Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '16 --Updated: The Plot Thickens With Woolsey

To describe the 2016 US Presidential Election as bizarre would be beyond a gross understatement. It is completely bat shit crazy with seemingly no real contemporary parallel. Some have attempted to equate it to the 1964 contest that saw LBJ defeat John Birch Society favorite Barry Goldwater by a wide margin, but this researcher does not believe the '64 contest featured anywhere near the same level of insanity and is highly unlikely to produce a similar outcome.

Like Goldwater in the '64 contest, Republican nominee Donald J.Trump has attempted to depict himself as an outsider pitted against the absolute epitome of Establishment corruption. While this may well be a far description of Democrat challenger Hillary Clinton, Trump is no more an outsider than Goldwater and both of our contemporaries candidates appear to be even more widely feared than Goldwater after the infamous "Daisy Ad." And surely there has never been a more thoroughly despised pair of candidates for the US Presidency than Trump and Clinton.

But what does it all mean? This question is not something than can be accurately answered at this point and indeed it will probably take years to fully understand the intrigues playing out behind the surface of this peculiar election. But I am prepared to offer a few observations that the reader may find of interest.

The Alt. Media and Conspiracy Theories

One of the most striking aspects of this election cycle has been the mainstreaming of conspiracy theories and the alt media in general. While Goldwater of course received ample support from the Birchers during the '64 election, Alex Jones and his ilk hold far more sway over the general public in 2016 than his Bircher predecessors could have scarcely imagined in 1964. Thus, while Goldwater attempted to keep the Birchers at arm's length, Donald J. Trump has unabashedly embraced Jones and his supporters. Indeed, on December 2, 2015 (the day of the San Bernardino shooting) Trump even appeared on Jones's online show where the mutual admiration was undeniable. The New Yorker notes:
"... Jones’s guest on his show the morning of the shooting had been, as chance would have it, Donald Trump. Jones had praised Trump, claiming that ninety per cent of his listeners were Trump supporters, and Trump had returned the favor, saying, 'Your reputation is amazing. I will not let you down.' "
Alex Jones
Since then Jones has become one of Trump's most dedicated attack dogs in the media (even as his behavior has grown more erratic). Consider this dust-up that unfolded between Jones and the Young Turks that occurred during the 2016 Democratic Convention.

But Trump's embrace of Jones was only a warm up for his decision to place Stephen Bannon, the chairman of the alt. right haven Breitbart, in charge of his campaign. This move effectively signaled that Trump was all in with the "alt. media." Mother Jones reports:
"Last week, when Donald Trump tapped the chairman of Breitbart Media to lead his campaign, he wasn't simply turning to a trusted ally and veteran propagandist. By bringing on Stephen Bannon, Trump was signaling a wholehearted embrace of the 'alt-right,' a once-motley assemblage of anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, ethno-nationalistic provocateurs who have coalesced behind Trump and curried the GOP nominee's favor on social media. In short, Trump has embraced the core readership of Breitbart News.
" 'We're the platform for the alt-right,' Bannon told me proudly when I interviewed him at the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July. Though disavowed by every other major conservative news outlet, the alt-right has been Bannon's target audience ever since he took over Breitbart News from its late founder, Andrew Breitbart, four years ago. Under Bannon's leadership, the site has plunged into the fever swamps of conservatism, cheering white nationalist groups as an 'eclectic mix of renegades,' accusing President Barack Obama of importing 'more hating Muslims,' and waging an incessant war against the purveyors of 'political correctness.' "
Stephen Bannon
While much has been over Trump's embrace of conspiracy theories and the alt media, Hillary Clinton has also tentatively linked herself with fringe topics. But rather than denouncing one world governments, it is the UFO question that Clinton's campaign has addressed.

The Clintons are of course no strangers to the UFO question. In point of fact, it appears to have a major topic of discussion during Bill's presidency. The Washington Post notes:
"During the 1990s, there was an effort by Laurance Rockefeller (of the Rockefeller Rockefellers) to encourage the United States government to release any classified information it had about extraterrestrials, alien spacecraft and UFOs. The effort, referred to as the Rockefeller Initiative by UFO truthers, included meetings between Rockefeller and senior Clinton administration staff. In August of 1995, the Clintons stayed at Rockefeller's ranch in Wyoming, and Hillary was photographed with him while holding a book titled, 'Are We Alone? Philosophical Implications of the Discovery of Extraterrestrial Life.' (A large number of documents pertaining to Rockefeller's advocacy on this issue were released under the Freedom of Information Act several years ago.)
"The subject was not an uncommon one for the White House at the time. That Christmas, Bill Clinton gave a speech in Belfast, in which he described letters he'd gotten from schoolchildren. He thanked a 13-year-old named Ryan for his letter and did his best to answer Ryan's question. 'No,' Clinton said, 'as far as I know, an alien spacecraft did not crash in Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947. And Ryan, if the United States Air Force did recover alien bodies, they didn't tell me about it, either, and I want to know.' "
Laurance Rockefeller, one of the principal sugar daddies of Ufology
The man widely cited as the source of the Clintons' interest in the UFO question is John Podesta, Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff from 1997 until the inauguration of George W. Bush. Podesta's advocacy for UFO disclosure would continue after the Clintons had left the White House. The Huffington Post reports:
"Podesta, who was Bill Clinton’s White House chief of staff, for years has called on the U.S. government to declassify UFO files. In a 2002 speech at the National Press Club in Washington, he said, 'I think it’s time to open the books on questions that have remained in the dark on the question of government investigations of UFOs. 
" 'It’s time to find out what the truth really is that’s out there,' Podesta said. 'We ought to do it because it’s right. We ought to do it because the American people, quite frankly, can handle the truth. And we ought to do it because it’s the law.'
"After spending a year as President Barack Obama’s senior adviser, Podesta tweeted on Feb. 13, 2015, that his biggest regret was 'not securing the disclosure of the UFO files.' "
Podesta is currently serving as Hillary's campaign chairman and has continued to vigorously pursue disclosure. Again from the Huffington Post:
 " 'I’ve talked to Hillary about that,' Podesta told KLAS-TV Politics NOW co-host Steve Sebelius during a campaign stop in Las Vegas. 'There are still classified files that could be declassified.'
"He continued: 'I think I’ve convinced her that we need an effort to kind of go look at that and declassify as much as we can, so that people have their legitimate questions answered. More attention and more discussion about unexplained aerial phenomena can happen without people — who are in public life, who are serious about this — being ridiculed.' 
"Podesta made it clear that 'the UFO question has been discussed' with Clinton, KLAS reporter George Knapp reveals in the above video (which includes statements from this reporter). The station broadcast the interview on Tuesday.
"Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, made headlines in January when she told the Conway Daily Sun newspaper in New Hampshire that she would 'get to the bottom of' the mystery behind unexplained aerial objects."
John Podesta
Podesta is not the only one who has been pimping disclosure of late. Tom DeLonge, former frontman of the god-awful pop-punk outfit Blink-182, has recently launched a new disclosure project that it is both ambitious and bizarre in equal measures. Consider:
"Tom DeLonge, former lead vocalist for Blink-182, recently came forward to publicly announce that he is receiving covert support from senior officials in the U.S. military industrial complex to reveal the truth about UFOs to the world’s youth. DeLonge says that he has assembled a team of ten advisors who have leadership positions in various U.S. military services, corporations and government bodies, who are giving him information about the 'deep black world of highly compartmentalized advanced technology projects.
"During his musical career with Blink-182 (1992 – 2015) and Angels & Airwaves, DeLonge has produced hit albums whose total sales number nearly 30 million. His Twitter page, which currently features a Nazi UFO, has over 650,000 followers.  It is DeLonge’s broad appeal to the Millennial generation that allowed him to successfully pitch his transmedia proposal for cooperation with leaders of 'deep black' projects related to UFOs and antigravity technologies.
"On March 27, DeLonge appeared on Coast to Coast Radio where he first publicly disclosed his involvement in the initiative. This was followed by the April 5 release of Sekret Machines, a fiction based on fact book co-authored with A.J. Hartley. A non-fiction book describing the technologies and historical events is scheduled to be released soon. In all, DeLonge plans to release three fiction and three non-fiction books which will reveal all in his 'full disclosure' initiative.
"In his radio interview and book, De Longe described how the extraordinary cooperation between U.S. military, corporate and government officials, and himself began in early 2015. This opportunity emerged by chance after DeLonge was approached and agreed to speak at a corporate event honoring the head of a major aerospace company, where he made it a condition that he could privately talk with this industry leader for five minutes afterwards, which was agreed upon. 
"DeLonge made a pitch for the corporate official to help in an initiative to disclose to the world’s youth the truth about classified UFO technology projects. Citing the readily available version of the history of UFOs, DeLonge said that many conspiracy websites had unfairly demonized the U.S. military industrial complex. In his view, the pioneering 'secret machines' being secretly developed were ground breaking, and those involved in developing antigravity and other advanced technologies were unsung American heroes. Their stories and contributions, according to DeLonge, needed to be told, so as to restore public confidence in government after 'full disclosure'."

It should of course always give one pause when an alleged whistle blower cites one of his motivations behind the revelations as being to recast elements of the U.S. military industrial complex as "unsung American heroes." But this depiction would likely have a certain appeal to Hillary's backers, as we shall see.

And make no mistake about it, the Clinton campaign has subtly aligned itself with DeLonge's project via Podesta. Exopolitics further notes:
"DeLonge has staked his professional reputation and career in coming forward to reveal his participation in the officially backed UFO disclosure initiative. So far, he has said he can’t name the officials, even though it has emerged that John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager was interviewed for a follow-up video, which will be released as part of his UFO disclosure initiative.
"Podesta has held very senior positions with the Democratic Party, including Chief of Staff for the Clinton White House. Podesta is on the record with multiple attempts made during the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations to promote UFO disclosure.
"However, Podesta is notoriously out of reach to most UFO researchers who have repeatedly tried to interview him over the years, aside from a select few who have the necessary gravitas meriting his cooperation. Now DeLonge has been added to that select list, making plausible his key claim of having received official blessing for UFO 'full disclosure'. 
"It is therefore significant that at the same time that DeLonge has come forward with his claims, Hillary Clinton has publicly stated that she will look seriously into the UFO issue, and that in doing so she is fulfilling a pledge made to Podesta. 
"Clinton and Podesta’s efforts in promoting UFO disclosure go back to the first Clinton administration (1993-2001), suggesting that DeLonge’s efforts, if successful, will make Clinton and Podesta heroes in the eyes of the youth. That will certainly help her Presidential campaign, which, to date, has not inspired the youth vote."
Tom DeLonge
Obviously, this has not come to pass. Trump's full on embrace of conspiracy theories and the alternative media has made it all but impossible for liberals to be associated with such things, as the mainstream media has relentlessly attacked Trump on this front for months now. Hillary Clinton and Podesta's musings on the UFO question have gone silent since the spring of 2016 and I do not expect to hear much more about it until after the elections. But nonetheless, the tentative overtures to the Coast to Coast AM crowd are there.

Thus, the 2016 election is witnessing not only an unprecedented influence of conspiracy theories and the alt media, but also battle lines drawn between two of the primary sources for such things, namely Alex Jones' Infowars and Coast to Coast AM. Would you be surprised to learn, dear reader, that both of these storied institutions also both have extensive ties to the US intelligence community?

It would seem then that these different factions of the alt media have been drawn into the broader conflict within the deep state that is playing out in this bizarre election cycle.


That there are cabals of elites working behind the scenes is hardly a revelation, but the focus on this aspect by the alt media has been rather one-sided and even that side appears to have been misunderstood. With that in mind, let us begin by focusing on the alleged outsider candidate, Donald J. Trump. 

Trump appears to have had longstanding ties to the old American Security Council (ASC) network. The ASC was the premier lobby group for the military-industrial complex throughout the Cold War, receiving ample backing from many of the nation's largest defense contractors. But this was only part of the story, the one that was revealed to the public. The other function of the ASC was to serve as a vast private intelligence network and as such was heavily staffed by "former" FBI, CIA and military intelligence officers. The ASC crops up in numerous deep state outrages, including the Kennedy assassination, state-sanctioned drug trafficking, blacklisting and so on. Much more information on the ASC can be found here.

A key aid of Trump's in the early years was the infamous New York attorney Roy Cohn. Cohn had cut his teeth working as part of Joe McCarthy's Communist witch-hunts in the 1950s. By the 1980s he was a board member of the Western Goals Foundation. The Western Goals Foundation was a private intelligence operation closely linked to both the ASC and the John Birch Society. Another board member of the Western Goals Foundation at the time was General John Singlaub, a former CIA and military intelligence officer. And there was also Admiral Thomas Moorer, another ASC darling whom appears to have played a key role in the intrigues surrounding Watergate (noted before here). 

Roy Cohn has also been linked to the infamous Republican lobbyist Craig Spence, whose addition to crack and call boys became a major national scandal for Bush I in 1989. But before that he had been one of the most well-connected men in Washington:
"Indeed, throughout the 1980s, Spence collected the rich, powerful and influential with the dexterity of a coin collector amassing rare coins. His parties and seminars boasted journalists Eric Sevareid, Ted Koppel, and William Safire. High-powered politicians--including Senators John Glenn of Ohio and Frank Murkowski of Alaska--attended. Former Ambassadors Robert Neumann, Elliot Richardson and James Lilly also came. John Mitchell, the disgraced former Attorney General under Richard Nixon, was a close friend of Spence and a frequent party fixture. Spence's soirees also attracted high-ranking military and intelligence officers. In fact, CIA Director William Casey seemed to be particularly fond of Spence and his high-flying get-togethers. Spence once threw a glitzy birthday bash for his friend and right-wing closet homosexual Roy Cohn, and his friend William Casey was one of the guests of honor..."
(The Franklin Scandal, Nick Bryant, pg. 296) 
Roy Cohn
Cohn has also been widely linked to the Franklin scandal, though these allegations are far more debatable. It seems highly likely, however, the Cohn had intelligence ties. And this raises the prospect that Trump was recruited by the old ASC nexus years ago.

This alliance is further demonstrated by Trump's association with Joseph Schmitz, a rather notorious foreign policy adviser. Democracy Now notes:
"When asked this week about how he would approach foreign policy, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told MSNBC, 'I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain, and I’ve said a lot of things.' He also announced his lineup of little-known foreign policy advisers, including Joseph Schmitz, a former Pentagon inspector general with ties to the Center for Security Policy, who was forced out of his job amid accusations that he protected high-level officials in the George W. Bush administration who were suspected of wrongdoing. We get reaction from The Intercept’s Jeremy Scahill, who notes Schmitz is a radical Christian supremacist with an 'insane worldview' who was a former executive with Blackwater."
Joseph Schmitz
In the same Democracy Now article Jeremy Scahill, author of the groundbreaking Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, would note another curious tie of Schmitz's:
"Yeah, Joseph Schmitz was the Pentagon inspector general under Donald Rumsfeld, and he didn’t really inspect much of anything. He was a big cheerleader, actually, for many of the most kind of excessive policies of Rumsfeld and the Pentagon in the post-9/11 world. A
nd when Schmitz left the DOD, he became an executive at Blackwater. And Joseph Schmitz is a—you know, is a radical Christian supremacist. He is a member of the Sovereign Order of the Knights of Malta and really is sort of a—you know, has a neo-crusader worldview. And I’m choosing those words carefully. I mean, that’s—he is definitely a radical Christian supremacist."
The Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) --more commonly known as the Knights of Malta --are one of the most powerful and secretive elite organizations out there. For years the Maltese knights have been the major force behind Le Cercle, a vast international private intelligence network that is even more exclusive and powerful than the Bilderberger Group and other longtime bugaboos of the conspiratorial right. Much more information on this network, which has been extensively linked to the intelligence agencies of multiple nations, child sex trafficking, Operation Gladio, numerous assassinations and religious extremism of various stripes --can be found here.

Le Cercle had longstanding ties to the American Security Council throughout its heyday (noted before here) and the were ample Maltese knights that dominated both organizations.

the Maltese cross widely used by the Knights of Malta
In addition to Schmitz, Trump also received early support from conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly, who recently shed her mortal coil. Trump was of course present at her funeral to eulogize. It has been widely reported that Schlafly was a Dame of Malta (the female auxiliary of SMOM), but this researcher has been unable to reliably confirm this allegation. It can not be disputed, however, that there were ample Dames of Malta present at Schlafly's funeral --the same one attended by Trump.

Schlaffy's funeral
In addition to SMOM, Trump is also receiving ample support from another far right cabal. Consider:
"The two political operatives chosen earlier this month to lead Donald Trump’s presidential campaign after two former managers departed have been members of the secretive Council for National Policy (CNP), Hatewatch has learned.
"Longtime Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway and Stephen Bannon, executive chairman of the far-right Breitbart News operation, were named on Aug. 17 as, respectively, the Trump campaign’s manager and its chief executive officer. The appointment of Bannon was by far the more controversial choice, given his role at a 'news' outlet known for bashing immigrants, Muslims, women and others.
 "The CNP is an intensely secretive and shadowy group of what The New York Times once described as 'the most powerful conservatives in the country.' It is so tight-lipped that it tells people not to admit their membership or even name the group. Revealing when or where the group meets, or what it discusses, is also forbidden. The organization, which can only be joined by invitation and at a cost of thousands of dollars, strives mightily to keep its membership rolls secret."
The CNP was established in the late 1970s and featured extensive overlap with the ASC and Le Cercle. Much more information on these ties can be found here

Hillary and the Eastern Establishment Civil War?

That Hillary has similar ties to "Liberal Establishment" luminaries such as the Council on Foreign Relations has been endless trumpeted by the conspiratorial right for years now. These claims are thus hardly worth discussing. What is interesting for our purposes here is the seeming divide emerging among different factions of Hillary supporters. On the one hand we have the neo-cons, whom Hillary has grown especially close to over the past decade or so.

It would appear that they now have bold plans for Clinton's presidency. Off Guardian reports:
"Here we go again. Earlier this year, some were surprised to see Project For The New American Century (PNAC) co-founder and longtime DC fixture Robert Kagan endorse former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for president.
"They shouldn’t have been. As is now clear from a policy paper [PDF] published last month, the neoconservatives are going all-in on Hillary Clinton being the best vessel for American power in the years ahead.
"The paper, titled “Expanding American Power,” was published by the Center for a New American Security, a Democratic Party-friendly think tank co-founded and led by former Undersecretary of Defense Michèle Flournoy. Flournoy served in the Obama Administration under Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and is widely considered to be the frontrunner for the next secretary of defense, should Hillary Clinton become president.
 "The introduction to Expanding American Power is written by the aforementioned Robert Kagan and former Clinton Administration State Department official James Rubin. The paper itself was prepared in consultation with various defense and national security intellectuals over the course of six dinners. Among the officials includes those who signed on to PNAC letters calling for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, such as Elliot Abrams, Robert Zoellick, Craig Kennedy, Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross, and Flournoy herself, who signed on to a PNAC letter in 2005 calling for more ground troops in Iraq.
"The substance of the document is about what one would expect from an iteration of PNAC. The paper cites a highly revisionist history of post-World War II American policymaking, complete with a celebration of America’s selfless motives for every action. Left out is any mention of overthrowing democratically elected and popular governments for US business, or the subsequent blowback for such actions in Latin America, the Middle East, and elsewhere.
"For the neocons and liberal interventionists at the Center for a New American Security, the United States has always acted for the benefit of all."

In addition to the PNAC supporters, Hillary appears to have enlisted Mr. Neocon himself, Paul Wolfowitz.  All of this raises the distinct possibility that a Hillary presidency would be like Bush II on steroids as the target this time around appears to be Russia rather than another over matched Islamic nation.

Not everyone is on board with escalating tensions with Russia, however. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser and a close alley of the Rockefeller faction (he was a co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller) recently make some striking comments concerning a new global realignment for The American Interest. Z-big wrote:
"A constructive U.S. policy must be patiently guided by a long-range vision. It must seek outcomes that promote the gradual realization in Russia (probably post-Putin) that its only place as an influential world power is ultimately within Europe. China’s increasing role in the Middle East should reflect the reciprocal American and Chinese realization that a growing U.S.-PRC partnership in coping with the Middle Eastern crisis is an historically significant test of their ability to shape and enhance together wider global stability.
 "The alternative to a constructive vision, and especially the quest for a one-sided militarily and ideologically imposed outcome, can only result in prolonged and self-destructive futility. For America, that could entail enduring conflict, fatigue, and conceivably even a demoralizing withdrawal to its pre-20th century isolationism. For Russia, it could mean major defeat, increasing the likelihood of subordination in some fashion to Chinese predominance. For China, it could portend war not only with the United States but also, perhaps separately, with either Japan or India or with both. And, in any case, a prolonged phase of sustained ethnic, quasi-religious wars pursued through the Middle East with self-righteous fanaticism would generate escalating bloodshed within and outside the region, and growing cruelty everywhere.
"The fact is that there has never been a truly 'dominant' global power until the emergence of America on the world scene. Imperial Great Britain came close to becoming one, but World War I and later World War II not only bankrupted it but also prompted the emergence of rival regional powers. The decisive new global reality was the appearance on the world scene of America as simultaneously the richest and militarily the most powerful player. During the latter part of the 20th century no other power even came close.
"That era is now ending. While no state is likely in the near future to match America’s economic-financial superiority, new weapons systems could suddenly endow some countries with the means to commit suicide in a joint tit-for-tat embrace with the United States, or even to prevail. Without going into speculative detail, the sudden acquisition by some state of the capacity to render America militarily inferior would spell the end of America’s global role. The result would most probably be global chaos. And that is why it behooves the United States to fashion a policy in which at least one of the two potentially threatening states becomes a partner in the quest for regional and then wider global stability, and thus in containing the least predictable but potentially the most likely rival to overreach. Currently, the more likely to overreach is Russia, but in the longer run it could be China."
Zbigniew Brzezinski
In other words, Z-big appears to be abandoning of American unipolarism (of which he was a longstanding backer of) in favor of a return to Britain's "Balance of Power" politics that served the Empire so well for nearly a century. China and Russia are now to become formal partners, with the US alternatively backing either up to the point that they do not become a serious threat to US interests. It is especially imperative that Russia be brought into the European camp. This would ensure that the Trans-Atlantic economy would remain the dominate sector of business in the twenty-first century. If Russia and China are to forge a closer relationship, however, the center of the international economic order will shift to Eurasia and leave the United States outside looking in.

Clearly, this seems to indicate a conflict of interest between different factions of Hillary backers, with the neocons still clinging to unipolarism while the Rockefellers appear to have resolved themselves to a kind of neo-detente with a strong British Empire influence. It is difficult to say how compatible these approaches are and in fact these discrepancies may be driving the rather bizarre approach the Democrats are taking to this election.

A Conspiracy Theory

Trump's erratic behavior has led some Republicans and other American conservatives to question whether he's deliberately tanking the election to get Hillary elected. But to this researcher's mind, it is the behavior of the Democrats that seems especially suspect. 

The decision to nominate Hillary in the first place is rather baffling. In many ways she is every bit as polarizing a figure as Trump, a fact that was laid bare during his first bid for the presidency. And contrary to the narrative of the mainstream media, it is not just inbred conservatives that despise Hillary, but increasingly the progressive wing of the Democratic Party

The conventional narrative is that the DNC had no choice but to nominate Hillary, so as to hold off "outsider" Bernie Sanders from getting the nomination. But given the way Bernie has prostituted himself after losing the nomination, it seems rather implausible that the Democratic power brokers would have found a Bernie Sanders nomination especially offensive. In point of fact, it would have all but ensured the DNC would emerge victorious as few dispute that Sanders would crush Trump in a general election.

Bernie Sanders
Instead, they opted to go with one of the most corrupt politicians of her era, a woman's whose closet is overflowing with skeletons and whom the base is lukewarm at best concerning. Adding to this quagmire are Clinton's inexplicable "deplorables" comments, which may rally the right in much the same way Mitt Romney's "47 percent" gaffe did to the left during the 2012 election cycle.   

And her recent near-fainting spell in New York during a 9/11 memorial have made her health a serious concern to the general public after months of dark rumblings among the alt right. While this researcher is highly dubious of these allegations, that way the Clinton campaign have handled these charges is curious at best and likely has given credence to some of the more incredible speculations being bantered about in the alternative media.

Trump's erratic behavior, outrageous comments and inability to come anywhere near Clinton in fundraising should have all but ensured that Hillary will defeat him by a wide margin. But with less than two months until the election, it is Clinton who appears to be on the ropes while controversies continue to unfold around her. The word "unelectable" now seems more apt for the former First Lady than the current reality TV star.

Are the elites backing Clinton truly this blind or was the agenda a Trump presidency all along? The question deserves serious consideration as Hillary is possibly the only challenger Trump has a real chance of beating in a general election. Indeed, Bernie Sanders would have likely crushed Trump in a general election while there have long been indications that Hillary would have an uphill struggle. Various Establishments would have us believe that a Trump presidency will be the end of the world and yet they nominate the one candidate who would have a tremendous struggle to defeat him.

Something here does not add up. Are elements of either the neocons or the Rockefeller clique collaborating with the Le Cerlce/CNP Fascist International to bring Trump to power? And if so, why? To de-escalate tensions with Russia? To preserve American military power? Or to have more of the clinched fist and less of the velvet glove in US domestic policy?

All of these reasons are compelling in one way or another, but something tells me there is something else that is not yet evident. Certainly a Trump presidency would be a game changer on any number of levels, but especially in terms of how elections will be waged in the future. This rise of the alt media in the 2016 contest and the results it has achieved on a very limited budget are not going unnoticed by major power brokers. Astroturfing may become the new norm rather than the media blitzkriegs of years past. Certainly it does not seem to have been especially effective for Hillary.

And with that I shall wrap things up for now. Until next time dear readers.

UPDATE 9/13/16: Enter Woolsey

Today Trump's campaign added yet another Deep State troll, this one with an even more impressive background than any other insider yet to sign up with The Donald. The Hill reports:
"Bill Clinton’s former CIA chief, James Woolsey, will act as an adviser to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s campaign. 
"Woolsey, who served as director of the CIA from 1993 to 1995 and describes himself as a life-long Democrat, praised Trump’s commitment to ending defense budget cuts from sequestration.
"He said he can’t support Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton because of the controversy surrounding her use of a private email server as secretary of State."
R. James Woolsey
Any former CIA director still has ample mojo within the Deep State but Woolsey is one of the most well-connected insiders out there. The great ISGP notes:
"One neocon who absolutely has to be discussed in relation to Coast to Coast AM is former CIA director James Woolsey. Listed as number 2 in ISGP's Superclass Index, with confirmed involvement in close to 90 (!) NGOs, immediately behind the more liberal-oriented Henry Kissinger, he has been prominently involved in dozens of neocon groups, the Center for Security Policy and the Intelligence Summit being just two of them. Besides these neocon connections, Woolsey has had an early and deep involvement in the defense industry, sat on numerous low-profile Pentagon committees, has been permanently present on the Executive Panel of the Chief of Naval Operations since 1980, and interacted with Kissinger, Brzezinski, Edmond de Rothschild and other leading members of the liberal establishment at the CSIS think tank since the 1980s. He is vastly more connected than any other leading neoconservative. And he is a peculiar one at that also."
Thus Woolsey has extensive ties to both the neocons as well as the Rockefeller faction as evidenced by his association with Kissinger and Brzezinski. Another Rockefeller tie appears to come from the UFO question as well. In Hidden Truth: Forbidden Knowledge famed Ufologist Steven M. Greer recounts a meeting he had with Woolsey in 1993 that was spurred by Laurance Rockefeller, a long time patron of Greer's. As noted above, Laurance Rockefeller had also pushed for many UFO initiatives during the Clinton presidency as well.

But besides Woolsey's ties to the neocons and the Rockefellers, he also has clear links to the old ASC-Le Cercle network as well. When the ASC began to peter out after the end of the Cold War, many of its more notorious members flocked to the closely related and even more prestigious Center for Security Policy. ISGP reports:
"The real post-Cold War continuation of the American Security Council has actually really been the strongly neoconservative Center for Security Policy. It was founded in 1989 by Frank Gaffney, one of the neocons who had worked for Senator Henry Jackson, a beneficiary of the ASC and close friend of the CIA. Gaffney was part of the absolute core of the conservative establishment, as can be gleaned from a speech he held to the Conservative Leadership Conference on November 9, 1990: flanking him were the Pentagon strategist Fritz Kraemer, whose son played a major role in the ASC, and General Graham, a co-chairman of the ASC. Typical subjects were discussed, as the Contras, SDI and SALT...
"Looking to the board of the Center for Security Policy roughly ten to fifteen years after its founding, it is possible to find many individuals who also sat on the board of the American Security Council. They include Paula Dobriansky, whose father was at the ASC; Edwin Feulner, also a key player in the Heritage Foundation and Le Cercle; Jeane Kirkpatrick, Sven Kraemer, General Bernard Schriever, Edward Teller and William Van Cleave. The board and membership of the Center for Security is also much more prestigious, and has many more CIA and military men on it than today's American Security Council Foundation. [37] Already before George W. Bush was elected president in 1999, all the major neocons he selected to serve in his administration were officers or members of the Center for Security Policy..."
Woolsey was an honorary co-chairman of the CSP by the early '00s. In this context, Woolsey's support of Trump is not especially surprising as Trump had already been citing the CSP in some of his more controversial claims. BBC reports:
"Raising the bar once again for US political controversy, Donald Trump called on Monday for 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States'.
"The Republican presidential frontrunner claimed that research by the respected Pew organisation showed a 'great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population' - but he did not refer to any specific study to support that claim, and we can't find one that does. 
"Mr Trump did cite a specific a study by the Center for Security Policy - 'very highly respected people, who I know, actually' - which he said showed that 25% of Muslims in the US believed violence against America was justified 'as part of the global jihad'."

Trump's ties to the CSP indicate that much of his campaign has been overseen by powerful forces within the American Deep State, R. James Woolsey being one of the first of these figures to openly support Trump.

As noted above, there seems to be a divide among Hillary backers --specifically between the neocons and the Rockefeller faction. Woolsey has links to both, which further fuels my belief that one of these two factions has thrown in with the CNP-CSP-Le Cercle network to put Trump in office. This appears to be a part of a full on nationalist revival being fueled by this network. In recent years Le Cercle has increasingly drifted towards Euroscepticism and may have played a role in Brexit as well.

Stranger times indeed dear reader.