In his bi-weekly piece today Jim Kunstler explains exactly how - in the name of saving our democracy - the blob executed a non-democratic Whole of Society gambit to interchangeably swap out Joe Biden and swap in Kamala Harris, exactly as the Whole of Society gambit is described by Jacob Siegel in the Tablet article I posted this morning.
He didn't actually "push" it, but in the circumstances--the possibility of shrapnel or bullet fragmentation being involved being essentially zero, as shown by days of video study--he should never have mentioned it. One wonders, who does he talk to in the FBI? Who prepares his talking points?
My guess is he was told to mention it. And as a hypothetical, even with a 1% chance, Wray felt safe in mentioning the shrapnel theory.
The question is whom told him?
The hypothetical helps the Democratic narrative to belittle Trumps heroism after the assassination attempt.
My guess the orders came from doj that has been throughly politicized. But perhaps it was internal from the fbi. The loyalty questions within the fbi to cull Trump supporters and other wrong thinkers is worrying.
My view is by mentioning it, he effectively pushed it. Perhaps someone wrote the talking points.
My guess was to reduce the perception of Trump as a martyr, creating uncertainty. It goes along with Obama’s initial tweet “we don’t know what happened”.
I was wondering the same thing, why even mention it knowing that it would create even more problems for his already trashed credibility. Seems kinda high risk way to take a cheap shot, but then we are dealing with an arrogant bureaucrat.
Probably coordinated with the media to deny Trump the claim that he "took a bullet for democracy." Newsweek is already running with it. All they need is a headline to make it work for 90% of Americans.
I’m so sick of “the media”, nothing but a bunch of half-assed political hacks posing as journalists. As my uncle used to say, “useless as tits on a boar hog”!
To be clear, what I'm saying is that by the time he testified it was beyond dispute that it was the first shot that hit Trump and there was--as far as I can tell--zero reason to suppose that the bullet hit anything before hitting Trump's ear.
1) it's headline fodder for the 8 people who persist in believing the MSM
2) It's an elaborate way of pressuring Trump to subject himself to an FBI interview which they would then use to gin up a "lying to the FBI" charge, or something like that
I have no doubt that the deep state and the current administration would love for Trump to assume room temp. It's a shame that a country like the USA has to deal with selfish, narcissistic criminals like the administration while continuing to fight the corruption of a rogue buraucracy.
Danielle DiMartino Booth is worth paying some attention to, for those that pay attention to the economy. She is getting much more attention these days as a borderline dissenting voice: they lie to us about numbers and then change them after the fact.
Watch out for “leaks” regarding the economy not being what they have been claiming the last few years, particularly if they want to take Harris out.
A way to view Harris: the Tri Lat commission (David Rockefeller and Zibig). It was founded in 1973 as a counter to what was being done with Kissinger (the other Rockefeller bro). The intent was to bring China into the globalist fold by way of Japan, so US, Japan, China as the 3 legs. This was rejected. Never carried out. Thus China was not embraced in that way. Recall that Nixon was slammed over his attempts with China as well.
Zibig was tasked with running this, so to speak. Who in the Senate got on board? Young Joe Biden. The Carter gets elected. Then it goes by the way side, really for decades. Then Obama gets elected and they talk about pivoting East, with uncle Joe as the go between. Kamala would have been brought in to agree with this. Thus the links back to ‘73, and Morning Joe being the mouth piece all these years with Zibig’s daughter. This may give some color Mark to who is backing who and who is against who…Rockefellers have no say anymore and have not for decades, but that project still exists, at least through Uncle Joe and others. Thus all of the saber rattling towards China and bad mouthing by Biden WH. Not what Rockefeller intended, but things develop new lives over time.
Gee, I wish you'd be more expository for us slow-moes.
Tri-Lat a counter to Kissinger...bring China into globalist fold....by way of Japan, (how so)....thus China not embraced in that way (what way) by K.....sounds like K. and B. at major odds; I missed that. Simple minded K./Nixon...B./Carter; I await a more medieval description.
Meanwhile DiMartino a major rush. Ideally which post would you put her in; Treasury, Commerce, Labor?....Good luck with that. Meanwhile all hell IS going to break loose. Only guiding light in the pit can help with that; let the truth evolve within.
After WWII, the West, led by the US (taking over from UK) decided that the best way to prevent another World War was to create institutions, such as the UN, World Bank, IMF, and so on, that would get everyone on the sale page, particularly against the Soviets. It’s what we call Globalism. Globalism was perpetuated by the TELEVISION paradigm: form everyone the same way. Give them the same thoughts, desires, opinions and so on. Social Construction.
China went Communist after the War. But it was never fully part of Russian sphere. It was something of an outlier. Viewed as backward. It has been ravaged by Japan and in the 19th century by the Brits and others (something like 30 million killed in China due to conflicts brought on by the West. Thus why China is not a fan of the Brits.
The Rockefellers spent a ton of money from WWI on to spread US influence throughout the world and to remake medicine and the social sciences: social construction. China was left out of most of this, aside from the UN. So they came up with the Tri-Lateral Commission in the early 70s as a vehicle to bring the Chinese into the Globalist tent. The powers that be in the US and West rejected this. So it never happened. China went on its own course, paid for by making all of our stuff. Now China wants nothing to do with Globalism and is leading the anti globalism movement through BRICS.
TELEVISION was the driver of Globalism. The TELEVISION paradigm: the fantasies about what humans can do and become, is now dead as a doornail. But there are many, particularly those in and concerned with politics that hold onto it. One could argue that the torch of Jimmy Carter was passed to Biden, not the Clinton’s or Obama. Biden took up those ideas from the 70s. One can hear it in his speeches. Old school. Harris is viewed by some as being picked by Biden to carry on his views, which includes making China (and Russia) heel to us. She is not focused on Israel. She points towards China, or at least the people behind her and in her ear.
Medieval: China is embracing the Medieval, as in their Medieval philosophies, history and so on. They have embraced the DIGITAL paradigm (while we try to regulate it) as an engine to get them to achieve their ends. China has a circular view of history. Xi and his wife and the few hundred people around them are Daoists. Daoists were the pro technology people, while the Confucians and Buddhists were anti tech, this why the Printing Press did not become a real thing in China and they have been viewed as “backward” ever since. But now the Daoists are in charge, so let’s use the tech to reach our cyclical height about 100-125 years from now.
Some background on US in the early 70s: Nixon was in something of a box visa vie the establishment back at that time. He was a Quaker, so far from an elite. He had learned from Ike as VP about what was really going on. Kissinger was brought into the Ike administration by Rockefeller as a proponent of using Nukes: how can we survive a nuclear exchange. Ike wanted no part of this. So he created buffers to prevent this. Come Nixon and the idea of using nukes is still present. To counter the CIA, who were the establishment back then, he created the Office of Net Assessment out of the Office of Navel Intelligence. This gave him contrary data from the CIA. A guy named Andrew Marshall headed this group. They did tons of Net Assessment/War games and it worked: no nuclear exchange.
What really got Nixon on the “wrong side” were his views on the Russians and particularly the Chinese. He felt times had changed, nukes were not an option so we need to engage them if we want peace. So that’s what he did. Pissed a lot of people off that wanted to view them as enemies and places for us to take natural resources from. As a Quaker, war was not Nixon’s first approach, keeping in mind that Vietnam started years before he became president.
The Tri-Lat Commission was something of an attempt to undercut Nixon regarding China: let’s manipulate China and get what we want out of her by bringing her into the Globalist tent. It failed, but there are still people that want to do this. China won’t go along with it.
Globalism is dead, because TELEVISION is obsolete and the world has gone DIGITAL and will resist fantasy attempts by the US/West to run the world. What people want now is not fantasy, but to remember what it means to be a human, as in before modernity split humans into parts.
It has been my understanding that the Tri-Lat was created as a foil to draw scrutiny away from the CFR, because people were getting suspicious about the CFR role in government.
And wasn't the focus of opening to China largely intended to prevent an alliance between them and Russia?
If this is the philosophy that Biden subscribed to then Obama really understated his genius.
Understand how one might think that. Important that it was David Rockefeller with Zibig that created the TLC. It was not the CFR that they were going after or covering for, it was Nixon’s approach to China. Recall that after the war, the Rockefellers had the largest hand in rebuilding Japan, including sharing their Western Electric patents for transistors, thus the Japan electronics industry, and SONY (Standard Oil of NY). The aim was China, through Japan. The intent, as with all the of Rockefeller domestic projects was cultural manipulation. Meaning change China. This was not Nixon’s approach. Rockefeller’s ultimately did not get support for their intentions, and while the TLC still exists, it accomplishes nothing. By the later 70s and 80s the CIA was attempting operations in China in an effort to destabilize. The Nixon and TLC approaches were both rejected. Today, we are exceptionally ignorant about China and what it is doing and importantly why. We do not take it seriously, rather we call it an enemy.
China can be quite the enigma but I don't see them as anti-globalism except of the West's willful definition thereof. Instead they portend to redefine it like Capitalism or was it Communism (vs USSR) with Chinese characteristics. They are a very old and steady civilization to hear many tell it, unlike the American arriviste. But perhaps by globalism you mean the 'international' deep state; the ones of whom Catherine Austin Fitts once remarked, "After all these years in government I still don't know who rules us." I keep accruing details that alter my take. Nixon was a Quaker?
Woah ! My first imprint was the bombing of Cambodia.
https://www.foxnews.com › us › bodycam-footage-takes-viewers-pennsylvania-rooftop-moments-after-trump-assassination-attempt
Bodycam footage takes viewers to Pennsylvania rooftop moments after ... 2 days ago. An AR-15-style rifle is also seen lying next to him, as well as shell casings. One of the law enforcement personnel on the rooftop counted at least eight casings.
Trump floated Larry Fink (of BlackRock) for Treasury Secretary and then denied it.
I wonder if Cook’s appearance in the BlackRock commercial had anything to do with it?
If BlackRock was Cooks recruiter then it would certainly open up a can of worms, an op within an op.
Was it the cosmically aptly named Fink of BlackRock or Prince of Blackwater?
OT:
In his bi-weekly piece today Jim Kunstler explains exactly how - in the name of saving our democracy - the blob executed a non-democratic Whole of Society gambit to interchangeably swap out Joe Biden and swap in Kamala Harris, exactly as the Whole of Society gambit is described by Jacob Siegel in the Tablet article I posted this morning.
https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/saving-our-democracy/
I am surprised Wray pushed the shrapnel theory. I guess he assumes a statement from the fbi won’t be questioned, due to FBI’s credibility.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13676453/donald-trump-fbi-assassination-attempt-bullet-shrapnel.html
He didn't actually "push" it, but in the circumstances--the possibility of shrapnel or bullet fragmentation being involved being essentially zero, as shown by days of video study--he should never have mentioned it. One wonders, who does he talk to in the FBI? Who prepares his talking points?
The question is why did Wray mention it?
His mentioning it was not accidental.
My guess is he was told to mention it. And as a hypothetical, even with a 1% chance, Wray felt safe in mentioning the shrapnel theory.
The question is whom told him?
The hypothetical helps the Democratic narrative to belittle Trumps heroism after the assassination attempt.
My guess the orders came from doj that has been throughly politicized. But perhaps it was internal from the fbi. The loyalty questions within the fbi to cull Trump supporters and other wrong thinkers is worrying.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-trump-questionnaire-exposes-divisive-partisan-politics-at-bureau-former-agent-says/ar-BB1qDt0Q
But this example of Doj tds is horrific:
https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/26/jack-smiths-anti-trump-deputy-excoriated-for-inappropriate-behavior-at-doj/
FBI now walked it back.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-fbi-bullet-ear-ronny-jackson-doctor/
My view is by mentioning it, he effectively pushed it. Perhaps someone wrote the talking points.
My guess was to reduce the perception of Trump as a martyr, creating uncertainty. It goes along with Obama’s initial tweet “we don’t know what happened”.
I was wondering the same thing, why even mention it knowing that it would create even more problems for his already trashed credibility. Seems kinda high risk way to take a cheap shot, but then we are dealing with an arrogant bureaucrat.
Probably coordinated with the media to deny Trump the claim that he "took a bullet for democracy." Newsweek is already running with it. All they need is a headline to make it work for 90% of Americans.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-might-not-shot-1930037
I’m so sick of “the media”, nothing but a bunch of half-assed political hacks posing as journalists. As my uncle used to say, “useless as tits on a boar hog”!
To be clear, what I'm saying is that by the time he testified it was beyond dispute that it was the first shot that hit Trump and there was--as far as I can tell--zero reason to suppose that the bullet hit anything before hitting Trump's ear.
One has to wonder what was the point then, disinformation, distractions or simple witless stupidity on the part of the arrogant Wray?
1) it's headline fodder for the 8 people who persist in believing the MSM
2) It's an elaborate way of pressuring Trump to subject himself to an FBI interview which they would then use to gin up a "lying to the FBI" charge, or something like that
Yep, never too early to crank up the rumor machine. Damn I hope Wray gets what he so richly deserves and sooner rather than later would be just fine.
I have no doubt that the deep state and the current administration would love for Trump to assume room temp. It's a shame that a country like the USA has to deal with selfish, narcissistic criminals like the administration while continuing to fight the corruption of a rogue buraucracy.
I’m wondering if they are brazen enough to give it another try?
Patriots.win shows that Trump is going to hold another really in Butler, so there you go. The nerve of this guy, lol
Danielle DiMartino Booth is worth paying some attention to, for those that pay attention to the economy. She is getting much more attention these days as a borderline dissenting voice: they lie to us about numbers and then change them after the fact.
Watch out for “leaks” regarding the economy not being what they have been claiming the last few years, particularly if they want to take Harris out.
A way to view Harris: the Tri Lat commission (David Rockefeller and Zibig). It was founded in 1973 as a counter to what was being done with Kissinger (the other Rockefeller bro). The intent was to bring China into the globalist fold by way of Japan, so US, Japan, China as the 3 legs. This was rejected. Never carried out. Thus China was not embraced in that way. Recall that Nixon was slammed over his attempts with China as well.
Zibig was tasked with running this, so to speak. Who in the Senate got on board? Young Joe Biden. The Carter gets elected. Then it goes by the way side, really for decades. Then Obama gets elected and they talk about pivoting East, with uncle Joe as the go between. Kamala would have been brought in to agree with this. Thus the links back to ‘73, and Morning Joe being the mouth piece all these years with Zibig’s daughter. This may give some color Mark to who is backing who and who is against who…Rockefellers have no say anymore and have not for decades, but that project still exists, at least through Uncle Joe and others. Thus all of the saber rattling towards China and bad mouthing by Biden WH. Not what Rockefeller intended, but things develop new lives over time.
Gee, I wish you'd be more expository for us slow-moes.
Tri-Lat a counter to Kissinger...bring China into globalist fold....by way of Japan, (how so)....thus China not embraced in that way (what way) by K.....sounds like K. and B. at major odds; I missed that. Simple minded K./Nixon...B./Carter; I await a more medieval description.
Meanwhile DiMartino a major rush. Ideally which post would you put her in; Treasury, Commerce, Labor?....Good luck with that. Meanwhile all hell IS going to break loose. Only guiding light in the pit can help with that; let the truth evolve within.
I will do my best.
After WWII, the West, led by the US (taking over from UK) decided that the best way to prevent another World War was to create institutions, such as the UN, World Bank, IMF, and so on, that would get everyone on the sale page, particularly against the Soviets. It’s what we call Globalism. Globalism was perpetuated by the TELEVISION paradigm: form everyone the same way. Give them the same thoughts, desires, opinions and so on. Social Construction.
China went Communist after the War. But it was never fully part of Russian sphere. It was something of an outlier. Viewed as backward. It has been ravaged by Japan and in the 19th century by the Brits and others (something like 30 million killed in China due to conflicts brought on by the West. Thus why China is not a fan of the Brits.
The Rockefellers spent a ton of money from WWI on to spread US influence throughout the world and to remake medicine and the social sciences: social construction. China was left out of most of this, aside from the UN. So they came up with the Tri-Lateral Commission in the early 70s as a vehicle to bring the Chinese into the Globalist tent. The powers that be in the US and West rejected this. So it never happened. China went on its own course, paid for by making all of our stuff. Now China wants nothing to do with Globalism and is leading the anti globalism movement through BRICS.
TELEVISION was the driver of Globalism. The TELEVISION paradigm: the fantasies about what humans can do and become, is now dead as a doornail. But there are many, particularly those in and concerned with politics that hold onto it. One could argue that the torch of Jimmy Carter was passed to Biden, not the Clinton’s or Obama. Biden took up those ideas from the 70s. One can hear it in his speeches. Old school. Harris is viewed by some as being picked by Biden to carry on his views, which includes making China (and Russia) heel to us. She is not focused on Israel. She points towards China, or at least the people behind her and in her ear.
Medieval: China is embracing the Medieval, as in their Medieval philosophies, history and so on. They have embraced the DIGITAL paradigm (while we try to regulate it) as an engine to get them to achieve their ends. China has a circular view of history. Xi and his wife and the few hundred people around them are Daoists. Daoists were the pro technology people, while the Confucians and Buddhists were anti tech, this why the Printing Press did not become a real thing in China and they have been viewed as “backward” ever since. But now the Daoists are in charge, so let’s use the tech to reach our cyclical height about 100-125 years from now.
Some background on US in the early 70s: Nixon was in something of a box visa vie the establishment back at that time. He was a Quaker, so far from an elite. He had learned from Ike as VP about what was really going on. Kissinger was brought into the Ike administration by Rockefeller as a proponent of using Nukes: how can we survive a nuclear exchange. Ike wanted no part of this. So he created buffers to prevent this. Come Nixon and the idea of using nukes is still present. To counter the CIA, who were the establishment back then, he created the Office of Net Assessment out of the Office of Navel Intelligence. This gave him contrary data from the CIA. A guy named Andrew Marshall headed this group. They did tons of Net Assessment/War games and it worked: no nuclear exchange.
What really got Nixon on the “wrong side” were his views on the Russians and particularly the Chinese. He felt times had changed, nukes were not an option so we need to engage them if we want peace. So that’s what he did. Pissed a lot of people off that wanted to view them as enemies and places for us to take natural resources from. As a Quaker, war was not Nixon’s first approach, keeping in mind that Vietnam started years before he became president.
The Tri-Lat Commission was something of an attempt to undercut Nixon regarding China: let’s manipulate China and get what we want out of her by bringing her into the Globalist tent. It failed, but there are still people that want to do this. China won’t go along with it.
Globalism is dead, because TELEVISION is obsolete and the world has gone DIGITAL and will resist fantasy attempts by the US/West to run the world. What people want now is not fantasy, but to remember what it means to be a human, as in before modernity split humans into parts.
It has been my understanding that the Tri-Lat was created as a foil to draw scrutiny away from the CFR, because people were getting suspicious about the CFR role in government.
And wasn't the focus of opening to China largely intended to prevent an alliance between them and Russia?
If this is the philosophy that Biden subscribed to then Obama really understated his genius.
Understand how one might think that. Important that it was David Rockefeller with Zibig that created the TLC. It was not the CFR that they were going after or covering for, it was Nixon’s approach to China. Recall that after the war, the Rockefellers had the largest hand in rebuilding Japan, including sharing their Western Electric patents for transistors, thus the Japan electronics industry, and SONY (Standard Oil of NY). The aim was China, through Japan. The intent, as with all the of Rockefeller domestic projects was cultural manipulation. Meaning change China. This was not Nixon’s approach. Rockefeller’s ultimately did not get support for their intentions, and while the TLC still exists, it accomplishes nothing. By the later 70s and 80s the CIA was attempting operations in China in an effort to destabilize. The Nixon and TLC approaches were both rejected. Today, we are exceptionally ignorant about China and what it is doing and importantly why. We do not take it seriously, rather we call it an enemy.
So, just for clarification, was the founding of Standard Oil of New York a RADIO paradigm?
Thanx for quick and extended reply.
I'll have to take some time to unwrap my wrap.
China can be quite the enigma but I don't see them as anti-globalism except of the West's willful definition thereof. Instead they portend to redefine it like Capitalism or was it Communism (vs USSR) with Chinese characteristics. They are a very old and steady civilization to hear many tell it, unlike the American arriviste. But perhaps by globalism you mean the 'international' deep state; the ones of whom Catherine Austin Fitts once remarked, "After all these years in government I still don't know who rules us." I keep accruing details that alter my take. Nixon was a Quaker?
Woah ! My first imprint was the bombing of Cambodia.
BRICS feels a bit 'globalist' to me...just not hegemonic...
Perhaps a better word for BRICS is Globalization. And not using the dollar as a weapon.
Anti- globalist is if necessity globalist.
In other words, if you want to counter the hegemonic world system you need to offer a replacement system for the rest of the world to flee to.
True, and SCO is advancing to military arrangements.
Once the war is on it hardly matters who started it.
Except to those trying to divine how to avoid the next one.
I won't be commenting on that:
https://www.foxnews.com › us › bodycam-footage-takes-viewers-pennsylvania-rooftop-moments-after-trump-assassination-attempt
Bodycam footage takes viewers to Pennsylvania rooftop moments after ... 2 days ago. An AR-15-style rifle is also seen lying next to him, as well as shell casings. One of the law enforcement personnel on the rooftop counted at least eight casings.
Asshole free zone.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+many+shell+casings+found+at+Trump+rally&ia=web