in ,

What might the Clinton plan be for getting rid of Trump?

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton meets with employees at a Velcro Companies facility Monday, Feb. 8, 2016, in Manchester, N.H. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Clinton is not the snore that she appears to be.

She’s a radical, an adept of the Hegelian doctrine of the state knowing what’s best for the individual and for the family. The notion that, “Father knows best,” is a relic. Stone Age vintage.  While Hegel’s disciples may have extended his philosophy to opposite hemispheres – to the Protestant Right and to the Marxist Left – little in Clinton’s book, It Takes a Village, or in her subsequent, expressed views, suggests anything but a militant Marxist perspective.

Brandishing hellfire assuredness, which some believe only the Devil can instill, she is still quite certain, despite advancing years, that with enough patience the radicalization of cultural and educational institutions will bring about the needed transformation of America prior to the advent of HER New World Order. The new dawn will see her ruling above all and everything.

CLICK HERE to Support The Duran >>

When her husband ran the show, Hillary was actively working to transform the US into a collectivist state through organizations like the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). “Operate in stealth from within,” remains a favorite axiom.

There’s only one problem with Hillary’s core identity.

Radicalism doesn’t win presidential elections. Every pundit will tell you: “Winning demands middle-of-the-road stature with just the right dash of populism.” In fact, it was the image that Bill Clinton successfully portrayed to dupe the electorate in 1992. Through their co-reign over America, Hillary zealously began injecting the radical left agenda (RLA) into diverse organizations as Bill pushed hard for globalism.

Hence, the dilemma for Hillary. She’s a radical but not the actor needed to play the middle-of-the-road game. Her heart – physicians claim she has one – wasn’t into it. At least not with a sufficient pulse or pressure to motivate even paid “volunteers.” Unlike the used car salesman at her side disguised as US President, she wasn’t enough of a hypocrite. She doesn’t have Obama’s talent at pushing hot air to get snake-oil sales. The more she presses, the more the fake laugh doesn’t fly.

Indeed, starting with the Billy-Hillary regime, the ideology of the RLA has been infiltrating the ideological vacuum in the Democratic Party. Considering the moral decay of the Washington Establishment and of politically, watered-down, Bush types, the RLA also has had little opposition among establishment Humpties and Dumpties.

It hasn’t been all downhill for the RLA. With respect to LGBTq-ism, for instance, a majority of Republicans and a minority of Democrats have vetoed legislation to advance LGBTq-ism. Their respective constituencies wouldn’t have it any other way. But how many of the same legislators have sought to counter LGBT promotional efforts by introducing legislation that would equate teaching the LGBTq agenda to second graders with pedophilia? Without enough of a political counterweight, the Democratic Party has been advancing in-your-face, Godless planks – the RLA seeks spiritual dominance – to replace traditional family ethics and God’s laws with its own laws.

The idea is to repackage biblical morals and to export them as a humanist, New Age Religion, throughout the world. The New Religion of the RLA repackages homosexuality as love between two humans conforming with the commandment of Jesus: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” regardless of gender. It’s not an “abomination” as scripture expressly states. RLA ideology has become theology – the spiritual component of George H.W. Bush’s New World Order.

Snowflakes routinely insult Trump’s intelligence yet he was apparently smarter than Clinton because he won. He was certainly sensitive enough and he had the right instinct to tap into the pulse of the nation’s distrust of her and her thinly-veiled, RLA planks.

Despite the best efforts of Clinton’s attendant media to sequester her shortcomings, she couldn’t fill a high school gym with paid volunteers while Trump was stretching college arenas, football stadiums and other venues to capacity. Tailgate parties comforted those who couldn’t be squeezed in. The sizes of Trump’s audiences were rarely mentioned by “news” stations. In this respect, Trump’s claim about CNN-Clinton collusion to downplay the support that he was getting is more than justified. YouTube amateur videos allowed anyone interested to gauge Trump’s draw strength. And for anyone who witnessed the buzz, it was apparent that an upset was possible.

What actually happened? 

Clinton lost because America was not ready for her, radical, collectivist vision. She couldn’t talk about it, outright, so she came across as having nothing of substance to say – as the boring, plastic lawyer-politician. The best lighting and makeup could not sequester media manipulation and topic tampering. It was specifically because she was shielded from controversial topics that she came across as a bland, listless figure. Her core faithful made it through the campaign by popping No-Doz, if not something stronger, to no end.  Enough cameras caught sight of the fainting spells. Rumors about a possible degenerative disease like Alzheimer’s didn’t help. The image of aides propping her up didn’t exactly coincide with the image of a robust Commander-in-Chief. 

In contrast to Hillary’s blasé campaign, Trump raised real, hurt issues within working America. Mostly, he projected energy. Although far from eloquent, his kitchen speech was understood by the masses, many of whom had not voted in years. Adding a few ideas of his own – which is a few more than Hillary introduced – Trump won.

Indeed, it shouldn’t have happened. Everything from the beast of the political system to the military industrial complex, as well as the Hollywood-US media syndicate, worked overtime against him. Even Bush and his CIA brotherhood refused to accept the non-establishment figure. More than one billion dollars in PAC money was stacked up against him. One can only speculate on the actual money-under-the-table sum. Nearly every mainstream newspaper endorsed Clinton. So did nearly every major television station. Illegal immigrants rode the carousels in swarms to vote several times for Clinton.  Even dead souls were resurrected. It was quite a ghoulish election night.

The tip of the carousel scandal eventually pierced Hillary’s pampered bottom when Democrats, through Jill Stein of the Green Party, backed a recount in the State of Michigan. Trump won the State by only 22,000 votes.  Curiously, the recount was abruptly halted and the media began to hush it up when results from the city of Detroit, revealed massive voting fraud in Clinton’s favor. 95% of Detroit voters voted for Clinton. Theoretically, it’s possible. But the recount revealed that voting machines in 248 of Detroit’s 662 precincts (37%) tabulated significantly more votes than the number of people who had signed in to vote. America’s a free country. Only in America do dead souls drive cars and planes, draw on Medicare, and vote in presidential elections.

“There’s always going to be small problems, to some degree, but we didn’t expect the degree of the problem we saw in Detroit. This isn’t normal,” Krista Haroutunian, Chairwoman of the county electoral commission, stated to the press. “Massive voter irregularities,” ran the NY Post headline. President Trump called the entire election “rigged in Clinton’s favor.” So-called Russian influence in the election was a tactic concocted by Clinton’s strategists, well in advance of election night. Since no proof of Russian meddling was ever presented, Clinton came across as a sore and dishonest loser.

At the Trump-Clinton debate in Nevada, Trump was asked by Chris Wallace if he would accept the election result. The question was stacked against Trump because it implied that he would be the eventual loser. Wallace said that there is a tradition in the country for the peaceful transition of power, “for the loser to concede to the winner the election result no matter how hard fought the campaign might be.” The cameras saw a smirking Clinton, bobbing her head in total agreement at the mention of “tradition,” ever-so-certain that she was of victory. When Trump said that he would decide later, whether or not to accept the result, Clinton chirped that Trump’s readiness to break with tradition is, “Horrifying.” 

The NY Times, propaganda machine headlined the next day: “Donald Trump Won’t Say if He’ll Accept Result of Election.” The opening paragraph reads: “In a remarkable statement that seemed to cast doubt on American democracy, Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he might not accept the results of next month’s election if he felt it was rigged against him — a stand that Hillary Clinton blasted as “horrifying. 

“Horrifying?” His statement, “cast doubt on American democracy?”

A curious twist of fate, is it not? Two years have elapsed since the election and Clinton has not accepted the result, despite conceding defeat. Apparently, Obama, Biden, Soros, and other leading lights have also been unable to swallow the bitter pill of America saying, “No,” to Madame Hillary and the RLA. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is “casting doubt on American democracy?” Does she see anything “horrifying” when she looks at herself?

Indeed, Trump wasn’t supposed to win. The entire electoral system, including the corrupt Establishment from both political Parties and their attendant presstitutes sided against Trump. The Bush family led the charge against him from the “Republican” side of the aisle. They, too, have since confirmed their unwillingness to accept democracy, considering that Trump made mincemeat out of Jeb Bush in the primaries. All of it shouldn’t have happened, which is why the election night turnaround was a true miracle – perhaps, the most thrilling result in 150-plus years. Poll projection manipulations failed to coronate Clinton. It was genuine democracy, the popular will of the people – something that had been lacking, for so long. Voters saw through it all.

The RLA introduced during the joint reign of Bill and Hillary, slowed down during the Bush years. It came out of the closet under Obama. Nonetheless, the corrosive influence of the RLA has been eating away at the social fabric of America since the radical 60s when Hillary was salivating over the Luciferian ideals of Saul Alinsky, her “college mentor.” That’s Lucifer aka Satan or the Devil. 

Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals” is a primer for overturning society. It’s dedicated to Lucifer who Alinsky honors on the dedication page as “the first radical.” Clinton only differs from Alinsky in one major way. She always believed that the system can be changed from within. And she has been at it ever since Billy made it to the White House. What did he address, first? Apparently, nothing was more life-line important than the issue of gays in the military. Americans weren’t aware it was an issue until Clinton’s made it one.

Credit her determination. Hillary has held true to the RLA course and she has succeeded in advancing radicalism from within. Is the world a better place for it?

Perhaps, one should ask the families of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of innocents who were killed by way of US policies and armaments in Serbia, in the Middle East, in Afghanistan, in Libya, in Ukraine, in Iraq, in Somalia, in Pakistan, in Yemen, and in Syria. What has Obama-Clinton & Clinton adventurism brought to these nations?

Taking note of how the War Party profits from blood, the Bush-Cheney, crime syndicate followed up on the model. In this respect, its arm-in-arm with Clinton Murder, Inc., with the Establishment Swamp, and with Peace Laureate Obama – the first, two-term president to have the honor of being at war for all eight years. Quite the distinction. Are Americans better off domestically or internationally because of War Party deeds? Let it not be forgotten that America is in the sights of a RLA transformation. Will it happen? Not likely, under Trump. It has been said that Satan always gets his due. Scary, is it not?

In the past, election wounds healed because of debate, patience, tolerance, and compromise – balm for the passions. Besides, differences between Republicans and Democrats were never significant. Anybody from the establishment can become president and every four years another anybody has been elected. President Anybody kept God at arm’s length and he didn’t encroach on the family regarding how to rear children. It was always, “Father knows best. 

To sum up, Obama-Clinton are categorically at odds with Christian tenets, with traditional family values, and with the libertarian ideals on which the US was founded. That is, they’re against liberty for the masses as the core principle, they’re against maximum, political freedom, and they’re against individual freedom of choice despite statements to the contrary.

Obama-Clinton collectivists are little different than Bolsheviks in the sense that they seek liberty for themselves and equality for the masses. History is a witness of the catchphrase lie: “liberty, equality, and fraternity.” Where equality exists there is not much liberty or fraternity and, certainly, not much prosperity. In every knot of history, otherwise referred to as revolutions, a ruling elite feeds on the blood and passions of the hoi polio until the privileged, inner circle consumes itself. Need anyone be reminded what Bolshevism did to Russia and to neighboring nations? Enough Americans saw through the Hillary façade to say, “No thank you,” to her RLA. Today, Trump is a finger in the dike restraining it.

What might the Clinton plan be for getting rid of Trump? Fact or fiction, the Clinton body count is impressive. 

See Part 1

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!

Report

What do you think?

5
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
LeaHelga FellayCudwieserJPHTheCelotajs Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
TheCelotajs
Guest
TheCelotajs

Hillary Clinton is one evil bitch. She has been all her life and would make Joseph Stalin look like a Saint.

JPH
Guest
JPH

Article seems waste of space. Apart from wanting power and money Clinton is far too close Wall Street Banks and corrupt money schemes like Pay-to-Play Clinton foundation to make this writer’s assertions about Clinton adhering to any ideology credible. Yes, Clinton knows to cater to a certain public to win their votes but that’s simply a tactic and nothing to do with her ideology which is egocentric to the hilt.

Cudwieser
Guest
Cudwieser

Bill, Hill and Chill (Chelsea) will be irradicated if anythinhg happens to Trump, just as a matter of reflex. What happens after is beyond imagination.

Helga Fellay
Guest
Helga Fellay

The Hillary this author describes can’t possibly be the same women the rest of us love to hate – there is nothing “left” about this neocon/neoliberal war hawk who is Henry Kissinger’s best buddy and never saw a war she didn’t like. She destroyed Honduras, Libya and the Ukraine. Her defining moment will always be that video interview when she said with glee “we came, we saw, he died hahahahaha” describing the torture and murder by being sodomized with a sword of the great pan-African leader Gaddafi – with utter amusement, something which only a completely soulless sociopath could do.

Lea
Guest
Lea

Does the author even know what a Marxist perspective is? Honestly, please American authors, try to educate yourselves before you write. In the eyes of any educated European, what you write comes out sounding like gibberish. Not to mention that you only add to the general confusion.
Words have definitions, and by no stretch of imagination is Hillary Clinton a Marxist. She is your run-of-the-mill American plutocratic psycho politician, only with even less brains than Obama, Bush the Lesser or Bill Clinton.

Mail bomb campaign against Trump critics too perfectly orchestrated

VIDEO: Vladimir Putin calls for new sanctions against Ukraine