I told people months ago that I never believed for one second that Trump would be kept off the ballot and that the attempts to do so are all just a distraction to push people's support and sympathy to Trump. I believe that "they"--whoever "they" are comprised of (though I'm pretty sure it's a bipartisan or perhaps global effort)--have manipulated those on the right into making Trump their frontrunner and party nominee. Could I be wrong about that? Sure, but there is some evidence and plenty of reasons for why Trump would be the choice of those elites who want to continue to hold onto their power. Anyone who read the Podesta emails should recall the references to attempts that were made to push Trump to the forefront even prior to the 2016 election. Did "they" prefer Trump back in 2016 because they thought he was the candidate who could most easily be beaten in an election? Or maybe it was because they knew, even then, that Trump was all bark and no bite and was never going to hold any of them to account. I don't know the answer to that. What I do know is that we are damn fools for not asking more questions to try to find out more.
The game is played on both sides, and people are so easily herded. I don't claim to know who exactly is pulling the strings on all of it, but I do know that the evidence points to the game board being something other than what we are led to believe that it is. It isn't "Democrats vs Republicans," but like sheep, we have been herded as a nation to see nothing outside of that.
I have viewed the election integrity issue from practically every angle, and it is upon the evidence of outcomes that I have been accurate in the things I have predicted would happen. The evidence of OUTCOMES is what we would be wise to pay more heed, but instead we often get distracted and view the planted distractions as "evidence" to support the lies we tell ourselves--lies which we are manipulated into believing by those who know just how easily people can be herded. The evidence of outcomes should cause anyone with the capacity for critical thought to question why we act as if we still have any faith in our elections at all. Even as so many elected officials and voters on BOTH sides of the aisle have claimed that our elections are not secure, we foolishly continue to engage in the theater of pretending that they do still work. Why are we doing that?
The 2024 election will 100% deliver an outcome that many will not (and should not) trust. That isn't "conspiracy theory." I can say that with confidence based on the facts of what has taken place in our government in the name of "election integrity," going back to even prior to the 2020 election. In 2019, it was the Democrats who were passing legislation to ban voting machines from connecting to the internet and from being made using foreign components. And back then, in early 2020, it was Republicans who claimed that this was an overreach of federal power. Well, let me clue you in--our elections are already run at the federal level, largely as a result of our elections having been declared on January 6, 2017, to be part of our nation's critical infrastructure and therefore under the purview of the Department of Homeland Security. Doing this was an acknowledgement of the vulnerabilities which exist as a result of our elections being conducted the way that they are. And, of course, if you look into it, you'll see that the entire operation is (almost certainly by design) a money pit, for our government doesn't even deny that, as the threats grow, so do the costs. So, of course, the answer from our government isn't to remove the source of the problem. It's to throw more money at it and to allow the problem to continue to exist. (Because if the problems go away, then so does the money--and so does their power and control over "we the people.")
The ball keeps getting batted back and forth in ways that ensure that no solutions are ever found and nothing is ever brought to a close. That is what my time spent fighting for election integrity has taught me. Republicans in the Senate in February 2020 argued that the job of securing our elections did not belong in the hands of our federal government (despite their own failure to acknowledge that our elections already are overseen at the federal level). And, in my own state of Nebraska, there has been no interest whatsoever shown by any of our state elected officials to remove the overreach of the federal government from our elections. So the evidence points to outcomes which can only suggest that no one in our government actually WANTS for our elections to be a reflection of the will of the people. Our elections have been captured and are in no way free and fair and of, by, and for the people.
Will it be Trump who is allowed to "win" this time? And if your preferred candidate "wins," will you simply cheer it as a victory and think that all is well? You shouldn't. Our elections have not been made secure, and we are being made fools of by our government when we continue to play our scripted roles of pretending that our chosen candidate could possibly win. But that is what the majority of people in our nation are doing. They are hoping for things to tilt in their favor. Or maybe they are just hoping that this time their side plays just as dirty as the other side has been. I can remember when Republicans used to warn that ballot harvesting threatened the security of our elections. Now, Republicans are chomping at the bit to be the party that uses ballot harvesting as their path to "victory." Does no one see that our problem isn't that we lack election integrity? The problem is that we lack integrity itself. We have become a nation of people who no longer even want a fair fight. We don't care if the best man or woman wins. We just care that our side "wins," by any means necessary. And in such a victory, it is never "we the people" who emerge victorious. NEVER. There is a machine that is rigging our elections. It is the machine of the two-party system. If you want to defeat the machine, you have to see it for what it is--and then you have to have the courage to declare your independence from it.
The evidence of outcomes should also cause anyone with the capacity for critical thought to question why it is that they should still trust Trump. Because he says so? The facts of the matter are that there is a lot more evidence NOT to trust Trump than there is to support the idea that Trump is any protector of the people and their rights. The evidence points far more to Trump having protected and been manipulated by bad actors than it does toward any actual proof of Trump having nailed the balls of any of them to the wall.
Trump got elected in 2016 on promises to drain the swamp and to hold bad actors like Hillary Clinton to account. He choked. He didn't do it. He gave Hillary (and the entire Clinton crime family--remember CGI?) a complete and total pass. And Trump likes to boast as an example of him having drained the swamp his firing of James Comey. Does Trump not even realize how foolish he was to have not dismissed Comey on Day One?
Perhaps Trump didn't know that Comey was one of the bad guys, but I knew it (and so did many others) even prior to the 2016 election. We watched as Comey barely gave Hillary Clinton so much as a slap on the wrist for having been "extremely careless." So after Comey lets Hillary (who Trump had PROMISED he would hold to account) off the hook, what are two of the first things that Trump does after he is elected? He keeps that known snake Comey on as his FBI Director and he immediately reneges on his promise to hold Hillary to account. His mistake in keeping Comey as his FBI Director is what gave Comey the opportunity to leak his memos which kicked off the Mueller investigation.
Trump's tough talk falls really freaking flat when his words are put next to his actions. The things I just described are ones that happened at the BEGINNING of Trump's presidency. He went out on the lowest note possible after having spent all of 2020 allowing Fauci to bend him over. And in between the beginning and end of Trump's presidency were a number of instances in which Trump would inevitably choose not to hold bad actors to account, such as when he endorsed known snake Mitt Romney (or should I say "Pierre Delecto!") and also when he championed McCarthy as Speaker of the House.
Trump's bad judgment abounds and when it comes to holding anyone to account he is all bark and no bite. The evidence proves that.
"He couldn't;" "He had no choice;" "He was duped;" and "He was lied to." Even the defenses that people offer to try to defend Trump only point to his weaknesses and to reasons for why those on the left would choose Trump to be their choice for the Republican Party nominee.
Trump may or may not have been duped. Any HONEST person would have to at least acknowledge that there is plenty of evidence to support an argument that it is WE who are being duped, with Trump either being made a useful idiot or with him having been in on the scam all along. An HONEST person would admit that the evidence of outcomes supports more reasons for us NOT to trust Trump than to trust him.
THE EVIDENCE IS THERE FOR WHY WE SHOULD NOT.
So why do so many continue to ignore the facts right under their noses? Why do people choose instead to put hope in a man whose actions and the evidence of outcomes should cause us to question? I would LOVE to be proven wrong and to have all of my fears about what the facts point to alleviated. But instead of calling for answers and transparency, people don't want to know the truth. They don't want Trump to have to answer the questions that we should, if we were wise, be asking. Some may argue that the evidence of outcomes would also point to many successes of President Trump, and on that I would agree; however, the deal with the devil that people are willing to make when they say that they want Trump back for the sake of a return to things becoming cheaper again is one that cheapens more than just gas from a pump and products on store shelves. To accept those things from Trump in exchange for turning a blind eye to the death and disease that is being reported as resulting from the shots that Trump has claimed we would not have if not for HIM, is a cheapening of the value of human life.
ADDENDUM: Since some people need me to state the obvious, I never focus my criticism on Biden because it should be quite clear from the context of my writing--and from the hundreds of other articles and videos of mine--that I would never consider voting for him. (I've never even once referred to the man as President.) My focus is on Trump instead because I DID vote for him in 2016 and in 2020, and so he is the candidate who could have--if he had been honest with me and won back my trust--possibly have kept my vote. The badness of Biden (or Fauci--or anyone else) does not equate to the goodness of Trump. Railing about Biden's incompetence is as futile as screaming at the sky, so why waste my time? There may yet be hope for Trump to do the right thing, though, and to finally speak honestly to us. Yes, it might come at a cost to his political aspirations and it would no doubt deliver a terrible bruise to his ego, but he should do it anyway, because it's the right thing to do (And because it could save lives for him to warn people now to stop taking those shots.)