BEGIN WITH HEADLINES, LINKS AND A FEW EXCERPTS…
Leaked Emails Show That Trump Was A Tool Used By The Hillary Campaign From Day One
If you were wondering if a Trump candidacy was any worry to Clinton, then wonder no more.
The hacked emails released by Wikileaks shows an interesting tidbit about how the Democrats looked at the idea of a Trump candidacy, and you can safely see that of all the candidates Hillary actively wanted to face, Trump was on the list.
Calling them the “pied piper” candidates, team Hillary describes Trump, Cruz, and Carson as nominees that could – if handled properly – make the extreme the mainstream….
…”We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them seriously,” it said in the email.
...Trump was a tool for Hillary’s campaign all along… In short, the Republicans have been played…
[NOTE: DT KNEW about this as he was part of the plan from the beginning…keep reading.]
Is Donald Trump Running a False Flag Campaign to Help Hillary Clinton?
[Trump’s] ties to the Clintons, his past pronouncements which are in such blatant contradiction to his current fulminations, and the cries of joy from the Clintonian gallery and the media (or do I repeat myself) all point to a single conclusion: the Trump campaign is a Democratic wrecking operation aimed straight at the GOP’s base.
Donald Trump is a false-flag candidate. It’s all an act, one that benefits his good friend Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party that, until recently, counted the reality show star among its adherents. Indeed, Trump’s pronouncements—the open racism, the demagogic appeals, the faux-populist rhetoric—sound like something out of a Democratic political consultant’s imagination, a caricature of conservatism as performed by a master actor.
The idea that Trump is running an elaborate interference campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton may sound absurd. But there is enough truth to Raimondo’s theory—it makes just enough sense—that it’s already begun to infiltrate, and inform the mainstream voices of, the mainstream Republican Party. On July 23, for example, the popular conservative writer Allen Ginzburg distilled Raimondo’s argument into a vexing thought experiment:
If Trump had an agreement with Hillary to ensure her win by embarrassing R’s & then running as an indie, what would he be doing differently?
…There are three main lines of argument supporting the assertion that Donald Trump is running a false flag campaign:
- Trump cannot possibly be considered either a Republican or a conservative, once you account for his apparent political beliefs (many of which are remarkably liberal) and concrete policy proposals (or lack thereof).
- Trump has close ties to both Hillary and Bill Clinton, and has in fact donated to her and other Democrats’ campaigns in the past.
- Trump’s apparent intent to run on an independent ticket—should he lose the Republican nomination—indicates he cares more about splitting the Republican vote (essentially ensuring the election of a Democratic president) than he does about actually electing Republicans. He also lacks the wherewithal and/or long-term funding to mount a legitimate presidential campaign were he to become the actual Republican nominee.
...On August 5, The Washington Post reported that Clinton spoke with Trump in May of this year about Trump’s political ambitions. Here’s the how the paper characterized the exchange (bolding ours):
Former president Bill Clinton had a private telephone conversation in late spring with Donald Trump at the same time that the billionaire investor and reality-television star was nearing a decision to run for the White House … Four Trump allies and one Clinton associate familiar with the exchange said that Clinton encouraged Trump’s efforts to play a larger role in the Republican Party and offered his own views of the political landscape.
What if Trump’s goal is really a Clinton victory?
Donald Trump is torpedoing his presidential campaign, Andrew Malcolm writes
Even when Hillary Clinton gives him openings, he talks about himself instead
And that, in November, will give another Clinton the presidency
…What seems unlikely to change, however, is Trump’s unpredictable, usually counterproductive behavior. So the growing question is: What if Trump’s idea of winning is electing Hillary Clinton? And devastating the GOP in the process?
We suggested 13 months ago that Trump was a Clinton stalking horse: Whether intentional or not, Trump’s candidacy will focus attention on him and elect the Democrat whom he’s long supported. Nothing has happened since to change our mind, save that another Clinton White House could be an unintended consequence of an enormous Trump ego that expands faster than the universe…
…Trump and Hillary Clinton are longtime friends and supporters of liberal causes. He’s contributed generously to her campaigns and family foundation. Trump conferred with her husband just before announcing his candidacy. And with Hillary Clinton’s FBI exoneration last week, we’ve seen the power of a Bill Clinton chat, at least with Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
More significant, though, is Trump’s behavior. Yes, it seems unpredictable. And that’s compelling as Sunday night entertainment. He has mocked the handicapped, POWs and a woman’s menstrual cycle, among other crude displays, with no apparent damage.
But Americans aren’t clicking a remote control for a TV pitchman. They mark a secret ballot for the world’s most powerful person. Showmanship and stage presence help, as Ronald Reagan proved. But will they choose as controller of the nation’s nuclear launch codes someone whose trademark phrase is “You’re fired!”?
Since locking up the requisite delegates to hijack the GOP, Trump has done everything possible to torpedo his campaign as a serious candidate – and help Clinton’s stumbling candidacy.
His fundraising is tardy and halfhearted. He’s being battered by millions of dollars’ worth in unanswered negative ads like the ones that bloodied Mitt Romney beyond repair in 2012…
…Trump’s done little to unify a fractured GOP riven with suspicions over his conservative credentials and with fears for its own political survival inside his Nov. 8 ballot blast zone. After a Friday meeting House Republicans said sound bites distorted how personable Trump was. So why not show the good side if he really wants to win?…
…now that Clinton has serial setbacks, Trump routinely steps in to divert attention back to himself. Whether it’s his uncontrollable spotlight addiction or not, the result is to protect the Democrat he allegedly wants to defeat…
…For instance, FBI Director James Comey gave Clinton a gift by declining to prosecute her for the email scandal. But the first 10 minutes of Comey’s on-camera remarks read like a federal indictment for perjury and national security violations.
Trump could also point out that Clinton’s emails were under subpoena when she destroyed them. A goldmine for a genuine opponent.
But no. Instead, Trump dredged up his old remarks about Saddam Hussein being a great terrorist-killer. And reignited attention to his Star of David gaffe by distributing a similar image on a Disney ad. Seriously?…
…another billionaire businessman named Ross Perot spent lavishly to challenge the Republican establishment and orthodoxy in a 1992 third-party bid that captured 19 percent of the popular vote.
The results of that populist effort served to split the GOP and — oh, look! — elect a Democrat named Clinton. Is it a coincidence that it’s happening again?…
Is Trump Deliberately Throwing The Election To Clinton?
In August 2015, I wrote a column for The Hill titled “Is Trump a Clinton plant?” At the time, I wrote that I was not seriously suggesting that Donald Trump is running as a Hillary Clinton plant for the purpose of bringing a second Clinton to the White House, but noted some facts.
For many years Trump, has heaped high praise on both Bill and Hillary Clinton throughout their tenures at every major office they have held since the 1992 campaign. I also noted that Trump has offered praise and campaign donations that continued for many years to prominent liberals and Democratic leaders such as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.).
A year after my tongue-in-cheek column asking whether Trump is running as a plant to elect Hillary Clinton, I will now raise the possibility, much more seriously, that one way to explain Trump’s repeatedly self-destructive behavior could be that deep down Trump does not want to win the election and is clumsily throwing the game.
Why might Trump, in theory, want to lose the election?
Perhaps Trump originally decided to run to get some publicity for his business, or satisfy his ego, but never expected he had a real chance to win. Perhaps it suddenly dawned on Trump that he did have some chance to win, and was petrified at the thought of filing the detailed financial disclosures that presidents are required by law to file, for the same reason he is hiding his tax returns and which, I predict, he will never willfully release. Perhaps Trump suddenly realized he did not really want his finger on the nuclear button. Perhaps he just concluded that he did want to do the work that the presidency requires.
Think about it. If a candidate genuinely wants to become president, would he repeatedly insult the giant wave of Hispanic voters? Would he insult veterans who were heroic prisoners of war by saying that he “like[s] people who weren’t captured”? Would he repeatedly insult the 2008 GOP nominee and great war hero, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.)?
If a candidate actually wants to become president, would he and his advisers plan a strategy that includes praising the mass-murdering communist dictator of North Korea? Which voters did Trump believe he would win with that one? If a candidate truly wants to become president, would he and his foreign policy advisors plan a strategy that repeatedly praises Vladimir Putin, the strongman dictator of Russia, and say he is not sure he would defend Europe nations from a Russian invasion? Does Trump believe there is a pro-Putin vote in America?
Or, as Trump often says, perhaps there is something happening here. Some people might say he does these things because he wants to lose the election and is throwing the game to Clinton.
I have been to many rodeos in national politics, and literally every single major player in politics that I know expected Trump to “pivot” after the conventions to appear to take more responsible positions and say fewer irresponsible and self-destructive things.
Republicans believed Trump would pivot with hope; Democrats believed he would pivot with dread.
Nobody I know believed that Trump would pivot in the opposite direction, becoming even more irresponsible and self-destructive after the conventions.
Did Trump and his campaign managers develop a strategy to attack a Gold Star mother and father? Could any presidential candidate who wants to be elected seem to publicly support Russian espionage against America, and take positions so extreme that a former acting CIA director calls him “an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation”? Would any candidate who actually wants to win make comments about the Second Amendment and a political opponent so that the Secret Service is not happy, the same kind of comments that helped Harry Reid pulverize his Republican opponent into dust in his last reelection campaign?
I predict that Trump will never release his tax returns because there is something in those returns he intensely fears being revealed. Shall we speculate about what could be so devastating in his undisclosed tax returns? Is it not possible, possibly even likely, that he might dread the thought, for similar reasons, of filing his financial disclosure papers if he is elected president?
There has been some speculation in GOP circles about whether Trump might drop out of the campaign. This is possible, but I doubt it. The more likely scenario, if Trump does not want to be elected president, is that he will keep saying and doing things that any freshman political science student in college would know will doom his candidacy, and that after he loses a potential landslide to Hillary Clinton, will shout from the rooftops: “I was robbed!”
I am not saying that I believe Donald Trump is trying to throw the election to Hillary Clinton, but I am saying this is a prospect that is now worth seriously considering if the endless series of Trump blunders and gaffes continues.
As we concluded a year ago when the topic of Trump’s false-flag presidential run came up…
Trump has been playing the media with his supposed presidential ambitions for years, but it was clear then that it was just The Donald doing what he does best – promoting himself. So why now has he suddenly turned “serious”? I give that word scare quotes because 1) Serious is not a word one associates with a clown, and 2) It’s not at all clear that, for all his megalomania, he really thinks he can win the White House. He may be a lunatic but he’s far from stupid.
And so the question jumps out at us: Why now?
…His ties to the Clintons, his past pronouncements which are in such blatant contradiction to his current fulminations, and the cries of joy from the Clintonian gallery and the media (or do I repeat myself) all point to a single conclusion: the Trump campaign is a Democratic wrecking operation aimed straight at the GOP’s base.
Donald Trump is a false-flag candidate. It’s all an act, one that benefits his good friend Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party that, until recently, counted the reality show star among its adherents. Indeed, Trump’s pronouncements – the open racism, the demagogic appeals, the faux-populist rhetoric – sound like something out of a Democratic political consultant’s imagination, a caricature of conservatism as performed by a master actor.
Now I realize this is a “conspiracy theory,” and, as we all know, there are no conspiracies in politics. In that noble profession, everything is completely aboveboard and on the level – right?
Like hell it is.
If this becomes the case then all is lost America as The Deep State’s control is more complete than anyone could have imagined.
Dear GOP: A Vote For Trump IS A FULL Endorsement Of Him
There’s an idea among the voting public that you can “hold your nose” while you vote for a candidate. This makes the action of choosing a certain candidate, however horrible they may be, seemingly tolerable. After all, you didn’t like that you chose them…as you went ahead and did it anyway.
Never has such an argument seemed so absurd as this year during an election cycle which narrowed our many choices down to two deplorables. God help us.
Whether you like it or not, voting for someone is a full endorsement of them. There is no other way around it. Choosing a candidate by way of voting means you are selecting them, their expertise (or not), their vision, their policies, their character (or lack thereof), and yes, even their temperament. Voting isn’t a half-hearted measure. It is a full approval of the person whose name you’ve selected. You can’t only kind of vote for someone. You’re either in, or you’re out…
...It’s quite difficult to maintain that you’re distancing yourself from a candidate you clearly dislike when, come election day, you jump in to the voting booth to raise your hand and select them. But as we’ve seen this cycle, the pull of that (R) does powerful things to the sheep in the electorate. Unsurprisingly, endorsement-by-voting applies to Republicans who are so fed up with Trump that they choose Hillary. Well, congratulations. You’ve just fully endorsed her and the package that comes along with that.
So please, GOP. Those of you who don’t like Trump can halt the attempt to water down your upcoming vote for him on November 8. It is a full endorsement of him. You can hold your nose all you want and feign inner turmoil, but you’ve no way out of it. We can smell the stench from here.
There was much more I could have used, but some (so-called) Conservatives have short attention spans and low tolerance for anything that, well, is the truth and uses facts and evidence from reliable and verifiable source. To these (so-called) Conservatives truth, facts and evidence are like a garlic-soaked, silver cross to a vampire.