where hypotheses come to die (madman101) wrote,
where hypotheses come to die


This is Part 5 of my "Bernie-Trump" series. (It has been divided into a part one and a part two). - All parts, and more, are conveniently listed in the latest technological fashion at: http://liberal-plus.livejournal.com/7435.html. This second-half will mostly be about collusion and corruption, less about Donald Trump, more about Hillary Clinton. (PS - Since this post was too long, the remainder will be posted ASAP. - It can also be found via the link above).

What is meant by, "The Politics of Preemptivism"? It means shouting louder than one's opponent, even if one's message is junk. It means cutting off the opponent, even with lies, before that campaign has a chance to get its boots on. It means hitting below the belt when the opponent isn't looking. It means getting one's message out first, bumping one's opponent out of the news cycle, and, yes, even arranging debates to be at times when few people will be watching. It is as if the debates had been virtually preempted on TV - as by a popular ball game - except that the handicap had been prearranged!

I think of a psych/game-theory concept I created called, "Preemptive Retaliation." I use, as an example, the idea of Israel concluding that another nation's, (probably peaceful), nuclear power plant poses a threat to its security, since it might one day produce nuclear weapons. So, Israel decides to fly in and destroy the nuke plant before it is even completed. Get that? Israel is massively retaliating, for something that hasn't ever happened. It is retaliating in response to ideas in its own head. Well, we have seen the USA adopt this dreadful stragedy in war, as well.

Certainly, this paranoid, megalomaniac, controllaholic behaviour trait can be found in many dysfunctional people, including psychopaths, and, "crazy bald-heads," like my downstairs neighbour. They attack others for their own prejudices, which then justifies their rush to "retaliate", suspecting they will be harmed otherwise, in some vague way. Most narcissists are so averse to criticism that they cut potential critics down before insecurity takes hold. But the habit can also be found in corrupt politics, especially at a time when psychopathic corporations want to rule the world. (I am writing more about all this in a post which will later be found at o_c_c_u_p_y

The main use of preemptive politics has been by the Establishments of both parties, in trying to squeeze out the populist candidates in the margins, Trump and Sanders. In their superficial left-right conflicts, and in their collusions behind the scenes, corporatist GOP and Dem Neoliberal Neocons have a common interest in keeping out BOTH populists. But they, (the Faux Middle), end up playing a game of whack-a-mole, trying to keep both margins, (the New Middle), down. Simply, the peoples' will is contrary to the Status Quo. And a big way they have been rigging the system in their favour has been through vote-tampering, (see below). Altering votes or voting is a prime way of preempting opponents, before they even get out of the gate.

Misrepresentation of one's opponent is another form of preemption, as it sets up a straw-man which can then be torn down, with many an on-looking dupe nodding in approval. Spending more money on negative campaign commercials is another. Setting up false arguments is another: As when Bernie lost New York, and Hillary was immediately insinuating blame at Bernie for not doing what she had done in 2008, vis-a-vis Obama, "Come together for the sake of the party!" - As if Bernie was somehow being recalcitrant and all the NY votes weren't even in yet. Once again, she was basically declaring herself the official nominee, as she has done from the start, back when she was setting up a debate with Jeb Bush, the OTHER chosen one.

By insisting that Bernie should back her, (even trying to shame him into it), Clinton was once again trying to set the agenda, arranging the game. Indeed, she was trying to write the official, "truth." This is an example of preemptive competition, forcing control, disguised as cooperation. Disingenuous!

The fact is that Hillary did everything she could to fight Obama in 2008, (though they shared so many stances), until she saw that she had zero chance of winning. Well, Bernie still has a chance. And his stance is very different to that of Hillary. So, it behooves him to stay in the race. It is right for him to insist that super-delegates follow the will of the states they should be representing!

[Just a thought: To "delegate" authority, is rather the same thing as to dictate, yes? So, these are just super little dictators, aren't they? That's consistent with our current zeitgeist of Corporate Totalitarianism. Corporations are Superheroes! I wonder how far Clinton might take Executive Orders - beyond Obama, and his auto-pen. I wonder what other illegal mega-treaties will be hidden from voters, until after they're installed. I wonder what wonderful new wars we'll get to see in our little terminally brief lifetimes].

I should note something I find interesting. You know how corruption and conspiracies congeal along the failing lines of power, in a dysfunctionalising status quo. When that happens, lies cover up shady business, and people say the opposite of what they do. They make promises to voters which they are bound to break.

Well, this perversion is also reflected when the Faux Middle - e.g., the failing Establishments of both parties - more and more utilises Preemptive Politics in its despair. To preempt marginalised opponents, the need is to cut in with lies, distractions, false promises, false arguments, and so forth. What this game of preemptivism amounts to, then, is that the Faux Middle more and more says one thing and does another. It is stop-gap, pretentious manipulation. And, it kinda spins out of control, geometrically, after a while. Thus the reins of power ultimately follow the lead of real entropy in the system.


OK, while listening to NPR's, "On The Media," several months ago, I came to the conclusion that Bernie Sanders needs a, "Truth Protection Team." That would be a team of media-monitoring people who issue press-releases, Tweets, etc., correcting all the false information that is floating around about Bernie.

You see, "On The Media," was doing a special bit all about how candidates LIE. This was prompted by a big hubbub about Trump lying. So, to be, "fair and balanced," - ("We report, you decide!") - "On The Media" began its piece by claiming that Bernie had lied, when he said, "Americans spend 2-3 times as much on health care as people in Europe."

"Well," said Brook snarkilly, "Americans spend more on health care, but... NOT TWICE AS MUCH!"

Well, yes, Bernie was correct. And how dare such a fine watchdog show assert that this fact was a lie - without even doing any research on the subject. It took a few weeks, or maybe months, but Bernie did in fact repeat his statement, affirming that this was indeed the truth. But, wouldn't it have been great if he had had a, "Truth Protection Team," to step up right away, and right this wrong?! The team could also work on issuing points regarding Bernie's economic policy ideas, and such.

One likely falsehood, or exaggeration, that is floating around is that pro-Bernie males are abusing pro-Hillary females online. I have to tell you, this smacks of Hillary Clinton's modus operandi, making herself out to be the victim and, yes, using the, "woman card." Recall how she complained that, "Bernie's negativity," towards her, in the Brooklyn debate, was hurting her(!) and her beloved party. Recall also that the two protestors at the Trump rally, (whom I wrote about), were Hillary supporters disguised as Bernie supporters.

Of course, there will be instances of ANYTHING online, especially on Facebook, so analogies are a dime a dozen. I just have to say again, I was viciously attacked online by Hillary supporters, with folks ganging up, and gossiping, and bizarrely accusing me of showing hatred for women. I don't know if some of them were pro-Hillary trolls, but who knows?

The reality is that Clinton trolls and plants can be made online, do their dirty work attacking females supposedly in the name of Bernie. And that's probably happening. Then, this supposedly justifies Clinton going on her own crusade for, "The Truth," which is instead, another corporate fabrication.

Because: When I listened to NPR's, "On The Media," the other day, guess what I heard? A pro-Hillary SUPER-PAC, called, "Correct the Record," is working WITH THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN, (despite laws against this), to Tweet out talking points and explanations of her statements, and to wage war against all those thousands of angry male Bernie supporters, with all their lies, and Trump-like misogyny.

So, Bernie should have been covering his ass, and now a little game has been played where he ends up being painted as the leader of the liars, eh? [For your information, this Clinton superPAC, sheltering its illegality behind an old law meant to free up bloggers NOT SUPERPACS OR CORPORATIONS, is being watched by: The Sunlight Foundation. This foundation notes that the superPAC says it is spending over a million dollars on its mind-game campaign - oh but it sometimes says that it isn't spending ANY money, just to keep it legal. Well, these sorts of shifty operations always show up later in campaigns, when there isn't enough time to run full lawsuits against them].

[Please take head: The trolls, shills and possible hackers of this operation may show up in bernie2016, in other communities, and even in your own LJ's! Be ready for crazy commenters! (Other trolls routinely come into LJ's just to spy).]

The corporate media, including NPR, (which seems to have a penchant for advertising loser mega-corps like ADM, Lumber Liquidators, etc.), is largely an extension of the Faux Middle. Therefore, it shares with the Status-Quo GOP/Dems the same pathology of passing deceptive and preemptive rhetoric like so much gas. As we all know, the media all tend to favour the same corporatist candidates, and yet they keep up the whole left-versus-right charade.

There was a big difference this year, and that was the divine appearance of a telegenic Reality TV star, which made them a lot of money, just by being a goof. Bernie was also a change, with his big crowds which were seldom covered. But he was largely shunned by the media, until he began performing the media equivalent of miracles. But, so far, it has been Trump who has been their money-maker. Now, they make their money on whether or not he can be stopped. Pretty ridiculous, really.

Anyway, in previous posts, I mentioned several examples of leaps of logic or sense by talking heads who were representing the status quo, establishment, or two-headed-monster party. Thus, they were misrepresenting the truth, or those who were advancing the truth, or productive change. When the truth mainly means change, then you know that the status quo has become dysfunctional, and full of misrepresentations, or lies.

One definition I have given to, "Power," is this: Power is the ability to lie and get away with it. There are many ways that status quo power uses to get away with lies, such as manipulating bribes and economy, or using military and police force, or garnering a monopolistic, corporate media to produce and "confirm" those lies. This is called propaganda.

But, many Americans are averse to calling these spades of counter-truths propaganda. They still see what they want to believe, through the fog of rhetoric about American dreams, and freedom, and a fair, democratic government - and a media driven by free choice and a free market and competition and all that. That isn't the reality.

The reality is that only six giant, globalised corporations control virtually all non-alternative media. This reality came about through the signature of Bill Clinton, who also gave us big bank & Wall Street deregulation, NAFTA, and so many more bombs upon our economy and our future, of which Hillary Clinton is so proud - or ambivalent... it depends upon her latest soundbite...

Like most globalised mega-corporations, and banks, and families, the CEO's are incestuous, (as well as parasitic, of course), sitting on the boards of each other’s companies, or sitting in posh government or cabinet jobs, or sitting in comfortable parachutes as lobbyists, pencil-pushers, or media talking heads. When the theme of the day becomes war, then the incestuous, 6-headed media fills up with former generals of the military, or CIA agents, or businessmen or politicians with ve$ted interest in the warfare, all giving their scripted opinions, talking away, and usually never identifying themselves as being generals, etc., highly involved in the status quo conspiracy.

And, every time rogue elements of the Pentagon or Department of WAR want to advance an agenda, out comes John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Diane Feinstein, etc., filling up your TV screen with their bloated heads. Not only does the media play along, happy to have such important people writing out their own propaganda, and not only does the media fulfill suggestions and commands of the Administration, they are happy to save a buck, not doing investigative journalism, or real thinking. That's why they fill up a full day or two with stories about, oh, "Donald Trump", (the candidate you'd most like to throw a beer at), or the latest "ping" sound peeping out of the deep, blackbox ocean, just to save a buck, and not have to report the crucial, important news like, oh, BERNIE SANDERS.

In conjunction with the establishment Democratic party, Bernie Sanders had been essentially banned in the corporate/NPR media - for like a year - (and, on the right, people like Roger Stone, Alex Jones and Dinesh D’Souza, have literally been banned). The kibosh has successfully been put on such alternative hitters as Jesse Ventura, Ross Perot, John B. Anderson, John Dean, Denis Kucinich, Seymore Hersh, and Elizabeth Warren - (not to mention Edward Snowden, et al).

I haven't heard anything lately from the author of, "Unstoppable," Ralph Nader, in these times of Trump and Sanders. (But John McCain is basically his own vast media conglomerate, it seems. Yep, the same guy who has been photographed, and recorded, as conspiring with Al Qaeda. And how can we forget Dick Cheney's perpetual returns from the grave?)

This is how the 6-headed media likes to make a buck: by denying the truth, or misrepresenting it when necessary. Even lately, NPR reported on the latest primaries all about how much more Hillary has to do to finally win, but all about how, "Bernie Sanders is a Socialist." Fortunately, NPR finally did some real reporting on Bernie today. But they always get back to insinuating the positives for Clinton right before the latest primary.

Let's take a look at a few ways the 6-headed media likes to quash the truth. One thing we probably all knows it has been doing, for decades, has been to give a false impression of fairness - as if it was nobly implementing its own Fairness Doctrine, (not). What it does is choose a status quo NeoCon from the Dems or GOPpers, and call that person a liberal. They then pit this moderate-right-winger, against a fundamentalist, far-right-winger, as from some conservative foundation or think tank, i.e., religion. Then we get an argument about how RIGHT the country should move, which is called, "a fair debate between the left and the right." (Individually, or together, the "news" people make additional bucks off of these very entities).

Another thing the 6-headest beast does is accept lots and lots of commercials from SuperPacs, candidates, and corporations advertising on crazy reality-TV political debates that go on and on... It doesn't matter how false the ads are. It doesn't always matter who is winning the horserace, so much as who makes the most money for the mediacrats. This is why Donald Trump was successful at taking the limelight away from the ESTABLISHMENT candidates, (Bush, Cruz and sometimes Clinton), basically for the first time ever(!) Meanwhile, the media has proceeded with protocol in trying to block Bernie Sanders, but has not always succeeded, against the unstoppable popularity behind this true leader.

Another thing the antichrist media does is air lots of glib celebrities and talkers, like Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck, in addition to their standard talking head guests, who dictate through anecdote. They take unlikely examples and generalise them into huge threats, or into huge selling points. Most of these false prophets have their NeoCon feet firmly planted in the Reagan-Friedman doctrine of trickle-down, corporatist economics.

But some liberal NeoCons are more interested in erring on the side of their politically correct doctrines, such as pro-"FREE-TRADE" - (?), or pro-woman, or pro-blacks, or pro-Hillary, or anti-Trump. These latter folks are all over at NPR, (ha ha).

Here's one example from my notes of how a bias, as through anecdote, etc., can be used to manipulate statistical reality, sometimes even unwittingly. (Casual, blithe denial is nevertheless a real component in conspiracies, such as in corporate media conspiracy). This is from NPR, because I listen to NPR a lot. There are lots of far better examples out there. (I listen to Alex Jones a lot, as well, and his dictate by anecdote is almost pathological). Deliberate or unconscious, the end result is distortion, misrepresentation and even lies, (as far as some listeners are concerned)...

A study recently noted that, in the USA, the average lifetime of white women is now one month less (than previously studied). I believe NPR devoted an hour of talk to this issue. It was said that, "white women are experiencing a crisis." So, the show was all about the crisis of white women. Assuredly, most people in this country are experiencing stress, due to the bad economy. This includes white women, who had hitherto advanced significantly.

But what the show never noted was that income inequality most certainly meant that it was POOR white women who were dying much younger, thus putting a dent in the AVERAGE lifetime of all white women. Yet again, the real, hidden story was one about rising POVERTY. Instead, the story was all about the entire class of white women; just as incidents of police abuse against urban blacks, (and many whites), are generalised to say that ALL blacks are violently under attack, or just as incidents of terrorist immigrants are interpreted to mean that, "ALL immigrants are bad" - or vice versa.

Along with this, identity politics is played, as by Hillary Clinton, which only results in groups arguing against groups, obscuring the broader reality of income dis-equalisation, and serving only to benefit the global banks and corporations, and their handful of super-capitalists.

This bigger picture what Bernie Sanders is TRYING to reveal, and what the 6-headed media do not want you to know.

When Bernie Sanders said that, "in this country, poor people tend not to vote," he was saying something factual: the truth. This truth is something he has known for many years. But pro-Hillary Chuck Todd chose not to respect the valuable wisdom of an older man, and instead went on the attack, announcing that Bernie Sanders was being disrespectful of poor people! OMG - Bernie Sanders is a big bully just like Trump!

Once again, skirting the real issue. Why is this happening? Why is the truth constantly being shafted by the dinosaur media, representing the Faux Middle, through the anti-logical methods of preemptive politics?

Chuck Todd also said that Bernie Sanders was all, "sour grapes," because Bernie criticised the Democratic Party, as not being clear on so many issues, (which you can see at bernie2016. Once again, the man speaks the truth. And Bernie Has been clear about his issues with this party all along. Chuck Todd instead blamed Bernie for whining after his loss in a recent primary, (when all were acting like the race was now over). Bernie then proceeded to WINDIANA! (ha ha).

You can listen on this issue, and more, when radio talker Sly talks to John Nichols, (The Nation), and then takes calls, 5/2/16 -"The Drive Home With Sly," http://slypodcasts.podbean.com/. Sly notes that Chuck Todd's childishness reminds him of the gung-ho idiocracy which existed everywhere, prior to the crash in 2008, (which precipitated the depression we experience today). Indeed, both of Todd's accusations are fine examples of preemptive misrepresentation.

And right there is the illumination! Indeed, all these media rats, representing the status quo; and all these political rats representing the status quo, and all this corporate MONEY tied into the status quo, ARE STILL WORKING FOR THE SAME ECONOMICS AND MENTALITY THAT FAILED US IN 2008. They are blind to their own error. They still BELIEVE that Reaganomics works - at least for the billionaires they know. They do not see that they are manufacturing lies designed to control consent. (See Chomsky's, "Manufacturing Consent").

Therefore, by so peddling the failed PAST, and all the centralised capital pooled there, these people inevitably MUST lie, and lie, and lie and lie. Why? Because they are all invested in something so completely contradictory to the reality - the TRUTH - of the present! And of the future which Millennials have a right to see. And, we all know that lies simply require more and more lies just to hold them together. And, we all know the NAZI motto that the bigger the lie, the more the public eats it up.

Lies, disingenuous leaps of logic, and rationalisations of denial: these are all attempts to CONTROL.

So: spend more and more on this bigger and bigger web of lies, and somehow this will save the mediacrats' and corporatist elite's fantastic world. But not so, say the people! The status quo is SO YESTERDAY!

My friends, what we have is a network of parasites at the "top", fully involved in, "the definition of insanity": Continuing to do the same thing over and over again, always expecting a different result, such as seeing the recession end, or watching Trump or Sanders lose appeal. Not going to happen.

Nevertheless, as this rude madness continues to strangle us all, many rich people - those not yet suicided - know too much, and are all rushing to islands in the Southern Hemisphere, to escape the logical conclusions - or concussions - destined to follow from this insane ILLOGIC.

And, as if we need it, there is no dearth of fanatics painting us all into a picture of, "the End Times." It's all a great, fatal crash, determined by, but nothing new under, the Sun. "What fools we mortals be."

OK: Now here's the central truth to this: They are all invested, with the reptilian greed of stubborn dogs, not only in ideas of the past, but in the DEBT accumulated by that regime, or regimen. Do you see what I am saying?

The dysfunctional status quo is, in reality, deeply dependent on accumulated debt - or on bets of a future which can never be. That includes the national debt and deficit; the massive derivatives market; the junky bond market; debts made to bad investments; and on and on!

This whole miasma is precisely what has given us opportunistic venture-vultures, Goldman-Sachs, and the austerity-addicted central banks and their associated economic dysfunctions. Instead of digging the world OUT of this insanity, through coordinated Jubilees, these conspiring maniacs simple borrow more and more!

And this mass-investment in formerly accumulated debt is the hand that holds the gun that points to the heads of all these talkers - all these illogical rhetoricians - forcing them to lie, to lie, and to lie. It is a pathology, and the likes of Hillary Clinton have been caught up in it. It is the realm of the devil, to many a spiritual observer. As long as this counter-productive juggernaut keeps careening, then there is no limit to the evil we shall see in men, or to the heights of their conspiracy.

(If this topic interests you, please see also: "Web of Debt"; "Crisis Capitalism"; "The Shock Doctrine", ... And look forward to my eventual post in o_c_c_u_p_y!)

I just want to add that, other than from some progressives like Thom Hartmann and "Sly", the place where I have heard most fair coverage of Bernie Sanders has been the Louisville, KY, radio station, WHAS 840. They have covered primaries, speeches, and have made great little commercials, all of which have been fair and balanced. Oddly enough, this radio station is a Fox News affiliate. ("Faux News" is the same operation which supposedly reported from the 2011 Madison, Wisconsin, protests while, somehow, Florida palm trees swayed warmly in the background).

But, this gives me hope for the coming Kentucky primary. And there are other states coming up where Bernie might do well, thus giving him some great momentum to enter the California primary!

But, on NPR, what did I hear? Another subliminal pro-Hillary news bit. Patrick Skayhill(sp?) was reporting on Hillary Clinton's use of the Sandy Hook event in order to sell her platform of gun control. The message was that, basically, this was a good thing. One woman voiced her enthusiastic testimonial of Clinton, singing, "She reminds me of my MOTHER!" (oh, glee).

But, to tell you the truth, I don't trust anything Clinton says, or anything she is involved in. Quiet frankly, after all my study of this and related issues, I am not even sure that the Sandy Hook massacre happened as it was said to. I am not sure that it was not all contrived, by millions of dollars, and by people so nobly in denial, and by political agendas, to sell the gun-control platform in the first place, as well as to instill more fear and doubt into Americans, (as European events continue to do), making them more susceptible to control and destabilisation. As was done to Chile, Greece, etc., etc., just before the banksters swooped in.

This may sound completely ridiculous to you. But, I am telling you, the extent to which the truth is being rendered asunder is vast and profane. It has also been very calculated, going all the way back to the JFK assassination. I only mean to assert to you that we are in really, really deep doo-doo. (See also, "Nobody Died at Sandy Hook" - this author is widely banned in the Mini-Medusa Media. His book has also been dropped by Amazon. See also http://www.BannedDocumentaries.com).

All we hear is the same-old same-old: "Bush!-Clinton!-Bush!-Clinton!..." zzzzz.....


If there's one word which many people would use to describe their sense of Hillary Clinton, it would be, "disingenuous." Not only do simmering real issues like the emails, Benghazi, Mena, and Vince Foster, make people doubt her, so do her daily mannerisms. I have heard her change her accent to suit every state she was visitting, the most recently, Indiana. She has said in speeches, just to impress women, that she dies her hair. Her little stunt about being stalled in the bathroom during an early debate? Another probably contrived event, designed to garner sympathy as a female. She has played the victim a number of times, e.g., blaming Bernie for being too mean. So, when it comes to her, "playing the woman card,"... uh, yeah.

"Of COURSE I am an outsider! I'll be the first female president! You can't get any more outsider than that!"

See also, "The Clinton's War on Women," by Roger Stone.

How many times has Hillary Clinton changed her story on NAFTA, the TPP, and on "free" trade? How many times has she amended her comments on issues? And what was that whopper about being shot down in Bosnia? It just never ends. A lot of people see through this. It is really unfortunate, that such a status quo shill should be given a greater chance than so many, more deserving women.

Beyond these habitual gaffs and fudges, I feel there is "benign" graft - grafted right into the manner in which Hillary Clinton campaigns. For example, who was she to try to steal the nomination so early, by stacking up over 500 super-delegates in her favour? This very operation, in itself, compelled many unenlightened Democrats to shy away from Bernie, from the very beginning. Hillary was, "sure to win", with these superdictators parked so snug in her pocket like little sock puppets. (I refer to Thom Hartman on this, in my first post in the bernie2016 community: "Bernie. In a heartbeat!" - http://madman101.livejournal.com/1775049.html

Isn't that attitude just like putting the cart before the horse, or just like putting ends before means, or just like putting the failed status quo PAST before the present, and the natural future? Isn't Hillary basically trying to win by shouting louder, or by using Might to make Right, or using corporations to shut up PEOPLE? This is the politics of preemptivism.

If it is moral for Hillary to steal these votes from the very beginning, then how can it be for Bernie to try to steer these delegates into actually representing the people in their states?! Yet Hillary, and associates, complained that Bernie is trying to manipulate the will of the people! If the majority are for Hillary, then that means that Bernie is interfering with the democratic process? have you ever heard anything so convoluted in your entire life?! Disgusting.

In this mentality, to be "moral" means to defer to the immoral. We should thank Bernie never to submit to this constant stream of garbage. Playing these adolescent games only brings our country farther and farther away from the truth it needs to save itself. At last, we have the chance NOT to vote for the (bush-clinton-bush-clinton) lesser of two evils! We have come so far in only a year!

The race is much tighter when Hillary's super-delegate lead is removed. And there is hope that many of them will switch to Bernie. In fact, even as she collects more delegates, Bernie edges out Hillary in national polls. That means that the true, overall will of the people is for Bernie. Or should we concede to the dictatorship-by-anecdote, putting thoughts before realities, just like they do on Wall Street?

And, beyond this, it is well known that Bernie consistently beats out Trump in national polls. This means he makes a better nominee, over Hillary, for the national election. In addition, Clinton has racked up many states which are sure to go to the Republican nominee instead of a Democrat. This means they don't count, if we're talking about REAL POLITICS here.

So, even as Bernie is a shoe-in for the real thing, Hillary and the status quo Party have been building up a house-of-lies, built on sand. They are drunk on their own doomed magical thinking. Even now, Hillary goons are having backroom talks, pressing Bernie to conform now, to Hillary's agenda. It reeks of a kind of despair, as if... As if something is coming which will cut short Hillary's run... Maybe something revealing from the FBI, oh idk...

Bernie is beating Hillary nationwide. Bernie is beating Trump nationwide. What part of this is so hard to understand? THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS BERNIE SANDERS.

More examples of Hillary Clinton's crafty, Baby Boomer preemptivism? As she has said several times, even early on, "I am the likely nominee!" Or, how about her arranging a debate with the other chosen "nominee", Jeb Bush, way, way early in the game? Or, how about her and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz arranging the Dem debates so that very few people would see them, and so become influenced by Bernie? Weirdly controllaholic, yes? Weirdly backwards. Do we really need more of this s**t? I think you know the answer to this profound question, dear reader.

Hillary has been trying to write the story before it even happens. I am sure she thinks of this as preventive medicine, but really it is the insane, rank politics of preemption. This is indicative of the status quo trying to FORCE control. This is like centralised planning of an economy, or like slapping a kid to make him grow up all good, or like spying on an entire population just to nab a few manufactured terrorists. It's like entrapment of the innocent. Think of all the innocent people who have been swayed by this sleight-of-hand to vote for Clinton. It makes me sad. It forebodes worse times of over-control coming in our batardised future.

But, just as so many Republicans frowned upon the Cruz-Kasich alliance to bring down trump, (another great example of preemptivism), costing them Indiana, so too do many Democrats see through this forced control, and oppose it, like natural Americans. And, so, the bullshit backfires. Just as the graft should backfire on Clinton. Ironically, it is looking like the last person you'd expect, a female "progressive" Democrat, shall end up as a Nixonian bookend to a tragic era. Very Faustian.

Of course, there is more illegal graft nipping away at Hillary's Achilles’ heals, alluded to above; (see also my own LJ's tags). I don't think I need to go much into this. Others do a better job than I.

But, I will mention that, according to Greg Hunter of http://www.usawatchdog.org, "Hillary Clinton sold State Department secrets for hundreds of millions of dollars for her foundation and put those emails on her own personal server so that they wouldn't be discovered... I think Obama is going to drop her. I don't see Obama can allow her to become president." - (para), TruNews April 22, 2016. (See also CCN story on the FBI and the email scandal, breaking 5/5/16).

The renowned investigative journalist, Seymore Hersh is also presenting clearly incriminating evidence of illegal Hillary graft in Libya, which should also incriminate Obama and other attendant top government politicians and CIA. Seymore Hersh, a very credible professional, has indeed referred to Hillary-associate, President Obama, "a snake." I guess that depends on one's perspective, ehem.

(See also: Hillary Clinton Approved Delivering Libya’s Sarin Gas to Syrian Rebels: Seymour Hersh – Global Research – 5/8/16 - http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-approved-delivering-libyas-sarin-gas-to-syrian-rebels-seymour-hersh/5522647).

In addition, this whole thing with the Saudi's and CIA and politicians being behind 9/11 is possibly going to hit the fan. If it does, there will be major shake-ups, including in the USA government, and this will reach as far as the Clintons. I think our hopes may be hinged upon the good consciences of a few FBI whistleblowers, and a tenuous economy. If Hillary comes down soon enough, then the contest falls to Bernie versus Joe Biden. I think Joe Biden may be too good a Catholic to play against Sanders, rather than running with him. IDK. *crosses fingers*

[Inserted 5/20/16, although written much earlier]
- Some final thoughts on graft in general... I think it is interesting how history does in fact "repeat" itself, not exactly, but in somewhat similar cycles. We wee humans bend, en masse, to the cycles of an immense, determined universe, like the curls of DNA, the Mayan calendar, or the transmigration of souls. As a poet, I have felt the same way as Alex Jones, that history does not so much repeat, as it rhymes. For example, these days, we have an incursion of (Arabic or Moslem) ISIS and refugees into Europe, which is very similar to the years of the Ottoman Empire incursions. Not the same, of course. Nature and humanity expand, contract, and change in waves. So, at times, the centrality of, "the holy lands," crystalises as somehow fundamentally important, while at other times, the world can pretty much do without that. Therefore, the descendants of the same regions, and countries, and conspiracies, and families, sometimes arise to repeat the same patterns, like the devil, or like the divine, in an eternal contest.

Also, whenever a status quo system or authority begins to fail, corruption accumulates along the lines of power. Those in control, ever more desperate to contain entropy, yet maintain their own inflating egos, resort to bad means towards ever-more delusional ends. "Preemptivism." These include lies, spying, abuse, extortion, assassinations, false-flags, vote-tampering, war, etc. It is necessary that these deluded narcissists tell themselves that they are doing what is best for, "the whole", or, "the people", or "God", (i.e., the declining status quo, which gave them power and identity and righteousness). More and more in conflict with the beliefs of the many, these people see themselves as being the chosen ones, more wise and justified than the common slob. (The ideologies of Calvinism, Anti-Communism, and Anti-Terrorism certainly stoke this mentality. See: "Dulles", "Bush Crime Family", "Nixon").

In our system, deified politicians are required to pander to the common slob, and so they develop an art of promising one thing while doing another. Of telling lies - and then conspiring with the elites, e.g., "I will oppose the TPP!..." Or - of conspiring secretly, breaking laws, to undermine opponents or democracy itself, all the while saying things like, "I offer an olive leaf to my opponent, blah, blah, blah..." Remember that whole thing involving the break-in to Bernie's voter data-base, which was then blamed on Bernie? Totally Hillary Nixon at work right there. "What unites us is far more important than what divides us, blah, blah, blah..."

It is interesting that, during this time of social discord, we have a candidate for the presidency, Hillary Clinton, who exhibits so many of the paranoid, corrupt, secret, controllaholic, holier-than-thou traits as were practiced by Richard Nixon, during the 1960-70's. That status quo was threatened then, as is the current one today. I have heard it said that, "The left rebelled so much against the mistakes of Nixon that it is now incapable of seeing itself making those same mistakes." And, yes, the aging baby-boomers, in general, seem incapable of seeing where the Bernie Millenials are coming from, either. They still have their heads in their pie in the sky.

And, Nixon sat at the official beginning of the overt petro-dollar regime. Now, Clinton, if she wins, will be sitting at the end of it. Like bookends. Nixon supposedly ended the main war, and Clinton...?

As I said, the petro-dollar scheme actually began way back during WWII. Around then, there was literally an attempted coup against FDR, the beginning of Cold War, and the crafting of the National Insecurity State we all know and love today. Also, today's Fed, monetary, and fiat dollar policies were innitiated then, extended from 1913. This was a conspiracy of bankers at work, for the most part. And post-NAZI corporatists. Government-bankrupters and privatisers. Whom have we seen fill the president's cabinet these days, but the same sodden ilk? Who shall inherit the same sort of mess, should Clinton be elected, but the same status quo degenerative planaria? Alors!


Ya know, several months ago, I tried to get in touch with the leaders of the local Democratic Party. First, it was hard finding out who they were, except vicariously through the internet. Then, I found phone numbers for three of them. I was able to leave messages for two. They never called me back. I think I tried again. No reply at all. One would think they'd be very eager to get those bumper stickers and yard signs out to the people cuz, well that's what they do. Right? Unless, maybe, they were holding back, just to preserve Hillary's lead.

I also tried contacting the national party, a few times. No reply. I tried my previous county. No dice. Pretty weird. You could call it a trend. Maybe even a conspiracy. Of dunces. Cuz, ya know, when you look at the record of Hillary, and what Trump described as, "collusion," in the GOP, it does seem possible that there was a Democratic collusion to ignore the people. Like high school mean girls. Which is backwards and stupid. In keeping with the times. But whatever.

The topic is, "collusion." I chose this word before Trump made it national. Bernie chose the word, "establishment," before Trump made that national, too.

Is there collusion in our current politics of preemptivism??? We have already discussed the media, with its collusions of SuperPac money and talking head politicos, not to forget Hillary-W-Shultz's collusion regarding the debates. So, let's start with Trump's situation. I think it is pretty clear that Cruz and Kasich conspired to hold Trump back or bring him down, only to flat on their faces.

What isn't so obvious are the games being played behind this whole dumb spectacle. The money that had moved away from Jeb Bush, and then away from Scott Walker, was seeing that it had to find somewhere else to go, with Cruz doing so badly. In the same way that Walker had a bizarre day just as the Koch money left, Cruz announced the bizarre selection of Carly Fiorina, (as if to fight Hillary the female), only to have Fiorina literally fall off the stage a day or two later, when the money left.

But GOP elephants don't do things by chance, they are famous for their arts of memory, collusion, and scheming away. So, it was rightly said that Cruz made this last move as a Reaganesque declaration of his candidacy in 2020, god save us all. At the same time, the Kochs said that they would no longer be backing any Republican during this election cycle. They were giving up, and looking towards 2020.

So, you can see it all being planned out. And they are still intent on making Trump lose, so that he won't win in 2020, beating Cruz. So, what they have been doing has been keeping Trump hanging on to the GOP just long enough to keep him from running as a thirdparty candidate. With that now expired, what they most likely will do is have a brokered convention, where perhaps Mitt "Corporations-are-people" Romney gets nominated. Which is also backwards and stupid. Although, it doesn't really matter if Romney loses the general election.

In fact, I suspect that much puppetmaster, & hidden GOP money, will now be flowing to Hillary Clinton(!) Getting her elected is another way of defeating Trump. (In fact, if this is so, then it may not even matter that the GOP go to a brokered convention to throw Trump out! But it must be known that I saw them getting ready for a brokered convention way back when they were saying there would never be a brokered convention, ha ha).

And, Hillary Clinton is, by far, the most inured to the faux-middle status-quo establishment-conspiracy we have all come to know and love.

So, Bernie beware! The whole system is colluding!

It is important to the whole game to keep real and apparent opposition going between the two parties. It seems simplistic to repeat it, but this is because division of the populace is necessary to its manipulation. Only by dividing the Dems from the GOPpers is it possible to divide the Sanders new middle from the Trump new middle.

Further, through money and identity politics, there is infinite subdivision, of groups against groups, blacks against whites, etc., etc., until every individual becomes a kind of super-alienated closet terrorist-cell full of anger and despair. Full of abstractions, vulnerability, and so fear. That's what keeps people NOT voting, and consuming instead. Or going to war. It is the massification of preemptivism, an eye for an eye, making the whole world blind.

Despite this left-right paradigm, (which is unnatural to begin with, unless we are discussing angry reptiles - or birds - as frequent FaceBook), there is not merely collusion within each party - there is collusion between the two main parties. This is partly because both parties have a mutual interest in keeping the two-party game going. Neither party really wants the other to die, because that would mean that the second party would die soon after.

But this collusion is also due to the related fact that most politicians, left and right, get their bribe money and campaign funding from the same duplicitous billionaires. As I said, these overlords spend millions and make billions - from the resulting, conspiring legislation, such as NeoCon wars, and the anti-privacy state.

Trump has admitted to being just such a billionaire, donating to both the Bushs and the Clintons, because they were the primary players, so to speak. Trump has apparently seen the basic perversion of this system, and is now fighting against, most certainly.

Also, there has always been collusion between the Bushs and the Clintons, where it mattered, under covers. They basically own the same gold. They go way back to Mena, to Nixon, to the Dulles - it's a cancerous web of deceit that reaches back to even before the birth of a nation.

Party collusion also showed it when the Benghazi fiasco was secretly discussed in the White House. This meeting included Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Boehner, Harry Reid, other two-party leaders, and some CIA and Cabinet. I suspect they mostly talked about damage-control... Things like, "Should we blame it on a video? Or not? Yes? No?"

Interestingly, when Hillary was called to testify for the Benghazi hearings, (in which she gave that weird wounded-bird cough), she was never presented with any questions regarding the REAL story, which was her involvement in gun-running, ultimately to ISIS. Now, how the heck did that happen? Collusion between the two parties. Yet, ammunition for the left-right paradigm remained intact. See how it works? (It is stuff like this that makes me wonder, e.g., "what exactly was behind the release of the Panama Papers?!")

Barack Obama, the head from which Hillary springeth, has been one of the more secretive and controlling USA presidents in history. This was evident from the very day he sent out his applications for staff employment on the internet, which were filled with prying questions and requirements.

This was followed by his unprecedented armed entourage of Darth Vader militants down Pennsylvania Avenue. Which was followed by his tacit assent to Single-Payer advocates being thrown out of Congressional hearings - just like C-SPAN. Then came the build-up of the anti-privacy, Insecurity State. And all that ISIS scheming, just to bring down Assad. Which was backwards and stupid. And, Fast-and-Furious, etc. And, the non-release of the unredacted 28 pages in the 9/11 report.

Recall when pro-Single-Payer Kucinich was invited into Airforce One for a private little conversation, after which we have basically never heard from Kucinich again.

"I have two words to say to you: Predator Drones - ah ha ha."

And then we get a TPP tome that virtually no one is allowed to read. I mean, come on.

So, you can bet that Obama knows the ropes regarding collusion, within and between parties of all stripes. If Seymore Hersh is right, Obama is another lying controllaholic psychopath. I like to believe that Obama has secretly been trying to undermine the corpahollic state, but there is almost no evidence to support this hypothesis.

I have researched a lot about the secrets of Benghazi, and much more about ISIS. After the killings at Benghazi, a non-existent video was blamed - in public, but not in private. After all, fake videotaping was the standard modus operandi when it came to propagandising the progenitor of ISIS, Bin Laden and his CIA-Al Qaeda, (later to be employed in ISIS fake beheadings).

Hillary went on to lie about this to the families of the victims. I also researched and wrote about the contrived connections between ISIS and rogues in the USA. There has been unbelievable untruth being manufactured during the Obama presidency, at the behest of globalised banks and corporations.

But when I wrote, not so kindly, about Hillary Clinton, online, my laptop was suddenly destroyed. And so was the hard-drive. I have been hounded by hackers in the past. And the capability to cause such damage is known to exist. So, who knows? The fact remains, anyway, that I lost all the info and links and writings concerning these things.

Finally, is there collusion between Barack Obama and the Clinton campaign? Yes. Most certainly. Obama regularly makes digs at those darned Republicans, just when Hillary needs it most, and always in accord with her latest talking points. He has also shot down Elizabeth Warren, who was threatening Hillary's run, when he said of Warren's thoughts on the TPP, "she doesn't know what she's talking about!" When you hear something so crass or inflated as that, especially from someone who plays it cool, you know that it is planted propaganda.

It's similar to when politicians caught in some crime turn and point at others, screaming something absurd and extreme, like, "Those people are crazy. That's the most ridiculous, insulting thing I've ever heard!" The finger of blame only points back at them. Like Cruz accusing Trump, of being a Satanist, or whatever. And then collapsing. Pride and denial before a fall.

In addition, Barack Obama always makes some big announcement, the day before an important primary, of some successful thing his administration is doing or planning, such as sending more troops into the Middle East. (It is during these times that he usually makes the digs against Republicans). He presents a positive agenda. Since Hillary Clinton is very much associated with the status quo Administration, this is a discrete but powerful boost to her campaign.

E.g., voters hear more about the threat from terrorism, and so they decide to vote for hawkish Hillary. Or, voters hear more about the supposedly improving economy, and so they see less need for Bernie. Mark my words, this has actually been happening! It is concerted collusion. There are billions and billions of dollars at stake for many powerful people. It would be surprising if this were NOT happening.

Also, it is likely that there is a correlation between incidents of mass killings or terrorism, and the days before primaries. Yes, I am hypothesizing that many of these incidents may be false flag inside jobs. I don't say this without having done a lot of study. But this is the sort of thing that won't become common knowledge for decades, a la 9/11.

On the other hand, just after a primary, Obama usually steps in to take the limelight off of Hillary and put it back on himself. I think this is in his competitive, narcissistic character. But it is also because it is safer to, e.g., leave off making mention of Hillary's email scandal until after she wins another state or two.

It is possible that his administration, in the Justice Department or the FBI, has some anti-Hillary dissidents in it, pushing for more negative stances on Hillary. This is, in fact, very likely, since such disagreement occurs throughout the government, the Pentagon, intelligence bureaucracies, and into contractors, rogues, mercenaries, etc. Everything is coming apart. (It is the same in society - and in the elites).

That is what we can hope for: That some rogue FBI agent leaks the dirty scoop on Hillary, in time enough for Bernie to win!

One more thing on Obama. He has this irritating habit of saying nefarious things right out into the open, as if to officially legitimise the original sins. I am calling this the, "sayitso", policy. He says it, he makes it OK, and so it goes. For example, he joked at the latest WDC roast that, after his presidency, he will be sure to make money off of Goldman-Sachs speeches, (just as Hillary has done). Nod nod, wink wink.

This obscene joke blithely legitimises both what Clinton has done, and what Obama's role as corporatist president has been. He sees no wrong done by Bill Clinton and all his NAFTA, deregulation, etc.

As I have said, these people are incapable of admitting that they could be wrong. Instead, they regard themselves as enlightened royalty, who know so much more than the common folk. They know better what should be done for - and by - the common folk. They are here to save us from our dastardly selves - while making themselves more money. All is fair in Trickle-Down. There is no shame amongst the bankster class.

And if you think that Hillary will reject the TPP, and other illegal mega-treaties, after all her duplicity in the past, don't bet on it. Look at her progenitor. Barack Obama was vocally against such trade deals in 2008. But when he got into office, he helped install three of them. Pretty much the same thing happened after 2012.

In conclusion, I would like to note that we have a right to push for democratic representation within the parties, even though they are both private institutions. We have a right to throw out the whole Super-delegate scheme, which is corruption institutionalised. We have a right to throw out the collusion and corruption within the status quo GOP establishment, as well. Why?

Because, as we have seen, the parties have been conspiring to remain the only game in town, always leaving us the final choice between the lesser of two evils. That means that their very structures are directly interfering with the democracy and representation of the American electoral process itself. They are habitually squeezing out the margins - the New Middle.

It is, therefore, criminal in nature, and requiring a political revolution, from we, the people.

"CONSPIRACIES IN GENERAL"; "VOTE TAMPERING"; "THE FUTURE FOR BERNIE SANDERS," and NOTES must follow in next post, since this post is otherwise too long...
Tags: clinton - hillary clinton (& see preside, presidents - trump donald trump, sanders - bernie sanders
  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded