The Globalists Chose Trump

Those at the top (a.k.a. the globalist elite, the new world order, the shadow government, and the deep state) are not omnipotent. They are just psychopaths hiding in the shadows. They are just players who have been slowly and secretly consolidating power for decades, and perhaps for centuries.

Their plays only work because we are asleep, but as each of us awakens to the truth and becomes immune to their plays, they lose power. Just as deception provides what the truth denies, the truth denies what deception provides.

America is the goose that laid the golden egg. It is their power base, and so, inside America, they had preferred the more peaceful route to global domination, which was Hillary, but we wouldn’t just give it to them. Using the truth, we made Hillary too much of a liability and thereby forced them to go with Trump, who was their plan B.  From their perspective, we will get what we deserve because those who make peaceful enslavement impossible, make violent enslavement inevitable.

They are currently desperate, and thus at maximum danger.

On March 2nd, 2016, the most likely plan by the globalists (to those lacking inside information) was: Trump is a Ringer. Hillary is Trump's Bitch. It was within Trump's power from the beginning to guarantee a Clinton Victory – like Ross Perot did for Bill Clinton. In exchange, one must assume that Trump would have owned Hillary. Of course, there was nothing Trump could do to guarantee his own victory given how the globalists control government, the media, voting machines, and the Internet gatekeepers. Such cheating could deliver about 25% of the total votes to a candidate – like it did for Obama. Therefore, those who said they knew Trump would win because of his true appeal to voters or because of his persuasive skills were not accounting  for how the world really works.

In other words, an anti-establishment candidate would have to be worthy of a 25% margin of victory in a fair system just to get 50% of the vote in our rigged system. Given a fair system, in Trump’s case, he would have only won with a 10% spread instead of 25%. Just for comparison, Ronald Reagan would have won with a 30% spread. It may seem like Trump would have won with a bigger spread given a fair system, but the unfairness of the system and the bias and violence of Hillary voters was a large part of Trump’s appeal. Of course, given a fair system, Trump and Hillary would never have been candidates in the first place.

Trump barely won the electoral vote and lost the popular vote. He would have lost if any one of the things in his favor had not happened. Trump would have lost without Hillary’s health, Project Veritas, Wikileaks, Dinesh D'Souza, Weinergate, or without any one of many other factors that no one predicted. Even what little damage was done to Hillary by James Comey was enough to give Trump his slim margin of victory. Trump would have lost if several hard core delusional leftists in the media, such as Chris Matthews and Michael Moore, had not inexplicably begun helping him the week before the election. Trump would have lost if several popular libertarians and anarchists, such as Alex Jones and Stefan Molyneux, had not unexplicably begun promoting him hard. Trump would have lost if the media and the government had decided to make the allegations against him stick – at least through the election. He would have lost if anyone had released another candid audio clip, of which several must certainly have been available.

Given Hillary’s bad health, and given how the globalists let Brexit happen, and given the highly improbable help one or two weeks before the election, it appeared plausible, though not likely, that the globalists had decided near election time that they wanted Trump to win; and with Trump's victory, and with his immediate backpedaling, we now know that is what happened – but why?

I think the globalists had decided that if Hillary had won, then government, academia, the media, and crony corporations would have lost too much credibility and would rightly have been seen as the enemy by too many people. If that had happened, then the globalists would have faced far more resistance going forward. They would even have been at risk of losing everything; whereas, now, they can claim that the system worked and that it was fair. For their agenda to succeed, the people must believe they are free and in control. Harriet Tubman said, "I freed a thousand slaves, and I could have freed a thousand more, if only they had known they were slaves."

Another benefit from Hillary’s loss is the ease with which globalists can provoke violence from the losers, and consider that all conflict can be used by the globalists as a pretext for more of a police state. Of course, they could have provoked as much conflict if Trump had lost, but now they can get two-for-one if they have the electoral college elect Hillary. This seems unlikely, but it is the kind of thing they can do when they are ready to incite insurrection.

It is more likely that they will not risk their credibility by using the electoral college to elect Hillary because they can simply wait 4 years and get the electoral collage repealed by a Constitutional amendment proposed by the next globalist President and his globalist Congress. It would be expensve to get ratification by 38 of the 50 states, but it would be worth it to them, and they could certainly fudge a few states.

Perhaps the main benefit of a Hillary loss for the globalists is how they can claim that bad voters elected bad people, and then, at any time, the globalists can trigger the collapse they have had primed for years, and their media will blame it on nationalists, conservatives, capitalists, racists, patriots, and anti-establishment types. For the problems caused by the globalists, their front men will propose solutions that will indirectly and eventually advance their agenda, which is: one world currency, one world government, one world religion, total dependence on government, total control by government, and total powerlessness of individuals.

Trump will feign reluctance when he gives in to globalist solutions for the crash they themselves caused. Consider that Trump not only was a Demoocrat, but that in 2013 he proposed the globalist solution to the crash of 2008 when he said, "We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability."

These are volatile times, and thus there are other possibilities, but a last minute switch to Trump by the globalists seems the most probable. It is almost as likley that they wanted Trump all along and were playing both us and most of their own front men and all of their useful idiots the whole time in order to give Trump street cred as the anti-globalist candidate. There is perhaps a 1% chance that Trump is backpedaling to deceive the globalists so they don’t do anything extreme to stop him before the electoral college votes and before he takes office. There is even a 1% chance that if we block too many of their moves by outing them ahead of time, then they will trump us by inciting insurrection and blaming it on us, which in the short term could be done through an electoral college surprise or a recount surprise.

Where I think they have miscalculated is that I don’t think they will be able to blame their opponents to the extent they need. In fact, we can derail their plans for years if we wake up enough people so that their attempted misdirection becomes too risky for them. Consider that we derailed their plans for Hillary by making her too much of a liability for them. We thereby forced them to go with their plan B.

The crash will have to come in January 2018 at the earliest to ensure that it is blamed on anti-establishment types and not on Obama. It is possible (30%) that this could be the big one … where the globalists perpetrate a 3 – 12 month collpase, declare martial law, trade bread for guns at FEMA camps, implant RFID chips, force vaccinations, bring in foreign troops, ban cash, collapse the US dollar, and execute a “night of the long knives” to take out likely resistance leaders. Such an extreme move would be pretty risky for them, so I think a lesser crisis is more likely, and if we wake up enough people before then, I suspect their plan B will be a crash more like 2008 with a modest move towards global currency.

A useful word to begin using is collaborator. Top progressives and neocons (Republican progressives) are collaborators.

Consider how Germans began to talk about loyalty in the 1920’s and 30’s. I don’t think this is coincidence. I think the US is being herded into the position of Germany in WWI and WWII.

The globalists see the armed American people as the last thing standing between them and global domination. This includes that minority of the US military still more loyal to the US people than to the government. Therefore, they must take down the American people as soon as they think they can succeed without looking like the bad guys.