The Qanon posts, and associated US political analysis

[AuCo]

Posted by Jayke (here)
New Article from LaRouchePac, discussing the Mike Pence speech on China, which Q has been directing us to watch. They do a good job of picking apart some of the deep state dynamics in this article, to show some of the different factions at play within Trumps admin, along with a potential answer for why Nikki Haley recently resigned.

• https://larouchepac.com/20181009/mik...mice-will-play

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mike Pence's Dumb Ass Speech on China: When the Cat is Away, the Mice will Play

Mike Pence gave a speech about China on October 4, 2018 which has received widespread international press coverage as representing a new hardline approach to relationships between the U.S. and China. It was even characterized in some overcharged quarters as the opening of a “New Cold War” although the speech itself hardly lives up to that inflamed billing. Analysts also should have learned by now that it is Donald Trump who runs American foreign policy, and, anything that Mike Pence or his ilk proclaim is subject to very rapid change.

As Pence’s missive was being delivered, the President was traveling to rallies throughout the United States in an all-out effort to halt the British inspired coup against him, the actual issue in the 2018 Midterm elections. He was also in a life or death battle over a seat in the U.S. Supreme Court—a battle implicating whether or not the nation itself descends into the sexual McCarthyite madness of the “Me-Too” movement. Many have rightly characterized the battle over the Kavanaugh nomination as a dry run for the battle over impeachment which will be launched if the Democrats win the House.

Pence, along with other old-school tools of the Washington-Wall Street-London neo-con axis, like the now canned Niki Haley, have adopted a strategy toward the President which involves endless preening, unabashed flattery, and feigned loyalty. For that, both have earned the moniker “toadies-in-chief,” from the legacy U.S. news media. All of this sycophantic fawning conceals the naked ambition of their own Presidential aspirations. Pence believes he was ordained by God to become President of the United States. Both Haley and Pence have a history of working aggressively to undermine Trump’s most significant initiatives, in this case, Trump’s relationship with China’s President Xi Jinping. For that, both Pence and Haley rightly earned speculation in Washington D.C.’s gossip circuit, that either or both were the “anonymous senior official” who claimed in a September 5, 2018 Opinion piece in the New York Times to be running a coup against the President on behalf of the “Resistance.” They got about equal billing as the probable “Anonymous” with Pence’s good friend, Dan Coats, the current Director of National Intelligence.

Despite the hideous coup against him, based on Trump’s desire for a decent relationship with Russia, and endlessly being fed “Washington Consensus” gruel about how China, rather than London and Wall Street, is the source of American economic misery, Trump has, until now, stuck to his guns concerning his desire for positive relations with both Russia and China. Now, Pence has gone for the jugular, so to speak, wildly claiming that China is intervening in the U.S. elections directly for the purpose of removing Trump from the Presidency. Helga Zepp LaRouche has often commented that what the British and the Neo-Con and Neo-Liberal America establishment ascribe to the Chinese is very often simply their own aspirations and behavior. This is definitely at work in this particular case.

The task of thinking people throughout the world should be to allow the President to see the potential for making the biggest deal of all, the deal for world economic prosperity under a revived New Bretton Woods monetary system in which money serves the purpose of the physical economic development of the nations of the earth, rather than the imperial needs of empire. As Vladimir Putin has correctly observed, it is foolish for other nations to directly respond to the great internal battle taking place within the United States. Instead they should be elaborating and finding the flanks which will benefit all human development. Trump really wants to build America anew. He really wants huge new infrastructure projects. He really wants sound bilateral relationships between sovereign nation states. Those concerned about human survival should do everything they can to oblige him.

For an international audience it is important to put some context on these events in the United States. First, regarding the Vice-President and the Vice-Presidency. For most recent American administrations, this post is a compromise involving the pragmatics necessary to win elections within partisan political parties. Think about Ronald Reagan, who desired to do some really revolutionary things, like Lyndon LaRouche’s Strategic Defense Initiative. Reagan made a deal with that rotten Republican faction headed by George H.W. Bush, who pretty much destroyed the potential of the Reagan presidency after the Anglo-Dutch imperialists had the President shot. Reagan did the deal because he needed the Bush electoral machinery to win election. Or, take the pairing of Al Gore and Bill Clinton. Gore pretty much sabotaged every genuine Clinton effort directed toward the good of the world, personally sabotaging, for example, face to face meetings between President Bill Clinton and Russia’s Yevgeny Primakov at a most propitious moment for strategic breakthroughs. As Lyndon LaRouche repeatedly emphasizes, pragmatism is what kills any ability for humankind to truly advance. All such deals involve compromises of fundamental principles which, more likely than not, will come back to haunt the dealmaker. Such deadly mistakes are typical of partisan politics and revulsion about them is why a huge sentiment is currently sweeping the United States seeking the end of both political parties and the birth of a politics based solely on principle.

Donald Trump ran an unprecedented campaign for the Presidency as a Republican, but, in reality, as an independent. Both the Republican and Democratic establishments opposed him, with as much ferocity as they could summon. But, as Lyndon LaRouche emphasized when the returns rolled in, the American population, along with other populations internationally, were in revolt against the political establishment which repeatedly sold them out economically and sent them into genocidal wars. In the U.S., Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton told them they had never had it so good, that manufacturing would never come back in the United States, that their future was in the bread and circuses decadent society which had produced massive poverty, an opium epidemic killing hundreds every day, and unprecedented suicide rates, while the very rich continued to get, well, very rich. The traditional Republican Party offered the very same poisonous recipes. Donald Trump promised peace with Russia and China, a return of the U.S. full-set economy, including a modern infrastructure platform, Glass Steagall banking separation, what he called the “American system” of political economy, and a return to space exploration. The adherents of the old system in 2016 never really had a chance, despite what the pundits and prognosticators forecast from within their self-satisfied, arrogant fish bowls.

Mike Pence faced a probable loss in his 2016 re-election effort to be Indiana’s governor and originally endorsed Ted Cruz for President. When Trump destroyed the extant Republican Party bench in the primaries, Pence endorsed Trump and avidly sought the Vice-Presidency. He almost jumped ship when the Billy Bush, sexual misconduct tape emerged, flirting with forcing Trump’s withdrawal and substituting himself as President. Pence also ran the entire Trump transition, stacking the President’s cabinet and significant political appointments with neo-Con and establishment allies, like his good friend Dan Coats as Director of National Intelligence. These people not only oppose Donald Trump. They hate him—particularly his determination to end globalism and forge productive relationships with Russia and China, an existential threat to the swamp in which they live.

Pence is a Christian-Zionist, a very significant power base within the Republican Party which is crucial to mobilizing the evangelical vote. He also enjoyed ready access to major Republican donors, including those, like Sheldon Adelson, aligned with the Christian-Zionists, and David Koch, whose networks played a major role in financing Pence’s entire career. Such donors are currently critical to winning a Presidential election in the United States. And, like all such pragmatic compromises, Trump made it to win the election and to form a government. Although Trump is said to have characterized Pence as the Vice-President from “central casting,” he has also reportedly characterized him as slow and “dumb” behind closed doors. Pence’s October 4th performance certainly supports the assessment.

Pence gave his speech at the Hudson Institute, which was certainly not an accident. The Hudson Institute was founded by Herman Kahn, the foremost proponent of the insane belief in winnable nuclear war. The Institute has honored Pence with awards. It has gone through several transitions since Kahn and others propounded their doctrines for killing most of the human race, even moving to Pence’s Indiana at a certain low point in its financial trajectory. Following the events of September 11, 2001, it became the Washington, D.C. bastion of the neo-conservatives and Straussians who populated the Bush-Cheney Administration. These are the creeps and overt Satanists who led the United States into repeated wars in the Middle East under the banner of British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Nazi slogan, “The Responsibility to Protect.” Scooter Libby, for example, is its senior Vice-President. President Trump has called these ventures, including the wars in Iraq, Libya, and Syria, which murdered hundreds of thousands, the biggest foreign policy mistakes in U.S. history. Hudson receives significant funding from CIA and Defense Department related foundations, such as Bradley, as well as from those agencies themselves. It is also funded by the government of Taiwan.

The Irony of the Michael Pillsbury and Stefan Halper Being Considered “China Experts”

In his remarks at Hudson, Pence singled out Hudson “scholar” Michael Pillsbury for praise. Pillsbury currently leads the Center for Chinese Strategy at Hudson, a constant font of hate against everything China does or is doing. Like Pence, Pillsbury cultivated Trump by aggressively moving to join the Administration soon after the Republican presidential primaries. Recently, Pillsbury has been regularly appearing on television channels the President watches, such as Fox, to launch acid attacks on the Chinese while claiming that the Chinese respect and honor the President. He says, the Chinese use the Mandarin term for “big brains,” or “brainy” to describe Trump. How he knows this is not really explained but that is true of most of Pillsbury’s alleged scholarship about China. He tells endless stories on the shakiest foundations, many of which have served as the foundation for billions of dollars in Pentagon expenditures on otherwise very dubious projects. And he has been doing this for a very long time.

Pillsbury claims that he played a starring role in the late 1970s and early 1980s openings to China, earning the notice of then candidate Ronald Reagan by advocating direct military ties with China. An advocate of Kissinger’s form of geopolitics and a member of Britain’s nefarious International Institute for Strategic Studies, Pillsbury envisioned using extant tensions between the Soviet Union and China at that time, to serve as a major force in destroying the viability of the Soviet bloc. According to his own website, he played a role in providing advanced U.S. defense technologies to China on the bargain that they would pursue the U.S. assigned use for them against the Soviets, as part of a covert plan by the Reagan Administration to collapse the Soviet bloc. These arms sales included new torpedoes, upgrades for jet fighters, and advanced electronics. He also claims to have played a most significant role in providing Stinger missiles to the Afghan Mujahideen. These groupings, of course, included Osama Bin Laden. Pillsbury also claims he played a major role in founding the National Endowment for Democracy and the United States Institute for Peace, the font for various U.S. covert regime change operations throughout the world.

Pillsbury also cultivated a deep friendship with Mohammed Hammoud, the front man for the notorious BCCI bank of drugs, terrorism, and money laundering, which almost sank his career. According to reports, Pillsbury met with Hammoud on numerous occasions and took funding from him, a situation which landed his boss at the time, Senator Orin Hatch, in an ethics investigation. Not to belabor the point of the rancid Michael Pillsbury being sold to Donald Trump as someone he can trust, it was Robert Mueller, then chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, who obstructed and blocked BCCI’s final and very much deserved criminal reckoning by the Justice Department.

Following the BCCI fiasco, Pillsbury went to work for Andy Marshall at the Defense Department’s Office of Net Assessments, which was spending a major part of its time concocting the idea that China represented an unrecognized mortal threat to the United States. Pillsbury joined what was called the B Team of China hawks, people who otherwise inhabited the Committee on the Present Danger of Robert Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz and other Neanderthals and Trump-haters, who successively got the United States involved in Iraq and other endless wars in the Middle East, the same wars the President has rightly and righteously condemned.

As reported by Sojoung Ho in the Washington Monthly of July 2006, under the title “Panda Slugger”:

“The Wall Street Journal took notice of Pillsbury [in 2005] in a front-page story that described him as ‘one of the Pentagon’s most influential advisers on China, with a direct line to many of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s top aides.’ The story observed that China, too, has been ‘keeping tabs on Mr. Pillsbury.’ For good reason: Thanks in part to Pillsbury’s influence, the Pentagon’s 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, or QDR–the blueprint for future defense strategy and spending–identifies China as the nation with ‘the greatest potential to compete militarily with the United States.’ And the Pentagon’s most recent annual report to Congress on China’s military contains passages that appear to be lifted directly out of Pillsbury’s writings, including warnings of “asymmetric programs” in the works. This can get expensive. The Wall Street Journal recently reported ‘the Pentagon now cites China as justification for a range of proposed procurements, most notably a new, multibillion-dollar long-range bomber program.’”

“While Pillsbury has achieved prominence within the Defense Secretary’s office,” Ho continued, “many defense experts within the military, government agencies, and universities reject his scholarship as tendentious at best, and their professional distaste is heightened by personal dislike. ‘Brilliant’ and ‘charming’ are words frequently used by acquaintances to describe Pillsbury, but so are ‘combative,’ ‘conspiratorial,’ and ‘ruthless.’ His career has been one of numerous short-lived jobs, at least three dismissals, and a revoked security clearance.”

Pillsbury’s latest book is called The One Hundred Year Marathon. In it, he claims that the Chinese, above all, are masters of deception and that Chinese military strategy is drawn from its Warring States Period, a period of pre-unification strife more than 2,300 years ago. He says, that as opposed to most Western analysts, he has cultivated relations with nationalist factions in the Peoples’ Liberation Army who have provided him with unique access to their views and strategies. He claims that these masters of deception have told him, a recognized China hater of some years standing, their secret plan for becoming the world hegemon by the year 2049, the hundredth anniversary of the Chinese Revolution. He claims that Xi Jinping is covertly such a nationalist and deceiver. The reason he says the Chinese bequeathed their master plan upon him was to use him to enhance their status in China. As they say in the game of outright scams, if you believe that, I have a bridge I can sell you.

The other side of China bashing, inherited by this President, is the neo-liberal version. As opposed to Pillsbury who leads the neo-con tribe, the neo-liberals have been led by one Stefan Halper. Halper’s Defense Department and British intelligence work includes a book, The Beijing Consensus: Legitimizing Authoritarianism in Our Time. It is to be noted that when not laying out how to geopolitically isolate and contain China, Halper worked for the British and the CIA to set up volunteers for the Trump presidential campaign on British soil, fabricating the leads which led to the unprecedented FBI counterintelligence investigation of Donald Trump’s campaign and the illegal Robert Mueller investigation of the Trump Administration.

Pence's Speech

In his speech, Pence gives vast lip service to Donald Trump’s friendship with Xi Jinping and the long history of U.S./China friendship, while attempting to escalate the present trade dispute between the two countries into exactly the type of geopolitical confrontation the President condemns. The President states emphatically that the United States is not going to tell other nations how to live. Yet, Pence takes up exactly and extensively, the hypocritical human rights and democracy promotion themes endlessly spun as the pillars of U.S. regime change operations. In the runup to this speech, Pence and Congressional allies arranged arms sales to Taiwan, also inflaming that very sensitive issue.

The second major theme struck by Pence is the trade dispute between the U.S. and China. There is no question but that U.S. companies exported major U.S. jobs to China and Asia, seeking the cheapest source of labor under the inhuman regime called “globalism” and “free trade.” Under the plan for the world economy crafted by the British and their U.S. satraps in the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations in the early 1980s, their export of U.S. jobs and major strategic parts of the U.S. economy were part of a plan for “controlled disintegration” of the advanced sector economies. The U.S. was to become a post-industrial service and consumer economy, while China and other nations were to be brought up to the fixed rates of production once enjoyed by the United States, but no further. In effect, the extant supply chain of the world’s economy was outsourced throughout the world, wherever the price of labor was the cheapest. What this conspiracy of idiots failed to recognize is that any fixed mode of production or technology will ultimately fail and collapse because it disobeys the fundamental physical laws of the universe. Successful economies must enjoy high rates of technological progress and fundamental scientific breakthroughs to be sustainable over a period of generations. Otherwise they die through technological attrition.

Thus, while Pence, Pillsbury, Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, and other dim-witted fools paint China as a ruthless pirate, who stole America’s future and continues to do so, the reality is that the City of London and Wall Street and their free trade and post-industrial madness are the actual culprits. Further, continued adherence to the present monetarist regimes of Wall Street and the City of London and their globalist prescriptions is about to make the situation even worse, as the bloated debt bubble accumulated since the 2008 collapse teeters on the edge of explosion. And that presents the danger of bringing every nation down. As Hermann Kahn’s fellows at the Rand Corporation meticulously proved, Hitler’s war machine failed because it expanded its economy only laterally and cannibalized its labor force in a genocide. In this trade dispute, some, in both China and the United States seem to view computer technologies, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and robotics as the crown jewels of the realm. But these prized, allegedly future technologies are only linear and lateral extensions of existing technologies and known scientific principles. They have existed in the bill of materials of the United States for some years and have utterly failed to produce significant advances in productivity.

The urgent question posed in the U.S./China trade dispute is how full set economies can be built in both countries such that they are self-sufficient and can reproduce their populations at the highest levels of development, as specified by Lyndon LaRouche. What does it matter if the United States gets more of the world-wide supply chain back, if it is based on an old mode of production and does not result in the fundamental advances in productivity necessary to actually jumpstart the economy? Fusion energy, space exploration, basic science at the very frontiers of human knowledge, together with massive new city building and infrastructure, are what is required in both countries to prevent catastrophe as the speculative world-wide bubble economy collapses. And the basis for rapidly doing this across the world can only be found in a fixed exchange rate world monetary system issuing long term low interest credit for development, the creation of which has now become an urgent issue for human survival. As with Ronald Reagan’s SDI, the United States and China should be collaborating jointly now on crash programs for breakthroughs in these advanced areas which are now crucial for the long term economic survival of both countries and the human race as a whole. It is extremely important now to remember that this was the Reagan offer to the Soviets, joint development for the good of humanity. It is that prospect, an initial step toward which is embodied in the joint approaches to settling the nuclear and other issues of the Korean peninsula which Pence, Pillsbury, and their British imperial friends are mobilized against. It is that prospect which Donald Trump could bring into being but which his opponents are determined to prevent, at all costs.

In his dumb speech, Pence made a variety of claims about China’s alleged geo-political aggressiveness in the Western Pacific and made allusions to encircling China with an alliance involving the United States, Japan, South Korea, and India. He did this without regard to the very delicate negotiations being conducted simultaneously by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in North Korea, indicating that his faction is intent on blowing up that prospect for peace. The pipe dream about a U.S, Japan, South Korea, India alliance is exactly that. Aside from the strategically blind United States, the other putative members of this alliance fully realize the actual potential and meaning of China’s great One Belt, One Road Initiative and want to fully participate. With respect to Pence’s claims about alleged Chinese aggressiveness and imperial aims in the Western Pacific, one wag commented that the claim amounts to demanding that China apologize for its geographic location in the midst of a deliberate encirclement by American bases, the reality of the Barack Obama’s Pacific tilt policy.

But, by far, the most vile part of Pence’s performance was aimed squarely at undermining the personal relationship between Xi and Trump. In that respect, Pence claimed that China is now in a “whole of nation” mobilization to remove Donald Trump as President because of the trade dispute between the two nations. He cited the fact that China ill-advisedly placed ads in Iowa newspapers condemning the President’s tariffs policy. This reactive gaffe clearly failed to understand the present U.S. political environment and is the sole factual basis for all of Mike Pence’s bellicose and false claims about Chinese election interference aimed at Trump. The rest of it is based on alleged classified intelligence reports which are almost certainly as bogus as the those produced by the cherry picked intelligence analysts who claimed massive Russian interference in the U.S. elections to elect Trump. After all, Pence’s good friend, the DNI, Dan Coats, has not balked at public rebukes of President Trump concerning Trump’s continued belief in Putin’s good faith and he most certainly wouldn’t balk at fabricating evidence and cooking the books to destroy Trump’s relationship to Xi Jinping.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

I would not give this article very much weight. The author seems confused seeing the difference between the CCP, the Chinese people, and Taiwan. Pence was speaking to all three at the same time and each knows exactly who he was addressing at. The key word is CCP and the author failed to mention it much (by first glance)

Of course, Pence and Trump are both on the same page.

[Jayke]

AuCo, it’s a long article, is it really necassary to quote the whole thing? Snip it down to the points you take issue with so we can see the passage you’d like to contend. Based on the limited remarks you’ve said so far, I’d place more weight in the article than I do in your attempt to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Anyway, in other news, we have Darth Soros complaining Trump is destroying the New World Order. All part of the theatrics no doubt.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VwfEsrlEKcc

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by mgray (here)
How ... may mean we will not see most of the documents unredacted.

Double dang and a drat if that turns out to be the case .

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Jayke (here)
AuCo, it’s a long article, is it really necassary to quote the whole thing? Snip it down to the points you take issue with so we can see the passage you’d like to contend. Based on the limited remarks you’ve said so far, I’d place more weight in the article than I do in your attempt to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Anyway, in other news, we have Darth Soros complaining Trump is destroying the New World Order. All part of the theatrics no doubt.

Well, (a bit tongue in cheek) there was one advantage, for me at least, in AuCo's quoting the entire article. I had not had time to read the article when you first posted it, but now I do, and am, thanks to its reposting.

None of the previous paragraph is meant to disagree with the reply of yours, Jayke, that I just quoted. Rather I agree.

[Jayke]

I’m all for people having contrary views, I just find it productive when counter-points are elucidated with greater distinction. I tried re-reading the article, but I still couldn’t figure out what AuCo was referring to with the “CCP, Chinese people and Taiwan” comment, or how that made the author of the article confused. That kind of logic just confuses me

Ah well, moving on...

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by mgray (here)
How ... may mean we will not see most of the documents unredacted.

Double dang and a drat if that turns out to be the case .

Strategem 13: Beat the grass to startle the snake

If that is the strategy the FISA declass is utilising, it’s actually more effective to keep the FISA classified—but with the threat of declassification—held like a Damocles sword ready to drop at any moment. There’s already been reports that the British have been scrambling to make deals with Trump in a desperate bid for him not to declassify. It’s all about the leverage.

https://mobile.twitter.com/GeorgePap...25473927176192

Frankly, it’s not surprising that the leaders of the UK and Australia have been recently begging the president to not declassify any FISA documents in which they are implicated, in writing, of spying on Americans and the president himself. Sometimes you hedge wrong and lose.

As Catherine Austin Fitts tells us, most people in politics have a ‘control file’, which is used to blackmail them into following certain policies. How do you bring all those who are controlled in line? to get them following a new agenda?

Answer: Have a control file on the people who hold the control files. In that way, you can turn the ship around without the chaos of mass arrests, which, although would be a great show of force, would also be a huge burden of resources. Especially when the ship needs to be turned around rapidly, which the USA will need to do to have a fighting chance of competing with the rising influence of China and Russia. The longer America dawdles with its political infighting, the further behind in global influence they’ll start to lag.

But that’s just gaming out potential scenarios based on what I’d do in Trumps position, and we’ll find out soon enough, after the midterms next month, to see how the Donmeister is going to play this one out.

[Ratszinger]

Posted by Jayke (here)
I’m all for people having contrary views, I just find it productive when counter-points are elucidated with greater distinction. I tried re-reading the article, but I still couldn’t figure out what AuCo was referring to with the “CCP, Chinese people and Taiwan” comment, or how that made the author of the article confused. That kind of logic just confuses me

Ah well, moving on...

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by mgray (here)
How ... may mean we will not see most of the documents unredacted.

Double dang and a drat if that turns out to be the case .

Strategem 13: Beat the grass to startle the snake

If that is the strategy the FISA declass is utilising, it’s actually more effective to keep the FISA classified—but with the threat of declassification—held like a Damocles sword ready to drop at any moment. There’s already been reports that the British have been scrambling to make deals with Trump in a desperate bid for him not to declassify. It’s all about the leverage.

https://mobile.twitter.com/GeorgePap...25473927176192

Frankly, it’s not surprising that the leaders of the UK and Australia have been recently begging the president to not declassify any FISA documents in which they are implicated, in writing, of spying on Americans and the president himself. Sometimes you hedge wrong and lose.

As Catherine Austin Fitts tells us, most people in politics have a ‘control file’, which is used to blackmail them into following certain policies. How do you bring all those who are controlled in line? to get them following a new agenda?

Answer: Have a control file on the people who hold the control files. In that way, you can turn the ship around without the chaos of mass arrests, which, although would be a great show of force, would also be a huge burden of resources. Especially when the ship needs to be turned around rapidly, which the USA will need to do to have a fighting chance of competing with the rising influence of China and Russia. The longer America dawdles with its political infighting, the further behind in global influence they’ll start to lag.

But that’s just gaming out potential scenarios based on what I’d do in Trumps position, and we’ll find out soon enough, after the midterms next month, to see how the Donmeister is going to play this one out.

Trump made deals for future political favors and in return he probably did consent to some things on his end but I believe in the end he was paid in some ways with information as well as promises of loyalty. In other words he made Rosenstein his bitch and probably did that with Feinstein, Graham and a few others that are now swaying his way politically or suddenly found their vocal cords. My feeling is that Rosenstein had already approached Trump earlier with some 'bargain material' trying to negotiate to save his own neck, likely playing that card that with his time in, experience, and knowledge of what is going on he would certainly be more valuable to Trump working inside for him than for this to come out and end his career.

Trump thought it over as is typical and they meet again on the plane to work it out. Next day and out of the blue Haley is fired or steps down we'll say whatever the case but this is connected to how RR saved his behind. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It may be he decided to go ahead and utilize some of the swamp as political tools, as well as his eyes, ears and fingers to go about his work holding them over a barrel doing to them just what they have done. I think we'll know soon because it doesn't look like RR has been fired or intents to step down.

Pence reads to me to be a good and honorable family man, with solid Christian morals but underneath it all is a power hungry ego that does indeed believe he was anointed by God to lead.

Both China and Russia are BS smoke screens to take away from the fact that it is the US intelligence services behind most of the spying. The elite have traditionally loved finding deviant types because they were easy to blackmail by simply hiring a private dick to tail them long enough to get good footage of them doing their nasty deeds! I understand Epstein's Isle was a haven for recording big wigs with minors and using it against them time and again making them do whatever they wanted for the rest of their lives.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

His explanation of the difference between a democracy and a republic - and why the word democracy is keeping us under the ptb's spell.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wIaDcwVYMi8

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by AuCo (here)
Of course, Pence and Trump are both on the same page.

Of course not .

Parliamentary governments form as a coalition of a few parties of similar enough views.

U.S. governments form as a coalition of two overlapping sets of powerful, somewhat behind the scenes interests, one more aligned with the President and one with the Vice President. If the ones behind the President lose their grip sufficiently, then the President is covertly assassinated (FDR), or is shot and killed (JFK) or weakened (Reagan), or the President comes into office already weaker than his Vice President (George "W" Bush versus Cheney), or the President is just a teleprompt reading Manchurian candidate controlled from the beginning by handlers behind the curtain (Obama).

This is not a game, and Pence and Trump are not teammates on the same side.

The struggle for power in Washington, DC is intense, and has been for a long, long time, perhaps since the white man first displaced whatever native Indians previously occupied those swamps.

[mgray]

Are investors in for bumpy ride as deep state fights back? Talk about the Fed.

[Valerie Villars]

Posted by Ba-ba-Ra (here)
His explanation of the difference between a democracy and a republic - and why the word democracy is keeping us under the ptb's spell.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wIaDcwVYMi8

Thank you Barbara. That was an interesting video and I don't disagree with any part of it. Words are spells. Our Republic versus The Great Sorosian Democracy.

May the Republic prevail.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by mgray (here)
Are investors in for bumpy ride as deep state fights back? Talk about the Fed.

My investment intuition is that we're in for a down draft, with a smaller bounce backup close to the elections, all sufficiently small so as to not seriously affect the key swing districts in fly over country.

Then the real storms, in both New York (financials) and Washington (politics) hit after the mid-term elections.

Disclaimer: as one can discern from my modest living arrangements, my investment intuitions aren't worth the pixels they're painted with.

[Lettherebelight]

Thank you, BaBaRa for sharing the Serial Brain vid.
That really hit home.

i pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands
one nation, under God, indivisible...
with liberty and justice for all

It feels good to say it again. I miss the Pledge of Allegiance...
it made all us children feel good to be an equal part of such a great thing.

[AuCo]

Posted by Jayke (here)
AuCo, it’s a long article, is it really necassary to quote the whole thing? Snip it down to the points you take issue with so we can see the passage you’d like to contend. Based on the limited remarks you’ve said so far, I’d place more weight in the article than I do in your attempt to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Anyway, in other news, we have Darth Soros complaining Trump is destroying the New World Order. All part of the theatrics no doubt.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VwfEsrlEKcc

. Yikes! Jayke, I did not realize there was a baby in the water. I have to admit, the water was so gross, I tossed out the pan as well.

Any way, the premise that the author based his/her theory on, imho is simply wrong that Pence and Haley are working against Trump: "Pence believes he was ordained by God to become President of the United States. Both Haley and Pence have a history of working aggressively to undermine Trump’s most significant initiatives, in this case, Trump’s relationship with China’s President Xi Jinping."

Trump appears and even claims that he and Xi are buddies but that is only on the surface for diplomacy sake, just as Reagan to Gorbachev.

I believe humanity can still be saved and if one has to guess where America is heading at this juncture he/she must know China's HISTORY.

Is Haley up for president? Very likely I'd say. Is Trump's life in danger? Certainly yes. Is Clinton gonna go to jail? I'd guess not. To preserve this republic, things must be in order from within.

[enigma3]

Q related.
1. I used Firefox this morning to access the Q posts only to find the site censored by Firefox using a Google tool. It can be overridden but a PIA. I sent them a message to stop it. Rotsa ruck there.
2. The FISA docs will be released unredacted as soon as the IG Horowitz gives his seal of approval. More delays.
3. The USA was set up as a Republic as per the Federalist Papers. That was sabotaged/changed into a Democracy with the passage of the 17th amendment. The Deep State at its ugliest.
4. The whole Kavanaugh episode may have been planned by the Patriots to show the demagoguery of the Dems and energize the Republican base for the midterms.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Jayke (here)
New Article from LaRouchePac, discussing the Mike Pence speech on China, which Q has been directing us to watch. They do a good job of picking apart some of the deep state dynamics in this article, to show some of the different factions at play within Trumps admin, along with a potential answer for why Nikki Haley recently resigned.

Another day, another great LaRouchePAC article

This new LaRouchePAC article goes over the unfolding details of the coup led by top DOJ officials against Trump: Robert Mueller's Gathering Storm: Thieves Fall Out:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Robert Mueller's Gathering Storm: Thieves Fall Out

This article was updated Wednesday, October 10, at 11:50 am.

Over the past few days, there have been dramatic developments in the countercoup with Robert Mueller’s “obstruction of justice” case against Donald Trump now clearly hanging in the balance.

Last week's testimony by former FBI General Counsel James Baker to the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees produced the following new developments:

(1) Baker testified that he personally met with David Sussman, the lawyer for Hillary Clinton and the DNC, to receive their British intelligence generated dirty dossier on Donald Trump, and other materials on Russiagate, and then, as FBI general counsel, shepherded through a FISA warrant on an American citizen, Carter Page which never told the court that this was the FBI acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign to spy on a U.S. citizen and a rival presidential campaign. This aspect of Baker’s role was redacted from the House Intelligence Committee’s report on Russiagate by the Justice Department on “national security grounds.” It is clear that there was no national security rationale for the redaction. Instead, the redaction was based on the job security of certain officials and the desire to cloak from the public the massive scandal now enveloping the top levels of the Department of Justice. While this aspect of Baker’s testimony has been widely reported, it is important to add that this spying was on behalf of the British and the Obama White House, in addition to the Clinton campaign.

(2) Baker also testified, according to accounts provided both by Sara Carter on Fox and by John Solomon in The Hill, that Andy McCabe and Lisa Page came to him shortly after a May 2017 meeting first reported in the New York Times. Baker’s testimony, corroborated the Times account that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was talking seriously about wearing a wire to record conversations with the President and to gather evidence against him following Trump’s firing of James Comey as FBI Director. Rosenstein, according to this account, said he was working with two members of the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove the President from office. Rosenstein has denied the Times’ report of this meeting and, clearly, Baker is pushing back on behalf of the fired Deputy Director of the FBI, McCabe and his former attorney, Page. In addition, Baker has a very close and sycophantic relationship to James Comey. Baker also testified that he told McCabe and Page that he saw nothing unethical about wearing a wire in order to set up the President.

Again, it is useful to remind the reader of the backdrop. Fired FBI Director James Comey has previously told the Congress that he choreographed every single one of his meetings with the President, contemporaneously taking notes and returning for “murder boards” with FBI lawyers concerning the next steps in this process. It is clear that Comey was operating in an entrapment operation against the President. It would not be a stretch to imagine that Comey himself was wearing a wire. As one of John Solomon’s sources summed up implication: “You walk away from the Baker interview with little doubt that the FBI leadership in that 2016-17 time frame saw itself as far more than a neutral investigative agency but actually as a force to stop Trump’s election before it happened and then maybe reversing it after the election was over.”

All of the people involved here are key witnesses concerning Mueller’s claim that Trump’s firing of Comey could represent an obstruction of the Justice Department investigation of Trump. All of the people, with the exception of Rosenstein, namely, Baker, McCabe, and Page have been fired or resigned, with Rosenstein’s concurrence, over egregious misconduct. While many have argued, correctly, that the President was lawfully using his constitutional powers to fire Comey, the case goes totally awry, in public perception, if the FBI and the Department of Justice were running a soft, illegal coup against the President and the President acted to stop it. The evidence for that assertion by the President seems slowly to be coming into view.

(3) Baker also was fed a version of the Steele dossier by reporter David Corn of Mother Jones, who was one of Steele’s journalistic contacts. Corn appears to have functioned in the same back door fashion, during the period when Steele had been fired by the FBI, as Deputy Associate Attorney General Bruce Ohr. The objective was to keep the Steele disinformation flowing into the FBI, protocols be damned. Quite an astonishing picture.

Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, who rode with the President to Florida on Air Force 1 on Monday and provided his account of these meetings, received the President’s pass, as least temporarily. It is unclear what Rosenstein told the President about the May 2017 meetings. Rosenstein was scheduled to appear before the House Judiciary Committee in a closed door session on Thursday, but that appearance may very well be put off. The Andrew McCabe Memos which document McCabe’s account of these meetings have been subpoenaed by the House Committee, but not turned over. It is unclear whether their release to the House is being blocked by Special Counsel Robert Mueller who has copies of the McCabe memos. McCabe himself is under criminal investigation for lying about press leaks and is the target of a sitting grand jury in Washington D.C.

Two things are absolutely clear regarding these developments: Rosenstein is hopelessly legally conflicted in terms of supervising Robert Mueller’s investigation, as he is a critical witness to the very events being investigated and his job is at stake. That conflict may very well have evaporated if there, is as they say, “no there, there” with respect to Mueller’s pursuit of the obstruction charge. Whatever his role in the May, 2017 meetings, Rosenstein was present when someone proposed running a soft coup against the President of the United States in meetings which we are now hearing about for the first time. Instead of withdrawing from this conspiracy and reporting those responsible, Rosenstein decided to appoint the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, who has conducted the witch hunt against Trump. Again, the implications are relatively astounding. Yet, the fact that Trump gave Rosenstein a pass here, at least temporarily, in all probability means that something much bigger is evolving other than the linear implications of the already reported, public facts.

A second major development was reported last week which, in any normal time, would represent a complete scandal in and of itself. According to stories in both the New Yorker and the Daily Caller, a Democratic Senator on the Senate Intelligence Committee reached out and outsourced the Senate’s own investigation into Russiagate in March of 2017 to a group led by former Senate Intelligence staffer Daniel Jones. The Democratic Senator was outsourcing the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation to a private group funded for this purpose by George Soros and a bevy of Silicon Valley billionaires. Soros, et al, funneled $50 million to Jones to continue the work of Christopher Steele of Britain’s MI6 and Fusion GPS to take out Trump. This obviously contaminates any conclusion which might be made by the Senate Intelligence Committee concerning Russiagate and the extent of the outsourcing should be the subject of a major investigation. Was the Senate Intelligence Committee entirely bought by Soros, et al.? Washington, D.C., speculation concerning the Senator involved centers on Senator Diane Feinstein who is Jones’ former boss.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[TargeT]

Interesting.... more bush beating?
Donald Trump complimented guests on their 'great bloodlines' in a weird speech to top business leaders

[Jayke]

Posted by TargeT (here)
Interesting.... more bush beating?
Donald Trump complimented guests on their 'great bloodlines' in a weird speech to top business leaders

Trump gets a lot of flack for his communication style, but I think the guy is a master of multi-level communication.

Hoberman, who now runs incubator and accelerator Founders Factory, told Business Insider during an interview that Trump made some peculiar remarks when he stood up and gave a speech.

Hoberman, with a passable Trump impression, recounted: "Where he read, it was bad. His bits off the cuff...were also a bit odd. He banged on about Churchill about a hundred times because of Blenheim, that was clearly a speechwriter's device. He did have some great lines. He said: 'You've all got such good bloodlines in this room.' That was awful, that was script. 'You've all got such amazing DNA.'"

Trump has form when it comes to touting superior genetics. The president has repeatedly credited his position in life to "good genes." In a July 2016 speech, he referenced his late uncle, a nuclear physicist, saying: "Dr John Trump at M.I.T.; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart."

Hoberman added: "It was weird because [Trump] was very warm actually, yet at the same time the news broke while he was speaking that he had given that interview in The Sun where he undermined Theresa May."

Trump committed a diplomatic faux pas during his visit by criticising the prime minister's approach to Brexit in an interview with the British newspaper. He told The Sun that he had advised May on "how to do Brexit" but that "she didn't listen to me." He also said ex-foreign secretary Boris Johnson would make a "great prime minister." He later appeared to walk back the remarks.

"It was utterly bizarre, and I think I saw someone whispering in Theresa May's ear," said Hoberman, suggesting that this was the moment the British prime minister was made aware of Trump's remarks in The Sun.

I won’t claim to know who his intended audience was for with those comments, or the message he was trying to convey to them, but the reference to Churchill was very interesting. I followed up on a link posted earlier in this thread about the Payseurs changing their name to Vanderbilt. One connection I noticed was that the Churchill’s and Vanderbilts intermarried into each other’s bloodlines. Can’t find the specific article but this one from Wikipedia seems to show the connection:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consuelo_Vanderbilt

Consuelo Vanderbilt Balsan (formerly Consuelo Spencer-Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough; born Consuelo Vanderbilt; 2 March 1877 – 6 December 1964) was a member of the prominent American Vanderbilt family. Her marriage to The 9th Duke of Marlborough has become an emblem of the socially advantageous, but loveless, marriages common during the Gilded Age.

In terms of multi-level communication, what he does with Henry Kissinger in this following clip from the White House is brutal:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=u9AC17Bshrc

After the obligatory niceties, Trump lets Kissinger speak to the cameras but Kissinger is clearly caught unawares. Kissinger looks like he’s used to strolling into the Oval Office and dictating terms to presidents, he doesn’t look like he was anticipating being caught on camera doing so. After Kissinger is forced into the spotlight, its back to Trump who says: “we were on the wrong path before, all you have to do is take a look...(while Kissinger’s decrepit bag of bones is sat right next to him) ...we’re on the right path now” (zoom in on Trump, Kissinger gets cropped out of view for the rest of the scene ).

[David Trd1]

Posted by Jayke (here)

Posted by TargeT (here)
Interesting.... more bush beating?
Donald Trump complimented guests on their 'great bloodlines' in a weird speech to top business leaders

Trump gets a lot of flack for his communication style, but I think the guy is a master of multi-level communication.

Hoberman, who now runs incubator and accelerator Founders Factory, told Business Insider during an interview that Trump made some peculiar remarks when he stood up and gave a speech.

Hoberman, with a passable Trump impression, recounted: "Where he read, it was bad. His bits off the cuff...were also a bit odd. He banged on about Churchill about a hundred times because of Blenheim, that was clearly a speechwriter's device. He did have some great lines. He said: 'You've all got such good bloodlines in this room.' That was awful, that was script. 'You've all got such amazing DNA.'"

Trump has form when it comes to touting superior genetics. The president has repeatedly credited his position in life to "good genes." In a July 2016 speech, he referenced his late uncle, a nuclear physicist, saying: "Dr John Trump at M.I.T.; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart."

Hoberman added: "It was weird because [Trump] was very warm actually, yet at the same time the news broke while he was speaking that he had given that interview in The Sun where he undermined Theresa May."

Trump committed a diplomatic faux pas during his visit by criticising the prime minister's approach to Brexit in an interview with the British newspaper. He told The Sun that he had advised May on "how to do Brexit" but that "she didn't listen to me." He also said ex-foreign secretary Boris Johnson would make a "great prime minister." He later appeared to walk back the remarks.

"It was utterly bizarre, and I think I saw someone whispering in Theresa May's ear," said Hoberman, suggesting that this was the moment the British prime minister was made aware of Trump's remarks in The Sun.

I won’t claim to know who his intended audience was for with those comments, or the message he was trying to convey to them, but the reference to Churchill was very interesting. I followed up on a link posted earlier in this thread about the Payseurs changing their name to Vanderbilt. One connection I noticed was that the Churchill’s and Vanderbilts intermarried into each other’s bloodlines. Can’t find the specific article but this one from Wikipedia seems to show the connection:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consuelo_Vanderbilt

Consuelo Vanderbilt Balsan (formerly Consuelo Spencer-Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough; born Consuelo Vanderbilt; 2 March 1877 – 6 December 1964) was a member of the prominent American Vanderbilt family. Her marriage to The 9th Duke of Marlborough has become an emblem of the socially advantageous, but loveless, marriages common during the Gilded Age.

In terms of multi-level communication, what he does with Henry Kissinger in this following clip from the White House is brutal:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=u9AC17Bshrc

After the obligatory niceties, Trump lets Kissinger speak to the cameras but Kissinger is clearly caught unawares. Kissinger looks like he’s used to strolling into the Oval Office and dictating terms to presidents, he doesn’t look like he was anticipating being caught on camera doing so. After Kissinger is forced into the spotlight, its back to Trump who says: “we were on the wrong path before, all you have to do is take a look...(while Kissinger’s decrepit bag of bones is sat right next to him) ...we’re on the right path now” (zoom in on Trump, Kissinger gets cropped out of view for the rest of the scene ).

When This meeting happened it was extremely interesting, especially in light of Daniel litzs x-series and the suggestive information he uncovered regarding, Trump/Nixon/Kissinger connection through his uncle and then trump himself. There are wheels within wheels here, EXTREMELY interesting...

[Praxis]

Posted by DNA (here)


You are focusing on the negative aspects of the current political climate that Trump has been unable to influence rather than what he has influenced.

We have had this discussion before, on this very thread as a matter of fact and I've always told you that I think you are expecting a bit much out of the man considering he has only been in office for two years, but I'm going to share what he has done and why this is so important.

No I focus what I am supposed to for the president. That means the things he is constitutionally responsible for. That is what I dont think you understand here. I critique congressmen for the laws they pass or dont because that is the area they have control over. I critique presidents for the actions of the executive branch agencies and the office itself.

He is in direct control of whether or not Guantanamo Bay Stays open and illegally detains people without trial. PERIOD.
This was a failure of Obama and is now a failure and catastrophe for trump since he is expanding and looking to send more people there.

He can do it. He invokes the Teller Amendment and then gives the land back to Cuba and a sufficient transition time to get out supplies and equipment out of there.

With the people in prison, You move them to federal prison someone in the US and try them LIKE THE LAW REQUIRES and because it is the moral and right thing to do. Governors cant stop him because he has concurrent jurisdiction on military bases in the US and therefore can transfer the detainees to Fort Leavenworth say.


He is in direct control, and this one is even more direct than the previous because he is the CIC of the UCC of the US Military as set down by the goldwater nichols act, of our support to Saudi Arabia and the crushing of Yemen.


Ill bet you might label yourself Christian. (just guessing based on God and not Ahura Mazda or YWH or Allah)

Did you know that Christian means "having the manner and spiritual character proper to a follower of Christ"?

You know I cant quite recall, but I think there is a Commandment that might mention killing. I dont know.

I think Christ was probably totally on board with water boarding and indefinite detentions without trial too.

My favorite Christ quote is "Rendition unto Ceasar that which is ceasars; but certainly water board the muslims for GOD."

EDIT

I had to edit after reading https://grayseconomy.com/2018/09/06/...-gitmo-answer/
Just wow.

Openly being okay with American citizens being declared Enemy Combatants and taken to gitmo for military trial.

Does not matter who you are . You deserve a civilian trial if you are not part of the military.

This is un american. It is un constitutional.

It should not have to come to your friends and family being declared enemy combatants for you to realize how bad what you support is even if it is for Clinton and Obama.

What starts with Clinton and Obama ends with you.

[DNA]

Posted by Praxis (here)
No I focus what I am supposed to for the president. That means the things he is constitutionally responsible for. That is what I dont think you understand here. I critique congressmen for the laws they pass or dont because that is the area they have control over. I critique presidents for the actions of the executive branch agencies and the office itself.
He is in direct control of whether or not Guantanamo Bay Stays open and illegally detains people without trial. PERIOD.
This was a failure of Obama and is now a failure and catastrophe for trump since he is expanding and looking to send more people there.
He can do it. He invokes the Teller Amendment and then gives the land back to Cuba and a sufficient transition time to get out supplies and equipment out of there.
With the people in prison, You move them to federal prison someone in the US and try them LIKE THE LAW REQUIRES and because it is the moral and right thing to do. Governors cant stop him because he has concurrent jurisdiction on military bases in the US and therefore can transfer the detainees to Fort Leavenworth say.
He is in direct control, and this one is even more direct than the previous because he is the CIC of the UCC of the US Military as set down by the goldwater nichols act, of our support to Saudi Arabia and the crushing of Yemen.
Ill bet you might label yourself Christian. (just guessing based on God and not Ahura Mazda or YWH or Allah)
Did you know that Christian means "having the manner and spiritual character proper to a follower of Christ"?
You know I cant quite recall, but I think there is a Commandment that might mention killing. I dont know.
I think Christ was probably totally on board with water boarding and indefinite detentions without trial too.
My favorite Christ quote is "Rendition unto Ceasar that which is ceasars; but certainly water board the muslims for GOD."
EDIT
I had to edit after reading https://grayseconomy.com/2018/09/06/...-gitmo-answer/
Just wow.
Openly being okay with American citizens being declared Enemy Combatants and taken to gitmo for military trial.
Does not matter who you are . You deserve a civilian trial if you are not part of the military.
This is un american. It is un constitutional.
It should not have to come to your friends and family being declared enemy combatants for you to realize how bad what you support is even if it is for Clinton and Obama.
What starts with Clinton and Obama ends with you.

You cover too many topics.

I would love to respond and exchange, but I just don't have the time to address all of the issues you bring up.

I think it would help if you could reduce the topics you wish to put forth.

Coming down with an avalanche of rationales for dismissing Trump causes you to come off like a hater.

I don't really believe you are aiming the post at myself even though I'm quoted, it feels more like you are just making this a pointed blow to all Trump fans.