist turn. Trump’s justice picks were all varying degrees of bad – Gorsuch was okay to a limited extent while Amy Cohen Barrett is a moderate-leftist except on abortion, while Brett Kavanaugh is a crying feminist type reminiscent of a more liberal Jordan Peterson even though the same liberals almost lynched him. The only two “real conservatives” on the bench are Thomas and Alito.

---

Trump’s personnel choices

Trump’s personnel choices were widely perceived as one of the weakest points of Trump’s administration. His picks were generally geared toward globalists either out of necessity (there were very few populists with government experience and populists were not going to be confirmed for cabinet posts in the McConnell-dominated Senate, at least not after the earliest 2017 picks when Trump arguably had a bit of a mandate), or because he thought dealing with the administrative state would somehow be like hiring and firing employees in business, or out of listening to the wrong people (such as Jared Kushner), or out of laziness and poor administrative ability. He ended up bitterly fighting with many of his personnel as they actively attempted to undermine his agenda, an extremely poor position to be in given his life-and-death battles against the active FBI and DOJ coup attempts and endless, intense media smears.

Let’s discuss Trump’s transition to the presidency and then highlight some of his especially poor personnel decisions. There will be a focus on the National Security Council position because the NSC did not need Senate confirmation; therefore, who Trump picked for that role was entirely up to him and provides helpful insight into his thought process (or lack of one) without requiring a filter of political consideration. Also note that the NSC was the only institution that could have offered a measure of protection against the FBI coup attempt “counterintelligence operation”, which is why they targeted Mike Flynn as a top priority (to be discussed).

Transition to Presidency

Chris Christie, one of Trump’s primary opponents who later endorsed him, was initially put in charge of Trump’s transition team on May 9, 2016; apparently this was a placeholder as almost no one expected Trump to actually win, although Christie treated the job seriously. By October, it was reported the transition team had grown to more than 100 staff, many of whom were policy experts brought on to compensate for a dearth of policy staff employed by the Trump campaign. The election was held on November 8, 2016 and only three days later on November 11 Christie was removed and Trump’s children along with Jared Kushner were named to the transition executive committee. On the same day, Christie’s close associates Richard Bagger and Bill Palatucci were both removed by Trump from the transition team. Globalist Vice President Mike Pence was nominally put in charge of the transition and eventually the truth came out: it was Jared Kushner who had Christie fired because Christie had prosecuted Kushner’s father more than a decade prior. According to Christie:

“If a guy [Kushner’s father] hires a prostitute to seduce his brother-in-law and then videotapes it and then sends the videotape to his sister to attempt to intimidate her from testifying before a grand jury, do I really need any more justification than that?” Christie said in a recent interview with PBS. “I mean, it’s one of the most loathsome, disgusting crimes that I prosecuted when I was US attorney.”

This was the first inkling that Kushner, a 36 year old nepo-baby who got into Harvard based on a multi-million dollar donation from his father, would for some unknown reason have almost total control over Trump’s decision making process. It was also a sign that Trump did not care much about displaying loyalty to those who had backed him as Christie had done.

On November 10 Trump met with Barack Obama. He looked quite uncomfortable, back hunched:

On November 22 Trump announced there would be no Hillary investigation into her private server despite his campaign pledge to “lock her up”. Senior adviser Kellyanne Conway went on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and conceded that with the campaign behind him, Trump isn’t looking to prosecute Clinton. “I think when the president-elect, who’s also the head of your party, tells you before he’s even inaugurated that he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone and content” to the rest of the GOP, she said. “ … I think he’s thinking of many different things as he prepares to become the president of the United States, and things that sound like the campaign are not among them.” Be careful what you say publicly, though: just because Trump decided to “show magnanimity” does not mean that his words would be forgotten. As argues:

Here’s the part many reading this don’t want to hear: Trump did this to himself. You can’t campaign on locking up your enemies and being this great bull in a china shop-type figure, and then let your enemies run your administration instead of locking them up. You also don’t threaten to invalidate an election and encourage your supporters to take drastic action, then do nothing after the action begins. One does not fish in the Rubicon, as they say. Actions have consequences, the bolder (or more foolish) the action, the graver the consequences.

The next day Trump picked never-Trumper and globalist Nikki Haley as Ambassador to the UN. On December 8 Trump picked globalist Andy Puzder as his labor secretary (later withdrawn). On December 17 Trump appointed General Kelly, a noted globalist who was willing to serve under Hillary to head Homeland Security.

Interestingly, outgoing National Security Advisor Susan Rice wrote a memo-to-self on January 20, 2017, the day of Trump’s inauguration, in which she outlined that on January 5, 2017 FBI head James Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told Obama, Biden and herself that Trump was subject to an active counter-intelligence operation. They were worried about new National Security Advisor Mike Flynn becoming aware of it, as he would have the operational expertise to understand what was going on and counter it. This was written as a cover-your-ass email in case the effort to overthrow Trump later collapsed. In other words, the efforts to begin the “Trump = Russian collusion” efforts began immediately after the election and with White House approval (to reference again the Peter Strzok text “The [Obama] White House is running this”) – and they had to, for the reasons outlined at the start of this essay. Their behavior was simply too corrupt and criminal to be able to back down; their only choice was further escalation.

Early presidential appointments

Trump was inaugurated on January 20 and was attended by an estimated 300,000-600,000 people. Liberals gloated that Obama commanded much greater crowd sizes, but it’s unclear if the photos showing small crowd size was taken early in the day. Also, given D.C. votes consistently 90%+ Democrat, the fact that a Democrat president would command a larger crowd size than a president that commanded 4% of the local area vote wouldn’t be surprising. Anyway, apparently many of the staff who worked on Trump’s campaign were blocked by a never-Trumper named Johnny DeStefano from attending the inauguration; DeStefano was put in charge of hiring staff in the administration and he either slow-walked or bungled the job, apparently intentionally not hiring campaign staff for positions within the administration (although, to be fair, Bannon (the gold standard for the populist wing) appeared to like him).

On the same day Trump appointed notorious globalist Gary Cohn to be his National Economic Counsel director. James Comey was not fired and remained as head of the FBI. There was no DACA repeal on Trump’s inauguration day despite his campaign promise to do so on day one. Trump had initially kicked off his campaign taking aim at DACA, vowing to “immediately terminate President Obama’s illegal executive order on immigration immediately” in his presidential announcement speech on June 16, 2015, and again during an August 31 rally in Arizona.  After a year of expressing intentions to strike a deal that “will make people happy and proud,” a draft of a White House Executive Order terminating the DACA program was leaked on January 25, 2017, the same day Trump said Dreamers shouldn’t be “very worried” because he has “a big heart” in an ABC interview.  He would later order an end to DACA in September, which would then get held up by the courts.

On January 22, 2017 globalist, nepotistic Jared Kushner was sworn in as Senior White House advisor, while Mike Flynn was sworn in as the National Security Advisor. Because of Flynn’s experience, knowledge, honesty and integrity, he was the top target of the establishment to take out. The FBI entrapped him claiming they just wanted a meet-and-greet, then claimed that he misled Vice President Mike Pence (who, as a deep state operative, was secretly working in tandem with the FBI) and others about the nature and content of his standard communications with Russian ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak. Robin Townly, a Mike Flynn ally and NSC director, was then denied high-level security clearance by the establishment and forced from the NSC; denying security clearances for Trump allies on flimsy pretexts was used to prevent many from assuming important roles. On February 13, 2017, Flynn himself was forced to resign — removing the most important impediment against the launch of the false Russiagate scam that would be used as the “insurance policy” to paralyze Trump’s administration.

Here are some other dates in the first few months of Trump’s presidency which offers a feel for his transition from populist rhetoric during the campaign to globalist governing realities. As mentioned, it’s hard to blame Trump entirely for this given the paucity of nationalist populists with experience (but then again, how much does experience ultimately matter versus loyalty to a shared vision?).

Jan 30, 2017: Reports that General Kelly “wins” and prevents anti-immigration hardliner Kris Kobach from being #2 at DHS.

Feb 7: Betsy DeVos, a never Trumper and former supporter of common core, is appointed as Secretary of Education.

Feb 16: Robert Harward, a globalist deep statist, turns down Trump’s request for him to head the NSC.

Feb 20: Trump picks H.R. McMaster, also a globalist deep statist, to head the NSC.

March 14: McMaster tries to fire Ezra Cohen-Watnick from the NSC, who exposed the Susan Rice wiretapping information to Devin Nunes; Kushner blocks it by going directly to Trump.

March 15: Neocon Dina Powell is appointed as Deputy National Security Advisor.

April 5: Trump removes Steve Bannon from his NSC post.

April 6: Bannon calls Jared Kushner, who is rapidly assuming power, a “cuck” and a “globalist”.

April 7: Trump attacks Assad in Syria despite a campaign pledge to have a non-interventionist foreign policy.

April 8: Reports that McMaster wants a 150,000 ground war invasion in Syria.

April 9: KT McFarland, a nationalist and Flynn ally, forced to leave the NSC. Reports that McMaster pushed her out.

April 12: Trump says Bannon is a “guy who works for me” and downplays the roll Bannon played in the election. Reports are Bannon is on the verge of being fired or quitting. He eventually leaves officially in August.

April 14: Trump officially declines to name China a currency manipulator.

April 17: Trump congratulations Erdogan on becoming essentially an Islamist dictator in Turkey.

April 22: Trump tells AP that DACA is here to stay. Pence announces that Trump will honor Obama’s agreement with Australia to take thousands of high risk Muslim “refugees” that Australia had denied asylum.

April 25: Reports that Trump, at pressure of Dina Powell, McMaster and Gary Cohn, will give a massive amount of weapons to Saudi Arabia as well as civilian nuclear reactors.

April 26: Ivanka says publicly that accepting Syrian refugees “has to be part of the discussion, but that’s not going to be enough in and of itself.”

April 28: Trump’s tax plan is released. It increases government deficit an estimated $6-10 trillion over a decade, decreases taxes on the 1% (including hedge fund managers, breaking a campaign promise), and potentially increases taxes on the upper-middle class.

April 28: Trump announces “I’m a nationalist and a globalist. I’m both.”

April 28: News reports that the head of Trump’s media team, Helen Aguirre Ferre, is a notorious and virulent never-Trumper.

April 30: Sebastian Gorka, a former Breitbart reporter and nationalist, is out of the White House; reports that McMaster pushed him out.

May 9: James Comey is fired. Major leaker and Obama holdover/donor David Laufman remains in key position at DOJ.

May 17: Johnny DeStefano, who heads Trump staffing despite never supporting Trump publicly, continues to block pro-Trump political appointees.

May 18: Steve Mnuchin refuses to support the reinstitution of the Glass Steagall Act in his first Senate banking appearance, in effect encouraging banks to take on additional risk and offload that risk onto the public (i.e. privatizing profits and socializing losses).

May 20: Trump agrees to $350 billion weapons deal with Saudi Arabia, including civilian nuclear reactors; Jared Kushner and McMaster reportedly high-five over the deal. Kushner would later be rewarded by Saudi with a $2 billion “investment” and McMaster went on to a series of lucrative consulting, teaching and board positions.

May 23: Thousands of rejected Australian Muslim refugees begin being screened to be accepted into the U.S.

May 24: Never Trumper Virginia Boney, who has no national security experience, is revealed to be part of NSC; she has support of Lindsay Graham and John McCain.

May 27: Reports that Trump is doubling the number of refugees allowed into the US for fiscal year 2017 from the current rate of 830 per week to 1,500 per week. Brian Hook, who serves under Tillerson at State and is an avowed never-Trumper, is responsible for this.

May 30: Senate majority leader McConnell refuses to use the “nuclear option” to end the fillibuster to pass healthcare reform, tax reform, or anything else.

May 31: Reports that Trump has not ended Obama era catch-and-release policy at the border.

June 1: Time Warner CEO says Trump won’t have impact on proposed AT&T merger.

June 5: Trump supporters Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie will not be joining the administration to help create a media war room despite earlier expectations.

As of June 6, none of the anti-Trump leakers involved have been fired or prosecuted (other than Reality Winner who received security clearance in February and who was not one of the principal leakers). Never Trumper Helen Aguirre Ferre remained at the head of Trump’s media team.

I’m going to end the play-by-play here, but it should be sufficient to demonstrate that even when Trump had total control over certain personnel as he did with NSC selection his picks were schizophrenic and increasingly globalist. Nationalist populists like Steve Bannon were increasingly sidelined and then removed entirely.

Regarding Bannon specifically, he had a giant ego and wanted to take credit for Trump’s achievements, and he also loved stirring the pot of drama and backstabbed the administration out of anger at being sidelined on his way out by talking to establishment leftist author Michael Wolff – in other words, he seemed to be a pretty bad employee. But it’s also clear that the populist agenda was being undermined quite intensely. It’s hard to separate good from bad with him, although there was no one else who cared so passionately about actually fulfilling the agenda that Trump ran on. Look at Bannon’s whiteboard of ideas, this was a creative guy who cared:

While the media was screeching hysterically about Trump and his administration at a level of intensity not seen in modern history, the media was unable to effectively concentrate the public’s attention on more than one or two things at once. Bannon’s plan was to “flood the zone” with a thousand initiatives which potentially could have countered, at least to some extent, the power of the media. Alas, Trump ultimately went in a different direction…

That different direction was Jared Kushner, whose level of control over his father-in-law remains one of the great mysteries of the presidency. It’s possible Kushner was simply Trump’s handler, much like Kanye West’s handler was “celebrity personal trainer”, Tavistock educated, Canadian- governmental-handler Harley Pasternak who threatened to take his children away from him if he didn’t play ball. Alternatively, Trump needed a core constituency of allies and white Christians nationalists were missing from government (even nominally pro-white congressman Steve King was hounded out of office over nothing). Kushner represented the AIPAC element, so where else could he have turned for protection against the bloodthirstiness of the left?

Anyway, Trump ended up feuding with many of his cabinet and other picks. He raged (correctly) at Jeff Sessions’ for his betrayal, he picked H.R. McMaster, a globalist to lead the NSC who offered him no protection against the security state’s coup and who wanted a giant war in Syria; he picked extreme warmongering neocon John Bolton to be his National Security Advisor from 2018-2019, and who later wrote a book blasting Trump; he picked Rex Tillerson to be his Secretary of State and he and Trump got along terribly; he picked Gary Cohn to be his National Economic Counsel director and Cohn illegally stole documents off Trump’s desk and then bragged about it; deep state Mike Pence stuck in the shiv in Trump’s back on January 6 as did Dan Coats, the Director of National Intelligence from 2017-2019 when he affirmed in 2018 the false FBI narrative that Russians had interfered in the U.S. election. I don’t blame this all on Trump — again, there was close to no nationalist populists to choose from with relevant experience, and cabinet picks had to be confirmed by the establishment Senate — but he surely could have done much better than this abysmal track record which made all his other problems much worse.

Thankfully, at least Trump kept hypocritical globalist Mitt Romney away, although he played with Romney by entertaining his plea for a cabinet position at a dinner which was famously captured on camera:

---

Trump executive actions and foreign policy

Trump did have some limited effect through executive actions and on foreign policy. He pulled out of the Paris accords on June 1, 2017 which would handicap America but allow China and other third world countries to pollute essentially at will. The withdraw was complete in 2020 but the Biden Administration re-joined in 2021.

Trump withdrew from the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership in 2018, although he later flip-flopped and signaled an openness to reconsider it. The Biden administration has not rejoined it as of 2024, meaning the establishment is not now in favor of TPP.

Generally Trump’s instincts were pacifistic. Trump resisted his National Security Advisor Mcmaster’s desire for a 150,000 boots-on-the-ground invasion of Syria. Instead, he opted to bomb some empty Syrian airfields after giving Syria opportunity to evacuate them. He also tried to get North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons, an attempt that Kim Jong Un wisely resisted as it would have set up North Korea for a future CIA-sponsored color revolution.

Trump did initiate the withdrawal from the 20-year Afghanistan war by signing an agreement with the Taliban, although the implementation was delayed so that Biden could claim credit for it in 2021. Julian Assange stated eloquently that the purpose of the Afghanistan war was a “forever war” so that the transnational security elite could graft off the U.S. taxpayer indefinitely:

The U.S. initiated the Russia/Ukraine war a mere six months after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, ensuring the rape of the U.S. taxpayer under the guise of another forever war would continue (Russia initiated the start of the war but that was after the 2014 U.S. CIA color revolution overthrowing the democratically elected president and eight years of heavily arming the Ukrainians who shelled the Donbass constantly, killing over ten thousand people).

Trump pursued an executive order to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama executive order to allow a large number of illegals to stay within America — i.e. Trump merely rescinded an executive order by his predecessor — but a district court judge issued a nationwide injunction to stop the rescission and the Supreme Court affirmed the district court judge in a 5-4 decision on technical grounds in an excellent example of despicable lawfare. Chief Justice Roberts joined with the liberal justices on the decision. Biden reinstated DACA back in 2021.

Trump also tried an executive order on the “Muslim ban”, pushed by Bannon and immigration hardliner Stephen Miller and which decreased the number of refugees from certain Islamic countries into the United States. A single district court judge in the state of Hawaii, personal friends with Obama, issued a nationwide injunction against it and the Supreme Court eventually upheld the ban in a 5-4 decision (this time with weirdo Roberts joining the conservatives).

Just before the 2020 elections Trump passed an executive order to gut civil service protections, which was a critically important move given the class consciousness which has arisen among the unelected civil service in Washington D.C. and which is overwhelmingly pro-globalist and anti-populist in outlook. The order was rescinded under Biden.

---

A note on the media

The media was used throughout Trump’s term as a naked weapon of war against his administration. Any claims to objectivity were completely discarded.

Per the Swiss Policy Research analysis, most western media coverage is provided by one of only three news agencies: the Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse. Six companies control 90% of U.S. media due to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and the top shareholders of Time Warner, Comcast, Disney, News Corp are Vanguard, Blackrock and Statestreet, all establishment entities.  The structure of the modern world will be discussed in Part 3, but basically all establishment media was turned hard against Trump immediately after his shocking election win in order to imprint the message that Trump was the equivalent of Hitler.

The intensity of the message pushed was unlike anything seen in the modern era until equalled or exceeded by the COVID “pandemic”, which will be discussed in Part 3. The population’s acceptance of this hysteric messaging gave rise to the non-playable character (“NPC”) meme because people who had faith in the media were not able to cope with the level of intense propaganda aimed at them. They glitched out, focused exclusively and intensely on Trump and became the complete opposite of their normal selves. The spigot of intense propaganda relating to Trump was not turned off until the start of COVID when the same people who so passionately hated him (because the media told them to) shifted to worrying about a worldwide “pandemic”.

The way the media worked was as a closed circuit echo chamber. One organization would report some false propaganda and then the next organization would piggyback off of and build off it in an ever-intensifying loop. They would also use the same key words in order to help hypnotize the public. We saw above how Andrew McCabe was the originator of some of these false leaks for which he was later fired.

Here are just two examples among an uncountable number of them:

Additionally, every Trump administration figure was personalized and profiled in depth with every action and statement held aggressively under a microscope, which is a common Saul Alinksi “Rules for Radicals” tactic (who was Obama’s inspiration; Alinski incidentally dedicated his book to Lucifer).

The media also highlighted with intense hysteria the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally where attendees clashed with Antifa members. James Fields, who was in his car when far-leftist agitators started hitting it, pushed on the gas to flee for his life, running over an obese woman who may have died from a heart attack. Consecrating the event with blood, Fields was charged with murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.2 The media then demanded that Trump disavow everyone at the rally and crucified Trump for his quasi-unwillingness to do so (as he likely instinctively knew it was a trap). Regardless, the media would hype this event hysterically in order to try to smear Trump as a white nationalist, and there were no subsequent major gatherings of Trump supporters outside of rallies until January 6. Charlottesville, in essence, removed the right’s tentative willingness to try to organize offensively; 1/6 would remove the right’s willingness to try to organize defensively.

Meanwhile, as mentioned in Part 1, the establishment came to understand the threat of unregulated free speech on social media after Trump’s shocking win. They forced Facebook to accept extreme government censorship demands, they had Twitter (where a large number of FBI and CIA agents were embedded as moderators) ban and shadow ban a huge number of influential far-right users, they made 4chan basically unreadable with bots and FBI agents, they banned populist right Subreddits such as /r/TheDonald, they imprisoned Julian Assange and destroyed Wikileaks and many other tactics. These tactics would grow more extreme under Biden.

---

A note on the economy

With all of Trump’s battles with the establishment, his polling was consistently in the low 40%’s – not good but not catastrophic:

Part of the reason for this was that the stock market did well under his presidency:

Part of the reason for this was Trump consistently hammered the Federal Reserve to lower rates – he even wanted them to go negative (as lower rates equal higher asset values); instead they raised them a bit but not much until 2020:

Trump’s low approval rating was kept above catastrophic levels by low interest rates, a rising stock market and drastically increasing central bank debt and which increased regardless of president or party:

In other words, the core, fundamental problem with American finances continued to get substantially worse under the “small government” Republican party which controlled the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. In a democracy people vote to take from their children’s futures until there is nothing left and if you want to reign in government spending you will be booted from office.

---

Conclusions

The threat of a populist president united D.C. through class interest to oppose his presidency at every turn. Only a few at the very top knew of the bigger picture plans of the realities of Agenda 2030 and beyond; everyone else was working off either class instinct, media hysteria, or core hatred of white Middle America. Even though Trump was essentially toothless against fighting back against these hyenas, by sticking to the rule-of-law he inadvertently awakened the average person to the existence of the so-called “deep state” and uniparty based off their intense, sustained and over-the-top hostilities when they instituted their Schmittian exceptions in order to do whatever they could to “get” Trump. The existence of the deep state was unfathomable prior to Trump and would have been considered an unhinged conspiracy theory; as a result of his presidency the truth is out in the open. According to Alexandru Constantin, “My dad, a Russian/Romanian who reluctantly followed my mom to the U.S. and who I don’t think was ever happy here, used to explain his distaste for America in these terms, ‘the difference between Eastern European governments and the West is that the Eastern Euros had the decency to be honest that they were corrupt pieces of shit instead of pretending to be good guys fighting for your freedom.’” After Trump, the wool was off the eyes of a substantial portion of Americans and things would never be the same again. And it’s much more costly for a regime to rule via hard power versus via soft power, although many regimes throughout history have ruled via hard power for long periods of time.

This brings us to the end of Part 2. In Part 3, we will look at the so-called COVID pandemic as well as the 2020 election and its aftermath.

Thanks for following.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 Comey also kept seven CYA memos to himself containing highly classified material in the safe of his house in case he was fired or his illegal activities were eventually prosecuted; after he was fired he illegally leaked portions of those memos to the media. The issue was later dropped as part of Michael Horowitz’s cover-up. “Comey violated FBI policy and the requirements of his FBI Employment Agreement when he chose this path,” Horowitz wrote toothlessly. This memo was relevant to both the ongoing investigation into Flynn and as documentation of a potential attempt to obstruct the Flynn investigation. “Rather than continuing to safeguard such evidence, Comey unilaterally and without authorization disclosed it to all.” Comey argued to Horowitz that he felt the issue was of “incredible importance to the Nation, as a whole” and that he felt leaking the information was “something I [had] to do if I love this country.” But Horowitz responds: “Comey’s own, personal conception of what was necessary was not an appropriate basis for ignoring the policies and agreements governing the use of FBI records, especially given the other lawful and appropriate actions he could have taken to achieve his desired end.”

2 There is something occult about this principle; if an establishment narrative results in at least one death of a member or ally of the establishment then that narrative gains a significant boost in narrative power. We will see how they flailed about hoping to secure such a death on January 6 (discussed in part 3) by lying that multiple security officers died, although ultimately failing when only one died and from an unrelated health issue. Given Ashli Babbitt was a Trump supporter her death did not count for this purpose.

This is a culture post about mostly modern-era dissident films.

I was pretty happy with my last pop culture post about the wonderful ABBA, so I thought I would hit popular entertainment from another direction: a list of films reflecting dissident themes, most from within the modern era (post-2000).

First, why care? Well, whatever content one consumes, even if you decide to reject it, it becomes a part of your psyche and impacts you – it leaves an imprint of the framing on your mind. Very few people understand this. The woke movement succeeds by putting it’s ideas in your mind even if you consciously reject it. This is why I try to limit the content I consume. For example, I have David Rockefeller’s autobiography to read and have been very reluctant to read it; I know the man and what he stands for, and his attempts to justify his actions to the public using extreme deception and duplicitous language, crouched in the most vile filth and lies, is going to require a lot of mental stamina to get through, if I do decide to read it. It will leave an imprint.

In the same way, watching content that highlights dissident themes serves to reinforce one’s worldview, so to the extent such content can be consumed it is a good thing. Although content in film and television reflecting these themes is quite rare, while less rare in books if one knows where to look.

Second, let’s define dissidence for purposes of this thread. The globohomo world order is centered around a core belief in egalitarianism, a belief which ratchets over time as an egalitarian ratchet effect. Super-imposed over the belief in egalitarianism is the privately owned central bank system. Being a “dissident” to this system is to acknowledge without judgment the inegalitarianism inherent in reality in all its various facets. No individuals, groups, religions, or anything else in this reality is equal – distributions occur on bell curves – and nothing humanity can do can ever make the unequal equal. That doesn’t mean humanity shouldn’t work to decrease inequalities, it’s just that there’s a world of difference between laboring to do so in the knowledge that it can never be fully accomplished (which is how Lee Kuan Yew approached it) versus coming up with ideological excuses (racisms, sexisms, -isms, -phobias, etc.) and if only humanity could banish them with control and violence it would be here.

An acceptance of inegalitarianism within film hits on at least some of the following themes, and the more the better:

1. The negative correlation between materialism and spirituality,
2. populism as a check on the horrors of oligarchy,
3. a king or dictator as a check on the horrors of oligarchy,
4. the importance of immigration restrictionism,
5. standing against globohomo-sponsored wars,
6. a promotion of religion at the expense of secularism,
7. an emphasis on community and family togetherness, and
8. resistance to groupthink and globohomo propaganda.

This definition excludes some large categories of male oriented films: pro-globohomo war films (Black Hawk Down, Lone Survivor or American Sniper), high-testosterone 80s action films (Predator, Alien), and action/adventure films like the great Master and Commander, even though these films highlight warrior brotherhood and various forms of masculinity.

Lastly, one has to be careful when looking at historical films or other forms of entertainment. These films embodied a particular moment of the cultural zeitgeist, and due to the egalitarian ratchet effect many APPEAR to be inegalitarian compared to the standards of today, but that is not how they were received at the time. Just like watching Archie Bunker now looks amazingly anti-politically correct but that is not how it was perceived at the time, or Married with Children or any of the 80s action movies which weren’t woke, etc. Pretty much everything looks anti-globohomo when you look back on it twenty years later. So the idea is for films that meet as much of the above themes as possible but especially in the context where they buck whatever the zeitgeist is in the era in which it was released.

The following list is in no particular order, except for the final film which towers above the rest. It is also not meant to be comprehensive.

1. Fight Club (1999), trailer here. It’s anti-consumerist and wrestles with how to find meaning after Nietzsche’s death of God and how to form brotherhood in an era of atomization. One of its producers, Art Linson, recalled the first screening of the film for Fox’s executives: they were, he said, “flopping around like acid-crazed carp wondering how such a thing could even have happened.” There were rumors that Rupert Murdoch loathed the movie so much that Bill Mechanic (the executive who green-lighted it) might have been quietly nudged from his position.

2. They Live (1988), trailer here. Put on the special sunglasses and they reveal subliminal messages in the media to consume, reproduce, and conform. The glasses also reveal that many people are actually aliens with skull-like faces. Anti-consumerist, resistance to groupthink and globohomo propaganda.

3. District 9 (2009), trailer here. An anti-immigration parable where low IQ, aggressive actual aliens who cannot integrate are dumped into a city and how they are handled. It also covers the sophistication of government propaganda in smearing its identified enemies. It’s originator Neill Blomkamp included other messages such as government malice and incompetence to add complexity and to get the film made, but the core message is still there.

4. Elysium (2013), trailer here. The ultra-rich live on an exotic wonderful artificial colony in space and everyone living on earth lives in terrible poverty and crime. The film highlights the basic theme of what globohomo is trying to do to the world. Also directed by Neill Blomkamp.Edit: It’s been a number of years since I saw this film, but an alternative interpretation pointed out in the comments by Martin Castillo may be to view “Elysium” as the rich west and how Elysium should open its borders to the rest of the world. It’s possible either interpretation may work; I’ll have to re-watch it, but note this point of caution on this one. If it’s ambiguous it shouldn’t be included on this list.

5. Idiocracy (2006), trailer here. From Mike Judge, this movie touches on the ever-decreasing intellectual and spiritual quality of the masses who have been shorn of hard conflict which is necessary to bring out higher qualities; it also touches on dysgenics and how higher IQ individuals have fewer children than low IQ individuals.

6. Office Space (1999), trailer here. Also from Mike Judge, this film touches on the dehumanization and emptiness of modern office work and the empty propaganda used to promote it.

7. American Psycho (2000), trailer here. This is a classic film demonstrating that spirituality and materialism have a direct inverse correlation. Patrick Bateman has all the money in the world but he is dead inside. The modern West is fully built around the pursuit of money and is, per Jung, “extraverted as Hell.” It is going to have an extremely difficult time as the West’s consumption patterns continue to decrease. This film was very difficult to get made and took many years to do so because the book on which it was based was so incredibly violent. At one point Leonardo Dicaprio was set to star in it but he thought it would detract from his female fans so he withdrew, and Christian Bale really wanted the role so it eventually went to him.

8. Margin Call (2011), trailer here. This film highlights the cynicism and greed of Wall Street and how they offloaded their losses onto the retarded heads of the public during the 2008 financial crash.

9. Passion of the Christ (2004), trailer here. Hollywood refused to finance or promote this movie so Mel Gibson took on the financing and promotion of the film himself. It became an enormous hit and is spawning a sequel which will also do well. Globohomo does not like promoting Christianity so for Gibson to succeed on this passion project was a pretty amazing story. Later on Gibson, who is part of a sedevacantist Church, ran afoul of Hollywood entirely and has been semi-blacklisted since then.

10. Apocalypto (2006), trailer here. This is an amazing adventure/action story, also written and directed by Mel Gibson, told from an indigenous perspective, showing the horrors of the Mayan human sacrifice culture before the arrival of the Europeans with their civilizing Christianity. Globohomo hates this film because it does not offer moral equivalence between cultures and because it promotes traditional notions of masculinity and the importance of family. It wasn’t available for free on any streaming service last time I checked as a result.

11. Barry Lyndon (1975), trailer here. This is a questionably dissident Stanley Kubrick film, but I included it because it shows the emptiness of material wealth — Lyndon becomes ultra rich through marriage, but he loses his child and then wants to die. Also, Lyndon desperately wants to be accepted into high society but he has the wrong upbringing so no matter what he does he is unable to bridge that gulf. Lyndon also spends a lot of time wandering listlessly which shows the strangeness and randomness of life. The film isn’t predictable which is a good thing. It also has the most beautiful cinematography of any film I’ve ever seen.

12. The Day of the Jackal (1973), trailer here. The film covers the betrayal by Charles de Gaulle of the pieds-noirs in Algeria and the OAS’s attempts to assassinate him in revenge, focusing on a fictional hiring of an independent, professional lone-wolf “jackal” while also covering the French government’s creative, intelligent and often brutal tactics in tracking him down. The film is a nail-biter and feels like a short film in how fast it goes even though it’s well over two hours long; it holds up exceptionally well. The actor who played the jackal was superbly cast and I havn’t seen him in anything else – he looks like a chameleon, being able to blend in anywhere. I like his physiognomy and it’s reflected in his politics. Ebert has a good review here. There was a more recent remake with Bruce Willis called “The Jackal” which was mediocre.
13. Eyes Wide Shut (1999), trailer here. Another Kubrick film, apparently the final cut was butchered by the studio and Kubrick died right after the film was made. In it Tom Cruise infiltrates a masked orgy of an unnamed secret society, which is reminiscent of the 1972 Rothschild ball.

13. Nightcrawler (2014), trailer here. This film shows Jake Gyllenhaal as a weird outsider (echoing Travis Bickle to some extent from Taxi Driver, which is not included on this list because Robert De Nero is such a deranged shitlib) using underhanded and illegal tactics in order to advance his career; it also shows the intersection between business, the media and voyeurism. It is a dark and nihilistic film and has the kind of ending one can expect from it.

14. The Matrix (1999), trailer here. This is a class gnostic-themed film about how the material world is an illusion and truth is found on an inward journey of exploration. Additionally, it shows how globohomo views the masses of humanity as simply digits on a screen to be exploited. All of the sequels were terrible and the director siblings later both became transsexuals.

And…drum roll please…the most dissident film I’ve seen:

The Angry Birds Movie (2016), trailer here. Even though it’s a cartoon based on a video game – the furthest thing one would expect to have dissident themes, which one would expect to be a shallow cash grab aimed at children – I cannot believe this film was made with the themes presented in it. The main character Red is a loner who no one listens to; green-colored pigs come to town with false promises that lull the bird population into a sense of complacency. Sensing something is seriously wrong with the pigs, Red warns everyone and tries to consult with the great American eagle, but everyone is too complacent, lazy and stupid to listen to him, and the American eagle is also fat, lazy and stupid. The pigs end up stealing the eggs of the birds and the population, shocked and demoralized, finally rallies around Red to get it back. The themes expressed in the film are the importance of thinking for yourself, the dangers and non-integration of foreigners, and the importance of community banding together to protect the community. It is an unbelievable film and it has to be watched; someone from globohomo dropped the ball by letting this get made. There’s also a sequel which I havn’t seen but the themes seem stupid based on the plot.

If you watch any film from this list (and hopefully more than one appears interesting to you), watch The Angry Birds Movie.

Lastly, I’ve been recommended a bunch of other films to watch that may contain dissident themes – Children of Men, Cool Hand Luke, Zardoz, Brazil, High Plaines Drifter, Pale Rider, The Room, Soylent Green, Falling Down, but can’t vouch for any of these until I see them.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

This is a narrowly-tailored post about how Rome’s destruction of its arch-rival Carthage led to unprecedented material prosperity that undermined the moral foundations of Rome and paved the path to empire. Comparisons to the modern era with the total triumph of Western-style oligarchical managerialism under the propaganda guise of “democracy” are apt.

This is a post on the Roman historian Sallust’s The Jugurthine War, one of his two fully extant works.1 Based on Quintus Curtius’s translation, Jugurtha tells a narrative within Roman history which illustrates the principle that achieving total victory is never what it seems. It’s also a great anti-hero story that could make a great film.

First, about the author. Sallust is the earliest Latin-language Roman historian with surviving works to his name. He served under Julius Caesar, including when he crossed the Rubicon, sharing a meal with him the next night per Plutarch. Sallust had much political and administrative experience along with deeply populist, anti-elitist leanings. He also wrote shortly before the Christian era, around 40 BC, and it is refreshing to see the world before its transvaluation of values under Paul of Tarsus.

Sallust’s writing is sparse and terse, contrasted against his rival Cicero’s long and poetic speeches.  Nietzsche credits Sallust in Twilight of the Idols: “My sense of style, for the epigram as a style, was awakened almost instantly when I came into contact with Sallust” and praises him for being “condensed, severe, with as much substance as possible in the background, and with cold but roguish hostility towards all ‘beautiful words’ and ‘beautiful feelings’”. Powerful compliment.

Sallust’s primary focus is on morality: who has or lacks noble virtues, which he believed to be specifically martial virtues. Martial virtues include the willingness to engage in warfare, to fight properly and honorably on behalf on the Roman people, its glory and its ancestors, to pursue right aims and right tactics, and to give one’s life when necessary rather than risk dishonor (as honor and glory were in some sense immortal versus the decaying weakness of the physical form). Stressing marital virtues was especially important for Sallust because he felt that Rome had fallen into decadence, corruption, individualism and greed. To Sallust, martial virtues and chasing wealth were competing priorities; only one could have primacy in both society and as individuals. There is no sense of Nietzsche’s slave morality or the ascetic ideal in his work, although there is a strong sense of Platonism.2

The Jugurthine War highlights the corruption that Rome experienced in the aftermath of its victory over Carthage in the Punic Wars where they wiped their rival off the map. Achieving unconditional victory may have been as much of a curse as a blessing because life is struggle and lacking challenge for survival leads to decadence and decay.3 We are slowly learning this lesson now as globohomo stands alone, victorious, basking in Fukuyama’s “end of history” in full power on the world stage as corruption and softness grows. As Julius Evola wrote in Ride the Tiger:

Hegel rightly wrote that the epochs of material well-being are blank pages in the history book, and Toynbee has shown that the challenge to mankind of environmentally and spiritually harsh and problematic conditions is often the incentive that awakens the creative energies of civilization. In some cases, it is not paradoxical to say that the man of good will should try to make life difficult for his neighbor! It is a commonplace that all the higher virtues attenuate and atrophy under easy conditions, when man is not forced to prove himself in some way; and in the final analysis it does not matter in such situations if a good number fall away and are lost through natural selection. Andre Breton was right when he wrote that “we must prevent the artificial precariousness of social conditions from concealing the real precariousness of the human condition.”

The Jugurthine War features a standout cast of characters: there’s Jugurtha, a kind of antihero/villainous Joker-type mixed with a charismatic Arnold Schwarzenegger; there’s the scandalous corruption of the Roman Senate; there’s Gaius Memmius, the honest elected tribune of the plebs who would hold the Senate to account; there’s the introductions of both Marius and Sulla who would later go on to shake Rome to its foundations. It would make a great movie or limited television series if globohomo wasn’t busy pushing worthless slop onto the masses to rot their brains.

Sallust chose to cover this conflict because “for the first time action took place to oppose the arrogance of the nobility.” Let’s see what he means…

---

Jugurtha’s background

Numidia was a large region in North Africa that bordered the remains of Carthage. The king of Numidia helped the Romans defeat and destroy Carthage, and in return for his loyalty and assistance the territory of Numidia was greatly expanded. When he died his son Micipsa ascended to the throne.

Micipsa brought into the royal household his brother’s bastard child Jugurtha as a favor (which, as we will see, will prove the maxim “no good deed goes unpunished”). However, Jugurtha was the product of a relationship with a concubine so he was not included in the line of succession. Micipsa had two legitimate heirs who were both much younger than Jugurtha.

When Jugurtha came of age he was handsome, charismatic, with a manly disposition. He mastered horsemanship and hunting, practiced with the javelin and competed with his peers in running. He soon became famous and everyone loved him, as he was humble despite his growing accomplishments.4

Micipsa grew worried about Jugurtha’s ambition and popularity, so he shipped him off to assist the Romans during the Numantine War, hoping he would be killed in the fighting. Instead Jugurtha distinguished himself with his courage and sharp and probing mind, he learned the Roman worldview, tactics and strategies, and made allies out of many of them. He also saw how corrupt Rome had become. When he went home with letters from Rome praising him, Micipsa felt compelled to elevate Jugurtha into the royal family and adopt him. He was clear that Jugurtha was to share Numidia with Micipsa’s two sons upon his death. Then he promptly died.

---

Jugurtha becomes king

Soon after Micipsa died, Jugurtha, who had nurtured a hidden but overweening ambition, arranged an ambush and murdered Micipsa’s younger son. The older son, Adherbal, shocked, raised an army and faced Jugurtha’s forces on the field of battle, but he lost and then fled to Rome. Imagine this: a father magnanimously adopts a bastard child of his brother as his own, then the adopted bastard child kills one of his blood children and seizes the rest of the country from the other child.

Jugurtha’s actions were a scandal in Rome but the Senate thought: why should we get involved in this? It’s not our business. Furthermore Jugurtha, who understood Rome’s ways, bribed as many Senators and powerful individuals as he could get his hands on: “Therefore he sent a few ministers to Rome a few days later with an ample supply of gold and silver; he directed them first to satisfy his old friends with gifts, and then reach out to new people. The goal was to do whatever could be done with lavish giving in the shortest time possible.”

Adherbal pled his case to the Senate, highlighting his family’s loyalty and the treacherous, ungrateful character of his cousin, as well as the cruelty Jugurtha inflicted on Adherbal’s loyalists — “As for those captured by Jugurtha, some have been crucified, others thrown to wild animals; the few allowed to live have been imprisoned in darkness to live out a ‘life’ worse than death amid sorrow and pain.” But his speech was for naught; the faction in the Senate who had received bribery and favors emerged victorious. They ruled that Adherbal and Jugurtha would divide Numidia equally between themselves.

Jugurtha was unhappy with this arrangement, though. He wanted all of Numidia, and he tried but failed to goad Adherbal into war with underhanded, violent provocations. Adherbal was mild in temperament and was afraid of Jugurtha’s power so he did not respond. So Jugurtha shrugged, discarded even a pretext for war and invaded Adherbal’s lands, destroying his forces in battle and chasing him to a fortress hideaway. Adherbal sent word to Rome asking for help again. Rome sent important senior officials to mediate but Jugurtha would not lift the siege. He captured Adherbal and tortured him to death, along with the Roman citizens within the city’s walls who had supported him.

---

Superficial war with Rome

When word of Jugurtha’s actions reached Rome, the same agents of the king minimized his atrocities. It looked like Jugurtha would get away with his crimes because of the massive bribes handed out except for the actions of Gaius Memmius, the elected tribune of the plebs. Memmius was “a keenly intelligent man opposed to the power of the nobility, [and he] explained to the Roman people that the gridlock was an attempt to whitewash Jugurtha’s crimes by a few of his senatorial collaborators.” As a result Rome reluctantly declared war on Jugurtha, but Jugurtha bribed the consul sent to wage the war, Lucius Calpurnius Bestia, and Calpurnius agreed to extremely light peace terms. The Senate waffled at this scandalous result while the lower classes were outraged; the upper classes were torn between their love of bribes and their fear of the masses.

Gaius Memmius stirred up the passions of the plebs again, referring to the assassination of the populist Gracchus brothers5 (which I may cover in a future post) and demanded that Jugurtha at the very least come to Rome to answer to the Senate for his crimes. Jugurtha reluctantly agreed, but when he came he bribed the tribune of the plebs Caius Baebius, who protected the king by telling him not to speak to the tribunal. So the plebs left the tribunal having been played for fools.

Despite Jugurtha’s apparent victory, he miscalculated and overreached by ordering the murder of a potential rival in Rome. While the murder was successful, the assassin was caught. Jugurtha was then expelled from Italy by an outraged Senate, and he is supposed to have said while leaving, “If the right buyer comes along, this city is a corrupt one, and one that will soon be destroyed.”

The war resumed between Numidia and Rome. Through guile and corruption Jugurtha surrounded Rome’s unmotivated army and forced its soldiers to pass, humiliated, under the yoke in a surrender ritual.

The Roman people were again outraged at this result, and they forced a measure (against strong Senate opposition) against those who had taken bribes from Jugurtha. The plebs and the Patricians were set against each other. According to Sallust, this sorry state of affairs was due to the lack of external threats after the defeat of Carthage:

The habits of partisanship, factionalism, and all related pernicious practices had arisen in Rome a few years before due to excessive leisure and the abundance of all things that mortal men consider most important. Before Carthage was destroyed the senate and the Roman people handled the political affairs of the republic peacefully and with discipline; rivalries among citizens for glory or domination did not exist. Fear of the external enemy kept the state focused on useful domestic endeavors. But when this fear lost its hold on the minds of the citizenry, unrestraint and arrogance inevitably grew, as these vices go hand-in-hand with opulence. Thus the leisure they hoped for during their hardships was – after they had gotten it – more bitter and unkind than their original troubles. So the nobles abused their positions to indulge their vices, and the people abused their liberty to indulge their own; every man stole, plundered, and robbed for himself. Thus everything was pulled forcibly to two extremes; and the republic, which was caught in the middle, was torn apart.

Does that not sound like the state of affairs today?

After suffering the latest humiliation, Rome finally had enough. The consul Metellus prepared to take the Jugurthine war seriously and with an eye for achieving victory.

---

Real war with Rome

Knowing the strength of Rome, Jugurtha knew that he would not be able to defeat them head-on — at least not at first. He adapted classical insurgency/guerilla tactics, employing flexible hit and run strategies, promising alternatively to surrender and then reneging and refusing to engage in outright combat. Over time this would drain and confuse Roman forces who were fighting in a hostile territory with unknown terrain. In response Metellus adapted counter-insurgency tactics; taking and razing key fortresses and food supplies, turning Jugurtha’s allies with promises and pressure, and killing the adult male population of any towns seen as excessively loyal to Jugurtha. “These tactics frightened the king much more than the previous battle that had gone badly for him. For while he had placed all his hopes in making use of hit-and-run tactics, he was forced to follow around his opponent; when he was deprived of the ability to conduct defensive operations in his own areas, he had to carry on the fight in other places.”6

These tactics over time worked and had a cumulative effect. Meanwhile Metellus’s second in command, Marius, decided to seek the consulship, which he won with the support an enthusiastic pleb class and then usurped Metellus’s command in Numidia even as he was closing in on victory.7 Marius’s own second in command Sulla would later engage in a bitter civil war against Marius himself.8 Even when an ambitious military commander sought glory and martial virtues over money, it seems it was difficult to separate such ambition from what benefitted Rome itself.

When Marius took command he removed the land ownership requirement of serving in the military which had existed until this point. Per Quintus Curtius, “By allowing anyone to sign up – and inevitably making such enlistees dependent on his personally – Marius was establishing a precedent that years later would eventually undermine the Senate’s authority [and pave the way for a transition to Empire].”

Jugurtha was finally captured when his ally, Bocchus I, the king of Mauretaina (modern day Morocco), who together with Jugurtha had lost numerous battles against the Romans, was faced with a stark choice: turn Jugurtha over to Sulla in order to re-ingratiate himself with Rome, or turn Sulla over to Jugurtha as a hostage bargaining chip in order to attempt to end the war that way. Bocchus was torn, undecided at such a momentous decision, but he finally made up his mind. Bocchus chose the side of the Romans and Jugurtha was betrayed and handed over.

The Romans took Jugurtha back to Rome, paraded him in a Triumph for Marius, then threw him into the Tullianum where he was either starved to death or strangled after a number of days.

Numidia was carved up with the western portion going to Bacchus as reward and the eastern part eventually became a Roman province.

Sulla wore a ring for the rest of his life portraying his capture of Jugurtha despite Marius being awarded the credit for it, hinting at their later rivalry which would engulf the Republic and set the stage for Julius Caesar’s ascendancy.

---

Concluding thoughts

As G. Michael Hopf states, “Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.” The fact that Jugurtha was able both to rise to power in such an ignoble fashion and then to keep it for so long by bribing Roman Senators and high ranking officials reflected Rome’s moral and ethical decline. Romans sought individualism, power and money at the expense of the state, which led to such instability that it only stabilized by a transition from Republic to Empire. The roots of decline were in Rome’s total victory over Carthage which led to widespread complacency and decadence. Only the constant struggle born from serious challenges can keep virtue from descending into vice. This is an important lesson repeated throughout history but never ultimately learned because the victory over ones enemies always feels so good, like candy before a toothache. Globohomo has been on top for so long, has had it so good since they unambiguously defeated all their enemies, and is richer and more powerful than any nation that has ever come before, so the corresponding decadence which exists today is likely the worst that humanity has ever experienced. Harder times are ahead, but the silver lining is hopefully they can eventually lead to a rebirth of virtue.

Thanks for reading.

Subscribe:
Email delivery remains on Substack for now.

---

1 The other being Conspiracy of Catiline, which is the inspiration for Francis Ford Coppola’s upcoming poorly reviewed epic Megalopolis which looks like a mess per the teaser.

2 The War of Jugurtha, II: “For as a human being is composed of both a physical form and a soul, all of our earthly pursuits attend to the nature of either the body or the soul. Thus a beautiful body, great riches, physical strength, and all other attributes of this type melt away in a short time; but surpassing deeds of character are, like the soul, eternal. Ultimately the goods of the body and of fortune have both an inception and a conclusion. Everything that has risen falls, and all that is created grows old. But the soul is imperishable, eternal, and the pilot of mankind; it moves and comprehends all things, but is not itself moved.”

3 From the Conspiracy of Catiline, X: “…and when Carthage, jealous of the Roman Empire, was destroyed root and branch and every land and sea lay open; then, at last, Fortune began to vent her disfavor and all began to become turbulent. Those who had easily borne labors, dangers, insecurity and bitterness now found that leisure and riches – so desirable in some situations – were instead a burden and source of woe. Thus first the love of money grew, and then the love of power as well; these things were essentially the building blocks of all evils. Greed overturned honesty, good faith, and the other positive virtues; in their place it nurtured arrogance, cruelty, neglect of religious duty, and the idea that everything could be bought for a price….after riches began to be considered a substitute for honor, and when glory, power, and force followed as a consequence, virtue grew feeble; humble circumstances were held a disgrace, and innocence began to be regarded with malice. As wealth grew steadily, luxury and greed combined with arrogance took possession of the youth. They freely took what they wanted, consumed with reckless abandon, and placed scant value on their own possessions while coveting those of others; shame, modesty, and all things human and divine were thought of as nothing. There was no sense of moderation.”

4 As an aside, growing up without parents can be a double-edged sword: the child loses protection and guidance but is free from parental expectations and demands, becoming free to pursue their own ends in their own way. This is why many Disney movies start with the death of the parents (see Bambi, Frozen, Cinderella, Snow White, Tarzan, etc). Back to the Schwarzenegger comparison, compare the physiognomy of Arnold’s carbon-copy bastard son who grew up with little contact with his father with that of his legitimate son. Without having a safety net, perhaps the bastard child instinctively knows he must rely on himself…

5 The War of Jugurtha, XLII: “After Tiberius and Caius Gracchus, whose ancestors gave so much in service of the republic during the Punic and other wars, began to champion the legal rights of the plebs and reveal the crimes of the wealthy elites, the guilty nobility was dismayed. They put obstacles in the way of the reforms of the Gracchi: they used the allies and the Latin communities of Italy, as well as the Roman knights, who distanced themselves from the plebs out of hope of an alliance with the nobility. First Tiberius was killed violently; then a few years later his brother Caius, who had taken up the same cause, met the same fate. One was a tribune and the other a commissioner for colonies. Marcus Fulvius Flaccus was killed along with them. It must be said, however, that the spirit fo the Gracchi – with its lust for victory – was insufficiently moderate. But a good man would prefer to be defeated rather than eradicate injustice through evil conduct.”

6 Quintius Curtius had an interesting footnote on this: “This important sentence encapsulates the essence of counterinsurgency operations…Metellus’s strategy throws Jugurtha off his game and takes the initiative away from him. Instead of chasing Jugurtha around, he forces the Numidian to chase him around.”

7 The Gods expressed their favor for Marius via divination. “By some chance at the same time at Utica a diviner [a trained soothsayer who could ‘read’ the entrails of sacrificed animals for predictions of present and future events’] uttered an extraordinary and momentous prophecy when Caius Marius was sacrificing some animals to the gods: the soothsayer told Marius that he should listen to his inner spirit and conduct himself with trust in the gods; he should put fortune to the test as often as he could with the knowledge that all his enterprises would turn out favorably.” Indeed, he ended up holding the office of consul an unprecedented seven times and died peacefully. Still, Plutarch relates that, ever an ambitious man, Marius lamented on his deathbed that he had not achieved all of which he was capable, despite his achievements.

8 When I think of Sulla, other than thinking of dictatorship and proscriptions, I think of the inscription on his grave. An epitaph, which Sulla composed himself, was inscribed onto the tomb, reading, “No friend ever served me, and no enemy ever wronged me, whom I have not repaid in full.”