2024 US election: A Kennedy presidency? Trump again? Will it be rigged?

aragorn said:
As I listened to the last 10 minutes which featured the UFO segment, I got the strong impression that he baited Rogan with the 'people coming from space' because he wanted to switch the topic away from the JFK files. The way he talked about the JFK files was weird and disappointing. I mean, if you really want justice you don't care if those involved in the assassination are still alive, what a stupid argument! And to call Mike Pompeo a good guy...c'mon man! :-)
Click to expand...

I thought the JFK topic was one of the only parts of the interview where Trump seemed to be somewhat uncomfortable. As to why he didn't open the files, to my mind it's pretty clear: it would have been yet another battle among thousands that he had to fight against the Deep State ("his people") and he chose not to do it. Plus, if he saw Israeli involvement in the files, that would be another reason not to go public with it, no matter how Trump personally feels about this. And to withhold the files probably was a good decision, given that it wouldn't have changed anything really at that point in time. Timing is crucial for such things. Maybe next time he'll do it (big maybe), and maybe the cultural moment will be ripe for it. But I don't blame him for choosing his battles.
 
aragorn said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but to me this week has been surprisingly uneventful in the US. I was expecting, for instance, a lot more staged hooliganism and protests to stir things up before election day. Some potential reasons: 1) Maybe it's the calm before the storm – they're saving their ammunition for the brawl that will come after the election; 2) They are confident that they can rig the results enough for a win (voting machines, mail-in ballots, 'midnight' ballot dumps, 20 days of 'counting' after election day etc.); 3) There's infighting between factions of the Deep State that is damping the dishonest efforts (some theorize that Biden's gang wants revenge on Kamala's gang because the way they ousted him).

Okay, wait and see... :-)
Click to expand...
We still have time for a big event or it could come after the election as you say. I also have thought for years we would have significant stuff happening by this time that would shut down the election. It's been suggested their plan is to make the election uncertifiable by using the steal techniques they used in 2020, turning that to their advantage. So far that looks like it could be the plan. What comes after that I don't know.

Maybe there's things happening behind the scenes with the Trump team which is the best case scenario. Do they have more power and pull then we are aware of? Have they been able to stop some shenanigans? Not a question thats been asked here. As is the case with all tyrannical governments the Sword of Damocles hangs by a thread above their heads

It's very calm right now which was not expected. It's become a very interesting show, what comes next? I'm actually feeling rather optimistic.
 
One question is: If they want to stage a civil war, which side should they let win? Getting the antifa brigades riled up should be easy with a Trump win, but Trump would be in command of the military, police and the whole executive branch. Plus, at least half of the country (probably more) is on his side. Not really a recipe for civil war I think.

Stealing from Trump again and then staging "far right" attacks seems to be more along the lines of what the PTB would want. More police state, more lawfare - the executive branch is fully in their control with a Kamala win.

Unless some other factors are more important than the manufactured "civil war", such as blaming Trump for Ukraine losing the war. Plus, Trump does seem to have more support from parts of the deep state this time, such as Jamie Dimon (JP Morgan). And he has been bending over backwards for the Zionists which are a powerful faction in the US. Though is their "friendship" enough to win?
 
One observation and one question on the Vance interview.

Question: I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but does anyone else think Vance laughs at inappropriate things to often?

Observation: I haven't watched Rogan for years so I don't know if this is a recent development, but it seems to me that Joe has read - at the very least - "Snakes in Suits". He seems to have expanded understanding on corporate/successful psychopathy.
 
T.C. said:
Question: I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but does anyone else think Vance laughs at inappropriate things to often?
Click to expand...

I noticed pretty much the same thing. There are a couple of other things I noted as well, such as how Vance seemed to end each of his statements in terms of facial expressions: Which almost seems to somewhat “contradict“ his charming and personable persona when he speaks. Another thing I noted was that it seemed to me that he lied at least 2 times deliberately, while knowing that he is lying/deceiving. I haven’t watched the whole interview though. The first one was his “factual“ claim that Russia is funding the green agenda in Europe to control them. The second one was when it seemed to me like he was sneakily lying/pretending that he doesn’t know what Rogan thinks of Psychedelics and their benefits for Veterans and such. It seemed to me that Vance tried to lure Rogan in there by pretending to not know what he thinks and then mention stuff to Rogan about it that Rogan likes to hear. I also noted toward the end how Vance seemed to shortly let “his mask slip“ when he asked when this will be aired. I also noted that he said his name first and then Trump when talking about voting for them. Also I noticed that he seemed to sometimes twist things just ever so slightly when he talked. I also noticed at times that his laugh seemed a bit over the top and fake besides the already mentioned weird laughs at inappropriate times.

I definitely give the guy the benefit of a doubt and will judge him on his deeds, but all the above made me quite a bit cautious about him.
 
Last edited:
SummerLite said:
This is a little creepy. Is Trump starting all his last, pre-election rallies with this song? A rally in Albuquerque NM.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1852061138248437922
Click to expand...
That is creepy.. not sure what his messaging would be.. that this election is a matter of life or death? if his team was going for "epic serious" which is the only thing I could think of, they missed the mark. But brave of Trump to rally in a state that republicans have not taken since GWB.

Cosmos said:
I definitely give the guy the benefit of a doubt and will judge him on his deeds, but all the above made me quite a bit cautious about him.
Click to expand...
I concur, have not watched the interview, will try before the election but.. I've always felt rather cautious about Vance, he's not someone that inspires a lot of trust, maybe it was just the nerves and the interviews making him feel tense. Appearing on Rogan is the best exposure anyone can get these days, so perhaps there was a lot of pressure to "just be cool".
 
Saw this yesterday where it appears ABC posted it in error showing Kamala beating Trump in a swing State. A rep from Dominion tried to explain that they were testing the system but it seem the selection is a foregone conclusion.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20241030_232828_YouTube.jpg
    Screenshot_20241030_232828_YouTube.jpg
    114.8 KB · Views: 29
Alejo said:
I concur, have not watched the interview, will try before the election but.. I've always felt rather cautious about Vance, he's not someone that inspires a lot of trust, maybe it was just the nerves and the interviews making him feel tense. Appearing on Rogan is the best exposure anyone can get these days, so perhaps there was a lot of pressure to "just be cool".
Click to expand...

Haven't watched the interview yet (just listened to the first 15 min), but one thing about Vance I mentioned elsewhere and that I think might be a problem is that he strikes me as somewhat weak. He seems overly selfconscious at times and insecure, which he tries to compensate by the things some of you mentioned. I'm not sure he's 100% cut out for the dangerous high-stakes game of politics at the top level. Which on the one hand is only human I suppose, and such sensibility can be useful for a writer, but it might also make him susceptible to manipulation and errors in judgement. That being said, in terms of winning the elections, he clearly was a great pick because he is so relatable, clear and smart, and speaks to a younger audience than Trump.
 
Alejo said:
Appearing on Rogan is the best exposure anyone can get these days, so perhaps there was a lot of pressure to "just be cool".
Click to expand...

I get what you mean. I couldn’t quite put my finger on it, but it could be interpreted as when a kid at school with not many friends gets paired up with a popular kid so he acts agreeable and laughs at his jokes, things like that.

If that’s the case, that’s very sad and doesn’t bode well for being a politician at the highest level, let alone just being a grown man. He will be putty in the hands of anyone who simply acts confidently in his company.
 
Another thing I noticed about Vance is how often he says/inserts “the American people“ in his statements. Well, he is a politician and that‘s what they do, and they are in an election cycle, but somehow HOW he inserts and says this almost sounds forced and dishonest to me. But when I hear Trump speak I almost never get the same feeling that he is faking to care “for the American people“ or “America“. In fact he almost never seems to use that phrase itself. What I‘m trying to say is that Trump comes off as honest and caring without needing to fake any of it.

At this point if I would need to bet I would bet on the possibility that Vance is a mole (while keeping the others possibilities open). Also I don’t know how much I can trust Tulsi either (as I mentioned on occasions on the forum). She is also a bit too much “robotic“ politician for my taste seemingly also using similar tactics as Vance. In short I‘m cautious about both people.

Some of the others around Trump I trust quite a lot more:

- Tucker
- Musk
- Kennedy
- Trumps sons
 
Tucker has his heart in the right place, but seems still too naive and lacking in knowledge.

RFK jr does seem to have a lot of knowledge and is great on topics like vaxxing, health, intelligence agencies, etc. Much better than Trump actually and those are important topics. He is still towing the Zionist line though.

Musk seems to be both a genius and a useful idiot for the oligarchy to some degree. He is helping build what Austin-Fitts calls "the control grid" (neurochips, Starlink, the "green" remotely controllable and maybe self-driving cars and trucks, etc.). But he is also outspoken against some globalist agendas like the "woke mind virus" or limiting free speech.

Tulsi has a history of both standing up to the PTB and folding to them. She could have been a real challenger to Trump if the Dems had allowed it. I like that she joined Trump.
 
Cosmos said:
Another thing I noticed about Vance is how often he says/inserts “the American people“ in his statements. Well, he is a politician and that‘s what they do, and they are in an election cycle, but somehow HOW he inserts and says this almost sounds forced and dishonest to me. But when I hear Trump speak I almost never get the same feeling that he is faking to care “for the American people“ or “America“. In fact he almost never seems to use that phrase itself. What I‘m trying to say is that Trump comes off as honest and caring without needing to fake any of it.

At this point if I would need to bet I would bet on the possibility that Vance is a mole (while keeping the others possibilities open). Also I don’t know how much I can trust Tulsi either (as I mentioned on occasions on the forum). She is also a bit too much “robotic“ politician for my taste seemingly also using similar tactics as Vance. In short I‘m cautious about both people.

Some of the others around Trump I trust quite a lot more:

- Tucker
- Musk
- Kennedy
- Trumps sons
Click to expand...
J D Vance is a newcomer to high-end politics, a lawyer by education, young and had a reputation of scaring the establishment. Judging by 'deeds' at the national level is not yet in his resume. Expectation to 'do it' against the 'beast' and still 'breathing' is still a tall order in the Western world at this point.

I haven't watched this Rogan's interview, so I can't comment on it. His rational argument to counter the Left's insane narrations is refreshing and "Crucial" (high stakes, differing opinions, and strong emotions). Whether an observer can acknowledge it and whether it matters or not is completely a different matter.

In the Western world that was built on 'Fine words and Slavery' (Gurdjieff's words), expressing emotions in public life or people management is a big No. Poker face is a common necessity for anybody in this field to hide the reality. Whether they hide it or didn't have it in the first place is a different story. People are not looking for Saints either and the politicians must follow the party line irrespective of their individual opinions. Otherwise, there will be a lot of attacks, and can't do what they promised to achieve. Gurdjieff's idea of various types of sincerities - Clever and Stupid is interesting in this context.

What if J D Vance hadn't yet mastered the art of 'Poker face' and naively embellished his achievement in that specific argument rather than a mole?
 
Trump continues saying stupid things:

He suggested that Nord Stream 2 was one of Russia’s greatest and most important projects. “I killed it. Nobody would kill it but me. I stopped it. The thing was half-built, dead” he said, without elaborating.

According to the Republican, while in office he raised strong objections with Germany over the country’s ties with Moscow. “I say: ‘Let’s get this straight. We’re helping and guarding you from Russia, but you are paying Russia billions of dollars a month for oil. How is that working?’ I stopped that,” he said, adding that he was still accused of being a friend of Russia.
Click to expand...
www.rt.com

Trump reveals who ‘killed’ Nord Stream 2

Donald Trump has claimed to have ‘killed’ Nord Stream 2 while in office
www.rt.com www.rt.com

Does Germany need "US protection" against Russia or cheap energy from Russia that it cannot get otherwise?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom