Coup d'état in the U.S.A.? Part III American History from 1960

A friend, commenting on who really runs the world, wrote me: "Maybe some day we will find out who is actually running the show."

Well, that's a great question. Who can answer it? I'll give a rough try, FWIW. I cannot help but be sarcastic, however, as world history since 1960 is absurd in the extreme. 

1. Satan and his peeps run the show in the overall scheme of things, of course, even now in the Vatican (people have known this for decades, even Paul VI famously asserted it about the "smoke of Satan..."; he wrote that in 1972; it was formally published in 2018). 
2. But I'm guessing the people on earth pulling the strings are the big bankers, and that would include BlackRock and Vanguard, who basically own most things. 
3. There's some old banking families that still are incredibly powerful, and George Soros (and now his son) probably fits in to that crowd one way or another. 
4. Whether the World Economic Forum is a joke or a serious Fascist-style takeover threat, remains to be seen.

Whatever else is true, the American people are no more sovereign in America than Charles is Sovereign in England. The American people don't want what they're getting. Yet they still get it good and hard. 

• This is a bitter irony because the idea underlying the existence of the U.S.A. is that its people are sovereign; i.e. not a king, nor an aristocracy, nor a plutocracy, nor a bureaucracy, and certainly not God (the U.S. Constitution pointedly does not mention God at all and excludes organized religion from any governmental role), but the people in general. The people are sovereign. This was the idea John Locke had and Jefferson, Madison, et al., promoted. Today, what we seem to have instead is an "Intelligence Service" bureaucracy government with a Potemkin Village "face" made up of the worst people imaginable, a "Kakistocracy"!

Take the following example. The American people proved what they wanted to do about the Vietnam War by voting in Nixon in 1968 and after he showed he was clearly getting us out of that war, they landslided him back in in 1972. His popular vote margin stood at +23.2%. The popular vote margin was 47,168,710 to McGovern's 29,173,222. Nixon carried every state except Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. (The District of Columbia is a joke; it's a Democrat Party prison-insane asylum: it should be dissolved or completely "demilitarized" with no "self-government" or vote for those who choose to reside there, and certainly no federal courts of any kind except the Supreme Court – all other lower federal court jurisdictions are created by Congress.)

Same again with Reagan in 1984. Popular vote for Reagan was 54,455,075 votes versus 37,577,185 for Walter Mondale. Reagan carried every state except Mondale's native Minnesota (and D.C. again, of course). In every other presidential election, the Republicans ran their establishment ("GOPe") candidates (Bob Dole, John McCain, the two Bushes) and either lost (first two) or narrowly won (second two). Clearly, the sovereign people rejected those clowns.

But the huge populist wins didn't matter. A Deep State coup d'état sent Nixon packing, and his vice president before him, so we had our first "installed" president, Gerald Ford (whom today we'd call a classic do-nothing GOPe "RINO" who lost his election bid in 1976). They tried to assassinate Reagan in 1981 only two months after he took the oath of office, and in his second term, they left him a total "lame duck" with Iran-Contra and a host of other garbage. As for Nixon, he himself did only a fraction of what Lyndon Johnson did, only Johnson was for more brutal and far-ranging in crime than Nixon. Nixon famously said, when asked about Kennedy's assassination, "I never wanted the office so badly that I'd kill for it." (Paraphrase, but pretty close.)

And that brings up Kennedy's assassination. The CIA hated him (see: Bay of Pigs), so did the Mafia. Nobody hated JFK, though, as LBJ did. JFK was a womanizer and drug addict (originally because of his hurt spine); the only admirable thing about Jack Kennedy next to his Navy service was his anti-Communist stance. LBJ, on the other hand, was a womanizer, thief, liar, personally more corrupt in government, far more corrupt, than the entire Kennedy family. But push came to shove. Jack was about to bunk out of Vietnam for a number of reasons – the British P.M. told him to get out, he didn't want to escalate American involvement – and esp after the South Vietnam's president, Ngô Đình Diệm, was brutally assassinated (a CIA-backed op) on November 2, 1963. A mere 20 days after Ngô Đình Diệm's death, Kennedy himself was killed. It was also about a week before Kennedy was going to accuse Lyndon Johnson of corruption. Gee, what a coincidence! Johnson was the most corrupt and downright evil man ever to be president, and dumber than Bill and Hillary combined; he was definitely in the pocket of the "military-industrial complex". (But you'd never hear that if you only read mainstream news.)

So there you have it. After Eisenhower's warning to the American people about the "Military-Industrial Complex" (now "Deep State") in this farewell address on January 17, 1961, we got an Asian war no one wanted or could explain, especially galling in light of what we ought to have learned in Korea a decade earlier. (Today we're friends with Communist Vietnam and ignore their atrocious human rights/religion violations.) Add to that any number of wars in the Mideast, one of which we left with our tail between our legs and tens of millions of dollars of military equipment behind, and now a war in Europe we seem hell bent on turning nuclear, no less – not to mention two coup d'états, the election of the two Bushes (ham-handed types much of the time, though the older was a naval aviator in WWII and the younger one once owned a baseball team, so there!), the senior Bush, George H.W. Bush, being the son of Nazi financier and WASP scion Prescott Bush, a banker, mind you, who became U.S. senator; replaced in 1992 by Bubba Clinton and his harpy lesbian wife, deadbeats who never worked a day in their lives, then a pot-head homosexual poseur whose father is unknown, and his "man wife" (c'mon; ever see Michelle's "package"?), also deadbeats who never worked a day in their lives – we don't even know what grades they got in college except reading Michelle's dissertation makes one realize 'she-he' has about a fifth-grade education level. And now we got a demented non compos mentis puppet who, back when he was actually alive, was also a deadbeat poseur who never worked a day in his life, and even plagiarized his academic and other writings, molested his own daughter, caresses and "handles" little girls on camera, and who shelters his crackhead porn-whore addicted son, both father and son clearly bought and paid for by the Chinese. The latter, to round this off nicely by returning to where we started, now owning the Vatican. (Smoke of Satan, indeed.)

And I haven't even mentioned abortion, yet. 

I mean, whoever is calling the shots for the U.S.A. must think we're all collective imbeciles for allowing this farcical farrago fatuity to continue five seconds! (The same, the exact same, could be said about the world's bishops in regards to Bergoglio.) Perhaps we are collective imbeciles, or perhaps we just have to be pushed far enough to finally snap and push back. I have no doubt "they" the Powers-that-Be are waiting for that very thing. We'll have to see. 

How much longer can this go on? Financially, these cretins though their mismanagement and endless wars have bankrupted the country. This can't go on forever. And the educational system is a catastrophe. Read this from Ann Barnhardt. Certainly, "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop." This laconic comment by Herb Stein, a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, may well describe our near-future. 

One way, or the other.

 

          AnP