Missing history: US oligarchs finance Socialism

Socialism was never a movement for “the masses”

by Jon Rappoport

February 20, 2018

In 1971, Gary Allen published his book, None Dare Call it Conspiracy. It quickly became an unofficial best seller.

Over the years, several million copies have been sold.

Allen’s thesis was stark: super-rich American capitalists were financing socialism. This bizarre paradox was resolved when socialism was properly understood—not as “power to the people”—but as elite power over the people. In other words, as a hoax.

These days, the socialist hoax is still unknown to most of the population:

Cloak a global power grab as progress for all of humanity.

Here, from chapter six of None Dare Call it Conspiracy, “The Rockefellers and the Reds,” is an explosive passage commenting on the period just after the Russian Revolution of 1917:

“The Rockefellers assigned their public relations agent, Ivy Lee, to sell the American public the idea that the Bolsheviks were merely misunderstood idealists who were actually kind benefactors of mankind.”

“Professor Antony Sutton of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, notes in his highly authoritative Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development:”

“’Quite predictably…[Ivy] Lee concludes that the communist problem is merely psychological. By this time he is talking about “Russians” (not Communists) and concludes “they are all right.” He suggests the United States should not engage in propaganda; makes a plea for peaceful coexistence; and suggests the United States would find it sound policy to recognize the USSR and advance credits [give loans].’ (Antony Sutton, Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1917-1930, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford University, Calif., 1968, p.292)”

“After the Bolshevik Revolution, Standard [Oil] of New Jersey [Rockefeller] bought 50 per cent of the Nobel’s huge Caucasus oil fields even though the property had theoretically been nationalized [by Russia]. (O’Connor, Harvey, The Empire Of Oil, Monthly Review Press, New York, 1955, p.270.)”

“In 1927, Standard Oil of New York [Rockefeller] built a refinery in Russia, thereby helping the Bolsheviks put their economy back on its feet. Professor Sutton states: ‘This was the first United States investment in Russia since the Revolution.’ (Ibid, Vol.1, p.38)”

“Shortly thereafter Standard Oil of New York and its subsidiary, Vacuum Oil Company [Rockefeller], concluded a deal to market Soviet oil in European countries and it was reported that a loan of $75,009,000 to the Bolsheviks was arranged. (National Republic, Sept.1927.)”

“…Wherever Standard Oil would go, Chase National Bank was sure to follow. (The Rockefeller’s Chase Bank was later merged with the Warburg’s Manhattan Bank to form the present Chase Manhattan Bank.) In order to rescue the Bolsheviks, who were supposedly an archenemy, the Chase National Bank was instrumental in establishing the American-Russian Chamber of Commerce in 1922. President of the Chamber was Reeve Schley, a vice-president of Chase National Bank. (Ibid, Vol.11, p.288) According to Professor Sutton: ‘In 1925, negotiations between Chase and [Russian] Prombank extended beyond the finance of raw materials and mapped out a complete program for financing Soviet raw material exports to the U. S. and imports of U. S. cotton and machinery.’ (Ibid, Vol.11, p.226) Sutton also reports that ‘Chase National Bank and the Equitable Trust Company were leaders in the Soviet credit business.’ (Ibid, p.277)”

“The Rockefeller’s Chase National Bank also was involved in selling Bolshevik bonds in the United States in 1928. Patriotic organizations denounced the Chase as an ‘international fence.’ Chase was called ‘a disgrace to America… They will go to any lengths for a few dollars profits.’ (Ibid, Vol.11, p.291) Congressman Louis McFadden, chairman of the House Banking Committee, maintained in a speech to his fellow Congressmen:”

“’The Soviet government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks acting through the Chase Bank and the Guaranty Trust Company and other banks in New York City.”

“’Open up the books of Amtorg, the trading organization of the Soviet government in New York, and of Gostorg, the general office of the Soviet Trade Organization, and of the State Bank of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and you will be staggered to see how much American money has been taken from the United States’ Treasury for the benefit of Russia. Find out what business has been transacted for the State Bank of Soviet Russia by its correspondent, the Chase Bank of New York’. (Congressional Record, June 15, 1933.)”

“But the Rockefellers apparently were not alone in financing the Communist arm of the Insiders’ conspiracy. According to Professor Sutton ‘… there is a report in the State Department files that names Kuhn, Loeb & Co. (the long established and important financial house in New York) as the financier of the [Russians’] First Five Year Plan. See U. S. State Dept. Decimal File, 811.51/3711 and 861.50 FIVE YEAR PLAN/236.’ (Sutton, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 340n.)”

“Professor Sutton proves conclusively in his three volume history of Soviet technological development that the Soviet Union was almost literally manufactured by the U.S.A…”

“…Sutton shows that there is hardly a segment of the Soviet economy which is not a result of the transference of Western, particularly American, technology.”

“This cannot be wholly the result of accident. For fifty years the Federal Reserve-CFR-Rockefeller-lnsider crowd has advocated and carried out policies aimed at increasing the power of their satellite, the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, America spends $75 billion a year on defense to protect itself from the enemy the Insiders are building up.”

NOTE: The descendants of these bankers are now doing everything they can to build up the story that Donald Trump won the presidency by colluding with Russians. To call this an irony, in view of the above information, would be a vast understatement.

However, the motives of these men are clear: regardless of whether Trump meant to keep his promises to destroy Globalism (aka worldwide Socialism), his mere mention of Globalism as the enemy, during the presidential campaign, and his declared opposition to Globalist “free trade” treaties, was sufficient to warrant an all-out attack on him.

The whole idea of nationalism as preferable to Globalism could act as a contagious germ spreading to the people of other countries—so Trump as the face and symbol of such sentiments had to be defamed and crushed.

Through various front organizations, cutouts, dupes, brainwashed useful idiots, and violent hired thugs, that operation to crush Trump is well underway.

Again—and this point must be understood—IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER TRUMP EVER MEANT TO KEEP HIS PROMISE TO BURY GLOBALISM. THE MERE MENTION OF GLOBALISM AS THE ENEMY WAS AND IS SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT UNCEASING ATTACKS AGAINST HIM.

Many, many of Trump’s supporters want to see Globalism buried.

Ultimately, these supporters are the real target of the Globalists.

These millions of targets—human beings who want freedom, a return to Constitutional principles, and an end to both Globalism and American Empire—gave support to presidential candidates before Trump: Ross Perot and Ron Paul.

These “targets” aren’t going away. They understand how the American Republic was betrayed. The above evidence reveals that betrayal was a set-up, designed to prop up and rescue a system (the USSR) that was dead on arrival, a complete failure.

Elite money created Socialist Russia, sustained it, bailed it out, and propagandized it as a movement of the people.

Socialism is a movement of, by, and for the super-rich.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Trilateral conspirators out in the open—and Donald Trump

Feb13

Trilateral conspirators out in the open—and Donald Trump

~an interview that will live in infamy~

by Jon Rappoport

February 13, 2018

Note: I wrote this article long before Donald Trump appeared on the scene. Love him, hate him, trust him, don’t trust him, he has spoken against Globalism and for Nationalism. Those sentiments have taken hold and reverberated across the planet, crossing swords with Elites who are bent on destroying separate nations and ruling one collectivist world from above. Therefore, whether or not Trump means what he says, he must be taken down. The genie must be put back in the bottle.

Who is in charge of destroying economies?

One group has been virtually forgotten. Its influence is enormous. It has existed since 1973.

It’s called the Trilateral Commission (TC).

Keep in mind that the original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.”

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

In 1969, four years before birthing the TC with David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote: “[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Goodbye, separate nations.

Any doubt on the question of TC goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America. Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration.

For example:

* Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;

* James Jones, National Security Advisor;

* Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;

* Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

Here is a stunning piece of forgotten history, a 1978 conversation between a US reporter and two members of the Trilateral Commission. (Source: Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management; ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980, South End Press, Pages 192-3).

The conversation was public knowledge at the time.

Anyone who was anyone in Washington politics, in media, in think-tanks, had access to it. Understood its meaning.

But no one shouted from the rooftops. No one used the conversation to force a scandal. No one protested loudly.

The conversation revealed that the entire basis of the US Constitution had been torpedoed, that the people who were running US national policy (which includes trade treaties) were agents of an elite shadow group. No question about it.

And yet: official silence. Media silence. The Dept. of Justice made no moves, Congress undertook no serious inquiries, and the President, Jimmy Carter, issued no statements. Carter was himself an agent of the Trilateral Commission in the White House. He had been plucked from obscurity by David Rockefeller, and through elite TC press connections, vaulted into the spotlight as a pre-eminent choice for the Presidency.

The following 1978 conversation featured reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took up the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations, and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches. [a lie]

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

This interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was buried.

US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been created in 1973 by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

When Carter won the presidential election (1976), his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We’ve lost. And I’ll quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force. A central engine of that force is the Trilateral Commission.

How does a shadowy group like the TC accomplish its goal? One basic strategy is: destabilize nations; ruin their economies; send millions and millions of manufacturing jobs off to places where virtual slave labor does the work; adding insult to injury, export the cheap products of those slave-factories back to the nations who lost the jobs and further undercut domestic manufacturers, forcing them to close their doors and fire still more employees.

And then solve that economic chaos by bringing order.

What kind of order?

Eventually, one planet, with national borders erased, under one management system, with a planned global economy, “to restore stability,” “for the good of all, for lasting harmony.”

The top Trilateral players, in 2008, had their man in the White House, another formerly obscure individual like Jimmy Carter: Barack Obama. They had new trade treaties on the planning table.

After Obama was inaugurated for his first term, he shocked and astonished his own advisors, who expected him, as the first order of business, to address the unemployment issue in America. He shocked them by ignoring the number-one concern of Americans, and instead decided to opt for his disastrous national health insurance policy—Obamacare.

Obama never had any intention of trying to dig America out of the crash of 2008. That wasn’t why he was put in the Oval Office. He could, and would, pretend to bring back the economy, with fudged numbers and distorted standards. But really and truly, create good-paying jobs for many, many Americans? Not on the TC agenda. Not in the cards.

It was counter-productive to the TC plan: torpedo the economy further.

Eight years later, along came Trump. Judge him in any way you want to. At the very least, he became a symbol for dismantling Globalism. And that was enough to trigger alarm bells in Elite circles and centers. And the word went out: destroy Trump by any means necessary.

Put the Trilateral Plan back on track—make the whole world One Nation, and erase the memory of America…

So that, one day, a student will ask his teacher, “What happened to the United States?” And the teacher will say, “It was a criminal enterprise based on individual freedom. Fortunately, our leaders rescued the people and taught them the superior nature of HARMONY.”

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

Secret House memo released: the fallout, the lies, and the bigger picture

Feb5

Secret House memo released: the fallout, the lies, and the bigger picture

by Jon Rappoport

February 5, 2018

The House Intelligence Committee’s 4-page memo has been released.

The hullabaloo about the memo unfairly “damaging the reputation” of the FBI and the Dept. of Justice is a joke.

The same types of Democrat ideologues who are spouting that line, now, were screaming at the FBI, decades ago, when COINTELPRO, the Bureau’s op to place spies inside dissident Left groups across the US, was exposed. But suddenly, now, the FBI is pure as the driven snow, and its reputation must not be besmirched; otherwise, Democracy itself could collapse.

And in more recent times, the mainstream Left press, without an ounce of regret or remorse, exposed monumental fraud and incompetence at the FBI’s vaunted forensic lab and stuck a dagger in its heart:

Washington Post, April 18, 2015: “The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000…the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death…Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison…”

So forget the idea that the Left is valiantly trying to protect the FBI’s reputation. The Left is trying to say Trump is a crook and a traitor; and whatever works toward that end—including spreading praise on the FBI as a holy church—is in the game plan.

At the heart of the House Committee memo is the charge, boldly expressed, that FBI/DOJ spying on the Trump team was launched or expanded after obtaining a FISA court warrant.

And that warrant, opening the door to spy on Trump team member, Carter Page, was granted based on the notorious Trump dossier, compiled by ex-MI-6 agent, Christopher Steele.

But wait. The dossier was bought and paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton camp. And therefore, in effect, a political op, launched to win the election for Hillary, helped start the ball rolling against Trump and his supposed Russian connections.

That’s bad enough, but that’s not all.

The focus comes back to the Trump dossier. Was it fake or real? Was it accurate or cooked up? If it was fake, a whole pillar of the FBI/DOJ investigation of Trump—including the Mueller probe—collapses.

Many observers have thrown dirt on the dossier, but they are missing one point that stands out like a mountain on a clear day. I’ll explain.

The Trump dossier: what no one is talking about

A British spy’s fantastical story.

First, a bit of background.

The dirty Trump dossier made several claims:

One: Russia had strong blackmail material on Trump and COULD THUS CONTROL A SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES;

Two: Most damning in that material, Trump used prostitutes while he was in Russia, and paid several of them to urinate on a hotel bed Obama had once slept in;

Three: Russia hacked DNC (Democratic National Committee) emails and passed them on to WikiLeaks, who published them. The emails were damaging to Hillary and helped Trump win the election;

Four: Russia obviously wanted Trump to win the election.

British ex-spy, Christopher Steele, who put together the dossier, once worked in Russia and allegedly had many connections there.

Steele assembled the Trump dossier after consulting with a number of Russians and spreading some money around.

Steele claims, in the dossier, that he was talking with well-placed Russian officials. That’s where he obtained his information.

What??

Why would these Russians speak with him? Why would these Russians expose a purported plot to hand the election to Trump?

If such a Russian plot existed, it would be a tightly held secret. VERY TIGHTLY HELD. BECAUSE IT WOULD BE THE NUMBER-ONE RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE OP.

AN OP FOR THE AGES.

THE HOLY GRAIL.

BLACKMAIL CONTROL OVER A SITTING US PRESIDENT.

Yet, here are Russian intelligence people spilling the beans to Steele, a former British spy.

And by spilling the beans, they’re pretty much committing suicide, because their Russian colleagues and superiors will be able to track them down and identify them, since they’ve had connections to Steele in the past.

Steele goes to Russia, sits down with a number of Russian intel people, asks them questions, and they tell him all about a top-secret plot to sway a US election and CONTROL THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. No problem.

OR…Steele never accumulated all the information in the Trump dossier. He made unwarranted leaps of inference. He invented key facts. He wanted to satisfy his employers, Hillary Clinton, and the DNC. They wanted dirt on Trump, and he gave them dirt.

Daniel Craig could play the Steele role in a Netflix series.

I’m working on a script. Here are the first few lines:

Steele: Hi, Ivan, remember me?

Ivan: Why, it’s Chris Steele! Haven’t seen you in years. Let’s see, you were working for MI-6 in the old days here in Moscow, right? Pretending you were a diplomat. Yes, we had a few lunches back then.

Steele: Right. Look, I was wondering whether you can tell me about a super-secret file you guys are building on Donald Trump. This is the off the record, of course.

Ivan: Sure. We’re blackmailing him. If we can help him win the election, he’ll be under our thumb, completely. This is a Putin operation. It’s a little noisy here in the restaurant. Why don’t we go over to my office and I’ll show you all the data.

Steele: That’d be great.

Ivan: Putin wants Trump to win. I don’t like Trump. I prefer Hillary. I assume you do, too.

Steele: Well, sure. I’m working for her. That’s why I’m here.

Ivan: Wonderful…

It’s a sure-fire hit.

It’s so believable.

Now to the bigger picture: to what degree is the secret House memo, just released, a limited hangout?

If the FBI/DOJ offered up a fake dossier to the FISA, in order to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump team, what else did they do?

The FBI, CIA, and NSA form a blanket of surveillance across America, collecting billions of messages. Are we supposed to believe the FISA warrant was the only effort to gain permission to spy on Trump? Or that legal permission was an issue in the first place?

Of course it wasn’t. The House memo focuses on the legal side of things as a smokescreen.

A politicized group of spying agencies would go a lot further in spying on Trump—but beyond that, we’re talking about spying on all citizens, including Congressional and other government officials, regardless of party affiliation.

There is only one barrier the NSA, CIA, FBI, and other intelligence agencies face: when they use surveillance-material in criminal ways, how can the material be released and falsely attributed to other sources?

This is analogous to “parallel construction.” If a law-enforcement agency tries to use illegally obtained evidence as a basis for prosecution, a court will disallow the evidence. Therefore, the agency must concoct a “parallel” investigation that arrives at the desired goal through another route.

In the case of spying on government officials, this “parallel” is rather easy to pull off. It’s accomplished, for example, by anonymous leaks to the press.

You could call this meta-government. Officials are threatened, blackmailed, smeared, and controlled by intelligence agencies.

It works. There is no need for a Steele dossier that blames Russia and Putin or any foreign actor. Actually, placing blame on the Russians—with enough press support—deflects attention from ongoing home-grown operations.

The Trump-FISA-dossier scandal is just the tip of an exceedingly large surveillance iceberg.

An American iceberg.

William Binney, cryptanalyst-mathematician, served 30 years at the NSA: “The FBI has access to the data collected, which is basically the emails of virtually everybody in the country. And the FBI has access to it. All the congressional members are on the surveillance too, no one is excluded. They are all included. So, yes, this can happen to anyone. If they become a target for whatever reason – they are targeted by the government, the government can go in, or the FBI, or other agencies of the government, they can go into their database, pull all that data collected on them over the years, and we analyze it all. So, we have to actively analyze everything they’ve done for the last 10 years at least.”

That’s a lot more spying than three warrants granted by a FISA court to surveil the Trump team. But you’re supposed to look at the warrants and how they were obtained, and not look at the wall-to-wall spying on every American.

You’re supposed to get embroiled in the Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee vs. the Democrat members, as they fling accusations at each other.

You’re not supposed to realize the NSA already has thousands of Trump-related documents, illegally obtained over a long period of time, as well as Obama-related documents, and documents on anybody and everybody who communicates electronically.

The endless spying is not for the purpose of catching terrorists. Ultimately, it’s not even for blackmail. It’s for implementing a long-range plan to profile and track and control every person— the Technocrats’ wet dream—and the real-time ongoing energy consumption of each human will be radically diminished, with quotas numerically assigned From Above, and regulated, at automated choke-points, in the Brave New World of promoted and fabricated Scarcity.

“We’re saving the planet. Thank you for your (enforced) participation. Be happy. Feel inspired.”

You’re definitely not supposed to look at that and resist it.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The rise and fall of CNN: the most busted name in news

Jan20

by Jon Rappoport

January 20, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

“CNN is still licking their wounds after a rather disastrous couple of weeks, where a shoddy Russia-Trump story led to three staffers resigning, a Project Veritas investigation exposed that the network’s producers peddled the Russia story for ratings, and what came off as a wholly inappropriate veiled threat against an anonymous Reddit user who created a Trump WWE video, which the president tweeted before the Fourth of July Holiday. The video shows Trump beating up WWE’s Vince McMahon, whose face has been superimposed with the CNN logo. The media went apoplectic as an attack against the press; it wasn’t. This spurred the network’s reporters to find the user and pretty much threaten to dox him if he continues to post things CNN doesn’t like.” (Townhall, Matt Vespa, 7/7/17)

If you create a giant, you gain extraordinary visibility, and if the giant develops an unsightly and grotesque case of fungal disease, that’s a problem.

CNN was born in 1980. At the time, it was the first television network offering 24/7 news, and it was the first network offering nothing but news in the US.

In 1991, CNN’s coverage of the Gulf War reached a billion viewers worldwide.

Today, CNN International reaches 200 countries.

That’s a giant.

But from the beginning, back in 1980, there was a major question: how was CNN going to fill up all that time every day with news? Face it, television networks, without bells and whistles, could boil down their coverage of a day’s events in four minutes. That’s because their analysis is so thin. It’s all surface.

When you assiduously avoid looking into WHO REALLY RUNS THINGS, the well runs dry quickly. When you avoid detailing the role of mega-banks and mega-corporations and groups like the Trilateral Commission and CFR and Bilderberg, and when you never define Globalism and reveal its true agenda; when you discover nothing of value about the CIA; when you never broach the subject of American Empire; when you refuse to examine the horrendous effects of the medical system; when you fail to expose the ongoing collaboration between establishment Democrats and Republicans, and the influence of lobbyists (e.g., Israeli fronts); when you intentionally remain blind to the destruction of the American Republic and the Constitution; when you ultimately side with National Security and the Surveillance State; when you manage to sidestep actual ongoing environmental pollution flowing poisonously from a number of sources; when you refuse to reveal the full effects of open borders; when you never connect the dots and instead rely on limited hangouts;

What are you left with? What do you do, for 24 hours of every single day?

Mainly, you wait for “big events,” and then you launch wall to wall coverage for as long as your viewers can stand it. The Gulf War; the first black president; the worst president and the worst human being in history (Trump).

You develop bloated panel shows, during which pundits babble across each other like meth addicts in a rubber room.

You call “the news” The Situation Room, as if you’re breaking vital stories every 30 seconds.

You plow the same ground over and over, until not even weeds can grow in the soil.

You fill your basket with the eggs of the “progressive agenda.” You go all in.

You fake stories.

You do a bizarre version of affirmative action with your on-air talent, as if this will result in “fairer” coverage.

And day by day, the public realizes you’re crazy.

You can’t hide, because you aren’t just laying on three fake newscasts a day; you’re ON all the time.

You’re hoping against hope for a new terror attack or a natural disaster, so you can flood the airwaves with live reports, but in the meantime, you’ll stick with 24/7 Trump, because he’s “the most interesting man in the world.” He’s creating your ratings, such as they are. You’re the tabloid at the checkout counter in the supermarket, and he’s always on the cover. You love him. You need him. It doesn’t matter whether he’s done what you say he’s done. That’s never been the issue. Without his presence, you’d be raking leaves outside a nursing home. You’re the self-appointed Pope, and he’s Satan, and that means dollars.

As a bonus, you’re doing what you’re supposed to be doing, on behalf of Globalism and the “interdependent world.” The risk of Trump speaking words of Nationalism against Globalism (whether or not he meant them) is too great to go unchallenged. The international system (aka technocracy) that has been under construction since the dawn of the 20th century must not be derailed.

So whether it’s the way Trump sips water from a bottle, or scratches his nose, or treats one of your so-called reporters, you’re the National Enquirer blowing it up into a scandal of the moment. You’re leaking leaks from pipes that don’t even exist. Maybe he has a love child; look into that. Maybe he has another wife he never divorced. Maybe he’s an alien from Venus.

Keep those ad revenues flowing, no matter what. Face it, you’ve got nothing else going for you. Connect Trump to the latest news from Tibet if you have to. Or Madagascar. Or Tierra del Fuego. He caused the cold snap across America, because he didn’t sign the Paris Climate Accords.

You’re CNN, “the most trusted name in news.”

Ride that horse all the way to the end of the road.

If you end up shithole broke, somebody will bail you out. Warts and all, you’re too big to fail. Not just because of your work against Trump, but because The News, as the public knows it, must survive.

Otherwise, the people will find out what’s really going on in this world and who runs things. And that must never happen.

That’s the prime situation in The Situation Room.

Who could have guessed, say, 15 years ago, that the following exchange would occur on CNN, in March of 2014?

As reported by New York Magazine, CNN host Don Lemon, discussing the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, said: “People are saying to me, why aren’t you talking about the possibility — and I’m just putting it out there — that something odd happened to this plane, something beyond our understanding? What if it was something fully that we don’t really understand? A lot of people have been asking about that, about black holes and on, and on, and on, and all of these conspiracy theories…That’s what people are saying. I know it’s preposterous — but is it preposterous, you think, Mary?”

To which, Mary Schiavo, ex-Department of Transportation inspector general, replied: “Well, it is. A small black hole would suck in our entire universe so we know it’s not that.”

Maybe it WAS a black hole, and we all disappeared, and resurfaced in an alternate universe, where we got the CNN we know today.

Let’s look at Jeff Zucker, CNN’s boss.

In April 2017, Zucker baldly told the New York Times, “The idea that politics is sport is undeniable, and we understood that and approached it that way.” The “it” was certainly the 2016 presidential campaign.

Zucker always has understood political news in this corrupt fashion—and in the process, he helped elect a US president and a California governor.

Zucker was the man who launched The Apprentice, starring Donald Trump, at NBC, in 2004.

In other words, Zucker happened to play a major role in electing Donald Trump. There is no getting around it.

Washington Post, October 2, 2016: “Looking for someone specific to hold responsible for the improbable rise of Donald Trump?”

“Although there are many options, you could do worse than to take a hard look at Jeff Zucker, president of CNN Worldwide.”

“It was Zucker, after all, who as the new head of NBC Entertainment gave Trump his start in reality TV with ‘The Apprentice’ and then milked the real estate developer’s uncanny knack for success for all it was worth in ratings and profits.”

“And it succeeded wildly — boosting the network’s ratings, as well as Zucker’s [and Trump’s] meteoric career. In turn, under Zucker, the show gave rise to ‘Celebrity Apprentice,’ another Trump extravaganza. And, in turn, Zucker became the head of NBC overall.”

“The show [The Apprentice] was built as a virtually nonstop advertisement for the Trump empire and lifestyle…”

“The executive [Jeff Zucker] rode the Trump steed hard. When the reality-TV star was preparing to marry Melania Knauss in 2005, Zucker wanted to broadcast the wedding live. (Trump, uncharacteristically, declined.)”

“But make no mistake: There would be no Trump-the-politician without Trump-the-TV-star. One begot the other.”

POLITICS IS TELEVISION, AND TELEVISION IS POLITICS.

If you’re looking for a person who embodies that fake version of reality most purely, you need look no further than Jeff Zucker.

Despite his network’s present hatred of Trump, Zucker would give Trump his own show right now if he wanted one.

For ratings and ad revenues.

Consider another event, one which I’ve analyzed in great detail. It took place on NBC in 2003, when Zucker was the head of the network’s entertainment division. The Tonight Show, with Jeno Leno, was a prime piece of that division then. What Leno pulled off in 2003 had to have the OK from Zucker, because it was a highly unusual move, a distinctly unethical move.

An actor wanted to launch a political career and become a governor. The whole news division of a major network surrendered itself, for one ratings-busting night, to a talk show.

This is how Arnold Schwarzenegger won the California governor’s race. It all came down to his famous appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, where he announced that he was going to run.

The Arnold interview was a global event. It was pre-hyped to the sky, and after three red hot six-minute segments, with a studio audience screaming in approval, the election was virtually over.

POLITICS IS TELEVISION. TELEVISION IS POLITICS.

Here are a few of CNN’s “black-hole” gaffes, just refresh your memory—

Because Trump was attacking CNN and other media as fake, CNN claimed THAT was making life more physically dangerous for journalists in war zones and at home. Wow. I guess the takeaway is: don’t criticize mainstream news, keep your mouth shut and stay hypnotized…

Independent journalist, James O’Keefe, released two undercover sting videos which revealed CNN medical producer, John Bonifield, remarking that the whole Trump-Russia scandal is “mostly bullshit right now, like, we don’t have any giant proof”; and Van Jones, CNN political commentator, stating that “the Russia thing is just a big nothing burger.” Of course, CNN relentlessly pursues the Trump-Russia story as if God and a choir of angels have certified it as the truest, most important event of our time.

June 2017: CNN dumped Reza Aslan, the host of their network documentary series called Believer. Why? Because Aslan tweeted, “This piece of shit [Donald Trump] is not just an embarrassment to America and a stain on the presidency. He’s an embarrassment to humankind.”

October 2016: CNN contributor Donna Brazile was dumped, because she passed along questions that would be asked in an upcoming presidential debate, sponsored by CNN. Brazile passed those questions to the Hillary Clinton camp.

CNN reporter-dunce Chris Cuomo, during the 2016 election campaign, preposterously told the viewing audience that accessing Wikileaks’ treasure trove of John Podesta emails was a crime—for any member of the public. Only “the media” were permitted to perform that delicate operation and then decide what to report. Put a picture of Cuomo on your wall and pray to it every night.

On June 13, 2015, CNN host Fredricka Whitfield talked about the attack on the Dallas police headquarters. She said the shooter, James Boulware, was “courageous and brave, if not crazy.” Who’s crazy, Fredricka?

The 2016 Milwaukee riots. CNN aired a woman named Sherelle Smith telling the rioters, “Don’t bring that violence here.” She was calling for peace. Well, not exactly. The network failed to broadcast the rest of Smith’s advice: “Burning down shit ain’t going to help nobody! Y’all burning down shit we need in our community. Take that shit to the suburbs! Burn that shit down!”

CNN: the most trusted name in news.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

Trump and his sh*thole remark: the story nobody is talking about

Jan13

(Assuming Trump made the remark as reported—he denies it)

by Jon Rappoport

January 13, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

You’re not a terrorist.

You aren’t trying to emigrate.

You aren’t a refugee who refuses to assimilate, who feels entitled to abuse his wife in any way he wants to, for any reason.

You’re not a member of the vicious MS-13 gang.

You’re not involved in child sex trafficking.

You’re not making anchor babies.

You’re not a pirate, a kidnapper, a street thug, or a drug dealer.

You’re one of the millions and millions of people who simply live out their lives where they are. You represent a FAR larger population than all the above categories put together.

You and your family call home a tiny shack in a large crowded city in an African country. Your family has existed in the throes of poverty and extreme hunger for many generations.

You drink water that is pumped directly from untreated sewage.

Garbage is strewn in the streets.

Riots and wars erupt from time to time, and so do epidemics, because no one in your neighborhood has a healthy body that can fight off germs.

All around the city there is fertile growing land, but most of it has been taken over by transnational agri-corporations.

I can predict with certainty that the last thing you care about is whether the president of the US has called your country a shithole.

You’re not circulating a petition protesting his remark and sending it to the United Nations.

You’re not watching outraged commentators on CNN excoriating the president.

You’re not reading tweets from liberals who are triggered by Trump.

You’re not watching YouTube videos made by college students in Boston.

You’re wondering whether your sick daughter is going to survive the night.

You do care about medical teams that sweep through the neighborhood and vaccinate everyone, because you’ve seen adults and children die after the shots.

You aren’t comparing the talking heads on FOX with the talking heads on MSNBC, to see who is parsing what.

You aren’t poring over the Washington Post.

You do know that the dictator of your country (the latest in a long line of psychopaths) has sold everything that isn’t nailed down, to foreign predatory corporations. You’re told that, half a century ago, there was a local leader who might not have been a psychopath; and the CIA killed him.

You do know that you and your people have been targets of exploitation for more than a hundred years.

If you were somehow made aware of Trump’s remark, you might wonder why no one is actually doing something to change the circumstances of life in your country. That’s the only question for you. And you don’t see any help coming.

You also know that chemicals from a mining company and a sugar company nearby have been seeping into the soil and making people sick and killing them. Why doesn’t someone stop that?

You aren’t analyzing what the Democrats and the Republicans are saying about a pending US immigration bill.

Every time doctors from foreign countries show up and label the latest round of illness and death with a disease name, you know they’re lying, because you can see, inside your shack, and out in the street, all the conditions that are destroying people.

If there is a word in your language that approximates “shithole,” you’ve used it yourself a thousand times to describe your country. You’ve used similar words to describe the president of your country.

So-called political correctness is not on your personal radar.

You don’t care who is sitting in the White House today or who sat in it yesterday. Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton; it doesn’t matter. None of them have done anything to help raise up your people.

If someone told you about the uproar in the press and the capital city of the US, concerning Trump’ latest remark, you would see all that as just another way to distract people from the fact that YOUR people are sick and dying.

Who is talking about you?

They’re talking to each other. They’re talking to each about what the president of the US has been talking about.

They’re pushing back from the table after a meal in a room that has heat and insulation, and someone is taking a piece of plastic out of his pocket to pay for the meal, and they’re wearing new clothes, and they’re looking at their cell phones.

You know your country is a shithole. The point is: who made it that way? Who took a fertile paradise and turned it into a sewer?

You know Bill Gates and the UN and the World Health Organization aren’t going to fix it. You know the head of Monsanto isn’t going to fix it. He might drench your country in more toxic pesticides, but that’s about it. His fake food is growing everywhere, but you aren’t eating much of it, and even if you could, it’s not going to bring you back to health. Facebook and Google aren’t going to fix your country.

You know how to fix your country.

Get back all the stolen land. Make small farms out of it. Return the land to the people who worked it and lived on it for centuries.

That was the answer then and it’s the answer now.

Does the US government care about that? Does the Russian or the Chinese government?

Do the shitholes called Washington and Moscow and Beijing care?

Do the snowflake liberal student shitholes care? Do the fat-cat cheating lying crony corporate shitholes care? Do the shithole banks?

You may not know the word “Globalism,” but you do know you’re a pawn and a target in a big operation, and the operation involves stealing everything your family once had. The big criminals may have fancy ideas about why it’s a good thing “for the world,” but you don’t know about that, and you wouldn’t care if you did.

You just want to drink a glass of clean water for once in your life.

You want the piece of land your great-great-grandfather used to own, you want to get out of the city and breathe real air again.

You want soil that isn’t filled with poison from factories and mines and big company farms.

There isn’t any mystery about it.

The idea that some big shot called your country a shithole? That would be a good thing…

If he did something about it.

But you aren’t in the equation.

You’re missing.

The people who are talking to each other about what the president said, when he was talking, aren’t looking at you. They don’t know you. They never will.

You don’t have time to try to figure out what they’re doing and why—if you were watching the news. And you aren’t watching the news.

You’re not a terrorist.

You aren’t trying to emigrate.

You’re one of the millions and millions of people who will live out their lives where they are.

What a US president said is the least of your worries. The people who are worried aren’t worried about you.

You’re just trying to keep your sick daughter alive through the night.

You know there has to be revolution in your country. You also know most revolutions are phony, staged to put a new psychopath in the palace. For starters, can you find ten good people who are smart, courageous, honorable, and willing? Who will mount a plan to eventually go up against the dictator and the foreign colossus behind him?

The odds are very long. But what else is there to do?

Meanwhile, you’re hoping your daughter survives the night.

What people, thousands of miles away, are saying about what other people are saying is not on your mind.

If someone told you what the president of the United States said—and if you could, by some miracle, sit across from this president, you would say: “Sir, you called my country a shithole. It is really a beautiful place. It was. But you’re right. It’s turned into a shithole. Can you help us do something about that? Perhaps I see a glint of light, because finally a powerful leader used an accurate word to describe what has happened to us. You used a word that cut through many fairy tales. So, can you help us reclaim the land that was once ours? Forget about building roads and airports and hospitals and office buildings and malls. We just need our land back, and then we’ll figure out what we need to do ourselves.”

That would be a strange moment.

Perhaps an embarrassing moment.

—Regardless of whether Donald Trump, Barack Obama, George Bush, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, Harry Truman, Franklin Roosevelt, or any of his predecessors were sitting across from you.

You’re not a terrorist.

You aren’t trying to emigrate.

You aren’t a refugee who refuses to assimilate, who feels entitled to abuse his wife in any way he wants to, for any reason.

You’re not a member of the vicious MS-13 gang.

You’re not involved in child sex trafficking.

You’re not making anchor babies.

You’re not a pirate, a kidnapper, a street thug, or a drug dealer.

You represent a FAR larger population than all the above categories put together.

You’re one of the millions and millions of people who simply live out their lives where they are.

You want your land back.

Nobody is listening to you.

If you and millions like you could get their land back, you would start farming it, and you would turn the shithole where you live into something better.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

Psychiatrists say Trump mentally ill

Jan10

Psychiatrists say Trump mentally ill

by Jon Rappoport

January 10, 2018

—After investigating psychiatry for two decades, I’m confident that, if we could go back and rewrite history, deleting all psychiatrists on the planet, so they’d never exist—deleting their diagnoses and their drugs—this would have resulted in a massive upsurge in mental health, moving forward—

The Daily Mail: “A group of leading psychiatrists told a conference that Donald Trump has clear hallmarks of mental illness that compromise his role as president. Twenty-five researchers made a drastic break away from ethical standards by meeting at Yale University on Thursday to discuss evidence questioning the commander-in-chief’s mental health.”

Psychiatrist Allen Frances, who has played a central role in defining mental disorders, disagrees. He wrote in the NY Times: “Most amateur diagnosticians have mislabeled [Mr. Trump as having] narcissistic personality disorder. He may be a world-class narcissist, but this doesn’t make him mentally ill.”

Dr. Frances makes an interesting point. He distinguishes between behavior and earning a badge for having a particular mental disorder.

For example, a person can be sad, but that alone doesn’t make him a candidate for the label, “clinical depression.” A person can take aggressive actions against authority, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is suffering from Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

Consider the accusation that Trump has Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). What does that mean? What is the official definition of NPD? Here is an excerpt from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the official bible of the American Psychiatric Association. Go ahead, plow through it, it’ll only take a minute:

“The definition of NPD states that it comprises of a persistent manner of grandiosity, a continuous desire for admiration, along with a lack of empathy. It starts by early adulthood and occurs in a range of situations, as signified by the existence of any 5 of the next 9 standards (American Psychiatric Association, 2013):

• A grandiose logic of self-importance
• A fixation with fantasies of infinite success, control, brilliance, beauty, or idyllic love
• A credence that he or she is extraordinary and exceptional and can only be understood by, or should connect with, other extraordinary or important people or institutions
• A desire for unwarranted admiration
• A sense of entitlement
• Interpersonally oppressive behavior
• No form of empathy
• Resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her
• A display of egotistical and conceited behaviors or attitudes”

“…No actual physical characteristics are seen with NPD, but patients may have concurrent substance abuse, which may be seen in the clinical examination.”

Got it? Now, think about this: NOWHERE IN THE DEFINITION IS THERE ANY DEFINING DIAGNOSTIC TEST.

No blood test, urine test, saliva test, brain scan, genetic assay. Nothing.

What you’ve just read is a collection of behaviors. This collection was assembled by a committee of psychiatrists, who decided that, taken together, they added up to a mental disorder.

There is no defining diagnostic test for NPD.

We’re talking about psychiatrists sitting in a room and arbitrarily deciding that a cluster of behaviors adds up to an official mental disorder.

These psychiatrists are playing word games. They’re inventing so-called mental disorders.

Underneath this story about Trump and the shrinks, there is a far more important truth. Psychiatrists are world-class purveyors of fake news. They always have been. Because you see…

None of the roughly 300 officially certified and labeled mental disorders has a defining diagnostic test. None.

If you have the tenacity, read through the whole psychiatric DSM bible and you will see for yourself.

Or read this brief exchange. In a PBS Frontline episode, “Does ADHD Exist?” Dr. Russell Barkley, an eminent professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, spelled out the fraud clearly.

Here it is.

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY: That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid.

Oh, indeed, that does make them invalid. Utterly and completely. All 300 mental disorders. Because there are no defining tests of any kind to back up the diagnosis.

Psychiatrists can sway and tap dance all they like and they won’t escape the noose around their necks. We are looking at a science that isn’t a science.

That’s called fraud. Rank fraud.

Imagine this. You walk into a doctor’s office, you talk with him for a few minutes, and then he says: “You have cancer. You need to start chemo at once.”

After you recover, you say, “You didn’t give me a test.”

And he says, “Well, we don’t need a test. We know what the symptoms are because we convened a high-level meeting of oncologists last year, and we listed the answers to the questions I just asked you. You gave those telltale answers. So we start chemo tomorrow. We may also need to surgically remove an organ or two before we’re done.”

That’s psychiatry. That’s the way it works.

Those boys have quite a con going. And now, from a few hundred miles away, they’ve diagnosed a sitting president.

Well, why wouldn’t they? They’ve been shucking and jiving all the way to the bank for the entirety of their professional lives.

Do you like Trump? Do you hate him? Do you think he’s nuts? Sane? Whatever you believe, it has nothing to do with the official pronouncements of psychiatry.

Psychiatry has become an arm of technocracy—an attempt to organize society according to a list of so-called mental disorders parading as science.

Psychiatry is fake science that can be used to discredit, minimize, accuse, deride, treat (with alarmingly toxic drugs), and eliminate any individual for any reason.

Now that is a good example of insanity. Of the criminal variety.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

(New piece up at my other blog OUTSIDE THE REALITY MACHINE
entitled “The psychiatrist and the universe of ice cream”. Click here.)

Jon Rappoport

Why has the Deep State gone to war against Donald Trump?

Dec17

Why has the Deep State gone to war against Donald Trump?

Some people say Trump is nothing more than another Globalist puppet. Is that the whole story?

Is Trump worse than his supporters want him to be, and better than his enemies claim he is?

by Jon Rappoport

December 17, 2017

Trump is unpredictable. He shoots his mouth off.

No one is sure what he might do next.

That is not the Deep State’s version of what a president is supposed to be.

Bill Clinton, George W Bush, Barack Obama—they were good boys. Globalists. The intelligence establishment and the military industrial complex knew “the situation” was well in hand. Trump is the strange intruder. The “crazy one.”

If his swaggering indifference to the Deep State’s agenda is merely a pose—a formidable acting job—then why is he subjected to withering attacks every day, even from his own Party? After all, he has surrounded himself with Goldman Sachs big shots—can’t they be relied on to keep him in check? What’s the problem?

Well, one huge problem is he keeps attacking mainstream media. He lashes out and calls them Fake News. He takes every opportunity to accuse them of lying. No president in modern history has dared to work that angle. Understand that the intelligence establishment—a major component of the Deep State—uses major media to shape public perception on an ongoing basis. Gunslinger Trump is upsetting that applecart, at a time when public trust in mainstream news is, all on its own, eroding. He isn’t supposed to be piling on.

If Trump’s attacks on The News are a carefully crafted theatrical ploy, somehow designed to serve the Deep State, where is the payoff?

I keep bringing up Trump vs. the Media, because, for the past 35 years, working as a reporter, I’ve seen the media damage and the mind control, the brainwashing and the corruption, the collusion between The News and the Deep State, and the resulting destruction of human life. Just to name two areas of major crimes: viciously lying war press coverage, and viciously lying medical coverage. Anyone—especially a president—who wades in and disrupts the seamless hypnotic flow of mainstream news, whatever his motives, deserves praise.

For the record, I believe Trump is, and will be, a complete and utter disaster for the environment, as regards corporate pollution. I see no evidence he will lessen medical crimes. He is out to lunch, when it comes to appointing people to forward his agendas and support his presidency. Who on his team ISN’T talking out of school? Who isn’t betraying him? Why did he extend the utterly failed war in Afghanistan? Some of his most ardent supporters saw, in him, a foreign policy man with the guts and intelligence of Ron Paul. They certainly aren’t happy.

The big lynchpin issue is immigration. It always was. Ideologues from the Left, and the Deep State, are outraged, because they want open borders. Forever. Their masters, who are far more cynical and calculating, are forcing the unending migrant flood as a method for erasing separate nations—a prime plank in the Globalist platform. Any fool should be able to see this. It has nothing to do with “humane” motives. The heaping of financial burdens on states and nations, as an outcome of the migrant flood, is also intentional. So is the resultant crime. These are not illusions. How serious Trump is about stemming the flood—that is up for grabs. But the fact that he has spoken out, time and time again, even if you assume he is lying about what he intends to do, has galvanized people all over the world. They are waking up to the resurrection of sovereign nations, as opposed to a one world-nation, under the ministrations of Globalist utopian tyrants. If Trump’s stance on the immigration issue is merely a con, it has certainly had a massive blowback effect against the new world order. For those who claim that top-down control of the planet is a given, with no exceptions, why didn’t the controllers make sure someone other than Trump was elected in 2016? If these controller-gods are so powerful, why didn’t they dump the flaccid useless Hillary Clinton and nominate a dynamic Democrat who would have taken Trump to the cleaners? Why didn’t they launch a really convincing Trump dossier and cut him off at the knees before the election?

For all the “Hegelian dialectic” people, who insist that Trump was put into office to whipsaw the public to the other side, after the socialist Obama had done his assigned job: consider the fact that any corporatist Republican candidate could have served that function—instead of a fast-talking, shooting-from-the-hip, swaggering narcissist cowboy Crazy, who suddenly began spouting anti-Globalist pro-nationalist rhetoric to a worldwide audience.

“Well, you see, they needed a really strong America-first nationalist guy, Trump, so they could take him down and snuff out the flames of separate nations, once and for all. They also wanted to exacerbate the divide-and-conquer strategy for America—causing the deepest conflicts to come to the surface and rip America apart at the seams”—

I’m not rejecting those arguments completely; but I am saying elite controllers would be taking quite a gamble with that strategy, because the Trump effect vis-à-vis nationalism is formidable, and elite Globalists aren’t in the habit of encouraging all the points that defeat their own stance. They aren’t in the habit of pushing a man into the spotlight (and the Oval Office) who talks those points endlessly and puts dangerous ideas into millions of minds. Whether fake or real, Trump is that man, he talks that talk, and he does it relentlessly. There was no way to stage the 2016 election without spawning all this anti-Globalist rhetoric?

Trump has also attacked the intelligence establishment and the FBI. Not just once, but many times. Yes, you could say his appointments to headline jobs in those agencies belie his words—but why allow such a president to exist in the first place? Trump is actually mirroring a few of the major charges the political Left has leveled at the intel establishment for decades. And people out in the real world are agreeing with his harsh criticisms. When Trump first started this drumbeat, Senator Chuck Schumer said it was big mistake, because the intelligence community has “six ways from Sunday getting back at you.” Schumer didn’t say Trump was wrong. He just said Trump was crazy.

And that may be a clue. Trump just doesn’t care. He grew up hustling in the real estate field. He rubbed elbows with the Mob. He made deals however they could be made, with whoever showed up with money. He survived, went broke, survived again. He developed a giant ego. He promoted himself ceaselessly, once he’d achieved a bit of fame. In his world, bureaucrats are the lowest form of human life. He’s a hard charging asshole, and after a few drinks, he might gleefully admit it.

This is not a character the Deep State wants around, and especially not in the White House. “I’m the president and you just handed me this CIA assessment? It reads like sheer bullshit. Why don’t you fill me in on the real facts, if you know what they are, or is your problem stemming from the fact you’re ignorant?” Even on that level, the intel community doesn’t want Trump around. Face it, Washington is full of bullshitters on every conceivable platform. These people have never done a thing to justify their existence, much less their jobs. They skate all day, every day, and they expect to skate all the way into their pensions. Now along comes this bull in the china shop. No one really knows when he’s telling the truth and when he’s lying, but he does seem to have a nose for spotting fakers—maybe because he’s faked it for so long himself. And done it well. Done it better than most. Certainly done it better than jive analysts at the CIA, who really have faint knowledge about what’s going on in hots spots across the globe, but try to talk a good game.

Don’t kid a kidder.

On this level alone, Trump has not endeared himself to denizens of the Deep State.

Continuing with the theme of “Trump just doesn’t care,” it’s possible he’s willing to be drummed out of office. He’s daring the press and his other enemies to try it, and his position is: “If you can carry it off, go ahead. See what trouble and disaster you bring down on your own heads, if you win.” He’s willing to fly away from the White House, as Nixon did, and go back to Trump Tower in New York and pick up from where he left off. That’s a strong position. He’s always been a go-for-broke character, and if this president thing doesn’t work out, there are other worlds to conquer. Such a stance would make his enemies nervous. He’s quite able to call their bluff.

Meanwhile, as long as he’s in office, he’s a proponent of President Calvin Coolidge’s famous “the business of America is business.” This is, at once, a gift to, and a theft from, Globalists. It’s a gift, because Trump intends to give mega-corporations, which are the action arms of Globalism, free reign to dominate the marketplace, horribly pollute to their hearts’ content, cooperate with government allies in stepping up surveillance of the citizenry, and pay less taxes, as long as some of these companies, or a few of them, bring jobs back to America. It’s a theft, because Trump isn’t structuring these corporations as part of the infamous Globalist trade treaties, like the TPP. (Unless he goes back on that promise, too.) He’s prone to making separate trade deals with separate nations. At least on the surface, he appears to want to prove that this tactic can succeed. And it can build up the US economy. Even, worst case, if he’s lying about opposing trade treaties, once again he’s planted an idea in many minds: you don’t need Globalist trade deals to make trade work. This is not a Deep State idea. Far from it. It’s corrosive to the Deep State.

Look at how many counties and states turned red in the 2016 election. Territorially, it was overwhelming. What were all those people on all that land thinking? It was a mixed bag. On the one hand (without mentioning it), they wanted the government benefits they were accruing, as a matter of course, to remain in place. At the same time, they wanted freedom, the right to be left alone, the right to reject political correctness, the right to celebrate America as an independent and sovereign nation, the right to feel proud of their country, the right to be able to work and find a job, the right to own guns, the right to shut down open borders, the right to uphold the traditional family, the right to reject major media as a bunch of liars and crooks (and ditto for the Washington swamp).

The Globalists deviously put a man in the White House who was stimulating that whole range of sentiment and conviction? Really?

Then we come to the Clintons. Major league bullshitters in their own right—and on a level Trump could hardly aspire to. The Deep State, with some reservations, had accepted the idea that one of their own, Hillary Clinton, with all her personal and family and political baggage, was going to be the next president of the United States. She and Bill seemed to be made of Teflon, or some similar substance that swallowed scandals whole and made them disappear. The press had played a central role there. (The press that Trump was violently attacking.) Forget the Clinton Foundation. Forget Hillary’s decades-long shameful defense of her husband’s sexual predations. Forget Mena and the cocaine trafficking and Bill’s arrangements with the CIA. Right out in the open, Hillary, with her sidekick, Barack Obama, had destroyed a whole country. Libya. They had reduced an entire nation to bloody chaos. If she could get away with that, she could get away with anything. So, for the Deep State, she still held promise. She could work a hustle beyond any hustle Trump could dream of. Good. She would do a good Globalist job as the next American president. The press would keep things reasonably quiet. She and Bill would continue their deep and long relationship with the CIA and all the CIA stands for.

But there was one major issue. Apparently, once again, the all-knowing and all-seeing and all-controlling controllers of the Deep State, who manage society flawlessly, as Hegelians par excellence, had screwed up royally. They hadn’t talked with Hillary’s doctors. These gods, who can execute the synthesis of opposites on a grand scale, who know the future decades in advance, had failed to notice Hillary was sick. Quite sick. Sick enough so that if she won the election, she might have to hide from the public for the better part of her term, and even that (absurd) tactic might not work.

So perhaps midway through the 2016 election campaign, the Globalist gods of the Deep State decided to back off and let Trump win. Not because they favored him, not because they knew they could manage his every move, and not because they had turned him into one of their own, but because they had messed up and had to scramble and make the best of an unpleasant situation. Because on a gross physical level, Hillary was toast.

But they would attack President Donald mercilessly and do whatever they could to drive him out of office and take him down. They would sink their claws into Vice President Mike Pence and reassemble however much of his brain they needed to adjust, for the moment when he would step into the presidency.

The press and sleazebag Robert Mueller would head up phase one of the raid on Trump. Violations of financial laws, sexual misdemeanors and felonies, cooperating with the enemy (Russia)—whatever could be cobbled together, true or false—was fair game. Operation Oust the President was seriously underway.

Some people believe I’m a Trump supporter. As I’ve been saying all along, I praise him on three counts: he helped keep Hillary Clinton from the Oval Office; he has relentlessly attacked major media; and he has mouthed strong anti-Globalist ideas. Everything else is up for grabs.

There has never been a doubt in my mind that he is a liar. But why is that news? Pardon me for noticing that every president is a liar. Obama, Bush, and Clinton run a close race for the recent winner on that score. My personal choice is Obama, only because he did the best work of the three in pretending he was honorable.

Bottom line for now: the Deep State has to hate Trump, because at the very least, he is a symbol and a lightning rod for anti-Globalism and pro-Nationalism.

Apparently, he has calculated (and made) a number of deals (that’s what he does) in order to (hopefully) stay in office. Deals with Goldman Sachs, deals with the military, deals with the military industrial complex, etc. These arrangements, of necessity, mean he has to walk back and discard some of his campaign promises. This is old hat for him. It’s business.

At the risk of repeating myself, most people don’t fully grasp the pernicious influence of mainstream news. Not just that influence now, not just in the past few years, but forever. The ability of the press, in concert with versions of the Deep State, to twist and deform and undermine and reverse and fragment public perception, on every major story and issue, is basically substituting death for life. If the population is, on a daily basis, under the influence of such mind control, then what kind of breakthrough is possible? No breakthrough. None. The game is over. Fortunately, through the Internet, that brainwashing is being shattered by independent media, piece by piece. And then—along came Trump. From a position of devil-may-care, extreme visibility, rudely, crudely, relentlessly, impulsively, he has attacked the press. He’s “crazy” that way. Like some wild Salvador Dali, he’s turned the tables on consensus reality. I don’t care why he’s doing it. I don’t care how he’s doing it. He’s doing it. This is an opening. This is an accelerated opportunity for all sorts of independent voices who, for their own reasons, oppose the Deep State. This opportunity must be taken.

There are certainly risks, when it comes to Donald Trump. But taking apart major media is not one of them.

Coda 1: The biggest risk is war. With North Korea. This is where cooler heads must prevail. This is where even arch Globalists must weigh in. They want control of a viable planet, not one in smoking ruins. If the business of America is business, an atmosphere in which sellers and buyers can operate is an obvious requirement. Not a nuclear atmosphere. But this isn’t just a Trump problem. It would have been a Hillary problem, if she had won the White House. Presented with a (completely insane) Pentagon “strategy” for defeating North Korea, either president would become “interested.” Given Hillary’s track record in Libya, she might be more eager than Trump…

Coda 2: Hollywood, in its own fanciful way, is marshalling its troops for yet another round of attacks on Trump, in the form of a movie, “The [Washington] Post,” which details the release of the Pentagon Papers, in 1971, as an act of defiance against corrupt government. Viewers are supposed to get the idea that the press is the hero, and their war now against Trump is a holy crusade, for which we should all be grateful. Hail to the press! We love you. We need you. There is also a report that George Clooney will produce a mini-series on the Watergate scandal for Netflix. Yet another Watergate re-run. I wonder how many lies this one will push. The theme, again, will certainly include the press exposure of the Nixon-team crimes. By extension, we are supposed to imagine the press is now the champion of truth in its anti-Trump campaign. Both these projects are oblique efforts to repair the press’ tattered image. They are Real and True. The independent media are Fake and False. Good luck with that one.

Sorry for the length of this article. It was far too short. I had to leave a lot on the cutting room floor…

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The evening news and the gunslinger called Trump

Dec8

The evening news and the gunslinger called Trump

by Jon Rappoport

December 8, 2017

Every television newscast: staged reality

The news is all about manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it. If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can’t fathom depth, and it certainly can’t appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time, the fourth dimension.

Focus on the network evening news. This is where the staging is done well.

First, we have the studio image itself, the colors in foreground and background, the blend of restful and charged hues. The anchor and his/her smooth style.

Then we have the shifting of venue from the studio to reporters in the field, demonstrating the reach of coverage: the planet. As if this equals authenticity.

Actually, those reporters in the field rarely dig up information on location. A correspondent standing on a rooftop in Cairo could just as well be positioned in a bathroom in a Las Vegas McDonald’s. His report would be identical.

The managing editor, usually the elite news anchor, chooses the stories to cover and has the final word on their sequence.

The anchor goes on the air: “Our top story tonight, more signs of gridlock today on Capitol Hill, as legislators walked out of a session on federal budget negotiations…”

The viewer fills in the context for the story: “Oh yes, the government. Gridlock is bad. Just like traffic on the I-5. A bad thing. We want the government to get something done, but they aren’t. These people are always arguing with each other. They don’t agree. They’re in conflict. Yes, conflict, just like on the cop shows.”

The anchor: “The Chinese government reports the new flu epidemic has spread to three provinces. Forty-two people have already died, and nearly a hundred are hospitalized…”

The viewer again supplies context, such as it is: “Flu. Dangerous. Epidemic. Could it arrive here? Get my flu shot.”

The anchor: “A new university study states that gun owners often stock up on weapons and ammunition…”

The viewer: “People with guns. Why do they need a dozen weapons? I don’t need a gun. The police have guns. Could I kill somebody if he broke into the house?”

The anchor: “Doctors at Yale University have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments in the battle against autism…”

Viewer: “That would be good. More research. Laboratory. The brain.”

If, at the end of the newscast, the viewer bothered to review the stories and his own reactions to them, he would realize he’d learned nothing. But reflection is not the game.

In fact, the flow of the news stories has washed over him and created very little except a sense of (false) continuity.

Therefore, every story on the news broadcast achieves the goal of keeping the context thin—night after night, year after year. The overall effect of this staging is: small viewer’s mind, small viewer’s understanding.

Next we come to words over pictures. More and more, news broadcasts are using the rudimentary film technique of a voice narrating what the viewer is seeing on the screen.

People are shouting and running and falling in a street. The anchor or a field reporter says: “The country is in turmoil. Parliament has suspended sessions for the third day in a row, as the government decides what to do about uprisings aimed at forcing democratic elections…”

Well, the voice must be right, because we’re seeing the pictures. If the voice said the riots were due to garbage-pickup cancellations, the viewer would believe that, too.

We see Building #7 of the WTC collapse. Must have been the result of a fire. The anchor tells us so. Words over pictures.

Staged news.

It mirrors what the human mind, in an infantile state, is always doing: looking at the world and seeking a brief summary to explain what that world is, at any given moment.

Since the dawn of time, untold billions of people have been urging a “television anchor” to “explain the pictures.”

The news gives them that precise solution, every night.

“Well, Mr. Jones,” the doctor says, as he pins X-rays to a screen in his office. “See this? Right here? We’ll need to start chemo immediately, and then we may have to remove most of your brain, and as a follow-up, take out one eye.”

Sure, why not? The patient saw the pictures and the anchor explained them.

Eventually, people get the idea and do it for themselves. They see things, they invent one-liners to explain them.

They’re their own anchors. They short-cut and undermine their own experience with vapid summaries of what it all means.

And then, of course, when the news cuts to commercial, the fake products take over:

“Well, every night they’re showing the same brand names, so those brands must be better than the unnamed alternatives.”

Which devolves into: “I like this commercial better than that commercial. This is a great commercial. Let’s have a contest and vote on the best commercial.”

For “intelligent” viewers, there is another sober mainstream choice in America, a safety valve: PBS. That newscast tends to show more pictures from foreign lands.

“Yes, I watch PBS because they understand the planet is interconnected. It isn’t just about America. That’s good.”

Sure it’s good, if you want the same thin-context or false-context reporting on events in other countries. Instead of the two minutes NBC might give you about momentous happenings in Syria, PBS will give you four minutes.

PBS’ experts seem kinder and gentler. “They’re nice and they’re more relaxed. I like that.”

Yes, the PBS experts are taking Valium, and they’re not drinking as much coffee as the CBS experts.

Anchors deliver the long con every night on the tube, between commercials.

Staged.

They’re marketing thin context.

There are various forms of mind control. The one I’m describing here—the thinning of context—is universal. It confounds the mind by pretending depth doesn’t exist and is merely a fantasy.

The mind, before it is trained away from it, is always interested in depth.

Another way of putting it: the mind naturally wants more space, not less. Only constant conditioning can change this.

Eventually, when you say “mind,” people think you’re referring to the brain, or they don’t know what you’re talking about at all.

Mind control by eradicating the concept of mind.

That’s quite a trick.

But now, on the national evening news, something has changed. The quality of the elite anchors has plummeted. These mind-control pros are less and less capable of delivering: the voice of authority.

In the old days, you had Water Cronkite, Harry Reasoner, Chet Huntley, Tom Brokaw, and (before he crashed and burned) Dan Rather. Big-time fakers.

Eventually, this devolved into a B-team of bench players: Dianne Sawyer, Brian Williams, Scott Pelley. Less believable—but still fairly effective.

However, now, at the three major networks, it’s androids on parade. Two pretty boys, David Muir and Jeff Glor, and the NBC cadaver, Lester Holt.

The ship is sinking.

Instead of trying to label their competition Fake News, the networks should look to themselves and try to figure out why they can’t find father figures to deliver their no-context broadcasts.

The audience is wising up. The correct notes on the scale of mind control aren’t being struck.

The system is falling apart.

When I named this site No More Fake News 16 years ago, I could see a fatigue factor setting in—not only in the mainstream news audience, but in the networks themselves. They were playing out the string, hoping to coast on their prior reputations. They weren’t just putting their viewers to sleep (their covert goal), they were slowly falling asleep themselves.

In the following years, the situation grew worse. The networks were moving on auto-pilot.

And now, they’re reaching the end of the line. They’re focusing on the only story that can deliver them ratings: Trump.

They fear him, they hate him—and they love him, because he gives them the numbers that justify their advertising rates with sponsors.

It’s always problematical when the only thing maintaining your survival is your enemy. Especially an enemy whose whole method of attack is to accuse you of subverting your basic mission, which is telling the truth.

And it’s far worse when he’s right.

No matter what you think of Trump, he’s delivering hammer blows to the foundation of network news.

I’ve been aware of every president since Roosevelt, and nothing like this has happened in that time span. A sitting president is virulently going up against The News. Not just the content—which would be bad enough—but the people delivering it.

Since the dawn of time on this planet, news has been controlled, for good reason. It’s the source of supposed fact. Important objective fact. The people who own the news have therefore been able to paint an overall portrait of reality for the masses. Which has been their intent.

In this age of science, the news has donned that cloak. “We’re recording events in the lab. We only relay confirmed results, checked and double-checked.”

And now this crazy cowboy hustler comes along, swaggers into the spotlight, and demeans the whole enterprise. IT’S FAKE!

And millions of people, who have long believed that very thing in the recesses of their minds, sit up straight in their couches and say THAT’S RIGHT!

Overnight, the situation turns surreal.

Up is down, down is up.

The bull is wandering through the china shop, deciding which object to crash next.

Naturally, the networks call him crazy, mentally ill, unfit for office, a Russian agent—while they’re reaping ratings from going to war with him. They have to strike back, and it‘s good for their desperate business to do so.

Whether Trump is, in fact, unfit for office is beside the point of the war.

The truth about Trump, whatever it may be, went out the window a long time ago. It was never in the house.

As the network news business was in a long slide from its former prominence, Trump showed up and stepped on its neck and ground in his heel. Impolitely, he spat in its face.

If you think the total effect was to draw people to Trump’s side, or to the networks’ side, think again.

People began swimming out of their hypnotic attachment to The News. The spell broke. Rudely. The swaggering gunslinger was showing up in their living rooms, accusing and laughing and setting off explosions.

And yes, you can separate that from everything else Trump has been doing or not doing, saying or not saying, committing or not committing.

And you should.

Because The News is supposed to be the ears and eyes and mouth and brain of the public.

And now—for several reasons, Trump very much included—it no longer is.

Which is a good thing, a very good thing.

Even if your hatred of Donald Trump knows no bounds.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAmR5osPCs8&w=560&h=315]

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

Top reasons why the Trump dossier is not believable

Nov27

Top reasons why the Trump dossier is not believable

—an expanded version of my original article on this subject—

by Jon Rappoport

November 27, 2017

I often write articles analyzing mainstream news assertions. I show that the implications of these assertions are titanic absurdities. This is one of those articles.

People don’t seem to understand what the Trump dossier claims.

Among other things, it states that the Russians had, and have, sufficient blackmail information on Trump to control him.

This is quite fantastic. A US president under the thumb of Putin and his top intelligence operatives.

Let that sink in.

Now imagine you’re Putin. You’re holding this gigantic ace in the deck. Through a long and carefully wrought plan, you’ve won the Holy Grail of intelligence work.

To what degree would you protect your secret and your victory? To the greatest degree possible.

Now imagine that a former British spy, Christopher Steele, who, from 1990 to 1992, worked at the British embassy in Moscow under diplomatic cover, waltzes back into the picture, in 2016. Not only does he have remarkable Russian contacts, he can tap them, and after spreading a bit of money around, they spill the beans to him.

One, they actually know about this super-secret successful Russian plan to blackmail and control the president of the United States; and two, at the risk of their own lives, they’re happy to tell Steele all about it.

Because, certainly, if these Russian intelligence operatives talk to Steele, they can be discovered, arrested, and killed—since they are revealing the number-one plum of the Russian intelligence establishment.

And Christopher Steele, who obviously understands all this, nevertheless believes he is being given true information. He blithely accepts the idea that Russian agents are chatty idiots, who have nothing better to do than commit suicide by blowing the whistle on their own operation to control the president of the United States.

Conclusion: The Russians fed Steele a load of disinformation and lies about being able to control Trump; or Steele made it all up.

What about Hillary Clinton’s role in all this? Either her people paid Steele, through several cutouts, to fabricate the dossier; or they paid Steele to collect a bunch of lies from Russian agents. In the latter case, it would be clear that the Russians wanted to defame Trump and help Hillary win the election. In effect, she was the Russian colluder.

Meanwhile, the mainstream press has chosen to ignore the absurdity of Russian agents confessing to their number-one, prime-cut, top secret.

To more fully appreciate the insanity of the dossier, let’s pretend the CIA had (and has) very damaging information on Putin: He visited the US, and while he was here, he paid a few local Washington hookers to deface a bed in a hotel room where Boris Yeltsin once slept.

Containing other horrific information on Putin, this dossier, under lock and key at CIA headquarters, constitutes such heavy blackmail, the CIA can control Putin. He belongs to them. This is an intelligence victory like no other.

Along comes some British ex-spy. He roams around Washington and Virginia, and multiple CIA people, who somehow know about this hush-hush op, chat with the ex-spy and tell him all about how the CIA controls Putin. They sit around and spill the biggest secret the CIA has. No problem.

“See, Putin is really working for us. It’s beautiful. He’s…well, he’s CIA now. We’ve got him. We issue an order, and he follows it. He kneels and does what we tell him to do.”

Sure.

If you buy this scenario, I have beachfront condos on the dark side of the moon. Place your order now. As a bonus to the first thousand customers, Mr. Putin has graciously agreed to personally sign a thousand letters stating: I OWN DONALD TRUMP. Suitable for framing.

Among the various reasons for inventing the Trump dossier: head off at the pass even the possibility that Trump and Putin would decide to cooperate on policies without the seal of approval from the Deep State, The Swamp, Rockefeller Globalists, Israel, and Islamic Caliphate-ists. In other words, Trump and Putin, sitting down, might possibly sort through ways to support sensible nationalism in many countries…

The Clintons had a very good thing going. Their Foundation was acting as a global clearinghouse for billions in donations, whose purpose was securing political and financial favors from the tag-team of former president, Bill Clinton, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The couple looked forward to continuing this massive scam during her presidency. ANY candidate who posed a threat to her winning the election would be attacked ferociously.

Lurking in the background of her election campaign was the Uranium One deal, which in 2013 transferred 20% of US uranium production to Putin. In the spring of 2015 (as I’ve reported in detail), the collusion of the Clintons and their Foundation in this deal was laid bare. What better way to divert attention from such a lethal scandal than claim that Trump and Putin were working together to steal the White House from her, Hillary?

Finally, Trump had to be attacked because, whether or not he was sincere in his statements and promises, whether he was quite the opposite of how he was presenting himself, his anti-Globalist messages were resonating with millions of people around the world. A major threat to the endgame of the “new international order” was building. Every major policy pronouncement of the Rockefeller Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, as well as the Bilderberger Group, was aimed at demeaning separate nations, erasing national borders, and solidifying a global management system for the planet. The flood of migrants into developed nations was a prime strategy in achieving these goals—and Trump’s constant attacks on open-door immigration were attracting massive support. Again, regardless of whether he was serious about making an immigration-policy turnaround, his words were having a significant negative effect on the plan to redistribute and reshape the demographics of Europe and America. Something had to be done.

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

After Harvey Weinstein; is Trump next to go down?

Nov7

After Harvey Weinstein; is Trump next to go down?

The shape of a psyop

by Jon Rappoport

November 7, 2017

(This is Part 1. For Part 2, click here.)

My article here is not about guilt or innocence. Understand that.

It’s about how press reports can be used to build a sense of CONTINUITY, which is vital for the ultimate card that is then played.

Follow along and see how it can be done.

First, the Weinstein story. It is sordid. Ronan Farrow reports, in The New Yorker (11/6):

“In the fall of 2016, Harvey Weinstein set out to suppress allegations that he had sexually harassed or assaulted numerous women. He began to hire private security agencies to collect information on the women and the journalists trying to expose the allegations. According to dozens of pages of documents, and seven people directly involved in the effort, the firms that Weinstein hired included Kroll, which is one of the world’s largest corporate-intelligence companies, and Black Cube, an enterprise run largely by former officers of Mossad and other Israeli intelligence agencies. Black Cube, which has branches in Tel Aviv, London, and Paris, offers its clients the skills of operatives ‘highly experienced and trained in Israel’s elite military and governmental intelligence units,’ according to its literature.”

“Two private investigators from Black Cube, using false identities, met with the actress Rose McGowan, who eventually publicly accused Weinstein of rape, to extract information from her. One of the investigators pretended to be a women’s-rights advocate and secretly recorded at least four meetings with McGowan. The same operative, using a different false identity and implying that she had an allegation against Weinstein, met twice with a journalist to find out which women were talking to the press. In other cases, journalists directed by Weinstein or the private investigators interviewed women and reported back the details.”

“The explicit goal of the investigations, laid out in one contract with Black Cube, signed in July, was to stop the publication of the abuse allegations against Weinstein that eventually emerged in the New York Times and The New Yorker. Over the course of a year, Weinstein had the agencies ‘target,’ or collect information on, dozens of individuals, and compile psychological profiles that sometimes focussed on their personal or sexual histories. Weinstein monitored the progress of the investigations personally.”

Farrow’s story is well worth reading. By inference, it suggests the outline of covert ops that can be used in many situations:

The pipeline would go from the powerful guilty client, to a law firm, which hires the “security companies.”

Persons who work for the security companies can pose as sources for journalists, pretending to offer information. But actually, they’re fishing. They want to know what the journalist knows and what he’s going to do with it, and when.

Then, the first-hand real sources for the reporter can be contacted and pressured.

These sources—victims of sexual abuse—can also be contacted by “sympathetic helpers” who do more fishing.

The security companies will probe the background and history of the reporter and try find information that can be used against him—either to impeach his reputation, or even for blackmail purposes. Anything to stop negative stories about the client from being published.

It would be only one step from there to enlist the cooperation of “Mockingbird” people in the press—covert CIA assets who work as reporters—if the client is powerful enough.

There are many potential wrinkles in this scenario. I’ll give you one that far exceeds what’s revealed or implied in Farrow’s New Yorker piece. This is how Farrow’s tireless work can be used by others, in a larger context, beyond anything Farrow intended:

Weinstein, who is guilty of various sexual offenses, is used to start the ball rolling downhill. Other celebrities, equally guilty, are exposed by victims. The news stories take on the character of a growing fire storm.

The result? The press is seen as the hero, doing its job for once. No one can cast accusations of a cover-up. They even beat the Mossad!

Then, when the public firmly believes the press is shooting straight from the shoulder…

The Trump accusers surface on cue.

At least a dozen women emerge, with their attorneys. They give their testimony of sexual harassment and abuse.

They add fuel to what is already a roaring blaze.

The public, already in a state of outrage, automatically signs on to the latest revelations.

This is not to defend or accuse Trump.

I’m just pointing out the way the game can be played.

It needs a foundation. It needs prior public “preparation” and belief.

More than anything, it needs a sense of continuity.

Otherwise, women who would come forward and accuse Trump of sexual offenses would be dismissed quickly.

But in the wake of many, many stories exposing public figures, the Trump story would have force.

“Aha. First there was Weinstein. Guilty. Then there was Kevin Spacey. Guilty. Then there was Mark Halperin. Guilty. Now there is Trump.”

“Look at how far Weinstein and his hired spies went to cover up his crimes—and they failed. The truth emerged. So now…who can doubt the honesty and sincerity of the press when they hold Trump’s feet to the fire?”

Read this from Washington Post (10/27), headlined: “All of the women who have accused Trump of sexual harassment are lying, White House says”:

“The question was posed during a White House briefing at a time when numerous men in high-profile positions have been undercut of late by allegations of sexual misconduct, including journalist Mark Halperin, who faced accusations this week from former colleagues.”

“’Obviously, sexual harassment has been in the news’,” Jacqueline Alemany of CBS News asked [White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee] Sanders. ‘At least 16 women accused the president of sexually harassing them throughout the course of the campaign. Last week, during a press conference in the Rose Garden, the president called these accusations “fake news.” Is the official White House position that all of these women are lying?’”

“’Yeah, we’ve been clear on that from the beginning, and the president’s spoken on it,’ Sanders said, before quickly pivoting to another reporter to ask a question.”

It’s a perfect news story. First, the headline, which suggests the absurdity of 16 women lying.

Then the claim that the press has slammed one of its own, Mark Halperin, without favor, on behalf of honest journalism. (“We’re fearless.”)

Then the question to the press secretary about Trump: IN LIGHT OF EVERYTHING THAT’S BEEN GOING ON RECENTLY, ARE YOU SAYING ALL THESE TRUMP WOMEN ARE LIARS?

And then the answer: YES.

In light of all the recent revelations about famous sexual offenders, the Post story hits home. It scores.

Again, I’m not saying Trump is guilty or innocent. I’m showing how the game is played. Effectively.

If this follows the Weinstein playbook, one woman will come forward and tell her Trump story.

The press will play it widely and loudly, with details. “Weinstein had his Ashley Judd, Trump now has his (insert name).”

Then another woman will appear and tell her story. And so on.

Media psyops have nothing to do with intrinsic guilt or innocence. They have to do with a final goal—and how to get there. How to achieve credibility with the public.

Working with actual guilt is easier than working with innocence, but the objective is SELLING GUILT.

That’s the trick.

Stay tuned.

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport's Blog

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Category Archives: Trump

Missing history: US oligarchs finance Socialism

Trilateral conspirators out in the open—and Donald Trump

Secret House memo released: the fallout, the lies, and the bigger picture

The rise and fall of CNN: the most busted name in news

Trump and his sh*thole remark: the story nobody is talking about

Psychiatrists say Trump mentally ill

Why has the Deep State gone to war against Donald Trump?

The evening news and the gunslinger called Trump

Top reasons why the Trump dossier is not believable

After Harvey Weinstein; is Trump next to go down?