Trump Elected: The True MAGA Era Begins, Now What?

Trump to bring back Robert Lighthizer to run US trade policy, same guy who he hired in 2016. There's more in this article about other positions too:


Lighthizer had also expressed interest in serving as Treasury secretary, but that position will most likely be offered to a financier, with contenders including the hedge fund managers Scott Bessent and John Paulson.

The possibility of an arch protectionist being reappointed to the pivotal trade role is likely to raise concerns in Beijing, as well as among US trading allies, given how influential Lighthizer was during Trump’s trade wars during his first term. Trump has vowed to impose high tariffs on all imports into the US, particularly Chinese goods.

Trump had considered Lighthizer for commerce secretary but the people familiar with the personnel discussions said the president-elect was most likely to offer that job to Linda McMahon, the billionaire co-chair of Trump’s presidential transition team.
 
Maybe Trump "owes" the Zionists (especially due to the huge campaign contribution by Adelson) and this is how he is repaying them.

Though considering that Iran is a way more difficult target to bomb than Israel thought, maybe the US-Iran war is off the table for sure, no matter whether a Zionist runs the US State Department or not. Trump has the last word on foreign policy anyway.

Israel can still focus on Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and maybe even Syria for its "Greater Israel" project - and Zionists in the US State Department could offer cover and support for all that.
 
Now we have Trump's first Cabinet pick. It's Elise Stefanik for UN Ambassador. This one is a bit less positive. Not only is she a staunch defender of Israel, this will open up a seat in the House. She's in New York, so no guarantee that it will be filled by a Republican. Here's Jackson Hinkle criticizing the choice (sorry for embedding so many tweets):

 
Now we have Trump's first Cabinet pick. It's Elise Stefanik for UN Ambassador. This one is a bit less positive. Not only is she a staunch defender of Israel, this will open up a seat in the House. She's in New York, so no guarantee that it will be filled by a Republican. Here's Jackson Hinkle criticizing the choice (sorry for embedding so many tweets):
What i'm wondering is if this kind of information, i mean : they select someone, let's say it's a BAD choice, many people go complain and argue mainly on X, then Musk makes a poll, and indeed, nobody want to see this person at this position. This then gives to Donald a good excuse to say back to the sionist (who funded his campaign) something like "Sorry but i can't hire this person in my team, the people do not want him/her at all, this would not be legitimate, i'm so sorry" (LOL in fact)

But anyone sees here what i mean ? Using the public opinion as a kind of shield. Sure the sionist will quickly feel betrayed, even if they are the biggest traitors that exist, and that may cause problem for funding the next campaing. But in 4 years, it gives time to help the average US citizen to be more aware, maybe in better financial situation, and thus, ask the baseline supporters help for any further campaign.

To come back to using public opinion, this would be a smart move. For instance, if jews/sionist ask for something, but that the people massively protest on X (mainly) and other platforms, that they are opposed to, Trump can have an excuse, and not only the excuse that his people refuse, but with also arguments, like "stop genociding palestinians prior asking for any kind of help"

This makes me consider this situation on an higher level, the fact that Trump, helped by Musk and X, is highlighting some truths by allowing free speech but also by amplifying it. Like opening a bright spot on some political aspects which were always decided in the dark, behind the curtain, to avoid people to be aware of all their shenanigans. And light is knowledge.

There's actually a big knowledge burst in US, big light bursts, like the big solar flares.
There are no longer cracks and crevices in the shell (think of it like an egg) of lies that have enclosed the US for so long; whole sections of the shell are crumbling, the bird of truth is hatching - look at the proposed logo for X that Musk posted.


All these energy-suckers, like vampires, who get fit via this system since ages are now fearing this increasing light burst. I think that the list of departures from the US will quickly raise.

Let's see.
 
What i'm wondering is if this kind of information, i mean : they select someone, let's say it's a BAD choice, many people go complain and argue mainly on X, then Musk makes a poll, and indeed, nobody want to see this person at this position. This then gives to Donald a good excuse to say back to the sionist (who funded his campaign) something like "Sorry but i can't hire this person in my team, the people do not want him/her at all, this would not be legitimate, i'm so sorry" (LOL in fact)
Floating names to the press to gauge the reaction definitely happens. I don't think that's the case here. Stefanik is a long-time Trump ally and she is probably being rewarded for that loyalty.
 
Second Cabinet pick announced, this one is another New Yorker. It is longtime Republican Lee Zeldin to lead the EPA. He narrowly lost the governor race to awful Kathy Hochul in 2022 and served on Trump’s defense team during his first impeachment trial in 2020. Another reward for loyalty.
 
Trump filled another important post, selecting Florida congressman Mike Waltz as his national security advisor. He's a Green Beret vet who served in Afghanistan, the Middle East and Africa. The WSJ refers to him as a China hawk and NATO critic. This post does not need to go through Senate confirmation.
 
Catherine Austin-Fitts posted this on her website, clarifying why she stopped working with RFK jr and won't join this administration:

When the campaign started I was helping RFK and his economic advisors informally on policy issues. That ended as a result of disagreements over Gaza and his statements regarding Bitcoin. At the core of the disagreement was sovereignty. He is supporting genocide and illegal policies that in my opinion would destroy America. In my book, this reflects loyalty to private interests which are opposed to US interests – and the interests of Western Civilization.

I have not read [RFK's] Wuhan book – I am completely clear that the continued desire to blame everything on the Chinese is patently ridiculous. Right when the pandemic started, I had one hospital administrator report to me that they had just received an enormous shipment of masks from China – it clearly had been ordered before the whole pandemic op started. Another clear sign it was an op.

As to his fruit loop approach, he is doing the compromise needed to do to get into the political machinery and the current culture (of a majority of people who have poisoned themselves and their children and do not want to face it) to get something done. This is exactly why I have taken the position that I am not going to endorse Trump or RFK and have no interest in working in this or any Administration. My job is to tell the truth – to make sure we have clear honest maps, including of what real reform looks and we move outside of the political machinery to bring real and deep financial and cultural change.

Our power to make real lasting change without the political machinery is an enormous opportunity – which is why I despair of the US 4 year presidential cycle where Mr. Global succeeds in channelling our time and energy back into the dead ends.

If you look at the speeches on or re Bitcoin that I have watched, Trump stayed within the Constitution, but is supportive of continued building of the control grid. Lutkin, his transition chair, sounds outside the Constitution and US sovereign interests, but I am doing more research. RFK is way outside the law or anything that supports US sovereignty.
https://home.solari.com/money-markets-report-november-7-2024/

I think she may be a bit too pessimistic regarding Trump, his intentions and what he might achieve. The presidential election is more than a "dead end", even if Trump ends up having to go along with some of the globalist agendas again.
 
Last edited:
Another appointment, this one is Trump's border czar. He is Tom Homan, who served as the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement between 2017 and 2018. This guy seems to be perfectly suited to the job Trump wants done. Here's a few snippets that show why Homan is very based:


another one of this guy

I don't know how long this will last. It looks to me that I am enjoying scrolling through X for the first time.
 
Stefanik may be a loyalty pick, and a nod to the AIPAC crowd, but if she's a rabid zionist, then parking her at the UN may not a bad move. She can't make policy as an ambassador, only express what she's told to on behalf of the administration. Lord knows she probably can't do any worse than Haley.

Maybe there's also the calculation that the open NY seat can be snagged should she actually get the appointment?

As to SOS, why Rubio when there's Grenell?

Then there's this:




edit: added tweet
 
Last edited:
How come that in none of the rumors Tulsi Gabbard or Kennedy are even mentioned as possible candidates?

If the rumors are true, it yet again looks like Trump is choosing the worst people. By now we could ask: Is that really all just explainable by his naivety? Maybe he hasn’t the guts to put interesting people into those positions? Maybe he is threatened/blackmailed? Maybe it is really his choice? Maybe he puts some people there to expose them and then fire them later? I dunno.
 
Back
Top Bottom