Sorry this post is a little long winded, but I like to be methodical when I'm trying to extract a dose of Hopium. I'm sadly doubtful by nature so it takes a lot for me to work up some Hope. I like to be thorough to make sure I'm not bull shitting myself.
So I was scrolling and I saw this:
NYT and other MSM outlets are trying to debunk claims that. . . Trump will be reinstated??
This kinda floored me. Of course, I don't know what's going to happen but. . . wow.
If it's so silly, why are they even trying to debunk it?
So the above link is from John Solomon's JusttheNews website. (I'd rather not share NYT articles on here, and John Solomon is actually a pretty decent guy and solid reporter)
Apparently the NYT has been going on and on about these claims that Trump says he will be reinstated by August.
Solomon's "JustheNews" gets a comment by Lewandowski about the NYT's latest hissy fit.
Lewandowski states:
"I can tell you as a person who talks to the former president on a very regular basis, I’ve never had that conversation with him so I’m not saying it’s dishonest, "I’m just saying that I’ve never heard it."
I took a double take with that: " I’m not saying it’s dishonest "
Maybe I'm overthinking this, but if the NYT was just being totally batshit and making up claims, wouldn't someone who is decently within Trump's inner circle respond with something like: "These accusations are outrageous. Of course ("former") President Trump isn't making such wild claims."
If someone is spreading a bunch of nonsense that would make you look bad wouldn't you want to extinguish that promptly and decisively? If something is definitely not going to turn out true, distance from it entirely, right? (think about how our sweet Kayleigh shut down the "suckers and losers" claim)
But he doesn't do that. He goes out of his way to tell us he can't say they are dishonest. He doesn't even say he thinks that's unlikely. He just tells us he's never heard it.
Unless Lewandowski is just completely zonked on valium or something and has no idea what's going on, there's some reason he's being careful with his words. A claim like this (Trump's reinstatement) doesn't just piss off Dems. It sounds pretty weird to normie Republicans too (Shapiro, Catturd, etc.)
Some other developments:
My vanilla liberal friends are starting to confront me with MSM articles talking about Trump and Flynn's "plans for a coup." Why are they obsessing about this stuff right now?
[Sorry I don't feel like linking to those articles, but with a quick search you can find them]
Also:
FAUCI is having one rough day. HOLY SHIT. I can't believe how fast that dam burst. (already lost a damn book deal I hear).
My Analysis:
We have seen a general pattern with the MSM for the past four years: They obsess over some claim Trump makes, or claims Trump's voters make. They go on and on about how silly it is. They DEBUNK it.
But then. . . their narrative falls apart. And then a little later we see some confirmation Trump might have been right after all. And then: BOOM we learn Trump was totally f*cking right -- and the MSM shit their pants.
Think about the lab leak hypothesis, or Trump's claim that Obama spied on his campaign, or that Comey was sending his cronies to spy on Trump in the White House, or Hunter and the laptop. The MSM was APALLED with all of this: "How could Trump stoop so low, and say something so outrageous" they more or less said. .
And then Trump turns out to be the one who was RIGHT ALL ALONG.
Long story short, I can't help but wonder if we're seeing this here. They're starting to obsess over some supposedly "crazy" stuff Flynn, the Q community, or Trump is saying. They're telling us how silly it all is ("muh. . .Trump cannot be reinstated in August. That's not how that works.").
Why on Earth are they focusing on this stuff ? Trump's not making any big public statements about it. These statements were allegedly made in private. Shouldn't they be focusing on the 'President" Biden's ambitious agenda or whatever they're hyping it as?
I think something's bothering them. They feel the need to "debunk" it. And if they're going out of their way to debunk something normies aren't even hearing about, they must be at least a little nervous.
But like the lab leak theory, maybe the dam will begin to break.
And maybe just maybe it's all true. Hope my way of presenting things is helpful for some of you. I know I'm giving myself hope.
WWG1WGA
Deep down they want him to be back in office. Way too much money to be had. They just can't say it out loud.
This is not about money. This is about power.
Trust me fren, they want both BADLY.
Agreed, but the only way to make sense out of their actions is to realize that they are willing to lose a lot of money to acquire power.
Money is Power.
I'm not being difficult here, but you're thinking small.
With money, you have a certain amount of power.
With power, you have collossal amounts of money.
Overall true, but think about the history and what money is.
Whoever controls the money, controls everyone.
Even the most powerful man will eventually fall to whoever controls the money.
The Central Banks are the modern day slave masters.
Nicely stated. I would imagine anyone who takes the Q phenomena seriously would admit that there's more going on here than money. We talk about things like the ever expanding influence of a globalist cult, a cult that attaches itself to intelligence agencies -- and in some instances, creates them (e.g. CIA) -- throughout the world. A cult that seeks to enact a one world government and establish a nightmarish form of Feudalism. Blackmail networks. Secret societies.
While it is certainly true that seeking lots of cash in the short run is a powerful motive of groups, I don't know how anyone who stops their analysis there could be seriously interested in something like the Great Awakening.
Agree. If it was about money they would have covered Epstein's Island and NXVIUM. Talk about money-generating crazy stories. Crickets from the press. Even the National Enquirer wasn't really interested. "Hollywood actors participating in a sex cult headed and funded by the Seagram family fortune, where the women branded and kept as sex slaves? Billionaire mogul ex-boyfriend of a British and Israeli spy's daughter entertaining the Royal Family, the Clintons, and countless other world elites is a pedophile and has an island with a Temple on it? Nah. What else you got?"
Perfectly put. These organisations likely do not care about stories, clicks, eyeballs or even revenues. They are apparatus. Organs of the (deep) state with even deeper pockets. If it’s in the “news”, it’s for matrix-level reality-bending political propaganda reasons only. Not public interest. And certainly not journalistic truth.
I agree some part of them does want Trump back in office.
But they eventually stopped showing Trump even though the ratings were so good. So I think you make a good observation that they realize Trump = $$$$$, and they wish they could still have that.
But ultimately I agree with ProudofAmerica. While MSM wants lots of money, there's too much at stake with him in office. Look at how they would virtually stop covering Trump when he got too hot to handle (e.g. voter fraud). The media's handlers had too much at stake with Trump in office. So much so that the money's not worth it.
"The Agenda" is more important to them ultimately then money.
I can't disagree with you. One thing is clear. The most powerful have the most money by a extreme margin. They equate money with power. With Trump in office they get to try for both at the same time.