Why do they hate Trumpy so much?


This one is easy, if you're of a mind to understand. It's about power.

Trumpy has been derided as a fool, incompetent and a complete idiot... endlessly. Is he? Prove it.  With facts. 

His economy is booming. He's done a deal with the Mexicans. The army likes him.  Many regular people think he's one of the best presidents ever (remember this is in context of JFK, Lincoln, Washington, Grant). 

The people complaining are coastal elites who have been robbing people blind and their globalist buddies. 

His base (supporters) is rock solid. Nobody in media talks about this.

He is doing things which ordinary Americans want; bringing back blue collar jobs from foreign countries, making "Made in America" a thing again.  This resonates with Americans (maybe not the extremes, but definitely with the middle class).

He is broadly in tune with middle America Republican values; God (Christian base), Country (Flag, Freedom, Guns), Family (Traditional Family structure).

The media on the other hand is focused on globalization, bullshit economics, left wing fascism (Anti-fa, identity politics, agenda setting) and rule by corporations. Doesn't seem so mom, pop, and apple pie?

It pays to note the the NYT and Washington Post are heavily infiltrated by Alphabet agency types, driving their particular agenda forward. Reuters are also worth watching for their position as a trickle down command and control point to local outlets. At this point media (of all types) looks like the scabby blog of corporatists who want oversight or control and to sell you his master's voice. 

Their job is not delivering news, it's driving an agenda... "duping the dupes."

No wonder Trumpy is painted in such negative shades. In contrast to them he's an absolute angel. 

Wouldn't it be best for them to ignore him? And carry on with their plan regardless? After all they have the means of persuasion? Both physically and metaphorically.

Unless their plan is just as abhorrent to regular Americans.

Why do they put him on the front page on a daily basis? If he is such a moron, nobody would vote for him. You wouldn't need a two year smear campaign. 

But they did. Later I'll compare British people voting for their "freedom" and follow a similar media narrative in that instance. 

The media said Hillary would win. They "told ya" she would. So did the market research companies and social media.  These are facts, not allegations. This is called "priming." They were setting you up for the next stage. 

Trumpy calls the print media and the big networks "fake news"? 

The president of a country calls the media outlets of that country liars on a regular basis. People whose job it is to deliver the facts to the public are derided by the first citizen of that republic.  

Is that normal? Does it make sense?

Look at the makeup of big media, (including the social networks) all vested in a few entities, six on one side (TV and Print) and five or six on the other side (tech).  Take a look at the makeup of those companies. You'll see something striking; Hollywood, media and tech all together in a little group, all parroting the same agenda.  Do they represent America? Who do they represent? Answer!

Seems odd, doesn't it? It's like watching a disease metastasizing.

The duly elected president of that country calling out the media and the media in turn calling him mad and incompetent. OK, say this was you. No one is going to believe you, they could say whatever they wanted.  You'd be locked up and never seen again (it's happened too often in history to be funny). 

Did you see what I did; the power locks you up and throws away the key.  The power in this case is not Trumpy (who they want gone), it's the media and the people behind it. Those grey people in suits pulling the levers of popular opinion. 

According to the facts, Trump has achieved more in the last two years in terms of the economy and jobs than any of the last four presidents. You'd think that would be news? He's invaded... nowhere! Propagandizing quadruple amputees will not be "a thing" anymore, it seems.

 He's on good terms with the Russians (apparently very bad - because someone wants animosity between two of the world's strongest powers). 

In real world terms Trump is one of the best Presidents that country has ever had...check the stats. People know it. 

Again, why is there such a vitriolic response?

 24/7 character assassination (nothing factual). Even Putin gets less ridicule (very weird indeed).  Think about that!  There hasn't been a single naked Russian leader on a horse pic in months that wasn't designed to attack Trump in some way.

Cross the pond to the UK and you'll see a majority of people voted to leave the "EU."  You know my opinion on an organisation which has changed its name from ECSC to EEC to EC to EU. It is simply a front for banks and their globalist agenda. 

My question has always been; who prints the money? That's it, simple.

The Brits kept their own money. The Irish took the "kings shilling" and will pay for it in the end.

I bring up the British accession and the way it is pushed on media and social media: How dare the Brits think for themselves! How dare the people decide for themselves! The selfish Brits!...really, in comparison to what or who? 

Who or where is this mythical state of unselfishness. I can tell you it's not Israel or Ireland. Think about that, a country of 50 million people being "ridiculed"and castigated for voting against the wishes of...who? 

Compare it to the Trump win...go on, I dare you.

Consider the recent successes of the "EU," bringing down the Greek economy, getting youth unemployment at 50% in Spain, providing bank bailouts in Ireland and across the continent and floating of the notion of a "European Army." 

With respect none of those things are "good." 

I remember the bitcoin shit. Do you? This incredible tool which helps you "fight the man" was sold all over the internet as new money. Who has the actual benefit. Is it all those dubious guys on the internet selling you "the greater fool theory?" 

Who benefits from new fake, digital, money (or credits as they might otherwise be called)?

Think about it. If the global banks wanted to create digital money (they already have) wouldn't it make sense to float the idea as "counterculture" first?

Who is "his master's voice?" Who is this agenda setter, this media manipulator controlling a very specific agenda? An agenda which always seems to work in favor of a very small group. A group that has no issue with shaping the "narrative" and putting it out there again, and again, and again. 

I want to say two things: to pull this off you need money (media ain't cheap). 

I would argue the only way to fund it is from the public purse. You'd have to embezzle enough cash or have enough reserves to keep the same messages running across multiple platforms.  Even if your crew worked for free, they'd need to get the same messages from someone and distribute it somewhere. It has to be in plain sight, in the public domain, otherwise it's ineffective. 

What I'm saying is that if you did it secretly, the flow of money to media would be easy to track. A few donors delivering bags of cash to a few media companies. The way it is being done is blanket coverage of one message, one agenda...that is specific.

Rule 1: Always follow the money, always!

Why do they hate Trumpy? 

Trumpy is actually the (billionaire) voice of the people. If you're not blind, you'll see it. When you see it, it should be obvious that Trump represents American nationalism or the republic that was voted for on the founding of the state.

The media, banks (those who print and move money) and the CIA represent global tyranny. The cool part is that they're all paid for, in part or in full, from your tax dollars.  

Rule 1.5: Always follow the "printing, distribution and storage of money."