Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

[RflctnOfU]

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
[...]

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.

[...]

For what it is worth, a friend of my mother's is a longtime career special forces guy. He told her he met trump, as did a LOT of the military guys, and they went apeshit (as in hooray!!!) when trump won. Apparently, there were quite a few meetings between trump and the military establishment, and according to my mother's friend, the rank and file are VERY MUCH on his side.

Perhaps another aspect of "big miscalculation"

Kris

 

[angelburst29]

Donald Trump winning the election seems to be having a domino effect with other Countries that supported Obama's War Policies? A new atmosphere (wave) of citizen backlash against the establishment, the political elite and those that have enjoyed power too long.

A recently published article titled with the words of a popular French song “Marlbrough s’en va-t-en Guerre” has attracted much attention around the background of Francois Hollande’s “achievements.

Monsieur Malbrough est Mort
http://journal-neo.org/2016/11/13/monsieur-malbrough-est-mort/

Now that Donald Trump has been elected as the next President of the United States, a string of European politicians have started voicing their discontent, including the current French President. He has failed to hide such discontent with the decision Americans have made. However, he described Trump’s victory as a “lesson learnt,” the importance of which “goes far beyond the borders of the United States.” Little did he know, French politicians have interpreted this passage in their own reserved way.

On November 10, the lower house of the Assemblée nationale has passed the vote to impeach Hollande, passing the bill with 152 votes out of the total of 199, resulting in the president of the Assemblée Nationale, Claude Bartolone, officially submitting a draft resolution for Hollande’s impeachment.

The impeachment procedure has only been introduced in 2014 in accordance with Article 68 of the French Constitution. According to the laws of the Fifth Republic, a president can only be impeached if he blatantly ignored his duties.

To start this procedure, one would have to obtain 58 votes in the Assemblée Nationale, where the Republicans are now holding a total of 193 seats. The demand for Hollande to leave was signed by a total 152 deputies, including the Republican Spokesperson in the Assembly, Christian Jacob and the former Prime-Minister François Fillon.

The Right are convinced that Hollande should be held liable for disclosing state secrets in his book with the telling title “A President Shouldn’t Say This“ (Un président ne devrait pas dire ça…). They are convinced that a president should know better than putting down all the details of French secret service operations aimed at assassinating terrorist leaders abroad.

If the draft is to be found valid, it will be handed over to a special judicial committee of the the lower house of the the Assemblée Nationale. Finally, when everything is said and done, the two houses will form the Republican High Court that will decide the fate of the sitting president. But regardless of how the impeachment procedure turns out in the end, this whole affairs has literally ended Hollande’s political career, since he has no chance to get reelected. Therefore, one could use the words of the above mentioned song: «Monsieur Malbrough est mort» (Malbrough is now dead).

However, this wasn’t much of a surprise for anyone who has been following French politics, since, according to Le Figaro, Hollande’s approval rating has hit an all time low of 11%. No President in French history enjoyed less support from the population, with even the Socialist party reluctant to back up Hollande’s policies, with only 34% supporting him.

However, it seems unlikely that Hollande will be the only European leader that will have to face the consequences of his mindless support of US President Obama’s warmongering policies that have, at the end of the day, inflicted serious damage to EU interests.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is facing going into next year's federal elections - seeking her fourth term - without the backing of her sister party of decades and other allies keen to distance themselves from her "establishment" credentials, following Donald Trump's victory in the US.

Merkel's House of Cards Collapsing as Allies Fear Being Out-Trumped
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201611101047305412-merkel-trump-election-populism/

Merkel is already facing an uphill battle ahead of next year's election, having drawn severe criticism within her own country and abroad over her generous 'open doors' policy to refugees, which saw more than a million asylum seekers flood across Europe to seek a new life in Germany.

The German Chancellor heads the center-right Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU), which campaigns and fields candidates across all Germany except Bavaria, where her sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU) — led by Horst Seehofer — hold sway.

She first drew the ire of Seehofer towards the end of 2015, when he railed against her inability to get to grips with the increasing burden that arriving migrants were having on German federal state budgets and resources — not least his, with Bavaria — in the south of Germany — bearing the brunt of arriving migrants.

Merkel 'Baggage' - Her party lost ground in the 2016 regional elections, with Merkel doing particularly badly in her own state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, where her party was beaten into third place with 19 percent, overtaken by the populist right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which won 20.8 percent of the vote, coming second to the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) which won 30.6 percent of the vote. The SPD is in coalition with the CDU/CSU alliance.

However, both the CSU and the SPD are seeking to distance themselves from Merkel ahead of next year's elections. Both see her as "baggage" dragging down their own constituencies.

The Donald Trump victory, however, has dealt Merkel another bum hand. Both the Brexit vote — to leave the European Union — and the Trump victory are being seen as a populist backlash against the establishment, the political elite and those that have enjoyed power too long.

The staggering rise of the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany party (AfD) in Germany, as well as the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) has rocked the traditional political landscape in Berlin. Now even her allies are collecting their chips and walking away from her table.

Leading CSU politician Andreas Scheuer has vocalized the central problem for Merkel's coalition.

"If all the parties are in the middle circle, then this is does not answer the questions of the citizens," he said. His fear is that the traditional ticket — going into German federal elections — of the CDU/CSU union, plus the SPD and other parties going into battle is no longer fit for purpose within a new atmosphere of citizen backlash — as shown by Brexit and Trump's election.

Federal spokesman for AfD, Jorg Meuthen encapsulated the mood when he said:

"Just like the AfD in Germany, [Trump] understood the people's worries and needs, and pressed the grievances of the establishment clearly and courageously."

 

[SummerLite]

Why did Trump show all that obnoxious behavior during one point in his campaign? That really set the tone for him with so many and still people see him in this light. After that, there was nothing else to see, his character was set in stone. To a certain degree, he gave the press and Clinton as well as her supporters all the ammo they needed. Now that he's won the presidency all that bad behavior is still how so many see him. Judging from the cartoons linked by angelburst29 its a world wide image, although some are very funny.

There has been a sketchy explanations here, that he was after votes. So he got the vote of certain people and they're on his side which is maybe a good thing, better then being against him. A vote is a vote. Hmm?

Then I've thought about the old saying, "all media attention is good even when its bad". He brought attention to himself, made a splash. Another reason maybe.

Any thoughts? Or is this one of those questions that cant really be answered at the moment.

 

[Phill4]

I was thinking about the big misscalculation after reading some of the comments, it could be that Trump may not respond aggresively to a fals falg attack against Russia, or in Syria.

In the scenario that the PTB pulls a false falg attack, a nuke here and there will make evident that it was not Trump or Putin or ISIS.

They are desperately trying to get their plans forward, but with Trump having his own agenda, they may attempt a false falg attack in haste and neither Trump nor Putin or the population will act as expected leaving a void and the trail of evidence to the hands of the puppet master.

This is an idea on the proportion of the media and the general population at large or at least among the elite cricles, they may assume they have been discovered and act under their own assumptions about the public Trump and Putin..

 

[RflctnOfU]

Hey all. I haven't been very active in the forum lately, at least in the sense of posting. I just wanted to share my internal experience regarding the most recent 'shenanigans of "'merka"'.

I shall use the label 'compartmentalized hope'.

At the beginning of "The Race" I didn't have any real emotional investment in the outcome. I was of the opinion that can be expressed with the acronym SNAFU. Having a need to be informed of what is happening in the world, I saw the presentation by the media of Trump, as we all did, and thought to myself...more than once..."what a clown! Perfect for this farce!" [I didn't really pass judgement (racist, sexist, etc.) other than a conviction he displays narcissistic traits...well, one exception was the incident of him making fun of the handicapped "journalist"...that really wasn't cool in my book...(Though that very well may have been part of the act to appeal to certain segments of the population...in which case, bravo [as in playing the game well])].

Then came the statement at a rally calling out corruption in politics - in general terms. That caused me to sit up and take notice. That very statement caused a feeling of hope to arise. At the time, in line with the principle of non-identification, I created a 'safe-zone' of sorts, for the "ember" that had been stoked. I wanted to remain as objective as possible.

Every now and then, I would check in with said ember. Consistently to my surprise, particularly after the election was called, that hope had grown in strength and vitality. Like many, I felt relief that Killary lost. But, that was mixed with joy that Trump won. It should be mentioned that I did not, and do not, vote. I voted once...just after I turned 18. After that, I chose not to vote because I didn't support either candidate. Then it became a choice out of principle...I refused to give tacit support to the "system". And that is the case still. Though, perhaps, that may change in the future, which brings me to the point.

Just prior to deciding to make this post I made contact with the 'compartmentalized hope' for longer than I have allowed previously, and the thought that resulted from that contact was "Trump will turn out to be , objectively, the best president in U.S. history". Basically it was a transposition of feeling to thinking. The surprise factor I experienced was the catalyst for this post. So, back in the box for now. Let us 'wait and see!' as the C's say!

Kris

 

[Cosmos]

I think it will be very interesting to see in the coming months, how Putin and Co. will handle the situation with Trump. If Trump really wants to change things for the better, the establishment will obviously try to do their best to further 1: blame Trump, 2: Continue their psychopathic games in America and the rest of the globe.

So we should pay close attention how exactly the russians will react in words and deeds to what is happening in the US right now. If the psychopathic game outside of the country continues (syria and ukraine for example), which is likely, it will be interesting how the russians will respond to that. It could very well be, that from now on, they will not focus their attention on Trump in regards to criticism and reminders, but rather even more on the power elite in the US behind the scenes, that tries to push Trump and co towards further confrontation and misdeeds. So we should pay attention to the exact language the russians will use from now on, towards the US.

I would also pay close attention to who will be on the the NSC board (United States National Security Council) under Trump and how broad the lawful requirement of that council, will be in that administration.

L. Fletcher Prouty makes it pretty clear in his book "the secret team", that if the NSC if properly staffed and handled, that it plays the key role of "diminishing or stopping" the actions of the secret team. In fact, how the NSC will be shaped and handled by the president seems to be one of the most crucial things Trump should focus on. That becomes quite clear when you read "the secret team".

The big mistake Kennedy made was to disregard/neglect the NSC and its role in the US. As it looks from the book, that was the major mistake Kennedy did, that enabled everything else afterwards.

So who will be the members of the NSC and how will Trump structure the NSC? I think we should pay close attention there.

 

[Beau]

We watched his interview on 60 Minutes last night, and he was very good. Composed, clear-headed and not allowing himself to be baited by the still-biased journalist interviewing him. It sounds like he's focused on doing what he intends to do without getting caught up in traps. Here's a link to the vid, doesn't seem to be embeddable: http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/60-minutes-interview-president-elect-donald-trump

 

[Laura]

WORLD’S BEST CARTOONISTS REACT TO TRUMP’S VICTORY

I like these three:
https://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2016/11/13/worlds-best-cartoonists-react-to-trumps-victory/cwzirnkxcaa9mfn/

Out of this list:
https://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2016/11/13/worlds-best-cartoonists-react-to-trumps-victory/

Most of them look like libtard propaganda.

 

[angelburst29]

Not that I expected it but Obama should have at least sent out a Press release, for the protesters to tone it down. By completely ignoring the situation, it gives the outward impression - he condones the violence and destruction, while he also claims - he's implementing a "peaceful transition" for the next elected President.

Even if I knew nothing about Trumps background, I would have to give him "credit" for the way he handled his first televised interview. Trump got his points across, in a precise and calm manner while he addressed topics that were reverent and of concern to the public.

Trump seeks to calm protests -- and reassure own camp
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-condemns-harassment-minorities-001659574.html

Also here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3930316/Protests-spread-Trump-tones-rhetoric.html

November 14, 2016 - Donald Trump sought in his first televised interview as president-elect to reassure Americans fearful of a crackdown on minorities -- while assuring his core supporters he will not let them down on gun rights, abortion or immigration.

The Republican billionaire -- whose shock election on a populist and anti-immigration platform has spurred days of protests -- told demonstrators they have no reason to fear his presidency.

"Don't be afraid. We are going to bring our country back," he said in the interview with CBS's "60 Minutes."

Trump said he was "saddened" by reports that incidents of harassment and intimidation of minorities had spiked since his election -- and called for it to end.

"I hate to hear that. I am so saddened to hear that," Trump said when asked about the reports. "If it helps. I will say this, and I will say right to the cameras: Stop it."

New York (AFP) - President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to move aggressively on a conservative agenda in filling Supreme Court vacancies, cracking down on immigration and cutting taxes, but also sought to reassure worried Americans they have nothing to fear from his presidency.

Setting aside the strident tone of his campaign, the 70-year-old assumed a gentler manner in his first television interview since his shock election, saying he was "saddened" by reports of harassment of Muslims and Hispanics, and telling the perpetrators: "Stop It."

The interview with CBS's "60 Minutes," which was taped Friday and aired in full Sunday, offered Trump an opportunity to reintroduce himself after an ugly, name-calling campaign and surprise victory that sparked protests in cities across the United States.

"I just don't think they know me," the billionaire real estate mogul said at one point, of the thousands of protesters who have massed in streets below his Trump Tower headquarters.

Told that many Americans are scared of his presidency, Trump said: "Don't be afraid. We are going to bring our country back."

- Conservative agenda -

Millions were expected to tune in to Trump's interview for clues on how the billionaire will govern, and to what degree he intends to convert his slogans into policy.

Trump earlier Sunday named anti-establishment firebrand Steve Bannon his top strategist and senior Republican Reince Priebus his White House chief of staff, blending pragmatism with a rabble-rousing edge in the first appointments of his new administration.

On the issues, however, Trump made it clear he intends to aggressively push a right-wing agenda, pledging to name justices to the Supreme Court who are against abortion and for gun rights.

"The judges will be pro-life," Trump told CBS. "In terms of the whole gun situation," he added, "they're going to be very pro-Second Amendment."

He will have an immediate opportunity to fill a vacancy on the court left by the death of arch conservative justice Antonin Scalia. President Barack Obama's attempt to fill the seat was blocked by the Republican-controlled Senate.

On immigration, Trump reaffirmed his signature campaign pledge to build a wall on the border with Mexico, although he conceded parts of it may be just a fence.

And he said as many as three million undocumented immigrants with criminal records would be deported or incarcerated.

"What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers," he said.

"We have a lot of these people, probably two million, it could be even three million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate," he said.

- Conciliatory notes -

He left the door open, however, on the fate of the millions of other immigrants in the country illegally.

"After the border is secured and after everything gets normalized, we're going to make a determination on the people that you're talking about who are terrific people," he said.

Immigration, he said, was one of three top legislative priorities he has discussed with House Speaker Paul Ryan, the others being action to undo Obama's signature health care reform and a bill to cut taxes and simplify the tax code.

Trump had previously indicated he would keep some aspects of Obamacare, including a ban on insurance companies denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

He also signaled that he would not seek to overturn the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States.

"It's law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean it's done," Trump said when asked if he supports marriage equality. "And I'm -- I'm fine with that," he added.

He also confirmed he would forgo the $400,000 salary that comes with the office of US president.

"I'm not going to take the salary. I'm not taking it," he said. "I think I have to by law take $1, so I'll take $1 a year," he added.

In a call to Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump told the leader he believes they will have "one of the strongest relationships for both countries moving forward," according to a statement released by the president-elect's team early Monday.

Trump -- who frequently savaged China on the campaign trail and threatened to impose a 45-percent tariff on Chinese-made goods -- agreed to meet "at an early date" to discuss the relationship, Chinese state broadcaster CCTV said.

- Conspiracy-mongering -

While Trump has veered on some pledges, his choice of Bannon as top strategist suggests he intends to preserve his populist edge.

Bannon, who was campaign chairman in the final months of the Trump campaign, is CEO of the right-wing, conspiracy-mongering Breitbart News website known for withering attacks on the Republican elite.

It has railed against everything from Muslim immigrants to women, once telling females facing online harassment to go away and stop "screwing up the internet for men."

Priebus, meanwhile, is a seasoned political operative and head of the Republican National Committee, with close ties to Ryan, the House speaker.

 

[Beau]

A little summary of his interview for those who may not be able to watch or not have time:

He reiterated that he wants to build 'the wall'. He's ok with it being a fence in some places, but said that in certain locations a wall is necessary. He's probably referring to Tijuana and Juarez, essentially locations where drugs, guns and criminals enter the country.

On deporting illegals: He wants to first either deport or incarcerate any undocumented illegals who are criminals or involved in criminal activity. The fate of millions of undocumented workers who are not involved such activity will be then be decided. My guess is it will be a while. It's going to take a long time to root out the criminals, plus he'll probably realize that a great many of those people are working directly with factions of the US gov't i.e. CIA/black ops.

Fighting ISIS: He refused to detail his strategy. He made a point to say that he wouldn't give the people in ISIS any information regarding what he plans to do. When the interviewer asked him if he thinks he knows better than the generals about what to do about ISIS, he didn't shrink. He says he does knows better because look what the generals have done so far. That's a good instance of Trump speaking honestly and clearly and why so many people voted for him. No BS.

Healthcare: He will keep a few parts of Obamacare that work, but will roll back the rest. He said that there will be no gap between the end of Obamacare and the institution of his plan.

On prosecuting Killary: He said that he's focused on immigration, healthcare, and creating jobs. He didn't answer if he would appoint a special prosecutor. Sounds to me like he wants to do what he thinks is important, at least in the beginning of his administration, but that doesn't mean she's out of the woods. He did say that she broke the law, so I think he will get around to it if he's got the political capital.

Supreme Court appointment: Looks like he will appoint a pro-life Justice and won't oppose the repealing of Roe v Wade. He said that he wants to leave it to individual states to decide on abortion. While I agree that the federal government should be legislating less and leaving states to do that, I think this could be an issue that causes a great deal of distraction.

Gay marriage: He is not interested in changing the law and said that any Justice appointed would not be changing it anytime soon. A little different tone than with Roe v Wade. He said in regards to gay marriage, "it's a law", but so is abortion rights. So a little contradictory there.

Lastly, his wife and kids joined. Melania was as composed and unfazed as Trump. Clearly living in NYC and living under that microscope has prepared her well for being the First Lady. The children all said they will be staying NY to work for Trump's business and not be joining him in the Administration under any role.

 

[Niall]

A little summary of his interview for those who may not be able to watch or not have time:

I think that 'straight-talk' is gonna win more people over as days go by.

Last question: "What do you think this campaign is going to do to the Trump brand?"

The Donald: "I don't care. This is our country. Our country's going bad. I don't care about hotel occupancy!"

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= SummerLite]Why did Trump show all that obnoxious behavior during one point in his campaign? That really set the tone for him with so many and still people see him in this light. After that, there was nothing else to see, his character was set in stone. To a certain degree, he gave the press and Clinton as well as her supporters all the ammo they needed. Now that he's won the presidency all that bad behavior is still how so many see him. Judging from the cartoons linked by angelburst29 its a world wide image, although some are very funny.

There has been a sketchy explanations here, that he was after votes. So he got the vote of certain people and they're on his side which is maybe a good thing, better then being against him. A vote is a vote. Hmm?

Then I've thought about the old saying, "all media attention is good even when its bad". He brought attention to himself, made a splash. Another reason maybe.

Any thoughts? Or is this one of those questions that cant really be answered at the moment.[/quote]

That's what I also don't get.

This those people support him because they got him figured out that being obnoxious scores votes these days and it was all just strategy?

Or did they simply support him because they didn't saw his remarks and some of his proposals as dangerous. Meaning they are ponerized and like authoritarian measures?

I suppose many people saw right through Killary and supported Trump because he offered hope and was worth the gamble.


[quote author= Pashalis]I think it will be very interesting to see in the coming months, how Putin and Co. will handle the situation with Trump.[/quote]

Putin and Trump have the same enemies now which means they are natural allies. Hopefully they will make a great team!!

I am hoping that Trump with his newly amassed power will be capable of exposing Epstein island and the whole pedophile establishment. It will be the hardest way of hitting the PTB.

Maybe that is revealing the 'man behind the curtain'

 

[kalibex]

Last question: "What do you think this campaign is going to do to the Trump brand?"

The Donald: "I don't care. This is our country. Our country's going bad. I don't care about hotel occupancy!"

It's really starting to look as if he sees the U.S. as a 'failing business' - and he wants to be the one to go down in history as having pulled it back from the brink of utter destruction, caused by the wishful thinking of the psychopathic corporatists, who can't even see (and, of course, don't care) what the final, logical results of their depredations will be.

 

[luc]

I'm not sure if this has been posted before, but here's a video of Trump's rally in Florida right before the election (starting at 28:48):

https://youtu.be/-0BPu5VLX9Y

For those who have the time, it's interesting to watch IMO. I can't say there's much in there that I disagree with. There are a few exceptions though, which might be explained if we assume for a moment that he's genuine, smart, and knows what he's doing:

* his stance on people 'flooding the country' - that is dangerous rhetoric IMO because it shifts the blame to those people the US put in that position in the first place (i.e. plundering of South America and the rest of the world etc.). However, it is a popular notion, and his 'America first' attitude might be what is needed now, it would be a huge step forward compared to the sell-out at home and meddling in foreign affairs the current elites stand for. I mean, can't win the election saying America is evil since the slaughtering of the Indians and you get what you deserve. On a positive note, he said he supports the black/Hispanic etc. communities.

* His stance on Iran and China - that's cheap rhetoric that doesn't hold water I think. BUT, he might be playing this game to win folks in the military, to give them an enemy, and bring home the point that America used to be a great military leader, but now loses all the conflicts because of the incompetency and corruption of the elite. If so, that would be smart - winning the military for his cause is absolutely crucial.

* He says he supports the fight of the Cubans against Castro, the Venezuelans gainst their oppression etc. - doesn't make sense to me. Maybe another tactic to 'pick his battles'? Or symptoms of an ideological anti-communist/'free market' bias?

* His praise for Israel. I must say I had a hard time detecting any signs that this is simply a strategy not to anger the 'mad dog', he seemed pretty convinced, but who knows. Interestingly, some Israeli right-wingers seem to praise Trump and are full of hate towards the liberal protestors - maybe they will have a rude awakening if what the Cs said is true and Trump merely picks his battles here. I sure hope so.


As for his strategy, it will be interesting to see how this plays out, and I think Timotheos made some good points. My guess is that he will continue his efforts towards reconciliation and speak to all Americans. He may bring in some establishment figures into his cabinet to appease some of the forces he can't tackle now. I think he will try to win the military and sane parts of the security establishment by having a decisive and straight-forward military victory - maybe Putin will assist him here and make him look good. I think the Russians will generally try to help him look good, maybe even by making a few concessions, and treat him with respect. Trump may want to pull off a few irresistible PR stunts as well, particularly in terms of controversial issues, to make it harder for the hostile media to attack him. Of course, he needs to be careful not to give the impression he's just another establishment candidate and quickly fulfill at least one or two of his promises... Then, it remains to be seen if he's smart enough to prevail against the huge forces acting against him, particularly in foreign policy. Let's not kid ourselves, what he proposed during the campaign (withdrawal from Nato, import taxes etc.) is nothing short of ending imperialism and turning the world economy upside down.

Just a few thoughts.

 

[Laura]

I think we all might consider the possibility that Trump's "cheap rhetoric" and appeals to the lowest common denominator and emotional button pushing was simply a tactic. Obviously, as a businessman, he's studied lots of things about how to "sell" and it seems to me that this was what he was doing: selling. Previous information about his views, and his actions thus far suggest that he was using the rage of the masses as a platform.

So, those of you that "don't get it", try thinking with a hammer here! Look at reality; apply analytical skills; put yourself in the shoes of others!