It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Someone please explain to me, (without vitriol) why Donald Trump is not the biggest psyop in history

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: schadenfreude

Honestly I'd like someone to explain to me why Donald Trump is not the biggest psyop in history -- without asking me to trust what comes out of his mouth during a campaign to gather votes.

What about his history says he can be trusted?

Nothing.

I don't have any reason to trust anything coming from the mouth of someone who identifies as a republican or a democrat. The parties pull the strings. And they protect their bread and butter government jobs TOGETHER. Everything about the government's record says this is true.

Words are empty.




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: schadenfreude

It's beyond obvious OP. And it shocks me - SHOCKS ME - that some really smart people on a conspiracy site can't see it. TBH, it's #ing scary at this point.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I m not sure his opponents are any better or worse. They all same just a different package.

And we the people again play the game...
edit on 16-3-2016 by saadad because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: schadenfreude

I cant honestly say its staged unless Trump was not in on the plan. I see him more as an opportunist in this than a conspirator. We saw with obama that anyone can get elected with a few choice words at the right time. "Yes We Can' was a great catch phrase and, had it actually materialized in real change from business as usual, I would be on board with it. What he promised and what we got are two very different things. It was no action that got obama elected, it was words and words alone. So Trump, being the opportunist he is, watched it happen and saw the end result: millions of people on both sides of the coin disillusioned and angry. There is no easier band wagon to jump on than one headin' for an ass whoopin'. Even if all you want to do is watch...



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: saadad

Anonymous has never been anything but a psy-ops.

When they first reared their dumb heads and took money from Stratfor and gave it to charity -- only to have those charities have to give it all back -- I knew they were just another domestic, government-organized, 'terror' group intended to serve some hacking purpose for our corrupt intelligence agencies.

There are no modern Robin Hoods. And why would anyone risk prison to give money to charity that would certainly have to be returned?

But no one is ever caught? BS.

Dumb. Anonymous is a crock.

Much like the Weatherman who managed to bomb the Pentagon -- destroy intelligence -- and then go 'free as birds and guilty as heII.' That doesn't happen without the help of the federal government.
edit on 16-3-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Why can't he be a conspirator?

He and Jesse Ventura destroyed the Reform Party's chances, in 2000, and helped assure GWB's narrow, minuscule victory.

Jesse Ventura? ATS member and host of the disinfo-shillirific show 'Conspiracy Theory?'



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:36 PM
link   
is trump the one..... as no matter what you do to trump he just gets stronger ???.... so like i said is he the one IE the Antichrist lol i had to put that in



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: tempestking

The image he is marketing is one of an outsider and a threat. So when the media and parties treat him that way, they are just supporting his marketing campaign.

Trump is 100% supported by the parties and the media.

Being a media darling and beloved by the GOP is definitely NOT advantageous to Trump.

Let's see the media and GOP do that for the next seven months and see if he gets stronger.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Why can't he be a conspirator?

He and Jesse Ventura destroyed the Reform Party's chances, in 2000, and helped assure GWB's narrow, minuscule victory.

Jesse Ventura? ATS member and host of the disinfo-shillirific show 'Conspiracy Theory?'



I'm not saying he cant be. He just seems like more of an opportunist in this than a conspirator.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Ha! Well I am sure there is a lot of opportunity in being a co-conspirator.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

If he was working with both parties, then I could see it. But I cant see Trump working with either party, let alone both. Just my gut feeling, but to me he saw two sides destroying each other and/or themselves and stepped in with a third option, and for the first time, it might be viable.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I can't find McConell's quote online but i swear I heard ppl talking about it on the radio. (I drive alot)

Its everywhere, however about "Establishment GOP" either voting for Hillary, or not at all.

Regarding your JFK sentiment, I'll go a step further & say it was a soft coup.

The local coroner was shoved aside & they lost JFK'S brain? Really?

Although the rest of your post was surely well thought out, honestly I don't believe any of it matters, because I don't believe our vote matters. I've become that dis-illusioned with the govt. The other day on Drudge some official squaked. "We pick the nominee, not you."

Yeah, no kidding.

So the only thing that has really changed, imo, is the lies are becoming more obvious, and the masks are coming off.

Truth be told? I don't think Trump has a chance. You guys may think its about Trump vs. Hillary.

Wrong.

It's about Enslavement vs. Hope. And Trump=rescue, and you can't have any.

And when we don't rise up, en masse, to kick these sobs out, they will take that as an agreement to be RULED over, not governed & then the real NWO will kick in high gear.

I know that may make me sound nutty as a fruit-cake, but I don't care bc I firmly believe all of it.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: MotherMayEye

If he was working with both parties, then I could see it. But I cant see Trump working with either party, let alone both. Just my gut feeling, but to me he saw two sides destroying each other and/or themselves and stepped in with a third option, and for the first time, it might be viable.


I guess I don't get your gut. Five firsthand witnesses approach the Washington Post to say Bill Clinton discussed Trump's run beforehand with him and your gut says there's nothing to see here?

Donald Trump talked politics with Bill Clinton weeks before launching 2016 bid



edit on 16-3-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: schadenfreude

Your intuition is probably on the mark.


I feel the same way. Its either the people have been drinking something or some other deep operation is going on regarding Trump.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Another thought...

One idea I have is that Trump’s candidacy is to besmirch certain issues the power elite want codified forever.

Trade, and bringing jobs back and immigration after Trump may be buried with his candidacy when it goes down.

It works like this:

Trump will crash and burn soon. Then all the ideas of getting jobs back through tariffs and stopping the trade deals will never be picked up by another candidate because it’s associated with “crazy” Trump.

I think that may be Trump’s mission



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: schadenfreude


The other day on Drudge some official squaked. "We pick the nominee, not you."


People seem amazed by this. The further back into our history you go, the less the average party member participated in the nomination process. If you think that proves that our votes don't matter, then you must also accept that our votes never mattered.

From another of my posts from today:


1789 & 1792 - the Electoral College did the nominating
1796 to 1828 - members of Congress caucused and nominated their respective candidates
1832 - first national convention where party leadership from around the country picked a candidate. Basically starting at this point, you see district caucuses overseen by party bosses who would then convene at state conventions from which delegates would be sent to the national conventions.

Then came the Progressive Era pushback against party leadership's strict control over nominations.

1899 - first state primary was held in Minnesota.
1901 - Minnesota institutes first mandatory statewide primary system. Florida organizes first presidential election primary 1910 - Oregon established first primary system where delegates to national conventions are required to support primary winner
1912 - There were 14 primaries (including DC's) but most were non-binding and simply used to gauge the voters' preferences/
1920 - There were 20 primaries, the highest number for several decades.
1936 to 1968 - Only 12 states held primaries.

The 1968 election was a watershed moment. Hubert Humphrey captured the Democratic nomination without being on the ballot in a single state primary (he focused all his attention on non primary delegates).

These days we have a patchwork of primaries and caucuses (caucuses of course being a holdover from the bad old days, updated to function more like primaries) and this has become the new norm.

edit on 2016-3-16 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
Another thought...

One idea I have is that Trump’s candidacy is to besmirch certain issues the power elite want codified forever.

Trade, and bringing jobs back and immigration after Trump may be buried with his candidacy when it goes down.

It works like this:

Trump will crash and burn soon. Then all the ideas of getting jobs back through tariffs and stopping the trade deals will never be picked up by another candidate because it’s associated with “crazy” Trump.

I think that may be Trump’s mission


Trump is most definitely a provocateur. The U.S. will reject him and with him -- all of his ideas.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: MotherMayEye

If he was working with both parties, then I could see it. But I cant see Trump working with either party, let alone both. Just my gut feeling, but to me he saw two sides destroying each other and/or themselves and stepped in with a third option, and for the first time, it might be viable.


I guess I don't get your gut. Five firsthand witnesses approach the Washington Post to say Bill Clinton discussed Trump's run beforehand with him and your gut says there's nothing to see here?

Donald Trump talked politics with Bill Clinton weeks before launching 2016 bid


Looking at the article it seems like a lot of waffling and differing accounts. Who called whom first, and so on. Without knowing the details of the conversation its hard to say it was conspiratorial in nature. It could have been, as I said earlier. But I just don't feel it. I would be more prone to think the clintons were getting a feel for Trump and what his game plan might be. No sense waiting to the last minute to start preparing...



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

I would never give Trump my support after reading that. Neither the Clintons nor Trump disputed or clarified anything concerning this article.

They laugh at gullible voters who put their trust in them. I refuse to be one of them.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: schadenfreude
a reply to: xuenchen

I don't think anyone is fooled by Hillary. I've even read ppl say if Trump is nominated, they'll vote for Hillary just so this country will burn down & reset.

Dead serious.


This country will survive a Hillary presidency, but I'm not sure that it'll survive a Trump presidency. Really!


How does the country survive 'debt free' tuition' ?

By the by that is the SAME thing as Sanders 'free' college.

This country can't stand any more socialist delusions.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join