Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

[shijing]

I don't have the imagination to fathom where is all the money coming from and where and to whom is it really going to???? Can she's be that naive? Or is she willing to campaign on this issue in the hope of personal gains? It's just suspicious on so many levels. To promote the Green Party now or in the future? They are wannabes at best. They only get traction with the socialist libs. Sounds like more government for the people. Maybe it's a new smokescreen ideology behind which to hide ulterior motives?

Actually, another thought just occurred to me. It seems out of character for Stein to do this just for personal gain, and as both Neil and I noted above, it would be equally out of character for her to do an abrupt about-face on Clinton. But let's say for the sake of argument that she's gone to the dark side all of a sudden, and that Soros may be behind it, despite current lack of direct evidence (that I know of). One thing I know from studying the Clintons' history the past few months is that they are certainly not above using sticks as well as carrots to manipulate people to their own end.

Instead of assuming that she's merely being bribed, might it also make sense to consider that she's been extorted in some way? Perhaps losing her private practice over her vaccine stance, or her family members being threatened for example. The deal could be: if you don't do what we ask, we'll make your life difficult; if you do, you'll get all this money for the Green Party's future use. It could back her into a corner, and also serve a dual purpose from the point of view of the DNC and their backers, where they can then support Clinton/foment unrest against Trump, and cause the Green Party to implode all at the same time.

I don't know if this is actually the case, but it might make sense of a situation where there seems to be so many things that suddenly fail to add up.

 

[shijing]

So take a look at the videos in this SOTT article which Stein has been heavily criticized for in the past couple of days, and just as an experiment, try to view them through the lens of someone who is being blackmailed or otherwise coerced:

https://www.sott.net/article/334842-The-mysterious-case-of-Jill-Steins-surging-recount-fundraiser-costs

Stein was always a proponent of Julian Assange and Wikileaks, and I don't believe she ever had a problem with Putin or bought into the whole 'Russia is hacking the DNC' thing. But in the first video, she's saying on the one hand that she 'doesn't know if the election was stolen' but on the other that the election was 'riddled with hacking'; in the second video she says that 'the money is raising itself' (perhaps in reference to some kind of payment Bot mentioned in the article m posted yesterday?). Could she be doing her best to convey the truth with the first and third statements and stating the rest under duress? Also, how does she suddenly know so much about the alleged hacking? She never mentioned the topic until 3 days ago that I know of, and I would assume that the Green Party's resources pale in comparison to either Trump's or the DNC's in terms of investigating a hacking issue. Anyway, I hope I'm not completely misjudging her character, but it's food for thought at any rate.

 

[Charade]

It certainly is puzzling at this point and any of the conjectures could be possible. I find it troubling because it whips up dissent, creates division and confusion and more distraction. It doesn't lay a clear path for Trump to initiate positive change, if he is so inclined. Whoever is fueling this movement is creating a reason to question the election results and that they have the consent from the public with all the $$$ rolling in to prove it. It keeps the nation stuck in place, retracing our steps, instead of moving forward. We know the system is corrupt. And that is fine and dandy until it doesn't work to the favor of the PTB. I think it's a ploy because they are so desperate to sway public opinion in favor of the unelected factions and against Trump and any possible unity within the general public to envision a better world. It's another wasteful and unnecessary misdirection of time and resources, IMO.

 

[Laura]

Meanwhile, there is this posted in the Fidel Castro thread that is a big, black mark on Trump's account:

I also heard many different opinions about him and, overall, I think he was benevolent and really had the people's best interests at heart. And he did some pretty good things from what I read and hear from people who visited or lived in Cuba. Of course, he also made some mistakes, and things weren't perfect in Cuba, but he is indeed a man to remember who inspired and will probably continue to inspire others. May he rest in peace!

So Trump is showing his ignorance with this message after Fidel's death:

https://www.rt.com/news/368243-fidel-castro-death-reaction/

US President-elect Donald Trump has called Castro “a brutal dictator who oppressed his own people for nearly six decades.”

“Fidel Castro’s legacy is of firing squads, theft, unimaginable suffering, poverty, and the denial of fundamental human rights,” he said in a statement.

With Castro gone, Trump promised that his “administration will do all it can to ensure the Cuban people can finally begin their journey towards prosperity and liberty.”

Compare to Putin's:

https://www.rt.com/news/368267-world-leaders-castro-condolences/

Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered his condolences to the Cuban government and people on Saturday. The Kremlin statement said Castro’s name “is a symbol of an entire era in modern history.”

“The free and independent Cuba built by him and his associates has become an influential member of the international community, and an inspiring example for many countries and peoples,” the statement said. It also underlined Castro’s personal determination to develop lasting relationships between Moscow and Havana.

“This man of strength and wisdom always looked straight into the future,” it stressed. “He represented the highest ideals of a politician, citizen, and patriot who firmly believed in his cause.”

Quite telling!

 

[Laura]

Also, cross-posting this from the Russia-Syria thread. Another most concerning signal:

Meanwhile, this disturbing bit of news:

Media Blackout: House of Reps passes 'No-Fly Zone in Syria' bill during special session with rules suspended
https://www.sott.net/article/334894-Media-Blackout-House-of-Reps-passes-No-Fly-Zone-in-Syria-bill-during-special-session-with-rules-suspended

...Establishment of a no-fly zone is the next crucial step toward full-scale war. It would mean Syrian planes could not fly in their own airspace and would bring the disturbing prospect of U.S. planes shooting down Russian planes — which are operating there on invitation from Syria to help battle ISIS.

Soon after the presidential election, key warmongers in Congress began formulating plans to make increased conflict a near certainty, complete with the kind of propaganda peddled before the Iraq attack. While everyone was distracted by the election of Trump, six representatives took advantage of the lame-duck session and suspended "normal rules" to bring us H.R. 5732.

As reported by Consortium News:

"Late in the day, on Nov. 15, one week after the U.S. elections, the lame-duck Congress convened in special session with normal rules suspended so the House could pass House Resolution 5732, the "Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act" calling for intensifying the already harsh sanctions on Syria, assessing the imposition of a "no fly zone" inside Syria (to prevent the Syrian government from flying) and escalating efforts to press criminal charges against Syrian officials...Most strikingly, the resolution calls for evaluating and developing plans for the United States to impose a "no fly zone" inside Syria, a sovereign nation, an act of war that also would violate international law as an act of aggression. It also could put the U.S. military in the position of shooting down Russian aircraft."

The suspension of rules procedure is supposed to be used for "non-controversial" bills such as naming Post Offices, but this small group of lawmakers used it to pass a drastically important bill. The blatant abuse of power shows the desperation in the neocon ranks.

Donald Trump has spoken out against regime change, but considering his unpredictable behavior, the actual position of his coming administration is anybody's guess. Trump's pick of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser is not a good portent.

Earlier this month, Flynn strongly supported Turkish President Erdogan in an op-ed at The Hill, suggesting he is under siege by "radical Islam" and desperately needs our help. Flynn seemed to dismiss Erdogan's crackdown on political dissidents and the dubious circumstances of the attempted coup which allowed Erdogan to solidify his power.

It may be no coincidence that just days ago, Turkey — a NATO ally — urged to U.S. to move forward with a no-fly zone in Syria. Incidentally, no one seems to have paid attention to a damning investigative report finding that the "Turkish government under President Erdogan is covertly providing direct military, financial and logistical support to ISIS, even while claiming to fight the terror network."...

 

[griffin]

It certainly is puzzling at this point and any of the conjectures could be possible. I find it troubling because it whips up dissent, creates division and confusion and more distraction. It doesn't lay a clear path for Trump to initiate positive change, if he is so inclined. Whoever is fueling this movement is creating a reason to question the election results and that they have the consent from the public with all the $$$ rolling in to prove it. It keeps the nation stuck in place, retracing our steps, instead of moving forward. We know the system is corrupt. And that is fine and dandy until it doesn't work to the favor of the PTB. I think it's a ploy because they are so desperate to sway public opinion in favor of the unelected factions and against Trump and any possible unity within the general public to envision a better world. It's another wasteful and unnecessary misdirection of time and resources, IMO.

It clearly seems obvious enough that powerful big-money force(s) are fostering, even manufacturing, popular dissent and political turmoil in a last-ditch programme intended to overturn the election and somehow install Killary during electoral voting on December 19, which is three weeks from tomorrow, Monday. If enough state electors can be bribed, threatened or otherwise suborned or coerced into voting otherwise than according to the popular votes in their states, Killary might become president.

Remember, in the 2000 election, a bitter legal controversy over recounting votes in Florida moved to the US Supreme Court, where the bare majority of five Republican justices selected George W. Bush to be president. If recounts can put the election outcome in question, something similar might happen.

 

[Laura]

Remember, in the 2000 election, a bitter legal controversy over recounting votes in Florida moved to the US Supreme Court, where the bare majority of five Republican justices selected George W. Bush to be president. If recounts can put the election outcome in question, something similar might happen.

And god help the world if that demon becomes president after being shown she isn't wanted... oy.

 

[Cosmos]

Remember, in the 2000 election, a bitter legal controversy over recounting votes in Florida moved to the US Supreme Court, where the bare majority of five Republican justices selected George W. Bush to be president. If recounts can put the election outcome in question, something similar might happen.

And god help the world if that demon becomes president after being shown she isn't wanted... oy.

Indeed!

Quite interesting development in regards to Jill Stein and that recount issue and to what it might lead to.

There are several scenarios I can think of, for why Jill did what she did there. But first off, it is important to notice that in those states, where the recount should take place now (and Jill pushed for), Trump won, and if the recount shows another result (aka. Killary "won"), that could lead to Killary actually "winning" the precedency (several articles point that out). Are we supposed to think that Jill wasn't aware that this move can lead to exactly that? Is she really that clueless? We have seen the same thing in the Bush/Gore election, where at the end Bush won, even though Gore likely won the real election.

So here are a couple of scenarios for why Jill might have done that:

1: Jill wants that recount out of her own innitiative, because she feels the "system is rigged" and that the real results are different, while being stupid enough to not see how that can lead to further manipulation and the winning of Killary. The reason for it. might be that she feels she herself has gotton more votes there, as oficcially stated. And/or she feels that Trump and/or Killary have gotton more votes there, then oficcially stated. To much "liberal" and "progressive" thinking there?

2: Jill wants that recount not out of her own innitiative, but because a third party planted the idea into her head, to show the people that the "system is rigged" and that the real results are different, while being stupid enough to not see how that can lead to further manipulation and the winning of Killary. The reason for it might be, that she was told, that she herself has gotton more votes there, as oficcially stated. And/or she feels that Trump and/or Killary have gotton more votes there then oficcially stated. To much "liberal" and "progressive" thinking there?

3: Jill wants that recount not out of her own innitiative, but because a third party (like the Killary camp) pressured her to do that, while Jill herself is not aware of how she is manipulated there to do evil things.

4: Jill wants that recount not out of her own innitiative, but because a third party (like the Killary camp) pressured her to do that, while Jill herself is aware of it and that it can lead to Killary winning.

5: Jill wants that recount out of her own innitiative in conjunction with the Killary camp because they made a deal for whatever reason.

6: Jill wants that recount out of her own innitiative in conjunction with the Killary camp, because they are in reality in the same "liberal" and "progressive" camp, and she just doesn't get it.

7: Jill wants that recount out of her own innitiative, because she is attached to "liberal" and "progressive" thinking, that blinds her for the horrors that can create.

8: Jill wants that recount out of her own innitiative and/or in conjunction with the Killary camp, because they are in reality in the same "liberal" and "progressive" camp, or lets say, psychopathic camp.

Just some ideas.

 

[sbeaudry]

It certainly is puzzling at this point and any of the conjectures could be possible. I find it troubling because it whips up dissent, creates division and confusion and more distraction. It doesn't lay a clear path for Trump to initiate positive change, if he is so inclined. Whoever is fueling this movement is creating a reason to question the election results and that they have the consent from the public with all the $$$ rolling in to prove it. It keeps the nation stuck in place, retracing our steps, instead of moving forward. We know the system is corrupt. And that is fine and dandy until it doesn't work to the favor of the PTB. I think it's a ploy because they are so desperate to sway public opinion in favor of the unelected factions and against Trump and any possible unity within the general public to envision a better world. It's another wasteful and unnecessary misdirection of time and resources, IMO.

It is certainly puzzling. I wonder if Jill was threatened, duped, or just not what she seemed to be? And now the Clinton camp's lawyers are involved, of course. The PTB are trying desperately to get something going to keep things according the official game plan. I'd like to think it will backfire, but who knows if the 'recount' will actually be a recount or simply a new count. If they didn't have enough votes because of their own hubris, well here's a chance to fix the problem. I can see it now, "Oh look here's 11,000 uncounted mail in ballots." Or, "hey, nobody counted the votes on this machine over here." Meanwhile, it creates more questions and uncertainty while maintaining the feelings of fear and division from a very contentious election cycle. Dangerous waters.

 

[angelburst29]

As the US Electoral College voters are set to elect the US president and vice president later in December, Russian media review whether Democratic contender Hillary Clinton still has a last chance to move into the White House and does the president-elect have any reason to be nervous.

Any Chance Hillary Clinton Could Still Move Into the White House?
https://sputniknews.com/us/201611271047893097-us-electors-presidential-vote/

The November 8 presidential election in the US was not, in fact, the final point of the election process of the US head of state.

Back in the 18th century, the Founding Fathers of the US prudently excluded any chances for unfit people to become the country's President. Not trusting the choice of the masses, they designed a system of bringing a trustworthy candidate into office. The system has also become a compromise to the idea suggested at the time that the President would be voted for by Congress. And so the scheme whereby the election of the US President is decided by the popular vote of qualified citizens, the Electoral College, came into being.

It's made up of the 538 Americans who actually elect the president. The number corresponds to the seats each state has in the US Senate and the House of Representatives (there are 100 seats in the Senate and 435 in the House), plus the three electoral votes allotted to Washington, D.C.

Pegging each state's electoral vote count to the size of its congressional delegation was specifically designed to give smaller states proportionally more influence than larger states. The national popular vote therefore simply doesn't matter to the election of the president, however it awards electoral votes to each state based on state-by-state results.

Therefore, on November 8 the country was choosing the qualified citizens who would then elect the president.

"The presidential election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. You help choose your state’s electors when you vote for President because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate’s electors," says the official website of the Electoral College. The electors are generally chosen by the candidate’s political party, but state laws vary on how the electors are selected. The meeting of the electors takes place on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December after the presidential election, this year it falls on December 19. Most states have a “winner-take-all” system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of “proportional representation.” Under the winner-take-all system, the state's electors are awarded to the presidential candidate with the most votes in that state.

Maine and Nebraska use the "congressional district method", selecting one elector within each congressional district by popular vote and awarding two electors by a statewide popular vote.

A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President.

No elector is required by federal law to honor their pledge, which suggests electors can go their own way.

In 29 states, there are either statutes or party rules that theoretically bind electors to honor state results. But the penalty for becoming a so-called "faithless elector" is typically a fine measured in the hundreds of dollars. The US Supreme Court has never ruled explicitly on those state laws and party rules, and some constitutional scholars say such state restrictions would be struck down if challenged.

Thus Clinton electors are now appealing to Republican electors to become "faithless" and abandon Trump on December 19. They have even posted a petition on Change.org website urging to "make Clinton president on December 19."

"On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, in 14 of the states in Trump's column, they can vote for Hillary Clinton without any legal penalty if they choose," it says.

"We are calling on the 149 Electors in those states to ignore their states' votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton," it adds, explaining that "Mr. Trump is unfit to serve."

By now, the petition has been signed by over four million six hundred thousand people.

Commenting on the ongoing campaign, Russian online newspaper Vzglyad suggested that these efforts are in vain.

Firstly, it says, in order to tip the existing balance in favor of Clinton, her supporters need to win over the support of a minimum of 37 Republican electors, which, they admit, is next to impossible. Current projections suggest that Trump looks likely to end up with 306 electors to Clinton’s 232.

Secondly, it reminds, Clinton as well as Obama have already accepted the results of the elections and have already recognized Trump as the 45th US president.

Thirdly, it says, even if to suppose that the electors give their votes to Clinton and she agrees to their decision, there are still very few chances that she will become the president: the results of this vote are to be adopted by the Congress, where the Republicans hold the majority.

Certainly many of them have no special liking for their nominee, but not to the degree of ushering his opponent into the White House, in full view of their voters.

With regards to the posted petition, the website doubts that the number of signatories really correspond to the number of Trump's opponents in the US, as the petition is available for signing to any internet user around the globe.

The newspaper also suggests that the attempts to push the Election College to the "revolt" are made in the hope of cancelling this institution of the American electoral system rather than to change the results of the elections.

 

[Neil]

Well, I don't think Stein's intentions are particularly selfless, which is part of the problem. Yes, if she "wins" and there is an honest recount, it would be a great boon for her and her party, but I think it is primarily about name recognition. Look at how much attention she has gotten in the past two days. Many Americans who don't really know the third parties exist now suddenly know her name. Trump accused her of running a scam to fill her coffers, and I think this is partially correct. A little while back, a Clinton aide spoke of computer "irregularities" in the battleground states, but Clinton ignored it because she had conceded. I remember the story being on SOTT. It appears Stein decided shortly after to make this her "crusade," which would put her in the limelight and give her some "free advertising." Three states were selected that would most easily be funded by democratic leaning organizations. Jill was happy to take their money for her self promotion. The problem with taking their money is that it pulls you somewhat into their orbit, and now with the Clinton juggernaut charging towards her, she has to pivot so that it falls on its face or she will get skewered. The Democrats didn't want a recount initially because the inner circle knew it was rigged in their favor, and it might be revealed with close scrutiny. Now that Stein has opened that channel, Hillary is pretty much obligated to get involved in order to cover everyone's ass. If Soros can get the right people in place in time, it becomes an attractive option to steal the election without having to do the full color revolution thing. The question is if Stein has the wherewithal to conduct a sincere recount against Hillary's superior resources. If she isn't very smart now she will end up making a terrible mess of things.

It is interesting Trump has thus far refused Stein's offer to have his people participate in the recount as well. He seems content that he has locked up the election and doesn't really care about how. He of course knows that it is rigged, he brought this idea to the forefront of the public's consciousness, and he looks a tiny bit silly saying "everything is ok" now that it has come out in his favor. Trump has his plate full creating his new government, and probably sees all of this as a distraction to spread him thin. I speculated on another thread that Trump has let Clinton and her crime cartel go for now because she has a lot of protection and obfuscation around her criminal enterprise, and is waiting for her to make more egregious mistakes. Trump's coalition is still relatively weak, not even being in office yet, and if there was irrefutable evidence of the Clintons stealing the election laid out for all to see, he would be forced confront them and set things right before he is really ready to. Nevertheless, if there is voter fraud, as we strongly suspect there is, I think the truth needs to be revealed regardless, but I also am not convinced Stein really knows what she's doing in her bid to be a "big fish." Trump can afford to lose Wisconsin, it wasn't one of the states rumored to have the Soros linked voting machines, so a recount there may prove to be a wash anyway. If it spreads to Pennsylvania and Michigan, he better send some of his loyalists out there to keep an eye on things or face the very real prospect of the election being stolen out from under him. My prediction is that it will ultimately work out in Trump's favor in the end because he still holds the possibility of creating a "real revolution" if it is true that 85% of military service members support him, not to mention informal citizen militias, but the twists and turns in the middle are likely to generate a great deal of suspense.

 

[Cosmos]

I also think that this "new count" of the votes in that state and maybe the other two, won't be able to pull the tide towards Killary being president. Even if they really want to pull another "Bush" out of the magic bag, I think it can't succeed in the long run, for several reasons.

 

[aragorn]

I have a couple of dumb questions concerning this recount-business:

1) How do they actually do the recount? I mean, if the software in the machines is designed to skew the results, how can they see what people actually voted for in case their vote was changed to the opposite by the contaminated software? Is there some sort of backup system where people also have to fill out a paper ballot even if they use the machines? A skilled, and unbiased computer technician would perhaps find the manipulation looking at the code/algorithms? However, with computers and codes, any dishonest examiner could come up with whatever numbers s/he likes.

2) Why didn't the Soros/Clinton gang start this fundraising for a recount themselves? So, perhaps they were afraid that their manipulation would be exposed, but now it seems that they are jumping on Stein's wagon, funding her efforts – what's the logic in that? Or, perhaps Stein is the perfect "outsider" to do their bidding, and they've gotten to her.

 

[Charade]

Also, cross-posting this from the Russia-Syria thread. Another most concerning signal:

Meanwhile, this disturbing bit of news:

Media Blackout: House of Reps passes 'No-Fly Zone in Syria' bill during special session with rules suspended
https://www.sott.net/article/334894-Media-Blackout-House-of-Reps-passes-No-Fly-Zone-in-Syria-bill-during-special-session-with-rules-suspended

...Establishment of a no-fly zone is the next crucial step toward full-scale war. It would mean Syrian planes could not fly in their own airspace and would bring the disturbing prospect of U.S. planes shooting down Russian planes — which are operating there on invitation from Syria to help battle ISIS.

Soon after the presidential election, key warmongers in Congress began formulating plans to make increased conflict a near certainty, complete with the kind of propaganda peddled before the Iraq attack. While everyone was distracted by the election of Trump, six representatives took advantage of the lame-duck session and suspended "normal rules" to bring us H.R. 5732.

As reported by Consortium News:

"Late in the day, on Nov. 15, one week after the U.S. elections, the lame-duck Congress convened in special session with normal rules suspended so the House could pass House Resolution 5732, the "Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act" calling for intensifying the already harsh sanctions on Syria, assessing the imposition of a "no fly zone" inside Syria (to prevent the Syrian government from flying) and escalating efforts to press criminal charges against Syrian officials...Most strikingly, the resolution calls for evaluating and developing plans for the United States to impose a "no fly zone" inside Syria, a sovereign nation, an act of war that also would violate international law as an act of aggression. It also could put the U.S. military in the position of shooting down Russian aircraft."

The suspension of rules procedure is supposed to be used for "non-controversial" bills such as naming Post Offices, but this small group of lawmakers used it to pass a drastically important bill. The blatant abuse of power shows the desperation in the neocon ranks.

Donald Trump has spoken out against regime change, but considering his unpredictable behavior, the actual position of his coming administration is anybody's guess. Trump's pick of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser is not a good portent.

Earlier this month, Flynn strongly supported Turkish President Erdogan in an op-ed at The Hill, suggesting he is under siege by "radical Islam" and desperately needs our help. Flynn seemed to dismiss Erdogan's crackdown on political dissidents and the dubious circumstances of the attempted coup which allowed Erdogan to solidify his power.

It may be no coincidence that just days ago, Turkey — a NATO ally — urged to U.S. to move forward with a no-fly zone in Syria. Incidentally, no one seems to have paid attention to a damning investigative report finding that the "Turkish government under President Erdogan is covertly providing direct military, financial and logistical support to ISIS, even while claiming to fight the terror network."...

This is bad news. Let's just go behind closed doors and suspend rules or reason and do what we wanted to all along. How psychpathic is that? Yes the blatant abuse of power by a small desperate group of lawmakers... You want to prove of a corrupt and rigged system of governing? Well here it is.

 

[Lilou]

I have a couple of dumb questions concerning this recount-business:

1) How do they actually do the recount? I mean, if the software in the machines is designed to skew the results, how can they see what people actually voted for in case their vote was changed to the opposite by the contaminated software? Is there some sort of backup system where people also have to fill out a paper ballot even if they use the machines? A skilled, and unbiased computer technician would perhaps find the manipulation looking at the code/algorithms? However, with computers and codes, any dishonest examiner could come up with whatever numbers s/he likes.

In the case of Michigan, the entire state uses paper ballots and they will be recounted by hand, by each county precinct, under state supervision. The final count according to state election officials, has Trump beating Clinton by alittle over 10,000 votes. A recount is unlikely to change the results.