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.

 

A prediction for the coming insanity

page: 1
91
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+69 more 
posted on May, 15 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   
First of all, let me make my allegiances clear. I am no fan of the current administration, absolutly opposed to Hillary Clinton's existence outside a Federal Correctional Institute, and no great fan of Donald Trump. My current, past, and expected future political affiliation is 'Independant'.

This post is based on my observations of the events which have been occurring during the last year or so, combined with (I believe) a deep understanding of the goals and ambitions of those within the halls of political power and my past experiences with human behavior in general. It is NOT based on any agenda or personal desire; my only agenda, which I have cemented over the last couple of years, is to be able to watch the coming social apocalypse from a nice safe recliner without undue concern for myself and my family.

The personalities involved, Clinton, Trump, and Obama, are not by any means unknown to even the most casual political observer. Clinton has a raging thirst for power, and an entitlement mentality that echoes the mentality of rulers throughout recorded history. She believes she is superior to those around her, and that anyone who dares question that superiority is obviously a troublemaker who should be purged from society. She is above the law, as she is the one who should be making the law instead of following it in order to maintain a stable existence for those pitiful creatures beneath her.

Trump is a businessman, somewhat successful, but more due to his brashness and competitive drive than to some assumed genius in marketing. He is also blessed/cursed with an entitlement mentality, but to a lesser extent than the other two individuals involved. His sense of entitlement is driven not by assumptions of birthright, but by success as measured by financial status. He does not think politically, but rather pragmatically. He also is used to getting his way, primarily due to his ability to negotiate (typically from a position of strength).

Obama is, and has been during his national political career, a rebel in search of a cause. His goal at this time is twofold: to implement as much of his agenda as possible in the time he has left in office, and to protect the 'advances' he has implemented from his successors. He understands that time is the true cement of society. Policies left in place long enough become socially-accepted norms, resistant to overturn, while policies not in place for long enough are fragile toward political vagrancies. Like Clinton, he has a birthright entitlement mentality, but he also has a cultural agenda.

It is now obvious that Clinton violated legal requirements concerning her email server, and that she has gone to great extents to cover up some of her activities concerning Bengazzi. What those activities are, I am not sure. Yet, she seems to be immune from prosecution for those legal violations. Trump has operated a campaign that would have resulted in anyone else being driven out of the country - from hasty statements to outright media baiting, to body language that is confrontational - yet his popularity steadily increases. I have seen this phenomenon many times in my life, and such momentum is typically a true juggernaught... unstoppable in all but the very long term.

Clinton's purpose is to allow Obama's policies to cement safely into society, just as George H. W. Bush's purpose was to allow Reagan's policies to cement. Obama got the difficult policies in place, so all she has to do is win and relax while she enjoys the power trip. Obviously, an indictment would make that impossible, so she is being protected. Trump was not supposed to be a part of the equation; as a major contributor (to both parties), he was allowed to enter the race for nomination to placate him. Everyone in the RNC expected him to flop early and crawl back into his 'proper place' as a funding source. I believe Bush was slated to be the nominee.

That didn't happen.

The media is adept at tripping up politicians; they have been doing it for a very long time. This time, every attempt to trip up Trump has resulted in a nasty fall for the tripper instead. Now Trump is the presumptive nominee and the Clinton campaign is running scared. Ignore the polls that show her ahead; she is facing an unstoppable force and knows it. Witness as an example the Trump rally protests: protestors are acting criminal to disrupt Trump, while carrying Bernie signs. Now, Bernie isn't dumb. He knows well better than to organize a violent movement overtly. The only other one who stands to benefit from disrupting Trump while discrediting Sanders is... drum roll please... Clinton.

That's a lot of trouble and risk to go to if she isn't worried about her chances.

Her dismissal responses to Trump are another indication of concern. So why is she so worried? Let's remember the FBI investigation. It's been hanging over her head during this whole process, and people in power generally don'the protect those who let them down. Clinton has much more to lose than a political position should she lose.

My prediction is this: Clinton is safe for now (assuming Sanders doesn't pull a rabbit out of his hat at the last minute, which would surprise me). But during the actual election cycle, when the Trump juggernaught overtakes her numbers, she will at some point be seen as a failure, unable to win and stop Trump from becoming President, and will be indicted on felony charges for her actions as Secretary of State. This will put Trump over the top for a Presidential victory. But Trump is not a politician and is not a puppet, so Obama will be forced to dispute the election as 'unfair' since Trump will not have had a viable rival. Obama recently established a Presidential Transition Team by Executive Order with no real reason behind it specified... could it be a hedge in case Clinton is thrown to the dogs?

I have heard accusations that Presidents would refuse to leave since Ford, and have learned to dismiss them. But this time around, there is more grassroots anger, more governmental intrusion, more social engineering with more forceful methods and more obvious governmental corruption than at any time in my memory.

I remember a few years ago in Western History class... we were studying the French Revolution, and every day I would have to look up at least once and ask, "Are we talking about Revolutionary France, or Modern America?"

Come to think of it, the professor seemed to understand my confusion...

TheRedneck
(back with a BS in Electrical Engineering)




posted on May, 15 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Woah.

that's some pretty out of the box thinking. I like it! Interesting theory/prediction indeed!


ETA: What do you reckon the effect of such an unprecedented presidential transition would bring to the 300 million population of the US?
edit on 2016-05-15T10:40:03-05:00201605bam3105am0331 by combatmaster because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: combatmaster

Thank you. Let's just hope I'm wrong and it fades into the massive pile of other failed predictions. That could be the final straw to riots in the streets if it were to happen.

TheRedneck

ETA: Like I said, potentially a period of unprecedented protests in America. The French Revolution was over a similar series of actions: policies which increased the misery of citizens to protect the upper class, culminating in obvious dismissal of populous expections.

Scary stuff. The revolutionaries in France were executed as well as the Royalty, as new revolutionaries gained popularity. No one was safe.

edit on 5/15/2016 by TheRedneck because: Answer edited question



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
If you think the lines were long for the Republican primaries, just wait until November 8th. Trump voters had better start lining up in October! Maybe Donald will make Internet voting available, after he becomes President.


+3 more 
posted on May, 15 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

An articulate and pragmatic assessment....based on the information that has reached us.

I have another concern and it isn't some move by Obama. I believe he flat out wouldn't get away with it and it would be destructive to his legacy. No, my concern is the power elite. When they see-and they probably do-that their usual mechanisms aren't working this election cycle, just how desperate are they??

If real desperate, would they use outside the political mechanism to derail this movement? An economic catastrophe? A new or vastly expanded military confrontation? Some blindside that diverts/deflects attention from this election and allows Obama to 'justifiably' implement some draconian executive order?

While I'm excited by the potential of change, my anxiety is also a bit higher due to this possibility....


+20 more 
posted on May, 15 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

That's the purpose of the recent Executive Order. Obama will not refuse to leave; the Task Force he put in place will demand he stay until things can be 'fixed.' Expect Obama to overtly complain about having to stay.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Great topic for ATS.

There would be a revolution though.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

What if instead of pulling back the protections on Clinton and merely send her to prison, they have plans to end her instead. She may decide to cooperate against her masters if she actually is faced with prison. Wouldn't they want to shut her up?? Or do you think they would just give her favorable prison terms in exchange for silence??



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

My prediction is much simpler.

Hillary will have Bill ""Vince Foster'ed" and she'll get into the White House on the sympathy and poor widow vote.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Wow! I agree with your analysis of the players and the over all political landscape. Like you, I'm an independent voter and not behind any of the candidates being served up. Hillary is a Machiavelian schemer, Trump is a bombastic narcissist -- if either of them wins, we all lose! Neither of them has an respect for the people they would serve nor the Constitution and both of them terrify me as potential Commander in Chief!

Most any conversation I've had with friends, family, and random strangers has contained some reference to how insane this presidential election cycle is. The strange place we find ourselves in as citizens and voters is that we are flooded with disinformation, and downright manipulation of the facts by a bought out media. To be informed, one has to search and scrounge out multiple sources of information and sift through it for facts. However it seems that even when more mainstream news sources post something substantial, it's ignored by the general population. I can only hope that your overall prediction of an extended Obama administration does not come to pass. I can only hope that there is yet some other unforeseen hand to be played in this rotten game of poker.

Surprisingly enough, Huffington Post has had several items about H. Clinton (such a humanitarian) and her dirty hands on regime change in Honduras:
www.huffingtonpost.com...
www.huffingtonpost.com...

These alone should condemn her to her target constituents! Logic is in short supply!

And Trump's supporters who love him for being such a self made winner!?

www.washingtonpost.com...
www.politifact.com...



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: AmericanRealist
She may decide to cooperate against her masters if she actually is faced with prison. Wouldn't they want to shut her up??

The Clintons are TPTB. They've got all the names ... and I'm sure they're written down. So, yeah ... she's never going to speak.

Can't just kill her though. That'd scare the Hell out of Bill (and Chelsea). Then you'd have to kill them too.

If what I said above is right, then Hillary will never go to court. It's already been taken care of (legally) behind closed doors. She's got a pardon in her hand already ... and there's absolutely zero requirement for her to show that to us ... just a judge.


+11 more 
posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Supposing your theory happens OP, there will be a Civil War in this country unlike History has ever seen.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

That's dark. Is that the picture you have?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

My question to that: cooperate against her masters with who? Indictment is already in the works. All that must be done for her to be indicted is to stop actively protecting her. If she is indicted, and especially if she is convicted, both her and Bill are marginalized permanently. She can sing like a canary in a choir, but no one will be listening.

It has been my observation that the ultimate solution is rarely used unless there is no alternative. Better to keep her alive for possible later use. And there's always a stronger threat hanging over her head.

That sounds extremely creepy...

TheRedneck


+2 more 
posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Obama recently established a Presidential Transition Team by Executive Order with no real reason behind it specified...


Most outgoing (and incoming) presidents establishes Presidential Transition Teams during the... transition period after the election and before the inauguration. The specific reason behind them is to aid in the transition... Recent presidents have established teams using an EO.

George W. Bush's Presidential Transition Executive Order

Bill Clinton's Presidential Transition Executive Order


edit on 5/15/2016 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
scary!



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Interesting theory and I tend to agree with most of it.

BTW - congrats on the degree in engineering. I got mine in 2014 and it has treated me well.


+7 more 
posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

I honestly don't know.

Civil War is a huge step. War and riots are two different critters. I think the worst case would be uncontrollable riots mainly in the metropolitan areas, spreading outward into suburbs and then close rural areas. It would probably be a battle for resources. Our foreign policy (I think I once explained this in a thread) is very unstable right now and is endangering our ability to fund the entitlement programs many depend on to live. We have financial enemies abroad, and enough civil unrest could cause our enemies to move to take over the International Reserve Currency, which would literally destroy the USA overnight.

The typical city in the USA tends to have supplies sufficient for three or four days. That's all. If the trucks and trains quit moving, most metro areas would have no food left after a few days. Transportation is already operating on a shoestring budget due to recent fuel price fluctuations. At some point in an economic collapse, transportation would effectively stop.

When people are angry, they tend to want to lash out violently. When people are hungry, they will do whatever is necessary to eat. When already angry people are hungry... it's just best to be somewhere else.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
We are seeing the classic Unstoppable force (trump) vs the Immovable Object (clinton) play out before our eyes, maybe we will finally have an answer to that old question.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

BH! It's great to see you again!

Correct me if I am wrong on this. As I am understanding the order, it differs in that it officializes the Transition Team so it is not an Obama team or a Clinton team or a Trump team... instead it is a beaurocracy in itself now to support the incoming/outgoing President, but not directly under the control of the incoming/outgoing President.

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics



 
91
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join