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

[axj]

Catherin Austin-Fitts thinks Trump staged the assassination attempt. She's not a reliable source.

I think that nobody is a fully reliable source and it takes discernment to see their biases, as well as where they present information and analysis that is spot on.

I can't believe there are forum members who aren't happy seeing what DOGE is doing.

The devil is often in the details. And while I enjoy seeing what is being uncovered, it is also clear that Musk is not an angel (biggest US defense contractor who wants to chip our brains) and that there is likely a Plan B of the pathocracy that is meant to be implemented under Trump.

 

[Cosmos]

Catherin Austin-Fitts thinks Trump staged the assassination attempt. She's not a reliable source. I can't believe there are forum members who aren't happy seeing what DOGE is doing. It is a monumental reorganization of the US federal government intended to wrestle control of the country away from the psychopaths who have been in control for over a 100 years.

I think that nobody is a fully reliable source and it takes discernment to see their biases, as well as where they present information and analysis that is spot on.

Of course, nobody has the full banana, but it is reasonable to question Catherin Austin-Fitts caliber of thinking and capability to analyse things objectively/correctly when she comes to the conclusion that Trump staged the assassination attempt and still thinks that that is likely the case.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

And that it is not even necessary to break any laws to do what Trump and Musk are doing with DOGE at the same speed, yet for some reason they apparently did break several laws.

Did she say specifically which laws are being broken? I find it hard to believe privacy laws are being broken when one government employee in a department has access to information that other government employees in that department have access to, for example. (DOGE is set up so that each department/agency is composed of a couple employees of that department, along with a lawyer.)

 

[Cosmos]

Five things I noted with interest recently in regards to Trump. Despite how he is often portrayed (and can surely often come across when you look at it shallowly) he doesn’t seem to be a “die hard strictly America first person, no matter what the consequences are to other countries“ nor, “a person that necessarily thinks that America must be the most aggressive and powerful military/country, no matter what“:

- While he wants companies like American Steel to be owned and controlled by America, he is fine by owning just 51 percent of that specific company and having other investors besides that. AND he made it clear that he has nothing against some if not many other companies to be owned by others.

- His announcement that he could consider cutting the defense spending of America in half (which is a huge deal!) if he comes to an agreement with Russia, China and others (to do the same?).

- He seems to be perfectly willing (not only in words) to make deals that greatly benefit not just America, but also the other party/country. In fact, he stressed that he prefers to not crush other countries but instead would like to have things fair to his country and also beneficial to other countries.

- He seems to be perfectly willing to make favorable compromises to other countries if they bring sensible arguments to the table via respectful talks and diplomacy.

- A central theme of what he has said and continues to say is: Wanting to have and create peace, basically everywhere on the globe, where he could make that happen via the inherent powers of the US.

 

[axj]

Of course, nobody has the full banana, but it is reasonable to question Catherin Austin-Fitts caliber of thinking and capability to analyse things objectively/correctly when she comes to the conclusion that Trump staged the assassination attempt and still thinks that that is likely the case.

Of course it is reasonable to question her view of Trump and on related topics. Keep in mind that I am the one who keeps pointing out her negative bias towards him and that she thinks the assassination attempt was orchestrated by his handlers. However, I think that a lot of her analysis of the Plan B of the pathocrats to be implemented under Trump is pretty sound.

Other people like Whitney Webb or David Icke are arriving at similar conclusions. Basically that a lot of institutions will be replaced by private contractors and eventually a technocratic 'rule by AI' that will be much "smarter" and "more rational" than any human.

They may all be wrong of course, but what they outline does not seem unlikely.

Did she say specifically which laws are being broken?

Conflict of interest laws in the case of Musk. Privacy laws and secret clearance laws at DOGE. Plus, Trump's memecoin being potentially illegal as a kickback scheme by the first major buyers of the coin.

Despite how he is often portrayed (and can surely often come across when you look at it shallowly) he doesn’t seem to be a “die hard strictly America first person, no matter what the consequences are to other countries“ nor, “a person that necessarily thinks that America must be the most aggressive and powerful military/country, no matter what“

And yet, Trump is silent on or directly involved in two genocides. I hope that RFK jr will do something to uncover the truth about the mRNA genocide that is still ongoing. Trump's executive order a couple days ago to cut funding to schools that still require covid injections is a good sign though that he may be more aware on this topic now, maybe due to RFK jr.

 

[Cosmos]

Conflict of interest laws in the case of Musk. Privacy laws and secret clearance laws at DOGE. Plus, Trump's memecoin being potentially illegal as a kickback scheme by the first major buyers of the coin.

Even if Trump, Musk or others in the administration should be breaking some laws that are related to the internal affairs of America (a claim which I find rather questionable
at this point in time) I do think in certain circumstances things like “common sense“ can and should sometimes supersede laws that might be pretty limited and/or inhibit decent conduct.

In german there is a saying about law, justice and being in the right that is hard to translate, but it means something like:

Being in the right (by any decent human standard) and getting justice (legally) can be two very different things.

 

[aragorn]

Of course it is reasonable to question her view of Trump and on related topics. Keep in mind that I am the one who keeps pointing out her negative bias towards him and that she thinks the assassination attempt was orchestrated by his handlers. However, I think that a lot of her analysis of the Plan B of the pathocrats to be implemented under Trump is pretty sound.

Other people like Whitney Webb or David Icke are arriving at similar conclusions. Basically that a lot of institutions will be replaced by private contractors and eventually a technocratic 'rule by AI' that will be much "smarter" and "more rational" than any human.

They may all be wrong of course, but what they outline does not seem unlikely.

I don't think we have enough data yet to suggest that "the new boss is the same as the ol' boss". For instance, while I admire the intellect and the amazing memory for details of Whitney Webb, I've lately found her to be a bit of a 'seeing conspiracies everywhere' type of person. Sure, she has many hits and is often spot on, but to me she appears to 'paint with a too broad brush', and she's predicting 'doom everywhere'. Same applies to Icke, albeit he navigates more based on his intuition than a super sharp mind, like Webb.

I could be totally wrong, but I think that peeps like Fitts and Webb are still stuck in some kind of old paradigm in their thinking. If you ask me, I think they're (and many others) missing the potential fact, as the C's have indicated, that there has been change the program by a decision made on the ultimate 'Quorum level', and thus the playing field is, at least temporarily, leveled to be more fair.

Maybe the dystopia of 'Plan B' is still coming, but at the moment it appears to be postponed. So, I don't see the point of 'dooming and glooming' right now; let's enjoy the show while it lasts!

 

[axj]

I do think in certain circumstances things like “common sense“ can and should sometimes supersede laws that might be pretty limited and/or inhibit decent conduct.

Maybe, but that is not how the US constitution or legal system work. Unless you are in favor of disregarding those, then breaking laws by Trump's team will likely have legal consequences in courts (all the way up to the Supreme Court).

And who decides under what circumstances laws can be disregarded in favor of common sense? That in itself is a slippery slope and an open invitation to misuse, in my view.

I also think that it is best to neither idolize or demonize Trump, acknowledging both the good and the bad he does. Of course it easier for those of us who are neither American or Mexican.

 

[Cosmos]

And yet, Trump is silent on or directly involved in two genocides.

I’m guessing that you are referring to Gaza/Palestine and Ukraine?

If so, the last thing I remember is that Trump got into the office less then a month ago, and already did the following:

- Trump brought an idea to the table that could ACTUALLY and REALISTICALLY stop the long winding and recently accelerated genocide against most of the Palestinians pretty quickly. A thing, oddly enough, no politician in the world seems to have accomplished, in over 5-6 decades of this happening right everyones face.

- Ukraine: Trump is already deep in hot debates/negotiations with Russia and Ukraine. Negotiations that, by all accounts, REALISTICALLY, could very well stop that bloodshed very soon.

 

[daddycat]

Conflict of interest laws in the case of Musk. Privacy laws and secret clearance laws at DOGE. Plus, Trump's memecoin being potentially illegal as a kickback scheme by the first major buyers of the coin.

That is not a specific citation of law. USC or CFR with specific numbers. Otherwise no law has been broken.

 

[axj]

I’m guessing that you are referring to Gaza/Palestine and Ukraine?

Gaza and the mRNA injections. He was responsible for Operation Warpspeed and just authorized a $500 billion "AI program" that will include the development of new mRNA injections. But let's wait and see whether RFK jr can make a difference on this topic.

As to Gaza, at this point it is just as likely that his Gaza plan (ethnic cleansing of Palestinians) will benefit only Israel. So I think you are overstating Trump's positive impact there, or at least it seems premature to draw conclusions.

 

[Cosmos]

He was responsible for Operation Warpspeed and just authorized a $500 billion "AI program" that will include the development of new mRNA injections.

Sure, Trump engaged/created Warp Speed. But we also shouldn’t forget that there was another country and/or person that literally warped that Warp Speed by a lot: Russia/Putin. And yet, at least according to the C‘s, Putin was aware (at least at the point in time the question was asked) what is really going on there. Despite that, he still played along to A CERTAIN EXTENT, likely because he had the bigger picture in mind and set properties in accordance with those long term considerations. That doesn’t mean it was similar with Trump, (although you could at least partly reasonably argue for that): He could have also acted naively, or, at least as likely, out of pure instinct (probably unconsciously fueled/informed by decent higher forces, such as his higher self).

 

[Gawan]

I don't think we have enough data yet to suggest that "the new boss is the same as the ol' boss". For instance, while I admire the intellect and the amazing memory for details of Whitney Webb, I've lately found her to be a bit of a 'seeing conspiracies everywhere' type of person. Sure, she has many hits and is often spot on, but to me she appears to 'paint with a too broad brush', and she's predicting 'doom everywhere'. Same applies to Icke, albeit he navigates more based on his intuition than a super sharp mind, like Webb.

I could be totally wrong, but I think that peeps like Fitts and Webb are still stuck in some kind of old paradigm in their thinking. If you ask me, I think they're (and many others) missing the potential fact, as the C's have indicated, that there has been change the program by a decision made on the ultimate 'Quorum level', and thus the playing field is, at least temporarily, leveled to be more fair.

Maybe the dystopia of 'Plan B' is still coming, but at the moment it appears to be postponed. So, I don't see the point of 'dooming and glooming' right now; let's enjoy the show while it lasts!

I agree. So far, I'm pretty amazed what Trump is doing and has done just within one month. And he and his administration even shook Europe a lot, i.e. the speech of Vance and pointing out the obvious and finding solutions for Ukraine without its current non leader.

Of course, Trump still has blind spots and will be having those. And if these blind spots lead to further destruction will be seen in due time. But so far, I can also enjoy the show and let's wait and see.

Regarding Europe: Almost nobody of the "mighty" countries had the strength to go against Biden and his administration, for whatever reason. And now they are without their "daddy" anymore and still follow the same path of destruction and are going against the free will of millions of people and not even consider what their own populations want.

It will be interesting what will happen in Ukraine, and it's crazy leader and if he tries to further escalate things, i.e. continue attacking nuclear plants and what not. Because "white nose" Zelenskiy gets nervous, and rightly so.

 

[axj]

That doesn’t mean it was similar with Trump, (although you could at least partly reasonably argue for that): He could have also acted naively, or, at least as likely, out of pure instinct (probably unconsciously fueled/informed by decent higher forces, such as his higher self).

@Cosmos, do you remember that you tried to convince me and others back in 2016 that Trump is a psychopath, authoritarian or an "overt fascist"? Now it is exactly the opposite extreme - you defending Trump's every bad deed.

I don't know what else to say about this, other than that it is good to be aware of such patterns.

The C's seem kind of ambivalent about Trump and even said years ago that the US is past the point of no return and heading for destruction no matter what. The details of "when", "where exactly", "how" and "how much" are of course still open and people like Trump could make a big positive difference in that regard.

 

[Cosmos]

Even if Trump, Musk or others in the administration should be breaking some laws that are related to the internal affairs of America (a claim which I find rather questionable
at this point in time) I do think in certain circumstances things like “common sense“ can and should sometimes supersede laws that might be pretty limited and/or inhibit decent conduct.

In german there is a saying about law, justice and being in the right that is hard to translate, but it means something like:

Being in the right (by any decent human standard) and getting justice (legally) can be two very different things.

Maybe, but that is not how the US constitution or legal system work. Unless you are in favor of disregarding those, then breaking laws by Trump's team will likely have legal consequences in courts (all the way up to the Supreme Court).

And who decides under what circumstances laws can be disregarded in favor of common sense? That in itself is a slippery slope and an open invitation to misuse, in my view.

No reasonable person is in favor of disregarding the US Constitution or legal system work. That's not the point. The first point is that I have yet to see any real evidence that Trump and or his team has broken internal US laws, and I find that claim, at least in this point in time, rather questionable and unlikely. The second point can also be stated like this: Breaking the law isn't always bad, because often there is "good and evil and the specific circumstance that determents which is which". And the third point is that what is morally right, decent and good, doesn't have to always be in accordance with the law: A straightforward and extreme example is; The Nazis (and/or whomever or whatever system/country you want to insert instead of that) found it and/or made it lawful to denounce your neighbor, friends or even close family members for all sorts of "crimes" that were written in laws: such as being a Jew and doing certain things and/or thinking/saying or spreading "though crimes", with the result that those people were likely put into prison or killed, man, elderly, disabled, women and children alike. The law can say one thing but if it is morally/decently correct to follow it, especially under certain circumstances, can be considered highly questionable and even evil, sometimes. Thus, fourthly: Sometimes things like decency and common sense can and should Trump questionable or even just imperfect laws.