Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

[Windmill knight]

*Edited: a quick summary:

• The GOP establishment is signaling that the "big beautiful" wall is probably going to be a fence instead
• It appears Trump's administration is getting ready to support big business
• It looks like Trump is moving to appoint industry insiders like Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase in his administration

So it looks like the new boss is the same as the old boss.

Thoughts?

The change in regards to the wall was to be expected, so no surprises there. Perhaps not many people know this, but there is a wall on the Mexico-US border already. I don't know if it runs continuously along the whole border, but the parts I've seen of it in Tijuana are quite tall. I don't think it's made of brick and mortar, so I suppose some could call it a metal "fence", but it's far more intimidating than what the word evokes (remember, the Israelis call the concrete wall with armed watchtowers around the West Bank a "fence" too). So what would be the point in building another wall along the border?? If people get through they certainly don't do it by simply running for it and jumping over when no one is looking; they do it through tunnels or specific weak points in the desert or they are smuggled or God knows how. If the purpose is to stop the flow of illegal immigrants, then instead of building a bigger wall, what is needed is something different. Ideally, helping out Mexico and Latin America's economies so that people don't have a reason to immigrate - but I don't see that happening any time soon. So they'll probably come up with some sort of reestructuring of already existing resources and man power, which is way more realistic than a wall that achieves little and costs too much time and money.

Of course, Trump knew this from the beginning. He was just speaking big words as part of his campaign strategy. I would have been surprised and worried if he took his own words seriously, so in that sense it's a good thing that he "changed his mind". And the same can be said about his most inflammatory declarations (about Muslims for example); I doubt they will materialize because they are unrealistic, impractical and pointless, and they were just said to appeal to a certain segment of voters. But we'll see.

 

[monotonic]

I wonder if Trump will be more responsive to petitions, IE if it is really possible we can "help him"?

 

[thorbiorn]

I think that this election has been a good trial run for all of us to learn how to SEE the unseen and get our perception meters tuned - from several angles. So, no need to do the "I told you so" routine, though certainly pointing out that there were tendencies one way or another is a valid autopsy of the event we have been covering here. Learning how to collect data and observations in the midst of a heated propaganda is difficult at best, impossible for MOST people as all of us see in the news reports and behavior of many of social media.

So yes, let's analyze where we went off-track, but be excellent to each other!

Personally I thought there was no point for Americans to vote, because one way or the other, it would be fixed by someone to their advantage. However, this was on the condition that all variables can be controlled. The Brexit and this election probably too, but not the Scottish referendum, indicate that this is not always possible. If there is too much fixing, it becomes easier to discover, thus the balance between risk and gain.

Maybe this mental voting apathy is due to the thinking that my one vote would not matter, and in a way it does not, it matters very little. If I as a voter is one of 600,000 voters who decides which of two candidates is going to win, then in a popular vote, the power I hold, is 1/600,000, or if we consider that 300,001 is what is needed for picking the winner, I hold 1/300,001, if the person I picked wins. The closer the race between two candidates the more important would it be to vote. In real life, this number can not be easily calculated, as one does not know beforehand, how many people actually show up to vote, or how many adjustments, if any, are carried out later.

There is also the question, if one should vote according to conviction or vote according to strategy. If I vote for a candidate that has absolutely no chance, then I leave it to the people who voted for the winning candidate, because I did not challenge their decision, for example by voting for the lesser evil. If now, I don't vote for the candidate that I really like, they will not get encouragement to continue. But of course, counting on them perservering, a donation could solve that issue.

No matter what we vote for, taxes are paid every year and significant amounts go to finance projects we absolutely do not agree with, so is voting a really big deal? How many bases in foreign countries were closed with Obama as the front figure of the US Government and US taxpayers paid af few % of every $ to these projects.

Another concern for me is evaluating whether a politician is qualified to be called a fascist or a psychopath, I think I need to add more arguments to the words, when and if I use them. Fx, instead of "Trump is a fascist", I could say that "Trump garners support from ultra right wing people" or that "his talking reminds one of the expression of former well known fascists" or step back and say, "When he speaks like that, he invites this and that group to vote for him, but will he actually deliver on the promises he makes to these people, because then....".

About Hillary being a psychopath? Well, she has acted in ways that can back up that claim to quite an extent, there are videos, data? But how would I know for sure she is not just ambitious of STS4, as hurting somebody else, does not necessarily mean there is no soul as we are living in a STS world.

Yesterday, I was trying to find out if Trump had a history of violation of minors. I dug up a claimed case, but the more I looked into it, even though it was well done, it lost credibility. The case was filed in June, taken down in September due to the arrival of another witness, (which also by the way resulted in the extension of the court hearing, very clever), finally it was folded on November 4th. Some of the media outlets went with the story after they had, in all probability based on the available evidence, realized it was, or could not be supported. Thus it amounted to a smear campaign, at least for now.

Politicians and newspapers have something in common. Many politicians are quite ready to say what it takes to gain voters, and many newspapers don't hestitate to run with stories that also promise them income and sponsor support, as long as they can express it in ways that keep them out of court. The problem for the listeners and readers is that, it may take quite a bit of research to try to verify the probability of the pronouncements and claims. This situation poses the problem about which cases that worth investigating and which not.

 

[neema]

As others have mentioned, I think it’s a good idea to observe this whole situation with detachment. Not anticipating any outcome. Just enjoying the ride.

After all we are all choosing at some level to be here and bear witness to all of it.

If as Laura points out, this is some sort of marker indication that cosmic events are accelerating, then I for one welcome it.
On Trump fulfilling his promises, I think the most important thing that the average American voter cares about is economic stability and jobs. So, if he manages that with some sort of massive infrastructure and military hardware upgrading he might become as popular as Hitler became. Then things should get even more interesting.

According to his show he prefers a dictatorship:

http://<iframe width="854" height="...gg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Although depending on who the dictator is, a dictatorship might not be so bad. ;)

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= axj]Yes, and we talked about the context of that remark which you completely ignored. It was about potential tomato throwers and as I already pointed out to you, throwing tomatoes at someone is a form of violence.[/quote]

It was about Trump saying he would pay the legal fees. Which helps incite violence


[quote author= axj]I doubt that you still see him as dangerous as you did back then. You pretend that nobody had more information or better insight than you, so whatever your opinion was at that time could have been the only possible one. In other words, back then the only objective way to see Trump was as a dangerous man, according to you.[/quote]

Nope I didn't saw him always as dangerous, nor did I point any out as the only possible outcome. this was a month ago :

[quote author= bjorn]We have to wait and see if Trump is controlled opposition. I doubt it because this guy turned his whole campaign upside down when he became the Republican nominee. Like he suddenly against all orders began to took it seriously. So things didn't go as planned, or some plans where chanced afterwards. Either by himself or the PTB.

Whatever the cause, to me he just looks like an loose cannon. He isn't conscience dominated. He is just another Ego maniac. Like Italy's Berlusconi. They are not evil persee, just idiots. And people like that would rather play ball with their overlords than take a risk for humanity. So I don't expect anything to chance really.

And if I am wrong and Trump is 100% controlled opposition. Well, say your prayers I suppose.[/quote]

I swifted my opinion several times as you can see.

I also said things like

[quote author= bjorn]it's difficult to make sense of what is really going on with the whole Killary vs Trump thing.[/quote]

And I also said.

[quote author= bjorn]It's either a complete mess for the PTB or something incredible evil is brewing.[/quote]

So as you can see I don't pretend to know it all. Bit of a childish accusation isn't it. But feel free to keep it.

I disagreed with you. That's all. Just as I disagreed with you on the Muslim ban.

I find that very dangerous.

Now that you got your ''I told you all moment'' I rather spend my energy on other things.

 

[T.C.]

I know this is going a bit out on a limb, but it occurs to me that there are parallels between Putin and Trump, in that Russia was a 'communist' state for so long and Putin was forged in the crucible of that kind of secretive, intelligence/KGB environment and so was perfect for Russia, and Trump was forged in the crucible of the American/capitalist environment, so will be perfect for America.

Also, you can almost turn Trump into an anagram of Putin: Putrm.

 

[Joe]

According to his show he prefers a dictatorship:

That's basically a "reality TV" show, which usually bear little resemblance to reality.

 

[MK Scarlett]

Was listening to some Leonard Cohen today, due to his passing, and considering some of the ideas presented in this thread, when some ideas about the potential symbolic connections between these recent events jumped into my mind.

It seemed a little strange that due to the news about Leonard Cohen, Hallelujah was trending on social media, in conjunction with Trump getting elected.
Then, I remembered the story about bald eagles being rescued, which pushed my thinking into symbolism.

Realized, I didn't exactly know what hallelujah meant, so I looked it up.
Apparently, it means “praise to God,” or more specifically “to sing in praise of God.” Interesting.

Then, in the Wikipedia article I was taking a look at, this caught my eye:

[quote author=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallelujah]
“In the great song of praise to God for his triumph over the -jezebel- of Babylon...”

I didn't really know much about the -jezebel- of Babylon, so I looked that up.
These passages stood out to me:

[quote author=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whore_of_Babylon]
Revelations

17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. (connected to the current hysteria being displayed from those in Killary's thrall?)

17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication... "
(the mention of purple struck me as interesting from the articles angelburst29 posted previously)

17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus..."
(we came, we saw, he died. *witchy cackle* )

So, I thought there were some interesting connections, with all these events in mind.
[/quote]

Good connections!

The thought DID cross my mind very briefly that it was interesting the Leonard died exactly when he did considering his influence on Western culture. I've been pretty busy observing and trying to collect other data AND trying to sort out what my various psychic/subconscious feelings and impulses might actually be telling me. Interestingly, today, my thinking intersects with what you wrote above.

Since I know perfectly well - and documented it in this thread - that Donald Trump is more or less following a template of Hitler's rise to power, and I don't kid myself that he is in any way going to be able to do a whole lot - and even if he was able, would we want him to? - so WHY was the most overwhelming feeling I had on learning that he had actually won RELIEF?

I've been chewing on this for a bit, reading, watching, gathering data, and today I finally think I have it sorted: the relief is due to the fact that the slow, incremental death by a thousand cuts inflicted on humanity since the assassination of JFK now ends. Donald Trump may very well accelerate processes that have been going on slowly and incrementally, and it will be that process that shows the face of the Man Behind the Curtain. It may also be that Trump and his coming administration and the results of same will act as an attractor for what the Cs also mentioned: Cosmic events.

I collected a few things that may be relevant. Remember, back in 2003 while Bush was starting things up with Iraq in exactly the same way that things have been ramping up vis a vis Russia there was the remark about the "Man Behind the Curtain".

/Snip/

Notice again that "wishful thinking", i.e. "big miscalculation", is related to the exposure of the "man behind the curtain".

Trump is a narcissist; narcissists sort of live on wishful thinking in many ways. He may be a good businessman - at least good at self-promotion - but he can't escape wishful thinking.

So, bottom line is: for good or ill, I think Trump is a catalyst, an accelerator of events and the relief I have been feeling is related to that more than anything else. Because, obviously, practically speaking, it's pretty much "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

Coming back to the "sign" of the death of Leonard Cohen and "hallelujah" ... well, as you noted, it was related to the destruction of Babylon.... and that was described in Revelation as cosmic.
[/quote]

I do not know how the very name of Donald Trump could have a symbolism in all that: Trump: annonciating the cosmic Trumpets?

Sorry if this has already been shared here (or elsewhere) as I did not finished to read the thread yet.

 

[Timótheos]

Some thoughts on a possible proposal for how Trump could save America.

Donald Trump is a savvy businessman. He couldn't have amassed such a fortune without an intimate understanding of how the system works and how to use it to his advantage. Being a smart guy, he must be somewhat aware of how the US political system works and realize that he is about to enter a job where everyone around him is heavily invested in maintaining the status quo. It's akin to entering a den of thieves and being surrounded by vipers.

If he is truly sincere about doing good for his country, and wants to make real changes to the existing power structure, then he must be exceptionally careful about what he says and does in his first few months of office.

Taking a lesson from history, we need only to look at the careers of Julius Caesar, John F. Kennedy and Vladimir Putin for good examples of how to garner the loyalty of the people and retain power long enough to affect positive change.

First order of business would be to make sure his closest advisors are people he can really trust, who share his vision, and be counted on to watch his back. If he really plans to "drain the swamp" in Washington, then he will instantly make a ton of enemies who will go to any lengths, including using blackmail, libel, and even assassination to thwart his plans and maintain their positions.

Second order of business would be to get the military on his side. This does not mean appeasing the M-I-C, weapons manufactures and arms dealers, but appealing the regular soldiers and servicemen who make up the bulk of the army, navy and air force. He could achieve this by packing up all operations in the middle east, bringing the troops home and using the massive amounts of money saved to take care of veterans and their families at home. Caesar used this strategy most effectively and knew that without a standing army to back him up, he could not have achieved all that he did.

Third order of business would be do go after the rich 1% oligarchs. That means jailing corrupt bankers and wall street crooks, breaking up the big banks, and forcing them to repay all the government bailout money they got in 2008. With this influx of cash he could easily fund many local infrastructure projects making life better for the average citizen in a noticeable way. Putin serves as a good example of how this can be done.

If I were Trump, I would nominate Bernie Sanders as Secretary of Commerce, Finance or the Treasury. That would send a real message to the corrupt financial sector that there's a new boss in town and would act as an olive branch to the social activists of the Democratic party, hijacked by Killary and her cronies. It would also show that Trump is a man who doesn't let political partisanship stand in the way of getting the job done.

Nominating Trey Gowdy as Attorney General is a great idea. He showed everyone with his excellent cross-examination of Hillary that he is willing to stand up and fight for justice against the rich and powerful.

If I were Trump, I would nominate independent candidate Dr. Jill Stein as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Let her have a go at fixing Obamacare or come up with a new plan to bring affordable health care to the people.

Fourth order of business would be to deal with the question of Israeli influence on American foreign policy. This will be most tricky as they seem to have dirt on everybody, and this may be a place where Trump will have to say one thing in public, and act quietly behind the scenes towards another agenda. JFK used this strategy when he would denounce Communist Russia in front of the media while secretly striving towards peace by communicating with Brezhnev through a series of private letters.

Cutting most or all funding and aid to Israel under the guise of saving money to be spent at home might work, but will engender many dangerous enemies. Nominating Dr. Norman Finkelstein as US ambassador to Israel would certainly make a statement.

Reigning in the National Security State apparatus would be another huge obstacle to overcome. JFK tried it and it got him killed. The CIA, FBI, NSA are all filled with entrenched career spooks who won't take interference into their clandestine operations lightly. Trump will have to be extremely careful dealing with these folks as well.

On a more whimsical note I think having a hollywood tough guy like Clint Eastwood or Chuck Norris nominated as Director of Defense or Homeland Security would be cool. Trump is a reality TV show star and President Reagan started as an actor, so it's not that far fetched! At the very least, they'd probably do as good of a job as whoever is in there now.

My point is that Trump could actually make America great again, but he would have to be wise as a serpent in order to do so.

 

[thorbiorn]

Donald means "ruler of the world" http://www.behindthename.com/name/donald Below is more Trump:

1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.

2 And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets.

3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.

4 And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.

5 And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the altar, and cast it into the earth: and there were voices, and thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake.

6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound.

7 The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.

In one place https://realtruth.org/articles/090907-006-weather.html the events following the sounds of the seven trumpets are called the trumpet plagues.
Could it be said that a trumpet is an instrument that magnifies the audibility of the signal or message it carries? Donald Trump has given voice to the dissatisfaction of many American voters.

 

[Richs]

we need to stay open towards and consider all possibilities.

This is true in all cases and all times.

Usually I have the same thoughts as the consensus but sometimes I have a different view. Almost all the time our views converge to the same conclusion after enough information and data arrives to indicate the correctness of our views. Till then, there can be differences in what each of us think is true.

The point I wish to make here is that there is no reason to be angry about someone's views, even if one thinks they are wrong, as eventually most of us will arrive at the same conclusions. We all need to remain respectful of others thoughts as sometimes we may find that they are correct. How do we then feel if we have jumped all over their viewpoint?

 

[Laura]

I've posted last night's session: https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,43069.0.html

I guess since the Cs are hitting a pretty high score on accuracy, it's worth considering that their "inside view" of the Trump situation might be close to reality.

 

[Yozilla]

Oh yeah - conduit was operational again! THX Laura et al!

 

[MK Scarlett]

[..]
“(Trump has) a strong personality with unpredictable policy…we must be careful.”
– Mikheil Saakashvili, former governor of Odesa Oblast

“It’s 5 a.m. in Kyiv, but I am scared to go to bed now. With Trump in office, Putin can easily turn Syria, Ukraine into his new Chechnyas.”
– Ukrainian journalist Myroslava Petsa.

“Life goes on. Everything will be fine.”
– former Ukrainian Economy Minister Aivaras Abromavicius

The art of instinctively creating chaos for the PtB through seemingly following commands.

Don't expect straightforward heroic acts from Trump, but rather indirect obstinate actions resulting in serious consequences for the establishment. He might reach his goals in roundabout ways, like announcing to the public of going against / sanctioning China, then actually achieving everything as agreed with Chinese leaders behind closed doors.

Trump with his recklessness - mentioned in the last Truth Perspective radio show - may instinctively mess up the plans of the establishment. Not really thinking through situations like the Kennedy's did, but reacting obstinately and in defiance he might seem to carry out his received commands, but in such a way that the PtB will scream "You messed up our plans!" and that will be excellent for Russia, Syria, the Middle-East and us the people.

The bolded part makes echo to me with the same pattern between JFK and Khrushchev as described in the James W. Douglass' book: JFK & the Unspeakable. Why he died and why it matters.

They were working on global peace in secret from their own respective governments...

So it looks like the new boss is the same as the old boss.

Thoughts?

Doesn't look good. :(

I think part of what's happening is still gaming. There is political unrest and a potential color revolution, so he may still be 'playing the game' to ensure he actually gets in. He doesn't like to lose. Much of what is coming out of his camp is conflicting and I think, even if he sincerely wants to make positive change(s), he will still have to pander to certain interests, even if it's just lip service (and maybe it isn't). We won't really know until the ball gets rolling, when and if he actually gets inaugurated and starts moving. OSIT

I think the same. We can't really judge right now.

I think the same as wel, time will tell...

I think that this election has been a good trial run for all of us to learn how to SEE the unseen and get our perception meters tuned - from several angles. So, no need to do the "I told you so" routine, though certainly pointing out that there were tendencies one way or another is a valid autopsy of the event we have been covering here. Learning how to collect data and observations in the midst of a heated propaganda is difficult at best, impossible for MOST people as all of us see in the news reports and behavior of many of social media.

So yes, let's analyze where we went off-track, but be excellent to each other!

Thanks for this reminder Laura.

Again, as I'm reading the thread, I am sorry if all this has already been shared.
And many thanks for all the very insightful ideas developed here, it's refreshing to have this "Trumpet" boondoggling the System for good or not, we'll see: I'm just enjoying the "ride".

 

[axj]

[quote author= axj]I doubt that you still see him as dangerous as you did back then. You pretend that nobody had more information or better insight than you, so whatever your opinion was at that time could have been the only possible one. In other words, back then the only objective way to see Trump was as a dangerous man, according to you.

Nope I didn't saw him always as dangerous, nor did I point any out as the only possible outcome. this was a month ago :

I swifted my opinion several times as you can see.
[/quote]

As I said, the general consensus didn't start to change until August, which is when when we had our discussion. Back then you claimed that he is dangerous due to inciting violence at his rallies, that snake poem about Islamic terrorists and so on.

You seem to have a hard time "not being right". Even though you still tell me that I lack understanding of ponerology because I didn't seem Trump as dangerous as you did back in August, now you say for some reason you didn't "always" see him as dangerous. 

Are you more interested in seeing yourself and the world objectively, or is it more about being right and disagreeing with everything I say on principle?

[quote author= bjorn]
So as you can see I don't pretend to know it all. Bit of a childish accusation isn't it. But feel free to keep it.

I disagreed with you. That's all. Just as I disagreed with you on the Muslim ban.

I find that very dangerous.

Now that you got your ''I told you all moment'' I rather spend my energy on other things.
[/quote]

What is childish is this passive-agressive mode you are in. You should really look at that.

When you claim that not seeing Trump as dangerous as you did back in August proves I lack understanding of ponerology, what does this imply? It implies that back then the only sensible or objective way to see Trump was as a dangerous man and anyone who didn't cannot have seen him more clearly than you did.

You don't see him as that dangerous anymore either, which now matches my view back then. And yes, you can take it as an "I told you so" if you wish, which is really not the point. The point is that there seems to be a strong tendency of a Right Man syndrome that you should look at.

I have it too to some degree, especially when someone questions my integrity. But at least I admit it to myself and do not indulge in it.