What Trump Is Missing about China

Who sends more contaminated poisoned products to the US than any other country?

by Jon Rappoport

September 12, 2019

(To join our email list, click here.)

This article would apply to any American president from either Party. It is about more than tariffs, more than trying to bring back US corporations from foreign lands. It’s about more than politics.

It’s about a subject every American is intensely interested in: personal health. And the overt poisoning of health.

And the president would announce, on global television:

“Do you think we should permit poisons to be imported into this country? I don’t. I’m talking about poisons that make people sick and kill them. For decades we have been allowing these poisons to come here, from China, AND THIS STOPS NOW. We will amp up our level of testing for all food products, medicines, vaccines, and other imports, AND THOSE WE FIND CONTAMINATED WE WILL SEND BACK TO CHINA AND REFUSE TO PAY FOR. AND IF THEY TRY TO SLIP THOSE PRODUCTS BACK INTO THE US THROUGH ANOTHER COMPANY WITH ANOTHER NAME, WE WILL BURN THE WHOLE SHIPMENT. IF AMERICANS CARE ABOUT THEIR HEALTH AND THE HEALTH OF THEIR CHILDREN, THEY WILL BACK ME UP TO THE HILT ON THIS. SOME PEOPLE WILL SAY I’M GRANDSTANDING. CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT TO. I’M PROTECTING THE LIVES OF PEOPLE FROM POISONING.”

At Natural News, Mike Adams recently wrote: “At my laboratory (CWC Labs), we’ve used mass spectrometry instrumentation to study lead exposure for the last six years… Over the years, we’ve…found high levels of lead and other metals in rice protein from China, which is grown in heavily polluted irrigation water that’s contaminated with industrial runoff from China’s factories… Thanks to the complete lack of environmental enforcement in industrial countries like China, lead pollution is spread around the world via air currents. China’s pollution becomes America’s soils contamination, and China does nothing to reduce emissions of toxic heavy metals and other substances. China is a cesspool of filth, corruption and pollution, and the food and supplement products manufactured in China are very often heavily contaminated as a result. (Yet somehow, all the ‘environmentalists’ in America never demand China take any action whatsoever to reduce its own pollution.)”

Reuters (2/18/19): “Major Chinese frozen food producer Sanquan Food Co Ltd said on Monday it has recalled products that may be contaminated with African swine fever, following media reports that some of its dumplings tested positive for the virus.”

Quartz (7/16/18): “…infant milk tragedy…a growing national disaster that would take the lives of six infants and sicken more than 300,000 babies…the [Chinese] national standards didn’t require testing for melamine [an industrial chemical]—no one had anticipated that milk producers would doctor their supplies with the chemical…the excessive use of pesticides and fertilizers in the 1980s…which has contaminated farmland, and could be transferred to cows that eat that grass. The government has only just started to tackle the problem [2018]…”

2019—Tainted blood plasma scandal…use of expired polio vaccine…

2018—Valsartan, a blood pressure medicine manufactured in China, is recalled by the FDA in the US, because it might contain carcinogenic material…

And so forth and so on. And so on.

You could ask the question this way: why can’t the US president try to protect the health and lives of Americans and stop imports of poisons? A better statement: if US health agencies are failing in their duties, the president MUST step forward and take drastic action.

This isn’t politics. This is LIFE on the line.

Or you could take a novel approach: “Let’s all be nice and polite and passive and try to pretend there is no problem.”

Some readers will reflexively ask, “What about pollution and contamination produced right here in America?” Yes, I’ve been writing about that for the past 35 years. This piece happens to be about CHINA.

The major reason Trump is missing this vital point vis-a-via China is: for him, the business of America is business, period. That’s called a blind spot. Another name for it is willful ignorance. Trump is far from the only one. It’s the same for all US presidents before him who have entered into trade deals with China. None of them have zeroed in on the overwhelming fact that Americans have been the end-users of contaminated and poisoned products. On the scale of importance, that fact has been pushed far down on the list of concerns.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Psychiatry in charge of gun control: utter disaster

by Jon Rappoport

September 5, 2019

(To join our email list, click here.)

During the reign of Barack Obama, mass shootings prompted a White House declaration that community mental health centers would be created across America, in order to spot and treat persons before they committed violent acts. Now, under Trump, we are seeing a similar reaction, with a twist.

The Daily Caller, Aug 22, 2019: “Trump Admin Is Considering Using Amazon Echo And Apple Watch To Determine If Citizens Should Own A Gun”

“The Trump administration is considering a proposal that would use Google, Amazon and Apple to collect data on users who exhibit characteristics of mental illness that could lead to violent behavior, The Washington Post reported Thursday.”

“The proposal is part of an initiative to create a Health Advanced Research Projects Agency (HARPA), which would be located inside the Health and Human Services Department, the report notes, citing sources inside the administration. The new agency would have a separate budget and the president would be responsible for appointing its director.”

“HARPA would develop ‘breakthrough technologies with high specificity and sensitivity for early diagnosis of neuropsychiatric violence,’ according to a copy of the proposal. ‘A multi-modality solution, along with real-time data analytics, is needed to achieve such an accurate diagnosis’.”

“The document lists several technologies that could be employed to help collect information, including Apple Watches, Amazon Echo and Google Home. Geoffrey Ling, the lead scientific adviser on HARPA, told reporters Thursday the plan would require enormous amounts of data and ‘scientific rigor.’”

Translation: Use all available resources to spy on Americans; and by deploying psychiatric definitions of mental disorders, somehow intercede before potentially violent individuals can legally obtain a weapon. Whether or not you favor gun control, creating this new federal agency would be on the order of injecting poisons in people to prevent poisoning.

Why? Because some of the most popular psychiatric drugs, given for “mental disorders,” cause people to go over the edge and commit violent acts, including murder. Once diagnosed, an uninformed person is at the mercy of psychiatrists who refuse to admit what their drugs are creating.

NOTE: Withdrawing from the drugs without expert supervision can result in effects which are even worse than those resulting from taking the drugs.


Here is an excerpt from my 1999 white paper, “Why Do They Do It? School shootings Across America.”:

The massacre at Columbine High School took place on April 20, 1999. Astonishingly, for eight days after the tragedy, during thousands of hours of prime-time television coverage, virtually no one mentioned the word “drugs.” Then the issue was opened. Eric Harris, one of the shooters at Columbine, was on at least one drug.

The NY Times of April 29, 1999, and other papers reported that Harris was rejected from enlisting in the Marines for medical reasons. A friend of the family told the Times that Harris was being treated by a psychiatrist. And then several sources told the Washington Post that the drug prescribed as treatment was Luvox, manufactured by Solvay.

In two more days, the “drug-issue” was gone.

Luvox is of the same class as Prozac and Zoloft and Paxil. They are labeled SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). They attempt to alleviate depression by changing brain-levels of the natural substance serotonin. Luvox has a slightly different chemical configuration from Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft, and it was approved by the FDA for obsessive-compulsive disorder, although many doctors apparently prescribe it for depression.

Prozac is the wildly popular Eli Lilly antidepressant which has been linked to suicidal and homicidal actions. It is now given to young children. Again, its chemical composition is very close to Luvox, the drug that Harris took.

Dr. Peter Breggin, the eminent psychiatrist and author (Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Prozac, Talking Back to Ritalin), told me, “With Luvox there is some evidence of a four-percent rate for mania in adolescents. Mania, for certain individuals, could be a component in grandiose plans to destroy large numbers of other people. Mania can go over the hill to psychosis.”

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo is a psychiatrist in private practice in Washington DC. He is the president of the Washington chapter of the American Society of Psychoanalytic Physicians. Tarantolo states that “all the SSRIs [including Prozac and Luvox] relieve the patient of feeling. He becomes less empathic, as in `I don’t care as much,’ which means `It’s easier for me to harm you.’ If a doctor treats someone who needs a great deal of strength just to think straight, and gives him one of these drugs, that could push him over the edge into violent behavior.”

In Arianna Huffington’s syndicated newspaper column of July 9, 1998, Dr. Breggin states, “I have no doubt that Prozac can cause or contribute to violence and suicide. I’ve seen many cases. In a recent clinical trial, 6 percent of the children became psychotic on Prozac. And manic psychosis can lead to violence.”

A study from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that in five examined cases people on Prozac developed what is called akathesia. Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the “jerking of extremities,” and “bicycling in bed or just turning around and around.” Dr. Breggin comments that akathesia “may also contribute to the drug’s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies … Akathesia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior … The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, ‘Akathesia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.’”

Other studies:

“Emergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment,” published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al. It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.

July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: “full of energy,” “hyperactive,” “clown-like.” All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were “totally unlike him.”

September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor. The boy is then “hyperactive, agitated … irritable.” He makes a “somewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.” Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.

The well-known Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a strange fact. It states that Ritalin [given for ADHD] is “structurally related to amphetamines … Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.” In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman’s terms, are obvious. You take speed and, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.

In his book, Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: “Combining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox, Paxil] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.” Children are frequently medicated with this combination, and when we highlight such effects as aggression, psychosis, and emotional instability, it is obvious that the result is pointing toward the very real possibility of violence.

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was titled, “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed over a hundred adverse affects of Ritalin and indexed published journal articles for each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects then, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions
• Paranoid psychosis
• Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
• Activation of psychotic symptoms
• Toxic psychosis
• Visual hallucinations
• Auditory hallucinations
• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
• Effects pathological thought processes
• Extreme withdrawal
• Terrified affect
• Started screaming
• Aggressiveness
• Insomnia
• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphatamine-like effects
• psychic dependence
• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
• Decreased REM sleep
• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
• Convulsions
• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Other ADHD medications, which also have a chemical profile similar to amphetamines, would be expected to produce some of the same effects listed above.

The ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News publishes the following warning in bold letters: “Do Not Try to Abruptly Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs. When trying to withdraw from many psychiatric drugs, patients can develop serious and even life-threatening emotional and physical reactions…Therefore, withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done under clinical supervision…”

—end of excerpts from my 1999 white paper on school shootings and psychiatric drugs—


There is a problem. It is chilling. Pharmaceutical companies, which manufacture drug after drug for “mental disorders,” are doing everything they can to cover up the drugs’ connection to violence.

They use their lawyers and PR people—and their influence over the press—to scrub the connection.

And now, one typical, disturbing, official reaction to every new mass shooting is: build more community mental health facilities. Obama was prominent in this regard, after Sandy Hook in 2012. The implication? More drug prescriptions for more people; thus, more violent consequences.

I’ll close with another excerpt from my 1999 report. It is the tragic account of Julie Marie Meade (one account of many you can find at ssristories.org (also here)):

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo has written about Julie Marie Meade. In a column for the ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News, “Children and Prozac: First Do No Harm,” Tarantolo describes how Julie Meade, in November of 1996, called 911, “begging the cops to come and shoot her. And if they didn’t do it quickly, she would do it to herself. There was also the threat that she would shoot them as well.”

The police came within a few minutes, “5 of them to be exact, pumping at least 10 bullets into her head and torso,” as she waved a gun around.

Tarantolo remarks that a friend of Julie said Julie “had plans to make the honor roll and go to college. He [the friend] had also observed her taking all those pills.” What pills? Tarantolo called the Baltimore medical examiner, and spoke with Dr. Martin Bullock, who was on a fellowship at that office. Bullock said, “She had been taking Prozac for four years.”

Tarantolo asked Bullock, “Did you know that Prozac has been implicated in impulsive de novo violence and suicidalness?” Bullock said he was not aware of this.

Tarantolo is careful to point out, “Violent and suicidal behavior have been observed both early (a few weeks) and late (many months) in treatment with Prozac.”

The November 23rd, 1996, Washington Post reported the Julie Meade death by police shooting. The paper mentioned nothing about Prozac.

Therefore, readers were left in the dark. What could explain this girl’s bizarre and horrendous behavior?

The answer was there in plain sight. But the Post refused to make it known.


Mainstream psychiatrists would certainly be in charge of any new Trump program to “predict violent individuals” before they obtain a gun or commit heinous acts. The program wouldn’t just fail. It would increase violence.

Two questions always pop up when I write a critique of psychiatry. The first one is: psychiatric researchers are doing a massive amount of work studying brain function. They do have tests.

Yes, experimental tests. But NONE of those tests are contained in the DSM, the psychiatric bible, as the basis of the definition of ANY mental disorder. If the tests were conclusive, they would be heralded in the DSM. They aren’t.

The second question is: if all these mental disorders are fiction, why are so many people saddled with problems? Why are some people off the rails? Why are they crazy?

The list of potential answers is very long. A real practitioner would focus on one patient at a time and try to discover what has affected him to such a marked degree. For example:

Severe nutritional deficiency. Toxic dyes and colors in processed food. Ingestion of pesticides and herbicides. Profound sensitivities to certain foods. The ingestion of toxic pharmaceuticals. Life-altering damage as a result of vaccines. Exposure to environmental chemicals. Heavy physical and emotional abuse in the home or at school. Battlefield stress and trauma (also present in certain neighborhoods). Prior head injury. Chronic infection. Alcohol and street drugs. Debilitating poverty.

Other items could be added.

Psychiatry is: fake, fraud, pseudoscience from top to bottom. It’s complete fiction dressed up as fact.

But the obsessed devotees of science back away from this. They close their eyes. If a “branch of knowledge” as extensive as psychiatry is nothing more than an organized delusion, what other aspect of science might likewise be parading as truth, when it is actually mere paper blowing in the wind?

And yet, the Trump administration, following the same general game plan as the Obama administration, is seriously considering the creation of a whole new federal agency that will somehow use “psychiatric knowledge” (an oxymoron), as a guide, to carry out new forms of surveillance on the whole population and intercede, when individuals with “mental disorders” try to buy a gun in order to commit a violent crime.

Not only will this strategy utterly fail, it will, through the prescription of violence-inducing drugs, make the tragedies expand and multiply.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Jeffrey Epstein Out in the Open

by Jon Rappoport

August 13, 2019

(To join our email list, click here.)

NOTE: This article concerns the reporting of Vicky Ward. I’m not automatically assuming her key point is factual, especially since it relies on an unnamed source, who is telling her about a private meeting which the source apparently did not attend. If, however, we assume the key point is accurate…

In my previous piece on Epstein, I cited two articles outside the mainstream, which make a case for Epstein acting as an agent for intelligence services—Mossad/CIA. Obviously, his work would have involved gathering blackmail evidence on powerful men, who had sex with his underage girls. The value of this evidence, to Epstein’s handlers, would be enormous as a means of controlling those men…

I realize many people aren’t satisfied unless they see something in print from a more mainstream source. So let’s try the Daily Beast (7/9/19) and writer Vicky Ward, who has had an extensive career as a reporter and editor (Vanity Fair, NY Post, HuffPost, etc.)

In her Daily Beast article, “Jeffrey Epstein’s Sick Story Played Out for Years in Plain Sight,” Ward attempts to shed light on a moment in time when a strange twist occurred in the Epstein saga. It involved Alexander Acosta.

Alexander Acosta served as Trump’s Labor Secretary from April 28, 2017, to July 19, 2019, when he resigned. In his former job, as US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Acosta made the shocking 2007-2008 sweetheart plea deal with Epstein, canceling any effort to convict him for sex trafficking of minors, and reducing the charge to solicitation of a 14-year-old girl. Epstein pled guilty and received a mild slap on the wrist.

Vicky Ward writes: “Epstein’s name, I was told, had been raised by the Trump transition team when Alexander Acosta, the former U.S. attorney in Miami who’d infamously cut Epstein a non-prosecution plea deal back in 2007, was being interviewed for the job of labor secretary…”

“’Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?’ Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had ‘been told’ to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. ‘I was told Epstein “belonged to intelligence” and to leave it alone,’ he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)”

If all this is true, the word came down the line: Epstein had protection coming from intelligence agency players; and he, Acosta, dutifully knuckled under and made the phony plea deal with Epstein. In a blockbuster federal case for widespread sex trafficking. A case that was receiving wall to wall press coverage. But none of that mattered to Acosta, the hell with blowback, contrasted against the intelligence agency clout shielding Jeffrey Epstein.

If Vicky Ward’s source on this is correct, it’s quite possible it wasn’t just Acosta who was cowed and played ball with the higher power. The Trump transition team, who blithely accepted Acosta’s astonishing comment, also could have been following the same marching orders. The Trump team purposely chose Acosta for his new shiny job, as Labor Secretary, because they were told to reward him for his “outstanding work” in the Epstein case.

The transition team could have easily made a list of 20 people who could fill the role of Labor Secretary. But they picked out the man who gave astounding cover to Epstein.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Donald Trump twenty-four months on…

by Jon Rappoport

December 28, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

It’s been twenty-four months since I first posted this. Would love to hear your thoughts on this article and President Trump two-years on. Sound off in the comments…


My position on Donald Trump

December 2016

I’ve written many words about the man and what he’s been doing. To repeat a few of them, his two most important achievements are: he’s contributing, in a major way, to the ongoing destruction of the credibility of big media; and he kept Hillary Clinton out of the White House.

Concerning the media— I am tremendously enthusiastic about what Trump has done. I pop champagne corks on that one. He’s provided a public service for the ages. We would be light years beyond where we are now, if the world of conventional journalism hadn’t sold its soul, its morality, its intelligence, and its hunger for getting to the bottom of things so long ago. In his own improvisations and riffs, Trump has turned the media stars on their heads looking out of their asses. He has been merciless. He has worked acrobatic tricks worthy of a Salvador Dali. When they thought he was here, he was there. When they thought they had him pinned against the wall, he vanished and there was no wall. When they thought he was done, he was starting. When they assumed they were occupying a higher position, he was poking them in the solar plexus of their pretensions and exposing them as rank amateurs. They go sober-serious, he laughs. They deride and mock him, he reminds them they’re supposed to be professional. They scream and go ballistic, he walks away. He’s supposed to be in Washington, he’s in New York. He’s supposed to lay out his schedule for them, he vanishes. He shouldn’t talk to a foreign leader, he talks to a foreign leader. The Washington Post reports the Russians hacked the election, he says the CIA is making it up.

Make no mistake about it, Globalists of every stripe and disguise infect Washington like the plague. Their goals, reputations, connections, and paychecks are on the line. They want to neutralize Trump by any means possible. He has hammered the TPP, and said he’ll cancel it (Chuck Schumer has already said it’s dead). He is raising the banner of nationalism, not Globalism, and he promises to bring back jobs to America…everything he promises in this regard is running counter to the Rockefeller agenda of destruction.

Will he change the pernicious culture, which is devolving to the point where “free-everything” for nothing is considered the most illuminated version of political philosophy? He will try, but indirectly, by opening up new levels of employment.

Will he continue to slam major media control of the information flow? Yes. In that regard, he has already done more than any president in modern history.

And if language is important (and it is), his communication with the American people, in its direct colloquial style, is a distinct departure from the polished, empty, grotesque media/politician mechanical mind-numbing bullshit that has all but taken over the landscape.

Will he try to curtail the divide-and-conquer “race-war” mentality that has been heavily promoted over the last eight years? Again, his basic strategy is: give people jobs. Renew the economy. Float all boats.

Will Trump curtail open borders and reduce the reality of terrorists and criminals entering the US? Will he knock aside the unproven claims of global warmists and erase the absurd and dangerous carbon-tax plan? Will he rebuild the fading infrastructure of this country? Will he put Common Core out of its misery? I believe he will make progress in all these areas. How much progress? Impossible to predict.

Will he refuse to launch wars and covert ops of Empire? Will he bring massive numbers of US troops stationed abroad back home, kick the neocons out on their asses, and scale back the enormous influence of the military-industrial complex, which, after JFK, encircled America with its dream of a forever World Empire? This would be one of the most important actions he could launch as president. And the effort is like trying to turn an oil tanker around in a small space. To the degree he rebuilds the military, he’ll keep pouring $$ into the maw of the military-industrial machine. I think it’s possible that he and his advisors see, from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, that American Empire has reached an end-point. It is a failure. It can’t go further. The blowback on America has outflanked its lists of Empire-conquests. However, until Trump shows he’s really going to try to cancel the neocon American Empire, and means it, I’m not making any assumptions whatsoever.

Is Donald Trump more than a puppet in the hands of Globalists? I believe he is more than that.

Is he a mere tool who was handed the election by Globalists who realized Hillary Clinton was too sick and deranged to stay the course in the White House? I believe he is not a mere tool in their hands, even if they ended up supporting him.

Does he want the job of president ONLY for the purpose of feathering his personal nest and stroking his own ego? I don’t think that’s the case now, if it ever was.

***However, unraveling his myriad business interests is necessary, in order to discover whether his decisions as president add to his wealth. Handing over those businesses to his family isn’t a barrier against self-aggrandizing policies. Trump is, after all, a real estate hustler from way back.

One question in this regard: Trump appears ready to give US corporations a tax holiday, so they can bring back huge amounts of money they’ve stashed overseas, for the express purpose of buying shares of their own companies. This practice has been a way CEOs can make their operations look good (share prices go up) while actually producing nothing new. As a reader of mine suggested (and I ask), will this Trump policy of share-buying do nothing to rejuvenate those businesses, thus creating no new jobs? And will this policy enable Trump’s family to buy shares in whatever piece of the Trump empire is publicly traded, pushing up its stock price? This needs serious attention.

Will Trump roll back the many local incarnations of the UN’s criminal Agenda 21 blueprint for closely monitored, extensively planned technocratic towns and cities? I’m not sure he’s even aware of this massive incursion on life in America—aside from sanctuary cities fronted by virtue-signaling liberal snowflakes and paid operatives. He will take steps to reduce those bastions of hope and change.

Is it possible that, when all is said and done, Trump’s most important action will have been his merciless attack on major media—and by extension, their Globalist handlers? Yes. And by my measure, he would then have achieved a step toward freeing information and truth from its century-long prison of mind control. The consequences of such a liberation could be titanic. In the long run, Trump is far less important than the millions of people who could wake up from their deep slumber.

I believe Trump’s plan to bring employment back to America will involve a kind of FDR/New Deal program of trillion-dollar government contracts to rebuild the infrastructure. This is by no means free-market America. If his plan gets through the Congress, many new jobs will be created, yes. On the other hand, the $$ power of the federal government will increase. It’s never a great idea to give the feds more control as the number-one employer in the nation.


I think Trump favors jobs, all jobs, and will go to extremes to create them. This includes giving the green light to tech giants to keep carrying out contracts to expand the Surveillance State. He’ll find ways to allow the FDA to license new drugs more quickly, thus maiming and killing more Americans. He’ll cast a blind eye toward big corporate toxic GMOs/pesticides. He’ll overlook and ignore major areas of agricultural and industrial pollution, and permit them to expand.

Will Trump curtail the disturbing trend of militarizing local police forces across America? Doubtful.

Will he root out and eliminate the power of vicious gangs in inner cities—gangs who are holding residents hostage in their own communities? I believe he’ll make at least a minimum effort. Even if a president is motivated, that’s a very tall order.

I assume that as a businessman he has committed criminal acts of one kind or another. Do they rank as high as the pay-for-play Clinton Foundation and the mass obliteration of Libya, two of Hillary Clinton’s favorite operations? No. Not even close.

Will Trump favor big-corporate cronies with the gift of government contracts? I would think so.

Will he make deals and side-deals, some of which go beyond the literal bounds of law, to advance his presidential agenda? I would certainly think so. What president hasn’t?

Could everything I’m mentioning in this article go by the boards, because Trump’s enemies create sudden disasters for him to manage—disasters which dwarf all other issues and programs? Absolutely.

Could Trump himself make a fatal error that brings his house down? For example, could his advisors convince him to make a wide-ranging deal with Russia that includes the extradition of Edward Snowden to stand trial in America? Maybe.

Could Trump be convinced to start a dangerous war somewhere, perhaps in response to a planned false-flag operation designed for that very purpose? It’s possible.

Does he see that so-called liberals, who are really socialists and Globalists and technocrats, have come very close to taking over this country, under the banner of “share and care” and “empathy” and “love”—behind which they hide an endless supply of venom for those people who believe in a) working for their own rewards; b) individualism; and c) independence of thought? I think he plans to approach that gigantic reality with jobs and more jobs; his blanket solution. Put America back to work. Is that a real solution? Yes, it certainly helps. But here we are talking about the culture, and what he can possibly say to the American people to restore a sense of traditional values (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) that doesn’t come across as vapid sentimentality. He is a clever man. I believe he wants to sidestep a direct confrontation with “the values issue.” Instead, he wants to cure the genuine desperation many Americans feel because they can’t find decent work. He wants to create a boom in the domestic economy that floats all boats. I can’t fault him for that. However, a major part of the US economy has long been predicated on jobs that either produce nothing or produce toxic outcomes. Those engines aren’t going to go away.

I believe Trump can make progress in decimating the political-correctness disease. I believe he can help reverse the obsession with parsing people’s words and finding “hidden racist content.” And the issue where all this rubber meets the road is: immigration.

His opponents will keep saying that anything less than wide open borders is Hitlerian. His point is: there is a threat and a danger. Letting in felons; letting in potential terrorists and actual terrorists; letting in people who hate America and want everything they can get for free in America; letting in people who take jobs from Americans (including legal immigrants); letting in people who overburden the economy via all the free services they can obtain—this is wrong, this is suicide, this is crazy. It has nothing to do with racism.

If he succeeds in reducing this immigration threat—wall or no wall—he will go a significant distance in proving that protecting America has nothing to do with hatred.

At the same time (and I have to stress this again), he can’t decide to keep forwarding Empire abroad, thus exacerbating the desire for revenge against America among many people who feel the destructive force of the US military machine.

If he turns into just another jingoist, he’s finished. And he should be.

He needs to talk to Ron Paul. At length.

What about draining the swamp in Washington? This is another case of trying to turn around an oil tanker in a small space. He needs to provide vivid examples. For starters, he should pursue, with all speed, the gathering of specific evidence for the prosecution of Hillary and Bill Clinton, vis-à-vis the Clinton Foundation and its nefarious activities. No stone should be left unturned. That would set a new tone.

For people who need a heavy dose of who and what the Clintons are, I recommend immersing yourself in everything the late Christopher Hitchens wrote and said about them. (I’m sure Hitchens would hate a Trump presidency.)


—If I were in charge of everything from the beginning of the Republic in the 18th century (!), my goal would have been to make a hundred Republics with severely limited governments on this continent—with virtually no foreign entanglements of any kind (political or commercial)—instead, opting for self-sufficiency as the primary value. But that’s another story for another time. Meanwhile, I see a glint of light here, and I see risks and possibilities, and I see that perhaps we can make steps toward ridding America of the festering woes that have beset it: Empire, on the one hand; hideous liberalism masking a technocratic Globalist takeover that would sink us, on the other hand.

At no time over the past 30 years of working as a reporter have I felt all is lost. At no time have I felt that the forces arrayed against us are too great or too smart. At no time have I felt that all doors are closed. I take the long view. Many things can happen to wake people up—mainly themselves when they finally feel their way of operating and living has become self-defeating.

Rather than opting for pure hope now, I believe Trump’s feet should be held to the fire. He made promises. Those promises are clear. We should see authentic efforts from him in those directions.

I’m aware that some readers can only accept extreme views of Trump or any politician. Wonderful or terrible. Messianic or hideous. That’s not what I’ve presented here. I’ve presented what I see. So be it.

Stay tuned…


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

How CNN boss Jeff Zucker helped elect a US president and a governor of California

by Jon Rappoport

October 25, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

One thing you have to understand about Mr. Zucker. What he does, he does for show. For ratings. If he could get away with claiming Trump met with Putin on the dark side of the moon to concoct a way to beat Hillary Clinton, he would run with it. If he could get away with claiming Arnold Schwarzenegger was the love child of Joseph Stalin and Greta Garbo, he would lead the evening newscast with it. He keeps selling the CNN Trump-Russia “investigation” because he’s (barely) getting away with it and he thinks it’ll keep drawing an audience.

In April, CNN boss Jeff Zucker told the New York Times, “The idea that politics is sport is undeniable, and we understood that and approached it that way.” The “it” was certainly the 2016 presidential campaign.

Zucker always has understood politics in this corrupt way—and in the process, he helped elect a US president and a California governor.

Who is Trump’s most consistent media enemy now? CNN is right up there.

But Jeff Zucker, CNN’s boss, was the man who launched The Apprentice, starring Donald Trump, at NBC, in 2004.

In other words, Zucker happened to play a major role in electing Donald Trump. There is no getting around it.

Washington Post, October 2, 2016: “Looking for someone specific to hold responsible for the improbable rise of Donald Trump?”

“Although there are many options, you could do worse than to take a hard look at Jeff Zucker, president of CNN Worldwide.”

“It was Zucker, after all, who as the new head of NBC Entertainment gave Trump his start in reality TV with ‘The Apprentice’ and then milked the real estate developer’s uncanny knack for success for all it was worth in ratings and profits.”

“And it succeeded wildly — boosting the network’s ratings, as well as Zucker’s [and Trump’s] meteoric career. In turn, under Zucker, the show gave rise to ‘Celebrity Apprentice,’ another Trump extravaganza. And, in turn, Zucker became the head of NBC overall.”

“The show [The Apprentice] was built as a virtually nonstop advertisement for the Trump empire and lifestyle,” according to the book ‘Trump Revealed,’ by Washington Post journalists Marc Fisher and Michael Kranish.”

“The executive [Jeff Zucker] rode the Trump steed hard. When the reality-TV star was preparing to marry Melania Knauss in 2005, Zucker wanted to broadcast the wedding live. (Trump, uncharacteristically, declined.)”

“But make no mistake: There would be no Trump-the-politician without Trump-the-TV-star. One begot the other.”

POLITICS IS TELEVISION, AND TELEVISION IS POLITICS.

If you’re looking for a person who embodies that fake version of reality most purely, you need look no further than Jeff Zucker.

Despite his network’s present hatred of Trump, Zucker would give Trump his own show right now if he wanted one.

For ratings and ad revenues.

Let’s go back in time and consider another event, one which I’ve analyzed in great detail. It took place on NBC in 2003, when Zucker was the head of the network’s entertainment division. Keep in mind that The Tonight Show, with Jeno Leno, was a prime piece of the entertainment division then. What Leno pulled off in 2003 had to have the OK from Zucker, because it was a highly unusual move, a distinctly unethical move.

What happened when an actor wanted to launch a political career and become a governor? The whole news division of a major network surrendered itself, for one ratings-busting night, to a talk show.

This is how Arnold Schwarzenegger won the California governor’s race. It all came down to his famous appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, where he announced that he was going to run.

I obtained a copy of show, watched it many times, transcribed the dialogue, and noted the audience reactions.

Breaking down the segments revealed what happens when news and entertainment and PR and political advocacy all blur together in a single wave.

The show had been hyped as the moment when Arnold would announce whether he was going to run in the recall election against California Governor Gray Davis.

The public anticipation was sky-high. No one seemed concerned that NBC was turning over its news division, for one night, to its entertainment division. Jeff Zucker, head of NBC entertainment, was all in.

Turning over network news to network entertainment was precisely the subject of the best movie ever made about television, Paddy Chayefsky’s Network. That didn’t register with the national media.

If Arnold decided to run for governor, he wouldn’t be announcing it at a stale press conference at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, after a brief introduction from The Snoozer, LA Mayor Richard Riordan. No, Arnold would obtain a rocket boost from Jay Leno.

Keep in mind that talk shows warm up and prep their studio audiences to act and respond with amphetamine-like enthusiasm.

And then that audience transmits its glow and howling racket to the wider television audience, thereby blowing an artificially enhanced event across the landscape.

On the night of August 6, 2003, Tonight Show host Jay Leno devoted two six-minute segments to The Arnold.

Of course, it was more than an interview. Jay had been touting this night as the occasion for a key revelation in the comic play called The California Recall Election.

Arnold would say yes or Arnold would say no. He would run for governor or he would decline.

Bigger than conventional news, Arnold strode out on to Jay’s stage. A Tonight Show camera picked him up from a grossly complimentary low angle, making him appear even larger and more physically imposing than he is. Jay was positioned standing behind him, applauding, lending an affirmative gloss to the entrance. Already, it looked and felt political.

This was not a beginning; the impression was of something already in motion, a train to catch up with.

As the man of the hour sat down next to Jay, he commented that there was a big audience in the house (“Can you believe all these people here?”) and, capping his first gambit, he stated that every one of them was running for governor of California. Ha-ha. (At one point, there were 135 gubernatorial candidates.)

Quickly, Jay gets down to business. The business of making the evening extra-special: “Now, I don’t think we’ve ever had this much press at The Tonight Show for any—[let’s look at] our press room—normally [the press] sit in the audience.”

Cut to a stark room, shot from above. About 40 reporters doing almost nothing at tables. Obviously, the room was set up for this event.

Jay cracks a couple of jokes about the press gaggle, lowers his voice and turns his full attention to Arnold: “…it’s been weeks…and people going back and forth…taken you awhile, and you said you would come here tonight and tell us your decision. So what is your decision?”

Arnold replies, “Well, Jay, after thinking for a long time, my decision is…”

The sound cuts off, and the TV screen displays an old PLEASE STAND BY notice. Thick white letters against a background of an ancient station test pattern from the 1950s. A mechanical tone plays for several seconds.

The audience laughs. There is applause, too.

Cut back to Jay and Arnold. Arnold says, “That’s why I decided that way.” Big audience laughter.

Jay, going along—as if Arnold had spilled the beans during a momentary technical malfunction—shouts, “Right, good, right! I tell you I am shocked! I can’t believe it! I can’t believe it!”

Jay then starts out from the bottom again. “[Whether you’re going to run has been] in my monologue…it’s been good for, like, a thousand jokes over the last couple of weeks…”

Once more, he gently poses the question. “What are you going to do?” It’s still too early for an answer, and Jay knows it.

Arnold wants another false start. He’s planned it.

“Well, my decision obviously is a very difficult decision to make, you know…it was the [most] difficult decision that I’ve made in my entire life, except the one in 1978 when I decided to get a bikini wax.”

Laughter, applause, whistles.

The studio audience warms to the fact that Arnold glimpses an absurdity about the whole proceeding.

“He’s our Arnie, laughing the way we laugh. Hell, all we’ve got are laughs in this life, and our boy isn’t going to go stuffed-shirt on us.”

Arnold then gives his rehearsed political speech.

He reflects that California was a grand land of opportunity when he arrived in 1968. It was the greatest state in the greatest nation.

However, now the atmosphere in California is “disastrous,” he says. There is a “disconnect” (thank you, pop psych 101) between the people and the politicians.

“The politicians are fiddling, fumbling, and failing.”

Very big applause follows. The audience is doing its job.

Close by, off camera, we hear Jay thumping his own personal hand claps. The host is pumping his studio crowd and giving his seal of approval to a remark whose veracity is supposed to be tested by the recall election itself.

And there is a phalanx of teen-age girls screaming at a very high pitch in the studio. They’re adding a major element of hysterical enthusiasm. Where did they come from? Are they a legitimate Arnold demographic? Were they pulled out of a Valley mall to paper the crowd? Do they migrate from talk show to talk show? From this point forward, they’ll play a huge role in every audience outburst.

Arnold gathers steam. He tells one and all that the people of California are doing their job.

They’re working hard.

Paying their taxes.

Raising their families.

But the politicians are not doing their job.

Now he executes a blend around the far turn: “And the man that is failing the people more than anyone is [Governor] Gray Davis!”

The crowd goes wild. The girls scream as if they’re at a kiddie rock concert in the magic presence of four sixteen-year-old pretty boys. It’s eerie.

And now the audience is suddenly on edge.

They can handle the juice. The longed-for result.

Arnold senses it.

He lets the audience-hysteria roller coaster die down and then, taking it up to heaven, announces that, he, Arnold is…

Yes…

GOING TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA.

Boom. Bang. Pow. Zow.

The studio audience cracks the ceiling. Wilder than wild. The girls are shrieking walls of sound way above high C. Undoubtedly, the show is flashing applause signs.

Jay shakes his head and grins like a pro hypster who’s just witnessed a very, very good variation on bait and switch. As if Arnold was supposed to say no, but now he’s saying yes.

The Tonight Show band lays down some heavy chords.

Jay shouts, “There you go! There you go! That woke ‘em up! That woke ‘em up!” We cut to the press room, and sure enough, the reporters are now on phones, typing at their keyboards. The story is live and good to go. A global event is underway.

Amid the roar and the music, Jay, smiling broadly and wisely, shakes his finger at Arnold and says to him, “You know something?”

It seems Jay’s about to utter, “That’s the best damn switcheroo I ever saw!” But he doesn’t do it. Instead, as the noise abates, he says it’s a good time to go to a break.

The band plows into a funk riff, under the applause, and the show cuts to commercial.

The sea has parted. The consecration has been performed.

The ax felled the tree in the forest, and everyone heard it.

Marshall McLuhan rolled over in his grave, sat up, grinned, lit a cigar, and sipped a little brandy.

After the commercials, in the next six-minute segment, Jay and Arnold attain a few more highs of audience madness.

High one: Arnold mentions that 1.6 million Californians have signed the recall petition and are saying, “We are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore!” Wowee.

No one notices or remembers this line was made massively famous in Network, the bitter satire on news as entertainment.

Is it remotely possible Arnold recalls the 1976 Paddy Chayefsky film and its newsman, Howard Beale, who survives a ratings dive by delivering a delirious populist message on air, and becomes, for a short time, the most revered man in America?

Is it possible Arnold knows the TV network portrayed in the film gave its news division to its entertainment division—exactly what’s transpiring right there, for the moment, on The Tonight Show?

High two: Arnold clarifies his message to all politicians everywhere. “Do your job for the people and do it well, or otherwise you’re out. Hasta la vista, baby!” Zowee.

High three: After telling the crowd they all know Gray Davis can run a dirty campaign “better than anyone”—and that Davis has been selling off pieces of California to special interests—Arnold says with conviction and confidence, “I do not have to bow to any special interests; I have plenty of money; no one can pay me off; trust me, no one.” Audience hysteria. They love that he’s rich.

High four: Arnold says of Davis, “Everyone knows this man has to go!” Huge roar.

High five: Arnold plays a final pun card. “I will pump up Sacramento!” Yet another roar.

The band takes it out with more funk. Jay stands up and goes over and hugs Arnold, in profile, near his desk, and follows him closely toward an exit at stage left. Jay starts to whisper something in Arnold’s ear, but pulls back and smiles and, still on camera, applauds Arnold along with the audience.

It’s show biz in a bottle. Jay, Arnold, the crowd, the band, bouncing off one another and yielding the effect of absolute (synthetic) thrill.

The Tonight Show provided the moment for a globally famous actor to decide to run for office in the same state where the show originates. In the entertainment capital of the world. In front of the clear prime-cut admiration of the host.

And the studio audience, that specialized creature from whose maw instant credibility can be coaxed and birthed in seconds—was very, very ready to go. All along.

Imagine an advance man pre-selling this kind of PR stunt:

“I know a guy who can introduce your message to the softest, wildest, water-cooler crowd this side of paradise.”

“Oh yeah? How big a crowd?”

“Only a thousand or two. But they’re instantly hooked up to, say, ten million people in the target area. It’s as infectious as Ebola.”

“Come on.”

“And that’s not all. I’ve got a host for that softest, wildest audience, and he has the whole world in the palm of his hand. When he exposes your message—for the first time anywhere—and when his audience goes nuts with glee, nothing will stand in your way. Your opponents will go down like bowling pins.”

“Too good to be true.”

“Wrong. And let me point out what I’m saving you from. If you tried to launch your message at a shopping center or a press club or a hotel ballroom or construction site or on a movie-studio sound stage, you could get laughed right out of town. Really. Because, let’s face it, you do have a pretty vapid message when you boil it down. You need a unique venue, where the joke and the camp and the craziness are all folded into the event itself, and the shock and surprise and hoopla are integrated. You need an audience that celebrates bad and good jokes as all good, and the host has the ability to marry up every shred of this bizarre happening and take his crowd to orgasm.”

“And the contagion factor?”

“The audience in the television studio and the viewing audience at home are One. My boy, what stuns and delights the former incorporates itself into the living cells of the latter. The home audience is terrified of being left out. The host and his in-studio crowd give instant universal legitimacy to the moment. Believe me, it’s irresistible.”

“Like that McLuhan thing. The audience becomes the actor.”

“Precisely.”

That is how it happened. That is how Arnold Schwarzenegger obtained his billion-dollar ad on Jay Leno, on August 6, 2003, and that was when he won the recall election. There was no counter-strategy for it.

Governor Gray Davis was left out in the cold.

The announcement of Arnold’s candidacy was the end of the election.

In the aftermath, media pundits did not punch up this piece of mind control with any serious heat; nor did they immediately seek a heavy investigation of NBC’s ethics in allowing the Leno-Arnold event to take place.

The Tonight Show was a perfect killing ground: Arnold, the earnest and powerful and Germanically jolly and occasionally self-deprecating soul, aware of the comic-book component of his success; Jay, the jokester, who can work as a homer and straight man at the drop of a hat; and Jay’s audience, willingly propelled into the late-night nexus of “we’ll laugh so hard at any old damn thing we’ll make a cosmic celebration out of it.”

Something out of nothing.

GE (then the owner of NBC): “We bring good things to life.”

An election campaign message was passed, hand to hand, mind to mind, adrenal gland to adrenal gland, from a concocted, groomed, cultivated, prepackaged television studio audience to every voter-district in California, and out to the whole world.

When people show up in the studio to see Leno in person, they soon understand the game. They’re not just there as happy onlookers. They’re drawn into the process. They’re offered a trade-off.

If they become active shills for the show right there in the studio, they’ll become part of the story. They’ll attain new status. Their laughs and squeals and shrieks and rebound guffaws, their revved-up salvational applause, at those moments when a guest segment or a joke is falling flat, will provide key segue and filler and affirmation and speed candy for the larger audience at home. It’s a group collaboration.

Who cares—except when a fading movie action hero suddenly says he’s going to take over the reins of California?

In the television studio, and in millions of homes, the audience roared and helped Arnold go for his coronation. They experienced a reasonable facsimile of emotional torque and busted a move that showered sparks around Arnold’s head and pushed him through a porthole into an ozone that just might have been the closest thing they’d ever find to immortality.

On October 10, three days after Arnold scored number one in the recall vote count, The NY Times ran a piece by Bill Carter headlined, “NBC Supports the Politically Partisan Leno.”

But Carter’s story was merely about Jay, on the night of October 7, taking the stage in Los Angeles to introduce Arnold as the recall election winner.

THIS was the issue? This was the barrier that Leno had crossed? Carter mentioned nothing about those 12 minutes on August 6th, on The Tonight Show, when Arnold announced he was running and thereby sewed up the election.

Jeff Zucker, then the head of entertainment at NBC (NOW THE BOSS AT CNN), told Carter he was aware Jay was going to introduce Arnold at the victory celebration. “I did not and do not have a problem with it,” he said.

Zucker noted that Jay was a private citizen with all the accruing rights of same.

Not a word from Zucker either, about the propriety of Leno hosting Arnold’s campaign launch on August 6, on The Tonight Show.

The Studio Audience, on the night of August 6, 2003, fingered and chose and elected a governor of California.

Jay Leno has gone on to thousands of other jokes.

But he’ll never forget that one.

And neither will Zucker.

He helped elect Arnold. And he made Trump a global star of the first magnitude on The Apprentice, and thereby helped him win the presidency.

If you like interesting coincidences, both the Leno Moment and launch of The Apprentice happened in 2004. And when Donald Trump left The Apprentice in 2015, who took over as the host?

Arnold Schwarzenegger, of course.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Destroy Trump for opposing NAFTA

by Jon Rappoport

September 3, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

NAFTA…The North American Free Trade Agreement…born on January 1, 1994…it’s a deal among the governments of the U S, Mexico and Canada.

One group has stated:

“Negotiated behind closed doors with hundreds of official corporate advisors, NAFTA was radically different than past trade deals that focused on traditional trade matters, like cutting border taxes. Instead, most of NAFTA’s provisions grant new powers and privileges to multinational corporations.”

So Trump recently spoke out decisively against NAFTA—and as in any situation where he speaks at all, he’s attacked by the press.

Here is a pop quiz. Here are three statements about NAFTA. You decide who uttered them.

ONE: “…most of NAFTA’s provisions grant new powers and privileges to multinational corporations. These new powers make it easier for corporations to outsource jobs…NAFTA’s ‘investor protections’ create incentives for corporations to relocate production and jobs elsewhere. Indeed, the U.S. has lost more than 950,000 American jobs due to NAFTA, according to the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) database.”

“Plus, NAFTA guts the Buy American policies that require the government to buy American-made goods when spending our tax dollars. This outsources our tax dollars rather than investing them to create jobs here.”

“NAFTA has also lowered U.S. wages, increased inequality, and hurt U.S. manufacturing and agriculture in all 50 states. At the same time, it has decimated the Mexican economy, driving millions from their homes.”

TWO: “I will fundamentally rewrite NAFTA, other trade agreements…Not only did I oppose permanent normal trade relations with China, I stood with Steel workers and united electrical workers in opposition to it…Normalized trade with China cost us 3.2 million jobs including over 120,000 here in Pennsylvania.”

THREE: “Remember, NAFTA was one of the WORST Trade Deals ever made. The U.S. lost thousands of businesses and millions of jobs. We were far better off before NAFTA – should never have been signed. Even the Vat Tax was not accounted for. We make new deal or go back to pre-NAFTA!”

OK? Ready with your answers? Yes, you guessed correctly from recognizing the rhetoric—statement 3 was written by President Trump (an additional part to that statement was also tweeted here).

Statement 1 was written by Lori Wallach, who works for Ralph Nader’s group, Public Citizen, which is decidedly on the political Left. And statement number 2 was made by none other than presidential candidate and avowed socialist, Bernie Sanders.

What’s the main difference between these three characters? Wallach and Sanders can say anything they want to, and the amount of heat coming their way is relatively minor. No matter what Trump says, he gets heat. And yet…

On this MAJOR issue, NAFTA, and free-trade treaties in general, Wallach, Sanders, and Trump are in agreement. They all see the insanity and criminality. A socialist, a far-left activist, and a bull capitalist.

Thus demonstrating that, for the press, it matters not what you say, it only matters who they decide you are.

And they decide who you are according to an agenda. Whose agenda? Simple: Rockefeller Globalists, who love free trade treaties, who have spent decades crafting them and foisting them on the public, who see President Trump as a wild card unpredictable swaggering cowboy…


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Trump, the NY Times, and fake news

by Jon Rappoport

July 30, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

—Major newspapers will, now and then, break big stories. But then they’ll walk away from them. The follow-up leads are obvious. But no. Those leads would result in some SERIOUS revelations about IMPORTANT PEOPLE. So forget it. It’s one and done—

We’re in the middle of an escalating information-war.

Trump and Sulzberger, the NY Times publisher, meet, talk, and then launch charges at each other. Sulzberger claims Trump’s attacks on MSM could result in violence against journalists.

Like him or hate him, Trump is threatening the media monopoly as no other modern president has.

Social media are shadow-banning and censoring voices perceived as pro-Trump.

I thought I’d boil a few things down and simplify them for AG Sulzberger, the 37-year-old publisher of the Times.

He and his paper are fake for several reasons—one is, they don’t follow up on their own best stories. It’s called continuing investigation—and they don’t do it. It’s their duty, and they are grossly derelict.

Two examples, both from the spring of 2015. On April 23, the Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.” The piece made an excellent circumstantial case for Hillary and Bill as key players in a criminal scheme to sell 20% of US uranium to Putin.

But…no serious follow up. No deeper investigation. No pressure on the players. Just one and done.

Ditto for a 3/15/15 Times story, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” The article details a revolutionary candidate for next-generation vaccines—injecting synthesized genes into the body to “protect against disease”—and thereby permanently altering the vaccine recipient’s DNA.

The story is nothing less than a revelation about a plan—right out in the open—to do genetic engineering on billions of humans who get vaccinated. No speculation necessary.

And again, no follow up. No deeper digging. No pressure on the vaccine researchers and their funders.

Here is the same pattern, from the Times’ chief competitor, the Washington Post (9/4/13), “When the US looked the other way on chemical weapons”: “…The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items…including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague…”

Mind-boggling. The US government, using a non-profit called the American Type Culture Collection and the US Centers for Disease Control (!), shipped dozens of biowarfare materials to Iraq in the 1980s.

No follow up. No further ongoing investigation. No laying open the corrupt CDC.

Here’s another Post story—October 15, 2017, “The Drug Industry’s Triumph Over the DEA”: “In April 2016, at the height of the deadliest drug epidemic in U.S. history, Congress effectively stripped the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against large drug companies suspected of spilling [trafficking] prescription [opioid] narcotics onto the nation’s streets.”

This piece is a blockbuster. It indicts virtually every member of Congress, and Obama, for passing a law hamstringing enforcement in the fight against the biggest opioid traffickers, pharmaceutical companies. But again, no ongoing digging. No pressure on members of Congress to repeal the 2016 law they passed, a law which keeps the DEA from busting Pharma executives and freezing illegal opioid shipments.

Here is where the Post could go with that story (but won’t) in an ongoing way:

“So, Senator, why haven’t you introduced a new bill to cancel the damaging one you helped pass in 2016? In your home state, the latest reports show there are at least 100,000 opioid addicts, 800 of whom have died. Don’t you want to let the DEA do its job? What are you waiting for?”

“This is outrageous. You’re accusing me of—“

“We’ve conducted a poll in your state. Your constituents want to know what you’re doing. So tell them…”

“I’m very active.”

“How? Exactly how are you active? Yesterday, we interviewed the mayor of your home town. He’s a Democrat like you. He says you’ve done nothing to stem the tide. We’ve put together a list of pharmaceutical money you’ve taken over the past ten years…”

This is why the Times and the Post and other similar mainstream outlets are fake.

Outrageously fake.

They have the resources and the reporters, but they don’t follow up on the most crucial stories they cover.

They refuse. They “move on.”

If they’ll comment at all on this glaring dereliction of duty, it’s: “Well, we already covered that.” “It’s old news.” “Our readers aren’t interested in that anymore.” “Mounting an ongoing investigation would cross the line into making the news instead of reporting on it.” Etc., etc.

All lies.

Mr. Sulzberger, who was handed the job publishing the NY Times by his family, should stop worrying about the Trump effect and just do journalism.

Of course he won’t, because he’s fake.

He has no intention of getting to the bottom of things in a way that would upset some very powerful apple carts.

He knows it, we know it.

And oh yes, one other thing, via Gateway Pundit: “NYT Publisher Complains to Trump About ‘Potential’ Violence Against Journalists – Ignores Over 500 Violent Attacks on Trump Supporters.” “There have been over 538 violent attacks against Trump supporters since the 2016 election season.”

Is Mr. Sulzberger interested?


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

It’s Showtime in North Korea

It’s Showtime in North Korea

by Jon Rappoport

June 13, 2018

People Magazine: “’North Korea has great beaches,’ Trump told reporters. ‘You see that whenever they’re exploding cannons into the ocean. I said, “Boy, look at that view. Wouldn’t that make a great condo?”’ Trump said he advised Kim that instead of pursuing his nuclear ambitions, he should build ‘the best hotels in the world’ on North Korea’s coastline to boost the country’s economy. ‘Think of it from a real estate perspective,’ Trump said.”

Sometimes a war is necessary, in order to do business. Necessary for the people making war.

Sometimes the threat of war is enough. It spurs growth.

—Here’s a shoreline of brand new condos. Move-in ready. Restaurants, hotels, shops, synthetic streets emerging from barren land. Let’s build a modern city. Let’s build ten. This could be how North Korea is shaping up.

Instead of a nuclear catastrophe, bring in the usual players, the giant construction companies, the electric-power utilities. They know how to put it all together.

As I wrote some months ago, for Trump the business of America is business, period. Let’s make a deal. You may like it, you may hate it, but there it is. That’s how he’s always rolled.

Environmental problems, pollution, earthquakes from fracking? Minor issues. Just keep building. The investors make piles of money. Tourists show up. The local backwater culture never saw anything like it? They’ll adapt. They’ll get used to it. Call it democracy, monarchy, dictatorship, socialism, who cares? There’s cash on the table.

The new North Korea may eventually look like a hundred versions of Dubai side by side. War and sanctions are the threats; business is the solution.

Trump has that viewpoint. Jobs will come, projects will climb upwards and sideways. Does it feel like a new era of capitalism or crazy gloss and shine? Depends on who you are. Are you nestled in the top tier of profiteers, or are you making beds and delivering meals in brand new hotels? Are you a janitor three floors below ground level making your daily rounds, or are you booking a suite thirty floors up in the air?

Kim understands the whole game, because he has China as a model. Repressive rule from above, along with active zones of volcanic capital investment and massive production of goods.

Foreign banks and financiers are popping champagne corks. The North Korean government will find a way to make hay while the sun shines, too, even if they have to back the manufacture of a synthetic sun. They’ll invent a new bank, they’ll invent new money out of air, they’ll say it’s “for the people.” A small farmer scratching out a meager existence on frozen land will turn into a waiter in a luxury restaurant in a city that was never there until yesterday. Voila. French cuisine spiced with kimchi.

Bring on the golf courses. The tennis courts. The equestrian show places, the NBA game of the week.

Absolute duty to the government leadership and its mottos of socialism will find translation into duty and obedience to the companies and corporations transforming the landscape. “We have the best workers in the world!” And those workers will unite under the rubric of money. Same tune, different lyrics.

Trump thinks, “Show me a shithole country, and I’ll show you a future of unlimited profit.” Only now he doesn’t have to worry about losses on the books and bankruptcies along the way. He doesn’t have to worry (if he ever did) about cooking the accounting ledgers. He’s both business and government. The whole North Korea renovation WILL BE cooked books—and it’s entirely acceptable, because it will be measured by expansion, visible to the world in hundreds of ways.

Anybody who is anybody will get his piece of the action. And no one who is anyone will ask questions.

A history of frozen wastelands and brazen population control will, one day, appear as a mere footnote in a Pyongyang museum. “Yes, it was once that way, but under our immortal leadership, we have triumphed and become entirely modern. Now we rule by edict and force in order to build a paradise for every citizen. Triple bacon burgers! Nachos! Rodeo Drive!”

Sort out the difference between low and high consumer culture according to what’s in your wallet.

It’s Showtime in North Korea.

This is the mouth-watering prospect for investors.

As I say, Kim knows the new model just by looking at China. He loses nothing in the way of control. He just plays from a different deck of cards—all aces.

Of course, in order for a titanic deal to go through, China will have to be included. No doubt, behind the scenes, they’ve been at the bargaining table. The Trump “trade war” with Xi Jinping has a number of moving parts.

Ready, set, go. Crony capitalism rides again.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

To Trump: how to win the war in Afghanistan

To Trump: how to win the war in Afghanistan

by Jon Rappoport

May 29, 2018

Win the war in Afghanistan? Impossible, you say?

Dear Mr. Trump: it can be done, I assure you.

There is a pattern. It’s tried and true. It’s been tested in America for decades. So let’s rely on this accumulated wisdom and put it to good use. Finally.

Ready?

Buckle up. This doesn’t need an executive summary. It isn’t a position paper. It’s an all-out attack. Let’s roll!

From hundreds of planes, drop fast food all over Afghanistan. Burgers. Fishsticks. McMuffins. Legs, breasts, wings—two weeks of chicken done right. It’s a good intro. Lightens everybody up a little. Hey, they’ve been cooking vulture over yak excrement for centuries. They’ll love the change. And the numerous chemicals in the food will begin to slow them down. That’s a given.

Then, from those same planes—candy! Fifty thousand tons of gum drops, jelly beans, Almond Joy, Reese. Hell, Reese all by itself is unstoppable.

Sugar! You’re telling me people can resist sugar? They’ll be scooping that stuff up off the frozen ground. In high mountain areas, tribes live on lichen. All of a sudden, here come 20 colors of Reaganesque jelly beans out of the sky!

Give them enough sugar, and they’ll be running in circles one minute and lying back and napping the next. It’s chemical determinism.

A month of heavenly candy.

Then next, a million cases of various diet sodas dumped out of our planes. Aspartame! Weird those dudes out. Three months, and they won’t be able to find their way back to their yurts. They’ll be bumping into rocks and trees, howling at the moon.

Now comes the heavy action. It takes a little longer. After installing an Afghan wireless grid, carpet bomb the joint with cell phones and iPads. Beam in Soaps, Judge Judy, Rachel Ray, Fallon and Colbert, Oprah, Little House on the Prairie reruns, Law and Order, and yes—sports! Soccer, and, of course, women’s beach volleyball! Kidding me? Amazons wearing G-strings running and leaping on sand, hour after hour?

“Hey, dude, it’s time for the Friday night tribe meeting.”

“Shh! First, two hours of Hermosa Beach Women’s Finals. Then Victoria and Billy just adopted a baby. She can’t have kids. Billy paid two million for a little girl. But it’s actually Daisy’s baby. Nobody knows it.”

The fabric of Afghan society comes apart at the seams.

US planes fly over with a few million cases of Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, and Ritalin. Open the bomb-bay doors. Drop those suckers right down the slot. And tranqs! Valium! Old stocks of Librium. Opioids.

On the ground, pills and capsules everywhere. You can’t walk by without picking a few up and swallowing them. It’s another law of nature.

You’ve got the whole country hooked on meds. They’re weaving and wobbling and gnashing their teeth, when they aren’t completely zoned. A suicide problem begins to develop.

And finally comes the coup de grace. Porn programming! Linda Lovelace, Marilyn Chambers, Amber Lynn, John Holmes, Ron Jeremy, Suzi Suzuki, Rick Masters. The classics.

Dudes in Kabul and up in the Hindu Kush are eating Butterfingers, downing Zoloft, and getting their vicarious porn freak on. A certain amount of internecine murder is expected, to say nothing of what happens when the WOMEN get hold of the porn files for their own private viewing…

All this, in a matter of a year or two, will totally destroy the Afghan culture, such as it is. You see, Mr. Trump, we’ve got weapons we didn’t know we had. Real weapons!

So we let all this simmer for a while. We let things take their natural course. We’re already out of there. Not a single US casualty is being sustained.

And then, just to make sure we have the entire country enveloped and warped beyond repair, the CIA begins to beam, through all those cell phones and iPads—take a deep breath—ready?—the AFGHAN HOME SHOPPING NETWORK!

Boom!

Oh yes, Mr. Trump, where there’s a will, there’s a way. The Afghan people don’t have money? They’ll find money! They’ll sell each other if they have to! They’ll pawn their old muskets and CIA supplied weapons and take out second mortgages on their shacks and huts and yurts.

The Afghan Home Shopping Network won’t be denied. Shampoos, soap on a rope, shower caps, earrings, toe rings, rugs, couches, square-dance instruction CDs, food storage containers, kitchen knives, scarves, fans, belts, undies, shelving, shoes, pet food, bird houses, pot holders, battery-operated hair dryers, perfume, books on tape, storage containers, stockings, lipstick, eye shadow, bathrobes, bracelets…

Victory.

Absolute conquest.

And not a shot fired.

And after the whole population has developed MAJOR symptoms from this all-out campaign, send in the doctors and the shrinks, so they can diagnose! Diagnose diseases and illnesses and disorders from here to Sunday—and they’ll prescribe more toxic drugs! And vaccines, of course, which push compromised immune systems over the edge of the cliff.

It’s a party.

America does to the Afghans what it’s done to itself.

Because you see, that’s the pattern. America knows it intimately, because America has bought into it.

America is already that kind of society. Who better to impose it on another population?

There you have it, Mr. Trump. Bang-bang. The formula and the game plan for an ultimate takedown.

Throughout history, no one has ever really won a war in Afghanistan.

You’ll be the first.

You can preen and swagger and congratulate yourself.

You can declare victory.

Your generals may not like it, but who cares? They won’t be able to deny the outcome.

And Congress? Hardly worth a mention.

They’re already drugged to the gills with prescription meds, right?

You like slam-dunks, don’t you, Mr. Trump?

This is the big one.

Big, bigger, biggest.


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Syria missile strikes: based on what evidence?

Syria missile strikes: based on what evidence?

Based on what constitutional authority?

by Jon Rappoport

April 16, 2018

“Let’s see, US Deep State actors from intelligence agencies, the Pentagon, and the Department of State, along with US allies, played a MAJOR role in creating, funding, supplying, and sustaining ISIS, while purportedly doing everything possible to destroy ISIS. No problem. Why should there be a problem?” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Trump and the Pentagon claim the strikes were based on clear evidence President Assad’s forces used chemical weapons on their own civilian citizens.

The Russians point out that international inspectors were due to investigate the chemical-weapons claims on Saturday—and their findings would have denied Assad chemical attacks took place—therefore, to prevent this embarrassment, the US-led missile attacks were launched one day earlier.

Posted at Washingtonsblog.com:

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Evidence Required for Military Decision on Syria

Mr. President,

“We the undersigned Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity join a number of other credible experts including former UK Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford…former UN weapons inspectors and former military officers who are strongly recommending that you obtain and review actual evidence from the site of the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, before ordering any military action. We have long brought to light significant evidence questioning the provenance of chemical weapons indicating that rebel forces may have tried to produce and use such toxic agents in Syria.”

“The main question that arises is, ‘What motive would the Syrian government have to attack its own people when it is enjoying popular support for routing anti-government rebels? Why would it risk Western ire?’…”

Attacks and wars initiated by governments aren’t prefaced by detailed evidence made available to the people. Presenting the whole story isn’t necessary, as far as governments are concerned.

In the US, Congress goes along with the White House. The media go along with the White House.

The last time “evidence” was rolled out—“Saddam was developing WMDs, bought uranium from Niger, bought aluminum tubes for nuke weapons production”—the whole show devolved into a farce and fell apart.

Now, it’s just “trust us.”

Many Trump supporters aren’t buying the package. They believed Trump when he said the US was going to abandon empire-building and leave foreign nations alone and let them settle their own conflicts.

Now, a number of theories abound. Trump was duped by the military-industrial complex. Trump was never serious about refraining from launching military attacks. Trump is compromising now, but he has a further secret strategy in mind, a brilliant strategy against the Deep State. Trump is bowing to the Globalists, who want to continue destabilizing the Middle East. Trump is actually carrying out an Israeli (and/or Saudi) agenda. Attacking Syria is part of a US, British, and French plan involving access to oil in the region. Trump is pretending to step up his opposition to Russia (Assad’s ally), to prove he isn’t soft on Russia, to deflate the ferocious assault on him vis-à-vis the “Russia influenced the election” claim, to deflect Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation. Trump wants to improve his poll numbers, which always rise for any president in a time of war. Trump has no idea what he’s doing. And so forth and so on.

There is no will, no determination, no desire, within the US government colossus, to be responsive to the wishes of the American people, when it comes to making war. There is no felt need to explain why war is necessary, in very specific terms that can be verified or rejected. There is no need to wait until evidence is thoroughly investigated.

This is nothing new. Trump is no exception.

Since 1998, how many Americans knew about, cared, responded, or tried to investigate US Tomahawk Cruise missiles launched at Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Bosnia & Herzegovina? And these attacks don’t include the recent history of untold numbers of drone strikes.

“Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war. The President, meanwhile, derives the power to direct the military after a Congressional declaration of war from Article II, Section 2, which names the President Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.” (Wex Legal Dictionary)

Presidents, of course, have wormed and weaseled their way around these strictures by calling war “police actions” or “single attacks.”

And now we have this missile attack on Syria, purportedly launched to knock out chemical-weapons facilities.

This is a classic Orwellian operation: The enemy is who we are told the enemy is, and he will remain the enemy as long as our leaders say he is.

Images sent our way are described by official voice-over and given meaning, which we are supposed to accept without question.

The “good forces” opposing the enemy in Syria are named the “rebels,” instead of ISIS terrorists our leaders helped create. This, too, we are supposed to accept.

But wait. According to The Intercept, “So while over 80 members of Congress wrote to Trump on Friday night stating that ‘engaging our military in Syria … without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,’ their action has no impact.”

Strange. Major media haven’t blasted, with big headlines, Congressional opposition to the Trump missile strike. News coverage has been urging and supporting the strike.

It gets stranger. The Intercept: “Trump almost certainly does have some purported legal justification provided to him by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel [OLC] — but no one else, including Congress, can read it.”

What?

“The Office of Legal Counsel is often called the Supreme Court of the executive branch, providing opinions on how the president and government agencies should interpret the law.”

“We know that Trump received a top secret OLC opinion justifying the previous U.S. strike on Syria on April 6, 2017. Friday’s bombing undoubtedly relied on the same memo or one with similar reasoning.”

The US Justice Department is “its own judiciary.” And its legal justifications for green lighting military attacks are secret.

Constitutional Separation of Powers doctrine?

Irrelevant.

Former long-term US Congressman and presidential candidate, Ron Paul, did much to stir up the American people with libertarian ideas and proposals, and, in the process, large numbers of Americans eventually went over to Trump’s side, believing he was the reincarnation of Paul’s positions—but with a much better reach into the heartland of the country.

Read what Paul wrote on October 2, 2017, and compare it with Trump’s present stance. Paul: “Now that the defeat of ISIS in Syria appears imminent, with the Syrian army clearing out some of the last ISIS strongholds in the east, Washington’s interventionists are searching for new excuses to maintain the illegal US military presence in the country. Their original rationale for intervention has long been exposed as another lie.”

“Remember that President Barack Obama initially involved the US military in Iraq and Syria to ‘prevent genocide’ of the Yazidis and promised the operation would not drift into US ‘boots on the ground.’ That was three years ago and the US military became steadily more involved while Congress continued to dodge its Constitutional obligations. The US even built military bases in Syria despite having no permission to do so! Imagine if Syria started building military bases here in the US against our wishes.”

“After six years of war the Syrian government has nearly defeated ISIS and al-Qaeda and the US-backed ‘moderates’ [‘rebels’] turned out to be either Islamist extremists or Kurdish soldiers for hire. According to a recent report, the US has shipped two billion dollars worth of weapons to fighters in Syria via eastern Europe. Much of these weapons ended up in the hands of ISIS directly, or indirectly through ‘moderates’ taking their weapons with them while joining ISIS or al-Qaeda.”

“’Assad must go’,” proclaimed President Obama back in 2011, as he claimed that the Syrian leader was committing genocide against his own people and that regime change was the only way to save Syrians. Then earlier this year, when eastern Aleppo was about to be liberated by the Syrian government, the neocons warned that Assad would move in and kill all the inhabitants. They warned that the population of eastern Aleppo would flee from the Syrian army. But something very different happened. According to the UN’s International Organization for Migration, 600,000 refugees returned to Syria by August. Half of the returnees went back to Aleppo, where we were told Assad was waiting to kill them.”

“What happened? The neocons and ‘humanitarian interventionists’ lied. Just as they lied about Libya, Iraq, and so on.”

If Trump is sounding like Ron Paul on the issue of Syria, an elephant is a space ship.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.