THIS Is Why The Deep State Turned Against Trump (akin to a toddler with a hammer going through the living room hitting stuff.-Christian Parenti best analysis of Trump+my views)

I was planning to post a video on fascism by Michael Parenti, but given the recent Trump interview, I thought I’d share my thoughts and provide some context. I’ll start with an older video I posted previously, which, in my opinion, offers the best analysis of Trump. After that, I’ll share my comments on the interview with Joe Rogan.

3:16

“Well, clearly, the establishment hates Trump, and the question to be answered is why. After all, he gave the rich enormous tax breaks and deregulation. What prompted me to write this article was a conversation with a number of very left-leaning and intelligent friends of mine who couldn’t even begin to have a casual conversation about topics like FBI infiltration of groups involved in the January 6 protests and the Hunter Biden laptop story. For many, any emerging story was dismissed with questions about his motives, like, “Why would he do this when he gave the rich everything they wanted?”

Indeed, domestically, Trump provided massive tax cuts, appointed people like Betsy DeVos, and in many ways, his domestic policy aligned with the Koch brothers’ wish list. But looking at his foreign policy, it becomes clear he was beyond the control of the establishment and the national security apparatus. Paradoxically, he was moving against the interests of the American ruling class, not as an anti-imperialist or out of any animosity toward the American Empire, but more from short-term, transactional motivations. He fundamentally did not—and does not—understand how the American global empire operates.

In Trump’s view, American power is like a security business, poorly run because the clients weren’t paying enough.”

5:40

“Trump wanted to withdraw a third of the troops from Germany and regularly discussed pulling them all out, which would effectively undo NATO. As I explained in the piece, these troops are not just foot soldiers. While there are infantry and cavalry units stationed there, they are not merely guarding Germany and Europe. They are at the center of a highly sophisticated international system. There are 150 atomic weapons, significant air wings, and various assets that project power well beyond Germany, all housed in the 40 military installations the U.S. uses in Germany.

The qualitative damage that Trump inflicted on NATO cannot be captured simply by saying he wanted to bring home a third of the troops. Mark Esper, his second Secretary of Defense, did his best to thwart Trump, as did everyone around him. Esper redeployed most of those troops within the European theater, as he did in South Korea.

Trump targeted the architecture of the American Empire because he didn’t fully understand how it worked. He viewed it primarily as a security business. One of the most telling vignettes in the piece describes a meeting six months into his administration. The Joint Chiefs of Staff had a meeting with him at the Pentagon in a secure room famously known as “the tank.” They presented maps and visual aids to help him understand, attempting to make sense of complex military strategies. However, he remained unimpressed, dismissing them by saying, “So you guys are dopes and babies and losers. You can’t win wars. We’ve spent seven trillion dollars in the Middle East. Where’s the oil?” That was the exact quote. He simply didn’t grasp the intricacies of how everything—from embassies and relationships to grants to universities—relates to military bases and satellites, or how these delicate relationships with allies fit into the larger framework.

When it came to withdrawing troops from South Korea, he insisted on “cost plus 50.” This highlights his perspective. The argument isn’t that Trump was a good guy or a secret leftist; it’s that he posed real threats to the American Empire and inflicted genuine damage. That’s why the establishment hates him so intensely. The U.S. Empire is a system designed not just for projecting and reproducing American power and benefiting American corporations, but also for maintaining the framework of capitalism on a global scale since the end of World War II. Trump was meddling with something fundamentally important to this entire system of global capitalism.”

9:46

“They don’t dislike Trump because of the things he did that helped reproduce the military-industrial complex; they dislike him for the other things he did, which are akin to a toddler with a hammer going through the living room, hitting stuff. It’s totally contradictory and incoherent, much like his personality. His basic logic is driven by a short-term economic interest.

So, no, it was not an across-the-board anti-imperialist administration at all. The fundamental point is that he increased the military budget. I think he believed he was helping to project American power across the globe, but he routinely questioned why we didn’t close all our embassies in Africa. He fundamentally didn’t understand how the system worked, and that’s why they hate Trump. My point is not that he was a good guy.”

12:54

“Yes, well, I’m not saying he was a peacenik. In a lot of these situations, I think you can argue that he didn’t really understand what was going on, which does not excuse him from culpability. That’s just an inaccurate description of who he is. He was surrounded by people who were actively opposing him.

For instance, Gary Cohen twice stole economic-related documents off his desk—one document that was going to scrap a trade agreement with South Korea, and another that would unilaterally eliminate NAFTA, which he later renegotiated. My point is not that we should like Trump’s foreign policy; rather, Trump’s foreign policy was incoherent in ways that threatened the establishment. That’s why I believe the FBI withholds information about the Hunter Biden laptop.

…he was threatening American global hegemony, and he did that because he didn’t really understand it. He couldn’t follow things, and every book about Trump states the same thing—there’s no book that describes him as a great listener or someone who focuses on details. They all say that in the middle of an important conversation, he just drifts off if he sees something on television.

In many of these policies, he would give an order, and then his staff would successfully undermine it. He was frequently unable to track what was actually happening with these policies. He seemed more focused on watching Fox News to see if his announcements were being reflected back to him through Hannity, creating favorable media coverage.”

LOL, that’s literally what was happening. It’s so absurd that it’s funny.

16:27

“The dirty war in Syria also faced criticism, and you highlight in your piece that Trump was sometimes honest—sometimes he told the truth. When the U.S. sends troops to the Middle East, the typical narrative is that we’re there to spread democracy or fight terrorism. Trump didn’t say that. Instead, this is what he said:

“We’ve secured the oil, and therefore a small number of U.S. troops will remain in the area where they have the oil. We’re going to be protecting it, and we’ll be deciding what we’re going to do with it in the future.“”

LOL

17:05

“Yeah, I mean, I think fundamentally, pulling back from all the details, they also had a problem: what do you tell the public? How do you explain this to the children? Are you going to say, “Okay folks, this guy’s nuts and he threatens the American Empire”? The American Empire is a very important thing for reproducing this system that is screwing people all over the world economically. This is how this system of inequality that you all experience is reproduced, and we have to maintain it in the interests of corporate America and the capitalist ruling classes globally. You can’t say that publicly to voters.

So they come up with a digestible narrative for the citizens, whom they treat as children, which is: he’s in with the bad guys. I mean, what else are they going to do? They have to come up with some reason to hate this guy, and they can’t—unlike Trump—they can’t tell the truth. They can’t say this is not a security business; these are public expenses. We tax you, the American citizens, to fund this incredible Empire, and then corporate America gets access to cheap labor and natural resources all over the world. That system is very important to the donor class; therefore, we’re going to maintain it, and you’re going to keep paying for it with your taxes. That’s why you can’t have free healthcare, re-hire education, etc. They can’t say that.

So they come up with a kind of Marvel comic, spy novel story about how he went to the Soviet Union as it was beginning to collapse in the late ’80s to build a hotel, and then the Russians put the zap on him. The more you read about Trump as a person, the harder it is to imagine him serving in that capacity coherently. However, I must say that in researching this article, I developed a certain kind of understanding—not quite a sympathy, but an understanding of the panic of the security establishment.

You can imagine how they could convince themselves that this guy is working for the enemy because, in significant ways, he was really threatening. I mean, the stuff he did around NATO was problematic. He hated NATO; he wanted to get rid of it. He arrived late at a summit, left early, and refused to sign a communique reaffirming the American commitment to a rules-based international order. The Western Empire was run by a guy who sort of said, “You know what? I just assumed burn the whole thing down and leave you guys to your own business,” right? He said that to Angela Merkel: “Don’t say I never gave you anything, Angela.””

21:00

I think on Nord Stream 2, it probably made sense to him. He thought, “Why should they buy oil from Russia when we’ve got this fracking boom? Gas prices have gone down; that’s our market.” His hostility toward Nord Stream 2 is a very important counterpoint to the Russiagate fanatics. Both Nord Stream pipelines are fundamental connections between Europe and Russia. It’s not just about the money; it represents a kind of integration that anyone working for Russia would not threaten.

Of course, they had to ignore his actual Russia policies when they were happening because those policies were escalating tensions with Russia, regardless of any nice things he said about Vladimir Putin. For example, when he had that summit with Putin in Helsinki and said, “I believe Putin when he says he didn’t interfere,” that was one of the most outraged responses ever elicited in U.S. media about Trump. It was seen as a challenge to the holy word of the National Security State, which freaked them out and fueled the Russia hysteria even more.

22:58

“It doesn’t mean that one should like Trump to be honest about the facts. I think the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story by the FBI is very serious. It constitutes the domestic intelligence state putting its thumb on the scale during an election. The left, including the activist anti-imperialist socialist left, has largely ignored this. One reason for this is that they are not addressing the contradiction that Donald Trump supported the reproduction of American capitalism and the interests of the rich, yet he also had these idiosyncratic proclivities that caused him to disrupt the American Empire in random ways.

This situation constitutes the motive for the FBI’s intervention. We definitely need to reject this kind of behavior. If we accept that kind of treatment against someone like Trump, then we can say goodbye to the idea of anyone like Bernie Sanders, or anyone to the left of Bernie Sanders, having a clean and open pathway to political power. We saw what happened in 2020 when they brought out the Russiagate playbook against Bernie during the primary. Right before the Nevada caucuses, Bernie Sanders got “Russiagated” after he spent years catering to the Russiagate narrative. They released fake leaks claiming that Russia was trying to install him and help him win.

This playbook was used against him because it’s all about challenging anyone—whether they are on the left or, as is hard to categorize, someone like Donald Trump on the right—who inconveniences the establishment. They will get smeared and undermined with these fake disinformation campaigns, as we saw with Russiagate and its spin-off, the Hunter Biden laptop story.”

2:46:56

“Trump: It’s a little interesting. I get that question almost as much as any other: Do you think we have aliens flying around, or whatever? What do you think? There’s no reason not to. I mean, there’s no reason not to think that Mars and all these planets don’t have life.”

I love how Joe instantly jumps in to explain that we have proof and actually know what’s on Mars, and that there’s no life there—something even an elementary school kid understands. You can see from the way he talks that he is oblivious. He he sounds like a nice person and kind man but you can hear how incompetent and oblivious he is. I’m not saying he’s a bad person; I’m saying he’s just completely oblivious.

In something I heard recently, someone mentioned that the last truly informed president was the first Bush. Since he was in the CIA, he knew everything. After him, the rest were just figureheads who didn’t fully understand what the CIA does. I think I’d agree with that view. Anyway, Trump seems especially oblivious; while other presidents at least partially understood how the world works, he was not a politician and was completely out of his depth.

1:31:22

“I defeated ISIS with the greatest generals. I had a guy who was so great that I flew to Iraq and met the real generals, not the idiots we usually deal with. We knocked out 100% of the ISIS caliphate. They said it would take five years; I did it in literally a few weeks. We hit them hard, and he said, ‘We’re going to hit them here, we’re going to hit them there, we’re going to hit them everywhere.’ I thought, ‘This guy’s great! I like this guy.’ I was told it would take five years, and I said, ‘How could it take five years? We have brand new fighters, the best planes, the best weapons, the best guns, the best bombs. How could it possibly take that long?’

I left at 3:00 in the morning; nobody knew I was going. I got on Air Force One, and we started flying. When we were about half an hour away from Iraq, where the airport was, they said, ‘Sir, I’m sorry, you’ll have to turn off all your lights.’ I asked, ‘Why?’ They replied, ‘We’re getting close to our landing site.’ I said, ‘You mean we spent $8 trillion over 20 years, and we can’t leave the lights on in a plane? That’s okay; turn the lights off.'”… you got his rambling about the plane just like Parenti said:He couldn’t follow things, and every book about Trump states the same thing—there’s no book that describes him as a great listener or someone who focuses on details. They all say that in the middle of an important conversation, he just drifts off if he sees something on television or rambles about planes and pilots. Later

1:36:20

“So, we go into the room, and they have these guys there. I asked, ‘How long can you do it?’ They replied, ‘We can do it in a couple of weeks, sir.’ I said, ‘Wait a minute. They told me five years. We can do it in—’ I don’t remember the exact number, but it was something like no time at all. I asked, ‘Why haven’t you done it?’ They said, ‘Because the orders came in from Washington, sir, and they would come here and tell us what to do. Don’t you challenge us; we’re not allowed to do that, sir. That’s not the military way. They tell us what to do, and we have to respect them.'”

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry—this is exactly what I was talking about. I’ve been posting and writing that ISIS was created by the CIA and that the U.S. allowed it to exist to siphon oil from Iraq, and he just partially confirmed it. I suggested that the West’s goal was to trade soldiers’ lives for discounted oil, and he essentially confirmed that too.

Do you think the generals on the ground wanted their soldiers to die for cheaper oil? Do you think they wanted it to happen? But since ISIS was a CIA project, they had to go along with it. So, when Trump came in and ordered them to destroy ISIS to stop trading human lives for cheaper oil, they were happy to oblige.

Now, after hearing Trump’s statements, I’m starting to think this whole COVID situation and the onset of “Cold War 2.0” may be a reaction to Trump. It seems like they needed a new enemy to maintain social cohesion. Originally, the ISIS caliphate, as a CIA project, served as a constructed threat to keep society aligned. But when Trump actively fought those terrorist groups, people stopped feeling threatened without ISIS’s presence.

So, with the fear of terrorism waning, an epidemic may have been manufactured as the new unifying threat, though it didn’t sustain fear for as long. Next up, we’re likely facing digital hacking threats, a renewed Cold War, or perhaps both—regardless, digital currency and digital ID seem to be the intended solutions. To reference a recent quote from Brzezinski I came across in a great article by Matthew Ehret on The Duran: How China Broke from David Rockefeller’s Slave Labor Agenda.

“The nation-state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multi-national corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state”.

“The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”

What Brzeziński is talking about requires a CBDC and digital ID system, with the goal of maintaining “up-to-date, complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen.” To achieve this, they need digital IDs and a CBDC. Instead of opposing this, China and Russia are moving toward it, which will, in turn, serve as an excuse to implement these measures in the West.