This is the only viable conclusion I can make based on the following:
-
Trump is not a savior and is part of the establishment (Israel support, Warp Speed, Epstein ties, tycoon and Hollywood background etc.) He has powerful interests behind him and he's just a front to them. The guy's a grifter and an actor (like Zelensky)
-
Powerful entities don't want Trump since the 2016 election and when all failed, they tried to kill him Kennedy style (whoever shot at him, the bullet was real and would have killed him had he not moved his head, this is obvious)
My theory is that there is infight within the global elites and there are two opposing factions. As for their motives, I'd speculate they are geopolitical in nature.
The Trump faction is partial to the neocon idea of US hegemony which is obviously slipping away because of the obvious subversion the country is going through for the past few decades in all spheres - economical, financial, cultural, societal and infrastructural. This faction sees the rising threat from nationalist states like China and Russia and understands it will lose its position if the US doesn't revert back to the Kissinger era realpolitik. This is the good old imperialist way of thinking that people like Cecil Rhodes had. It also matches what Oswald Spengler predicted for the 21c - resource wars between nation states, Caesarism and despotism (endless wars as in 1984).
The other faction is the classic NWO corporate socialist technocrats who seek to depop, deindustrialize (net zero circular austerity economy) and to abolish nation states, subjugating all people under a centralized international beast system modeled after the UN and the EU. Basically Huxley's Brave New World.
Both factions agree on the means used but the ends are essentially different.
The counter to that is that there are no factions and everything is staged to steer us in the NWO scenario but I see many holes in that theory.
Have you ever seen the guerrilla in the room experiment?
If you havent done this video, dont read anything about it first, just watch the video and do what the video asks you to do, which is count how many times the balls is thrown by the people wearing the white shirts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmdoK_ZfY
This the exact same thing they are doing with the left, and the right. The deep state and the normal state. Its a circus, meant to maximise your attention so your not paying attention to what is happening in the background.
Once you understand that, youll understand there isnt two governments, a "shadow" government.
Its all owned and controlled by the super wealthy elite.
With this mindset, the news becomes more akin to reality tv, than anything that actually resembles ethical reporting. Makes alot more sense anyway.
Like that black lady they killed after cornering her in the kitchen. The elite are to smart to let us know the truth, because then everyone would actually understand, that there isnt anything left to lose.
:shrugs:
Yes I know the experiment and I also think distraction plays a huge role, and while they're all part of the elites and are essentially against the people, I don't think they are entirely on the same page. When it comes to power you always get infight (like in the cartel and mafia world). Because they lack any sense of morality, they roll by the laws of nature and might makes right.
No, they are not, or rather they have no problem letting the truth out - there are dozens of their books and white papers spelling out their plans. The thing is they know only a small minority will ever care to read them and be able to connect the dots.
I always ask the blackpillers: If there's nothing left to lose then why do they bother keeping up the charade? If they're fully in control they could roll out their NWO dictatorship anytime they wish.
Role implies "taking a part", which distracts one from being a partial (perception) within whole (perceivable). Taking a part implies consenting to the suggestion of another partial, while ignoring that only nature gives (inception) and takes (death) partials (life).
Dozen implies "collecting units", while book implies "to bind". If one collects units (taking partials); then one binds self (ones choice) to another (chosen one).
One cannot focus on a book without confining self in-between a cover. That cover implies ones ignorance of perceivable (inspiration) for suggested (information).
What if one cannot keep up (life) while losing (inception towards death)? What if letting go resists the temptation to keep, and what if resistance could be grown to sustain self within loss?
What if full (whole) doesn't roll together (con-trol), but directs (inception towards death) apart (life)? What if the opposite of full isn't empty, but ones opportunity to grow self within a full offer? How could one be empty if all moves through one, hence fully fueling one?
French élite - "selection, choice"...https://www.etymonline.com/word/elite#etymonline_v_5740
Does not each one wield a free will of choice to select? Could there be a higher value than evaluation?
What does it imply to put theism (the) before ones selecting choice (elite)?
Does one "stand under action" or do reactions rise (life) during fall (inception towards death) of action?