Breaking News, Recent Shows - posted on July 7, 2017 by

7/7: CODEPENDENCE DAY: CONVERGENCE

CODEPENDENCE DAY

CONVERGENCE

The leaders of the world’s 19 wealthiest nations plus the European Union have converged in Hamburg, Germany for the G-20 summit. It is traditionally greeted with fierce anti-globalization protests.

Despite the rise in nationalist and protectionist sentiment in the US, UK, and elsewhere, the topics at the summit are still the topics that have been produced by globalist elites that certainly move us towards a one world government.

Germany has the presidency of the G-20 this year, and has put on the agenda topics almost guaranteed to rile the nationalists, including climate change, free trade, and helping migrants and refugees.

These are topics that have been hard-lined by Donald Trump. His hard stance against this the globalist agenda has made him a target of criticism in the media and arguably is part of the reason why the media have spun various conspiracy theories about him and his relationship with Russia. The Kremlin conspiracy became a tool used by the media to push an agenda to delegitimize Trump’s presidency.

It appeared those who were pushing the conspiracy theory seemed to be more interested in President Trump’s removal from office than completing an investigation, which by the way, seems to have faded away and people like Robert Mueller have been conveniently flushed down the memory hole.

The true believers wanted Mueller to launch a wide-ranging political witch hunt into Donald Trump and his associates with the aim not of bringing the matter to a resolution, but of creating a steady stream of media codependence that seems to be happening between media outlets like CNN – and President Trump.

In the middle of it all is once again another conspiracy theory within the conspiracy theory and it is a spin that makes you wonder about Washington, the media and personal vendettas that create a reality show narrative that fits the reality show president.

According to a Vanity Fair article that was published last year, Donald Trump was considering creating his own media business. Trump demonstrated an aptitude for manipulating the news cycle, gaining billions of dollars worth of free airtime, and dominating coverage on every screen.

Who better to start a media empire but Donald Trump – he already had a successful reality show under his belt and the mainstream media made him a Google search phenomenon.

Prior to the election, he discussed the possibility of launching a “mini-media conglomerate” outside of his existing TV-production business, Trump Productions LLC. He enlisted the consultation of his daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who owns The New York Observer. Trump’s rationale, was “win or lose, he could be the voice for millions of Americans that feel that they are not being heard.

The rumor is that he didn’t want to have to create a media conglomerate from scratch — he wanted to buy a network and own it out right. Allegedly, he wanted to own CNN. The conspiracy is that both CNN and President Trump have been depending on each other to bring up ratings. Trump’s idea to own CNN was not happening and so he lost his interest in the company and set out to devalue it. This way, Trump could make an amazing deal and CNN would be forced to sell. Of course, Trump need to gather up some major talent to launch his network.

Allegedly, he wanted to have Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. Now it is no secret that at one time Trump was tight with cable’s own news power couple and even offered them a wedding reception at the Trump Tower building in Canada, in return all Trump wanted was for them to tie the knot on live TV. It would have been great publicity for a property that has now petitioned to have Trump’s name removed from the Tower.

It was reported that Joe and Mika politely declined the offer. Trump of course, took it personally and launched into his Tweet war and rants against them.

Which by the way, pushed their ratings into the stratosphere.

It is clear that TV news ratings surged during the 2016 political season, when the media gave Trump billions of dollars in free publicity. This hasn’t changed; only now, the mean spirited agendas against Trump are creating a social breakdown and it can be argued that the media has a sick codependence on their own conspiracy theories that are connected to Trump.

The media wants you to believe that they are the guardians of truth, but they still are succumbing to Russian obsession and propaganda techniques that are creating tensions that could escalate future problems with Russia.

There has been no accountability or even penance for CNN and the New York Times falsely stating as flat unquestionable fact that “all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies” concurred that Russia did “meddle” in last November’s U.S. election and that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election.

For 6 months, this claim has been the go to scandal whenever the media wanted to delegitimize the election of Donald Trump.

As senior news executives reviewed the disinformation’s evolution, they found red flags that appeared to have been ignored. Three major reporters at CNN resigned after the revelation.

The New York Times also issued an absurdly written correction that the Russian meddling and collusion story was not accurate. The problem is that these stories became a nonstop liberal talking point for the case of impeachment.

For his part, Trump’s refusal to abide by the niceties of established presidential decorum has kept him front and center of the American consciousness almost every single day since January 20th. Plus it makes him a big hero among that very sizable portion of the U.S. public that absolutely loathes the mainstream media.

If you watch CNN, it is as if the commentators there think they must be doing something right by pissing off conservatives and they wear it smugly like a badge of honor.

When Trump and the media have their little Twitter fights, they are like the codependent parents of a dysfunctional family. We are like the kids that wish they would stop fighting or get a divorce.

Whenever things calm down Trump tweets something pissy and the round of dysfunctional fighting starts all over again.

Today, the media were ever vigilant – converging on the G-20 summit standing around like wolves eyeing the world leaders like sheep. The reason for such commotion was that Donald Trump was about to meet with Vladimir Putin.

The media was waiting to see just how Trump would approach Putin on issues like Syria and the so called meddling and collusion issues that the media themselves spun.

Trump did in fact mention the whole meddling fiasco to Putin.

Putin asked for “proof and evidence” that Russia was behind the 2016 election meddling. They wanted to get past the issue and move on to more important things.

They also discussed the problem with North Korea and a cease fire in Syria.

Both seemed to have good chemistry and I would ask again – what is wrong with the United States keeping the peace with Russia?

Coziness with Russian leaders is not necessarily nefarious, and the idea that the media always has to always vilify Russia always has seemed suspicious to me.

Then again, I am a kid who grew up in the times where Ronald Reagan befriended a Russian leader and eventually we saw the fall of communism in Russia.

On the surface, the case of Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev looks most like that of Trump and Putin. When Gorbachev became Soviet leader in March 1985, both of our countries remained in a stance of Cold War, and the Geneva summit that November produced little or nothing in the way of concrete agreements.

But both leaders regarded the personal chemistry they achieved at Geneva as a breakthrough that nearly led a year later to an agreement to eliminate nuclear weapons. In June 1988, when Gorbachev’s transformation of Soviet domestic politics and foreign policy was accelerating, Reagan declared during the Moscow summit that the USSR was no longer the “evil empire” it had been in “another time, another era.”

The fact that Reagan and Gorbachev had so much in common helped to produce the personal bond between them.

But the content of what they had in common was particularly important: both were innately optimistic, convinced that people were basically good and could be trusted to do what was right.

However, history has shown that even upon first meetings and good chemistry things can fall apart very quickly.

FDR and Joseph Stalin had a very complicated relationship.

To Roosevelt, Stalin resembled a no-nonsense politician with whom he thought he could business. He tried to win over Stalin at the 1943 Tehran conference by teasing British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and the more Churchill scowled, FDR later told his Labor Secretary Frances Perkins, “the more Stalin smiled.” After “Stalin broke into a deep, hearty laugh ,” Roosevelt felt comfortable enough to call him ‘Uncle Joe.’”

Despite this mistrust, the two leaders were able to hold the Grand Alliance together until the end of the war. But their disagreement on the outlines of the postwar order contained the seeds of the Cold War.

The case of John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev of course is an example of how personal chemistry between two leaders can be bad. Kennedy and Khrushchev were as different personally as their countries were opposed politically at the height of the Cold War. Khrushchev was older and intimidating and would break out in rages over ideological differences with Kennedy.

In June of 1963, Kennedy attempted to smooth relations with Russia in a speech he delivered at American University, now entitled the “Peace Speech.” It was one of the most remarkable speeches ever delivered by an American president. It was broadcast all across the communist Soviet Union, the first time that had ever been done.

History will tell us that this speech was a controversial one in so much as he said that he was ending the Cold War. He also wanted to end the collective hostility towards Russia.

It was a radical idea and a very dangerous one insofar as he was concerned. The Cold War against America’s World War II partner and ally had been used to convert the United States from a limited-government republic to a national-security state, one consisting of a vast, permanent military establishment, the CIA, and the NSA, along with their broad array of totalitarian-like powers, such as assassination, regime change, coups, invasions, torture, surveillance, and a few other nefarious activities.

Those who hated Kennedy used this as proof of collusion with and adversarial nation. Some of his detractors saw it as treason and accused Kennedy of being a Russian agent.

Everyone was convinced that the Cold War and the so-called threat from the international communist conspiracy that was supposedly based in Russia, would last forever, which would naturally mean permanent and ever-increasing largess for what Kennedy’s predecessor, President Dwight Eisenhower, had called the “military-industrial complex.”

As a follower of conspiratorial history, I can say that once again, the mainstream media has failed to capture the controversy that John F. Kennedy’s so-called collusion with the former Soviet Union generated and how it led to his eventual assassination.

The conspiracy theory that has been spun by the mainstream media against President Trump is yet another example of how the intelligence cabal under the direction of the Deep State owns the media and is making a concerted effort to delegitimize the president and to destabilize our government.

The G-20 meeting between Trump and Putin went over two hours. Overall, those on the inside say it went very well and that it is promising to see them speak openly about concerns of the world.

Maybe it is because Russia values freedom as much as the United States says it does.

The entire “Deep State” apparatus, which Putin is very much aware of, is opposed to peaceful cooperation, and will do anything to stop it. We all know that the
military-industrial complex is dependent on hostility between the US and Russia.

Russia is said to be a conservative society and Putin is committed to the concept of National sovereignty — he doesn’t wish to play ball with the globalists. This makes him unpopular for the Deep State bureaucrats that want a New World Order.

Nationalism in all its forms is opposed by those who pine for a globalist empire, and this is what sets them against not only Putin but also against President Trump. Their allegiance isn’t to the United States, but to covert groups who wish to destabilize countries that fight against an encroaching super state.

It is globalism versus national sovereignty.

The sooner we as Americans learn the strategies of the elitist oligarchs, the better we will be. Perhaps we can learn to take care of problems at home instead of generating problems globally.

The G-20 is just another way of promoting globalism and today, both men who are against this threat met in the belly of the beast. We better pray that we can all get along because the alternative is not very promising.

Comments

rose-ellen

The last millennium saw the rise of the nation state. The new millennium launched by alquada on 9-11 may have been the rise of the end of the nation states.
In the age of internet; instant global communication, easy travel, global trade, the sovereignty of nation states is becoming out dated. It matters morally and economically if workers in china are getting slave labor wages and appalling working ; it matters if in Saudi Arabia women are stoned for adultery; it matters if religious schools are teaching that homosexuals deserve to be killed etc. It matters to us here morally and pragmatically. This fixation on only having national[local] laws apply to oneself is now quaint. Why is having to obey laws established in Washington dc. more acceptable then having to obey laws that are international? Why would having trans national elected representatives, universal declarations [constitutions]offend ones sensibilities? Sounds like pure xenophobia; an outdated false dichotomy[us and them, foreign and domestic] and division of humanity.It may have served humanity well in the last millennium when we were getting civilized, but it does not necessarily serve us well now. I may have more in common with a like minded person living in china today then with my neighbor. The internet allows these realities to exist.
I think the media are quite the Americain nationalists. They have as much power as the president; their narratives are all about US interests only. They may be Democrats and liberal but they are still nationalists. They were not opposed to Putin when he saved Obama[ US] from the red line ultimatum. They oppose Trump because Trump is more of a globalist then them actually. For all his talk about make “America great” he had the nerve to say what no president has ever said and what no politician or MSM today would ever dare say; what you think we’re so innocent? He has said in speeches ” may God bless the whole world”.Never heard any US president say this. He had more humanity then any media outlet or any politician of the left or right when he went against his own party and attacked Syria after the regime gassed civilians. Even you Clyde are indifferent to gassing of Syrian .[ you are an anti Semite; a 21st century kind; against Arab Muslims this time; that’s why; you’re a nazi as you said Trump was wrong to stop Assad from bombing or gassing Sunni Muslims Syrians]. The masses of nationalists who voted for him thought so too; But because he is a humanistic globalist he responded to THEIR suffering. That freaked all nationalist Americans out, including you![lol

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *