Charles Hughes Smith's connects a dot in his ongoing thesis that more rational elements of the deep state are trying to neuter the Neocon's foreign policy to preserve the empire and thus are likely behind the recent FBI developments regarding Hillary in an effort to torpedo her candidacy according to his latest posted today at ZH
While I'm not convinced that this is the case, it certainly is the most optimistic analysis and favorable spin on deep state I've seen especially in light of the heightened nuclear confrontation risk.
I'm hopeful that Chris will explore this thesis with Charles in his next off the cuff and am always appreciative that CHS engages us here directly in the dialog at PP.
CHS's idea is very interesting. Time2Help posted this yesterday on his fb page.
The Deep State consists of multiple factions of powerful people inside and outside of government.
They form and break alliances. I imagine it like the TV show "Survivor." Some DS players are most identified with the USA and some more identified in the international oligarchy.
The number of people who understand that 9/11 was an act of the Deep State is very large now. I'll make a guess that 50 million to 70 million Americans know. With this understanding, faith in the MSM, especially the Neocon associated MSM, has been devastated. They are understood to be guardians of "the myth." Waging war by deception only works well on the gullible.
Similarly, government scientific agencies are understood to be corrupt or corruptible. What other scientific bodies have been corrupted to serve the oligarchy? We can't know anymore.
The FBI and AG shenanigans of this last week show that the activities of these institutions are but pawns in the global power game. They are certainly unrelated to "justice" and they are not even trying to pretend to be anymore. Rampant corruption is tolerated with disinterest by both the justice department and the MSM both. "Sure you can collect bribes. We are cool with that."
And Twitter, Reddit and Facebook are not trending the leading news stories. Controlling the discussion is within the rights of for-profit privately-owned communication venues.
I have watched videos of Hillary speaking in what are now known to be lies. She does so without the hesitation and subtle discomfort (such as eyes looking away) that signal that a human being with an intact conscience is lying. I am concluding that her psychological structure is that of a psychopath. She will be able to lie utterly convincingly and has no preference for "truth" over "lies." Cheney's "We create our own reality" really only works for psychopaths who have not yet been discovered.
So will the Neocons retreat quietly? Admit defeat. Lick their wounds. Or will they go all in with one last Hail Mary event?
I suspect that what CHS says is at least partially the case (i.e. that they are slowly backing away from Clinton as her political liabilities add up), but as far as Comey's latest move I think it's just as likely (if not more likely) that Scott Adams of Dilbert fame is accurate in that with both the exoneration and the latest announcement Comey was doing what he thought was best for the country as a whole: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152531307171/james-comey-as-seen-through-the-persuasion
Now I wouldn't go as far as Scott Adams and say Comey is a "hero" because I think it is also likely (though not certain) that his initial decision was compromised to a degree by political pressure, yet the new emails on the laptop could be so damning that he felt compelled to announce the news to Congress as promised. So he might have done it to either avoid a larger revolt of the FBI rank-and-file or to keep some shreds of his reputation intact after the full details come out (or both). I can see how one might see giving Clinton a pass the first time (albeit with harsh words) was a way to let America decide and not interfere with the election, but from my perspective since Clinton's team were the ones stalling and deleting… er… I mean delaying… the email investigation, she has no one but herself to blame when some of the nastiness comes out so close to the election. Oh well, too bad, shit happens. Or Trump happens… but I probably repeat myself
Billionaire Sheldon Adelson has committed $25 million to an anti-Hillary Clinton super PAC, just one week before the presidential and congressional elections are decided...
Adelson had previously said he would give $100 million to help Republican nominee Donald Trump win the Oval Office, but has waited until the end to follow through on his promise.
The money was given to Future 45, a super PAC founded by the Ricketts family in Chicago, owners of TD Ameritrade. The Ricketts endorsed Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker during the primary season and has only recently come around to endorsing and funding Trump's campaign. One source said Adelson was motivated over the weekend to help Trump after the FBI enhanced its investigation into Hillary Clinton's email activities.
Previously Adelson had urged other wealthy Jewish donors to join him in supporting Trump saying:
... “like many of you I do not agree with him on every issue”, but he stressed that Trump will be a “tremendous president when it comes to the safety and security of Israel”.
I've always wanted to use that word in a sentence. Given the state of things in the U.S., perhaps its use may becoming back into vogue. It has only been 500 years since the last major "Deep State" shakeup. If Donald got rid of his 'comb-over", he might consider the tonsured look of the past befitting a heretic. Unfortunately, a tonsured head is a sign of humility. Guess that leaves Donnie out!
I find myself unconvinced that the Deep State has suddenly developed cold feet about Hillary. It's just too alluring and comforting to be correct. It's something I want to believe, so I am immediately suspicious of my instincts.
So let's assume we are talking about the same deep state that has pulled of a long and unbroken string of disruptive, and violent deceptions to achieve its aims.
Are they about to go quietly into the good night? If not, their options seem to be:
Hope that Hillary wins
Corral Trump to their cause somehow
Remove Trump and rely on Pence
Double down and commit another shocking event that can be used to usher in their desired candidate(s) and policies.
Whatever the next event, it would have to be really big because people are not so easily shocked anymore. The Orlando shooting was horrifying, and large, and it just came and went in the national consciousness.
So I fret a little as my inner thriller novelist concocts various scenarios knowing that any 'next event' would have to be quite inventive to really shock. And the Deep State is clearly quite a creative lot.
You've missed your calling in the literary field. I think there is an international, quasi-fiction, best seller waiting to be written. Ever toyed with the idea? If Kunstler can get away with it, why not you.
Uncletommy
The way it ties in here is she talks about the research that supports the importance of creativity in keeping us happy and whole hearted. It's one of many important elements she outlines, but I do have a creative writing side that's sitting there, and I let it come out in my family's Christmas letters.
And I used to playa lot more guitar than I currently do. A ton more. And I want to get back to that, so I am committing to penciling in more creative time for me.
"Play" is another thing she surfaced, which I will crudely remember her defining as "an unstructured activity where you love it so much you lose track of time, and would choose to do it whenever given the chance."
So good suggestion, I'll let you know what I come up with. :)
At any rate, I highly recommend the above audio 'book.'
I have a similar take with the exception that I think they may have indeed given up on their first choice of Hillary. Where I differ from CHS is that I don't think that is attributable to the conscious initiative on the part of a 'saner' faction of the deep State.
Rather that represents an emergent response to the cascading revelations of Wiki leaks, undercover videos and discrediting of establishment media propaganda organs and what appears to to be a potential significant upset win on Nov 8th. All trends building to a critical mass that would make a Hillary Clinton presidency counter productive despite having all the right Neocon players and policies already picked out for her administration.
The ass covering under the bus throwing transition has started and will only pick up speed. With the advantage to first movers! You are seeing this everywhere from Obama, not backing the 'Comey is a Corrupt Partisan' narrative in Hillary's defense, to some in the tank 'reporters' and commentators, suddenly starting to criticize Hillary and feign objectivity. This was actually starting before the FBI bombshell dropped, on the strength of wiki leaks re the Clinton foundation pay to play corruption notably on MSNBC where even Mika Brzezinski daughter of the grand poohba Neocon/cold warrior Zbig Brzeznsinski got into the action.
I believe at this point Hillary's goose is cooked regardless, Best she can hope for even if she wins is a pardon.
There is a credible argument that Obama, in a Machiavellian twist worthy of the Prince, has intended all along to really hand his legacy to VP Tim Kaine,. Tim kaine who is actually an Obama Loyalist and was selected a year ago ( as we now know from Wiki leaks) in what appears to be a quid pro quo for Obama's public support of Hillary. was perhaps a manchurian candidate intended to ascend in the face of Hillary being subsumed in scandal. (Scandal which is and was always there and ready to be exploited by insiders) Despite public appearances, I do believe there is real bad blood between Obama and Hillary.
To the extent that Obama's 'rapprochement with Iran was one of his signature achievements, and foot dragging re. confrontation with Russia in Syria spoke to his relative restraint vis a vie the hardcore Neocon agenda, perhaps catapulting Kane over the corrupt corpse of the Clinton machine was a brilliant maneuver to extend and preserve that legacy. Speculative of course but that scenario would be one that is moderately consistent with CHS thesis.
That conspiracy theory aside, my sense again is that developments are more a function of heavy duty player awareness of leaks and revelations coming down the pike and the building public zeitgeist which would make Hillary ineffective. That doesn't have to be a neocon thing, Occams' razor tells me that is just political realists trying to save themselves.
In the meantime you can see the Neocons/Likudniks rapidly maneuvering for influence with Trump. They have always had players in the trump camp with the entre' being his misperception and acceptance of Iran as a boogie man as per Israeli talking points.
Remember Trump's advisors include General Flynn who co authored a book with Ultra Neo Con Ledeen, and who's raison d'être is anti Iran anti Saudi. Rudy Guiliani who is either the dumbest prosecuter in the world or complicit in 911 and
Sheldon Adelson who just pitched in 25 million to a last minute advertising blitz and is a total Zionist Sayanim Even today you had uber neocon Bill Kristol softening his tone to trump advising him to commit himself to one term.
The race is on to surround and influence a potential Trump administration. This fits the MO as the influence and control is devoid of any ideological underpinnings and is always first in support of LIkudnik Zionist agenda.
While this fact is unpalatable to people who have been immersed in the dominant memes of our media and culture, but like trying to discuss Radical Salafist ideology without aknowleding its Saudi Whabist DNA even cursory study of the origin of the Neocon movement clearly shows that it was and remains a Zionist driven agenda, born from Jewish intellectuals. It is by nature independent from other constraining political ideologies. That is why it was birthed with radical leftists, morphed into right wing conservatism, pivoted easily to Neo Liberalisim under democratic control and now is poised to adapt as necessary.
While there are Neocons that are not necessarily Jewish or Israeli, such as Rudy Guliani, resulting from the alliances with cold warriors, Super conservatives and hardcore elements of the military/security industrial complex the architecture is fundamentally built around perceived Israeli Security interests. Those interests dovetail nicely with the aforementioned alliances and full spectrum domination in support of American Empire.
Neo Con's can work with Trumps anti Iranian anti Saudi stance I suspect that any significant false flag would occur after Trump was in power, and would be blamed on Iran. So while a populist non globalist egotist is not ther first choice, a Neocon pivot to destroy Iran ( which was always their crowning intent ) could conceivably leverage the ideological belief systems already present in Trump and many of his supporters. a lot of that agenda could be advanced in Bill Kristol's putative 'one term presidency
Plan A to work through Hillary is likely dead because she has sustained too much damage
Plan B (always a contingency) is to put a different set of players in with Trump and pivot to the Iranian agenda.
Plan C if that doesn't work is put in Pence by assassination.
While it is possible that Trumps populism and isolationism will prevail and diminish the Neocon agenda, I agree with Chris, there is basically no chance that the Neo Con's will fold up there tent and going quietly into the night. At a minimum they will adapt and lay in wait.
Here are some of my favorites from: http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/. They claim to have the top 100 Most Damaging Wikileaks. Note that these change frequently because they are adding more. The numbers may not line up. Go there early and often.
Grover
31. Hillary says climate change activists should "get a life"
Last year, environmentalists probed Hillary Clinton on renouncing fossil fuels, and this is how she responded to them. Yet another example of private vs. public positions on policy.
“Though CAP is still having issues with my email and computer, yours is good to go. jpodesta p@ssw0rd”
Why is this important? The media is lying to us. They are saying the "Russians are feeding Wikileaks" and that they are hacking us. Their passwords are literally password. Some security. They only blame Russia so it can take our focus away from what is actually in the emails, which they do not deny it's validity. As mentioned in the info section, Wikileaks has a 10 year, 100% accuracy rating. Not one leak has ever been disproven.
Not only that… but Podesta LOST his cellphone Extremely dangerous since he illegally had access to top secret documents.
John Podesta's password was p@ssw0rd and the White House is trying to claim only a foreign state organization could have been savvy enough to hack these servers.
44. Hillary Clinton had to be told when to smile during speeches
“[Smile] My goodness, I was having a lighthearted moment when I said that.”
Her campaign seems more scripted than the WWE. This is why people don’t like her (not accounting for the corruption, scandals, extremely careless behavior, etc.) She just doesn’t seem genuine/authentic at all. When you are told to smile, read “sigh” off the teleprompter never have an unscripted moment, have every word of every line you say get polled and tested by multiple focus groups several times before you even say it… people just don’t feel like they know what you truly stand for.
“Raisers are effectively salespeople selling the candidate on the donor marketplace, so their feedback is valuable to HQ in terms of tweaking policy, messaging, tone, etc … big donors usually have ideas/advice and want to feel like they are being heard.”
These leaks prove that Hillary will do anything for money, regardless of morals. Her staff even comments often about how worrisome it is. She takes money from countries who (under Sharia law) kill gay people, enslave women, and persecute Christians, but turns a blind eye to it as long as she gets paid. She changes her policies based on who gives her what. She sells U.S. assets to countries who donate in pay-to-play schemes… what a mess...
74. Hillary’s speechwriters: “I don't mind the 'backs of dead Americans' because we need a bit of moral outrage." (Benghazi)
One prominent theme throughout the leaks is that Hillary is just a put together political head piece that is drafted, rewritten, and approved before being sent into public. They note where she should be outraged, they note where she should smile, she even sighed when they told her to sigh. All of the words coming out of her mouth go through weeks of tweaking so that she comes off as likable as possible.
80. Bill Clinton admits Clinton Foundation has no “real projects”
“Flagging that Bob B. heard that they could ask about carbon tax and late-term abortion restrictions. Solow and I are pulling debate book materials & running abortion answer by Jen & Rachel ahead of 3pm.”
If this is accurate, it is essentially describing exactly the scenario that CHS posited
he is describing a coordinated whistle blowing effort on part of internal intelligence/FBI/ and other governmental agencies using wiki leaks as the weapons for a bloodless info 'counter coup'
It will be interesting to see if this can rise above fringe awareness and if his assertions remains consistent with rapid ongoing and escalating developments.
His claims imply additional leaks beyond the Podesta files so time will tell if other bombshells start landing.
I note that he has his Wikipedia page(if accurate) I lists and impressive educational background and resume.
Pieczenik's autobiography notes that he attended Booker T. Washington High School in the Harlem neighborhood of New York City. Pieczenik received a full scholarship to Cornell University at the age of 16.[3] According to Pieczenik, he received a BA degree in Pre-Medicine and Psychology from Cornell in 1964, and later attended Cornell University Medical College. He attained his PhD in international relations from MIT while studying at Harvard Medical School.[4] Pieczenik claims to be the first psychiatrist ever to receive a PhD focusing on international relations.[5]
While doing his psychiatric residency at Harvard, he was awarded the Harry E. Solomon award for his paper entitled: "The hierarchy of ego-defense mechanisms in foreign policy decision making".[3]
Under the controversies section of wikepedia we find this:
On May 3, 2011, radio host Alex Jones aired an interview in which Pieczenik claimed that Osama bin Laden had died of Marfan syndrome in 2001 shortly after the September 11 attacks, and that the attacks on the United States on 9/11 were part of a false flag operation by entities within the American government, the Israeli leadership and Mossad.[31]
That is quite a resume. I love it when really, really smart people act as truth warriors… we so need them in times like these where the matrix of lies and propaganda threatens to drown us completely. Here is another of my favorite, super-intelligent truth tellers (oxymoron alert) at work, lawyer John Titus. John analyzes the legal aspects of what may be going on with Comey and recent events;
“And as I've mentioned, we've all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking - and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.”
I didn't watch the video, but I did read the email linked to on the Wikileaks site. It's from Bill Ivey, appointed chair of the National Endowment for the Arts by WJC in 1998. As best I can tell, he is not directly involved in the campaign - he is perhaps a mid to upper level donor. The quote above is taken out of context and seems to be just a general reference to "we", the citizens of the US or perhaps, we the establishment. It is very unlikely that he has knowledge of or is speaking for the Clinton campaign when he writes it.
I'm sure there is plenty of real evidence in the emails, but apparently there is a least one piece of manufactured dirt by people who don't like Clinton.
Just looking at my news feed this morning, the number of articles that are basically yelling at me is just astonishing. The entire mainstream media is vomiting up volley after volley of mud, hoping some of it might stick. It just reeks of desperation. "The mighty Wurlitzer" comes to mind.
Nevada is now in play, 53/46 Clinton.
These are actual headlines from reddit politics. Shriek-o-meter to MAXIMUM.
Video shows trump with mob figure he denied knowing
Greenville Church burned and spray painted "Vote Trump" (No false flag there)
Mass media has utterly failed to convey the policy stakes in the election
White nationalists plot Election Day show of force
How the American freak out over Clinton's emails buried definitive proof of Trump's awful business record
Trump's supporters vastly overestimate unemployment - and they blame politicans for it
Jon Stewart rips Trump for past anti-Semitic attacks against him
Don't let the FBI decide the election
Donald Trump authored a novel and naturally it's about non-consensual sex and workplace racism
Trump's call for policing urban polls stirs defiant reaction among black voters
Conspiracy theories, not facts, driving Clinton haters
Florida poll: 28% of GOP early voters picked Clinton
Clinton's path to 270 appears unchanged
35% of Donald Trump Twitter supporters also follow White Supremacists
And I disagree with your pro-Trump view, Chris, which is how I have to interpret your position, if you say your red-pill moment is to agree with Hudson, that Clinton is a greater danger. Putting a narcissistic, constantly lying, torture advocating, environment trashing, uniformed fool in charge of one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world makes no sense under pretty much any circumstances. It will do huge damage in the US and in the world in so many ways - as I saw first hand as I worked with global grass-roots activists on economic, social and environmental issues largely against corporate run governments when GW Bush was president. It was horrible - "the clean air act, clean water act" - 1984 speak for trashing our world. Trump wants to kill the EPA, put the country's top climate skeptic on it, etc. I understand Hudson's argument, but really don't buy it. I'd rather have someone clever, corrupt and consistent than a obviously demagogic, fascistic wildcard who is guaranteed to do major damage.
Yes, there's a danger that Clinton would start a war. There's also quite a danger that Trump would start a war as well. This website is finally getting a little too close to an Alex Jones conspiracy shout fest for me. I'm really with you on recognizing the major danger of the Neocons being in control, the incitement against Russia, but we've got a number of potentially unstable regimes who have nuclear capability now. Many are dangerous, including the US, but all have reason to pause before they start a nuclear war, no matter who they are. I'd rather have someone that at least has a cover-story of intelligence, caring about the world and sanity, even if they're part of a corrupt Establishment and allied with Neocons. Trump has no such cover story. Neither is good, as 70-80% of the country knows.
Okay, you all can start giving me a hard time now. There must still be a couple of people who agree with me. If not, I'm really not on the right website anymore, since, while I don't mind discussing or arguing with people, I really prefer and enjoy a range of opinions. This is getting too over the top.
kelvinator-
I think the problem with many people here is that they are so tired of being harvested in a variety of ways by our corporate masters and their politician servants, they're willing to stick a thumb in the eye of the system and vote for Trump. Not true for everyone, but I suspect its a common theme.
As Armstrong might say, that's just where we are in the cycle. We've hit peak confidence in government, and now we're skidding down the other side. She is status quo, Trump is not, and its as simple as that.
For me, I want to send a message to the party machinery that torpedoed Bernie. I believe they will not actually receive this message - they will try and continue force-feeding us who they want - unless they first experience a colossally embarrassing defeat of their hand-picked candidate by someone like Donald Trump. Experience is the only language they understand. Only if they get collectively smashed in the face will they pay attention, and just maybe, democracy will have a chance next time around. [If you get the idea I'm not pleased, you'd be right.]
"Why am I not 50 points ahead?" Because the party machinery picked a horribly corrupt politician rather than listening to the voters, that's why.
I have confidence in the ability of the country to survive. Roman Empire survived Caligula. We can survive Trump.
I respect those who have a different opinion of things - most of my friends are for Clinton. Then again, most of my friends are well educated, are in the tech industry, they make a whole lot of money, and so the status quo for them is actually pretty nice.
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Dave. I had to laugh when you said most of your friends are for Clinton, but then, most are well-educated, in the tech industry & the status quo for them is actually pretty nice. That's because I strongly supported Bernie, and all the while was railing at my Clinton leaning friends before and after Clinton took the nomination that both Trump and Bernie are right, that the system is rigged, but that they just weren't noticing because they're in the relatively small group that's doing fine.
I kept quoting them the stats that in the last 25 years or so, the share of wealth of the bottom 80% of people in the US went from 14% of total US wealth in 1990 to 7% in 2014(!!), and that in the same time period, using 1990 inflation calc methods, the purchasing power of the median income in the US was cut in half, according to my rough calculations. The constant Establishment Dem narrative that the Democrats have been making incremental economic progress for everyone has been a big lie (I called it a "false narrative" to be more polite), and now Americans are rightly really, really pissed off, and my friends are just out of touch with what's going on when they wonder in awe at the Bernie and Trump phenomena. They told me Bernie was too risky a candidate, and I said no, this year, it's Hillary that's too risky, and they shouldn't support her. So, we share similar perspectives on that front.
As I noted in my post, I'm an activist in various ways, and don't just express opinions around elections and vote (not to imply that you or others aren't active at other times, too). It's just to say that I know from my own sad experience that I absolutely and without any question would rather be active and put pressure, (including civil disobedience pressure) on in a Clinton environment than Trump environment. That's what Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and millions of people across the board fed up with the corruption will do as they loudly go after Hillary's various hypocrisies if she's elected.
We just really disagree in a big way about Trump. To me, it's not a game of sticking things in party's eyes and hoping by putting a fool and would-be demagogue in office to create change, as far as I'm concerned. Bernie almost won this time, and the young demographics (and boiling public discontentment) favor busting the status quo by next election. The deep stupidity, fear, hate, racism, potential major curtailing of civil-liberties and other mad dogs are likely to come out much more than they have so far as times get tougher, in any case. It's important to hold everyone to a much higher standard than that, whether it's you, me, Trump or Hillary. It makes no sense to set the mad dogs loose just to see them tear the old world to shreds. I don't at all share your confidence they'll stop there.
Hi Kelvinator,
I appreciate your speaking up and voicing your thoughts.
We share a bunch of values. Lets list them:
Honesty and abhorrence of lying, especially in a public figure.
Compassionate and respectful treatment of all human beings and absolute abhorrence of torture.
Valuing the environment and being aware that our human lives depend upon a healthy Earth.
Peace and the avoidance of conflict. Not likely to start wars.
Intelligence and intelligent policy
Works well with others. Can build a cooperating team.
Loves Bernie Sanders. (my buddy-the only politician I have ever just LIKED)
I must admit that Trump does not seem to have all of these values, and certainly not in abundance! I suppose I should admit, that I actually know very little about Trump.
I am guessing that the biggest difference is our understanding of the Neocons, sometimes the Global Domination Group, and sometimes called other things. What is their scope and effect on our world.
In my view, it was the Neocons (or the Global Domination Group) that brought us:
9/11 attacks themselves. Designed to traumatize, frighten and enrage the US citizens,
the re-introduction of torture as an "official American practice,"
The "extraordinary rendition" program (abducting an flying people to other countries to torture them)
Guantanamo Bay prison and torture location where people are taken without charges or evidence (and who are NOT prisoners of war) and tortured with no recourse whatsoever.
Abu Ghraib prison and torture,
Lying to kill millions in wars that were never declared or debated.
Bombing many nations. Parking an aircraft carrier 200 miles off shore and sending bombers in day after day for weeks and months to destroy roads, dams, power stations, airports. Creating living hell for the men, women and, especially, the children, living there.
Violation of international law to drone assassinate enemies across national boundaries (and kill all of the people near them) with no judicial process--just a secret decision from somewhere in the MIC.
the NSA who collects private electronic communications and transactions. I have absolute certainty that, in time, this network will be used to imprison political opponents here in the US.
The passage of the NDAA, a legal framework where any US citizen can be arrested at any timewithout evidence or due process or notification of family for "suspicion of terrorism."
The Neocons were active under Clinton 1, Bush 2, and promise to return to unchecked ascendancy under Clinton 2.
I have heard Trump described as uninformed. And he may well be on many areas where I know little about him. But he does seem to understand 1) the criminality of a charity that functions as a bribe collection system, and 2) the leadership role the Neocons have played play in reshaping America into a totalitarian and militaristic society.
