The Michael Flynn resignation has changed the equation. Donald Trump’s enemies are now playing this Russian connection gambit for all the mileage they can get out of it. Flynn appears to have misled Vice President Pence and others about his communication with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Trust was killed. The Deep State’s collective antennae shot up higher than that wall will ever be!
Trump has had enemies before, but the Deep State is an entirely different animal. I think he and Steve Bannon, lacking experience with the real centers of power in the Western world, quite underestimated what they would be up against. Paul Craig Roberts reports that former NSA spy John Schindler sent out a tweet immediately following Flynn’s departure indicating that the Deep State was “going nuclear” against Trump, and that “he will die in jail.”
These are not folks The Donald is accustomed to making deals with. These are people who, along with the globalists they serve, have controlled every White House for at least the past 70 years. The last president who tried to stand up to them was shot to death in a motorcade: JFK. Then Bobby Kennedy, the immensely popular Democrat who would have been a shoo-in for the presidency in the 1968 election and would very likely have reopened the investigation into his brother’s murder, was also gunned down. To this day a man rots in prison who maintains he has no memory of the shooting.
In other words, Trump is up against folks who would kill him outright if they thought they could get away with it. In today’s connected environment of alternative and social media, Deep State denizens doubtless know that millions of people would react instantly if anything bad happened to Trump. I would not be surprised if pitchforks came out and there was blood in the streets of the Asylum on the Potomac. I do not think the Deep State wants that. Its minions and its masters would much prefer a slower route to technofeudalism.
Trump is a target because the platform he ran on, and has furthered since Inauguration Day, opposes everything the globalists want: open borders and free migration, “free trade” which makes global corporations richer, and a reversal of the de-industrialization of the U.S. that began with NAFTA and went into overdrive after the Meltdown of 2008.
He’s also a target because he’s doesn’t play political games. He’s not a Harvard-bred over-intellectualized ideologue, and says what he thinks. (Actually, he attended the more down-to-Earth Wharton School of Business.) He calls out the controlled mainstream media on its fake news. This might play in the rough-and-ready “red” culture of Peoria but is totally out of place in the antiseptic “blue” culture of the above-mentioned Asylum.
And now, his administration is in danger! We can’t pretend otherwise!
A new official narrative is being laid into place even as I write.
Please allow me to digress. I have been studying official narratives for over 20 years now, ever since I realized (mid-1990s) that the civil rights movement had been hijacked, and its replacement’s call for racial realignment instead of nondiscrimination was being defended by less-than-honest means. My first book grew out of that. Then it dawned on me that there were other official narratives besides the one on race and gender. Many.
Here is my working definition of an official narrative: a government-approved and media-sanitized account of some dramatic event, such as an assassination or terrorist attack or mass shooting. It can often be identified by having appeared in near-complete form very quickly after the event that prompted it, then being repeated endlessly in all major media outlets, along with powerful supporting images, its essentials never again questioned by “responsible” commentators — this despite a lack of actual evidence (witnesses, “smoking gun” physical evidence, etc.) and sometimes despite physical evidence to the contrary. A convenient enemy is named whose motivations explain the event. Patriotism may be invoked, or its opposite, as the situation requires: whatever manufactures consent around the narrative by leading the viewing audience to suspend independent judgment and trust the authorities. The final stage is to demonize anyone who questions the narrative as a “conspiracy theorist,” a meme the CIA invented out of whole cloth in 1967 to circumvent critics of the Warren Commission Report. Other weaponized words are now available, such as “truther.” All to cement the narrative in the masses’ minds and make it almost impossible for them to think it false.
Examples of official narratives: Oswald shot JFK and acted alone. Sirhan Sirhan shot his brother five years later and acted alone. James Earl Ray shot Dr. Martin Luther King that same year and acted alone. The Gulf of Tonkin attack actually happened. Timothy McVeigh’s truck bomb destroyed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City; he and Terry Nichols acted together with no involvement by “unknown others.” Osama bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks, in which 19 Saudis commandeered planes and flew them into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Two Chechen terrorists, acting on their own, were behind the Boston Marathon Bombing. There are others, but those will do for now.
Logic and evidence have nothing to do with the process of cementing an official narrative in place. This was the hardest thing to wrap my brain around, given my philosophical training and the value it places on critical thinking skills, which by definition do not yield to mere authority.
Combatting an official narrative is extremely difficult. Since it isn’t a product of logic or evidence, using logic and evidence against it is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. Done from within institutions, taking on an official narrative can be career suicide. Ask former faculty members of universities who questioned the official 9/11 narrative. Or ask James Tracy, fired from his tenured position at a Florida university following his questioning the Sandy Hook official narrative on his private blog.
Returning to Donald Trump, I fear we are watching another official narrative fall into place, especially since the end of Flynn’s brief tenure in the administration. It goes something like this: Trump and his associates had numerous nefarious contacts with Russian agents going back through last year’s campaign and before. In the end, Russian influence helped turn the tide in his favor and against Hillary Clinton … perhaps in exchange for lifting the sanctions put in place in response to yet another official narrative: Russia’s “invasion” of Crimea in 2014 (it was an annexation following an overwhelming popular vote, as most of the inhabitants of Crimea are ethnic Russians).
Were this true, and Trump knew about it (corporate media has revived the meme of “What did the president know, and when did he know it?” from the Nixon years), it would be grounds for impeachment.
The problem is, as with all official narratives, there is no evidence it is true. Trump-haters have been circulating the “35-page dossier” that was leaked to the media, one of many such illegal leaks. It contains nothing decisive, nothing that would stand up in a court of law. Moreover, “the Russians” can hardly be given credit for the record turnout at GOP primaries that led to Trump’s nomination; nor did “Russian hackers” tell millions of people who to vote for on November 8.
But: “there you go again, Yates, thinking logic and evidence matter”! There is truth to the claim that in today’s power-structured and media-saturated political economy, truth doesn’t matter. There is a sense in which we inhabit a truth-free world. We have for years.
The upshot is that Trump and Steve Bannon are dangerously close to being in over their heads. I don’t mean this in the usual sense, which deems them incompetent. I mean it in the sense that they’ve underestimated their enemies. Not the aggrieved Left, who still believe themselves entitled to a Hillary Clinton presidency. I mean the Deep State, an essential component of the globalist military-security-surveillance complex. I don’t think Trump had any idea what he was going up against, how powerful the CIA and other elements of the Deep State really are, or of their capacity to destroy his presidency possibly with plants on the inside.
Sometimes Trump has been his own enemy. He’s gotten careless. He’s easily distracted and gets off message (e.g., about his daughter Ivanka losing a Nordstrom contract — or whatever it was). He’s assumed he could run the government from the White House like it was one of his business empires. Frankly, I was afraid this would happen. Nomi Prins recently took note of the alarming number of former Goldman Sachs people now working in this administration. This is especially troubling given Trump’s (correct) campaign allegation that Hillary Clinton was owned, lock, stock, and barrel, by Goldman Sachs. He comes off looking hypocritical. Just the other day, Chuck Baldwin took note of the number of CFR members Trump has (hopefully unknowingly) taken on board.
It’s a fair question: can you “drain the swamp,” presumably of globalists, when your organization is full of people with present and not just past affiliations with globalist organizations like Goldman Sachs and the CFR?
Be all this as it may, Donald Trump is still doing his part!
Last Thursday, Trump gave a press conference. Having read an article in my (mainstream) Yahoo newsfeed calling it “crazy” and implying that it had been a disaster, I gave it a close listening. Trump made a few trivial errors, such as getting his electoral vote count wrong and claiming he’d gotten the most electoral votes since Reagan. During the Q&A session he seemed (to me) more rattled than usual. But under present circumstances who wouldn’t be? He’s never been a great speaker. He got important things spot on, however, such as the obvious media bias against him, a bias amounting to sheer hatred. If anything, he put corporate media in its place. They hate that. But as Commander in Chief with access to a great deal of classified information that could be dangerous to the country if it got out, he’s under no obligation to broadcast specific plans regarding Russia or North Korea to a mostly hostile audience.
Trump had to repeat himself more times than I could count, that these claims of Russian interference are an official narrative (my term obviously, not his). He noted, also correctly — this should be a no-brainer! — that given their status as “powerful nuclear countries,” peaceful relations between the U.S. and Russia would be better for everyone than the collision course the two nations were on during the Obama years and would have continued under another warmongering Clinton presidency.
Sadly, the Deep State does not want peaceful relations with Russia. That doesn’t fit their agenda, which may not be eventual war (one hopes not!) but a mere continuation of tensions that justify a continued flow of taxpayer dollars into the war machine and the covert Intel apparatus, filled with bureaucrats who pass reports around all day.
And the Deep State serves Trump’s real enemies, the globalists. Which is the main reason the Trump administration is in trouble.
I can’t know the immediate specifics of the globalist plan. I am sure there is one. I had been assuming that Brandon Smith had the right idea in that the globalists will allow what the controlled media call the “populist” insurgency to continue for a while, prick the global debt bubble (which would remove trillions from the global economy practically overnight), and blame the “populists.” It would be the biggest and most destructive official narrative ever: “populism” (i.e., national sovereignty, local economics, border controls, and all that other “deplorable” stuff) can lead nowhere except to economic devastation!
But maybe that’s not the plan! Aside from George Soros organizations bankrolling a few agents of disruption at places like Berkeley, I see little evidence of globalists themselves doing anything beyond overseeing publications on how terrible the “populist” insurgency will be for the global economy (i.e., how it threatens their moneyed interests), and how it is steeped in ignorance and a rejection of “expertise” (i.e., their agenda for the world). All they need do is wait, while Trump and his administration flounder helplessly against relentless media attacks driven by illegal leaks until it is rendered dysfunctional. Trump’s enemies are salivating at the prospect of his being impeached or forced to resign, as was Nixon, or possibly far worse — for if the charges of his having won an election due to covert Russian intervention he knew about could be made to stick, he could be tried for treason.
That would be the worst punishment the Deep State could inflict on someone who opposed them! Never again would we see an outsider attempt what Donald Trump has attempted, which is to oppose the Deep State and the globalists on their own territory, that of corporate-bought governance and controlled corporate media.
I don’t know that this will happen, of course. I pray that I am wrong, and that Trump will be able to ride this out.
For though I may not know the immediate specifics, I am reasonably sure of globalist goals. I have shelves of books and articles that spell many of them out, sometimes in their own words, and allow us to reasonably infer much more.
Globalism’s primary goal is corporate-controlled world government: a consolidation of wealth and power begun decades ago through the network of central banks anchored at the Bank for International Settlements, which in turn answers to the vast corporate leviathans in the City of London (home of N.M. Rothschild & Sons and the de facto seat, therefore, of the Rothschild-Rockefeller axis of evil; also the Fabian Society, the Bank of England, the London School of Economics where Soros and David Rockefeller Sr. both earned advanced degrees); furthered through semi-secret “think tanks” such as the CFR and the Trilateral Commission; continued today via “free trade” deals that free corporations to do as they please; and broadcast almost openly via Davos confabs (which Trump has not once attended, by the way).
Once in place, this power structure of power structures would be immune to attack from the outside, as it would control the resources necessary for mounting any sustainable opposition, especially finances and technology.
If the globalists win, no one alive today will ever again see a financially independent middle class, anywhere. There will be limited social mobility, carefully vetted and confined to globalist loyalists like the Mark Zuckerbergs of the world or other tech-obsessed geeks who invent all sorts of cool gadgets and apps but never question the dominant political economy. Those people will be allowed to get rich, as Zuckerberg has, and be praised in controlled media for their “entrepreneurship.” (Yes, Virginia, Zuckerberg is a globalist.)
If the globalists win, there will be no meaningful education; the focus will be on vocation. The potential power of subjects like mine has already been reduced to almost zero, after all. The twentieth century philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein once described our subject as a “battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language.” Indeed! But where do we see that happening? Almost nowhere!
If the globalists win, there would be little or no work stability outside those tech circles just mentioned. Precarity, it is now called, will be the fate of the masses: labor that is part-time, temporary, consisting of “independent contractors” instead of real employees able to organize and bargain for better wages, work conditions, etc. Saving for retirement will be a thing of the past. For most millennials as it turns out, this is already true.
If the globalists win, there will eventually be total surveillance of all work and consumer activity — which will be child’s play once cash is eliminated in favor of electronic transactions, the use of cash eventually criminalized (only drug dealers, gun runners, and terrorists use cash will be that official narrative).
Needless to say, under corporate-controlled world government there will be no national borders of more than ceremonial significance. Mass migration will still be used to destroy the last remnants of the once-dominant culture in the U.S., a culture that will continue to be demonized as too white and too masculine, but was really too enamored of independence and self-reliance, with its guns and its God.
Speaking of Whom, if globalism wins, mass secularism will be the order of the day, not theism. No politically meaningful Christian activity will be allowed. You may see a contentless “spirituality” or perhaps the prosperity pseudo-gospel of the Jim Osteens or the “purpose-driven” message of Rick Warren (CFR). This is allowable in a culture whose real gods are money and power, and in which you “monetize yourself” or starve.
If the globalists win, there will still be abundant bread and circuses — mass consumption of unhealthy fast food, sports, celebrities, scandals, violent movies out of Hollywood, drugs (legal and illegal), etc., all to pacify the masses, in some cases damage their health, and ensure continued manufactured consent.
There will likely be continued theatrical wars, especially in the Middle East. Possibly the globalists will decide that Muslims have served its purpose and can be safely “terminated with extreme prejudice,” as it were. (Islamophobia was never more than another of those fake phobias, after all.)
For whatever it is worth, the Donald Trumps of our world are all that stand between the present and the rapid development of that world, technofeudalism, the specific political economy of corporate-controlled world government.
If Trump is taken out by the Deep State, that’s the future, which we can expect probably within ten years and possibly sooner, depending on how much chaos ensues. I wonder how many of Trump’s enemies, whether in the media, on the Left, or wherever, have any idea.
© 2017 Steven Yates – All Rights Reserved