Trump’s election null and void? Part I

Frustrated and frightened.

Blog No. 117.      

I finished writing this blog on Wednesday 11th Jan and intended to post it on Saturday 21st, the day after President Trump assumed office. On Thursday, I heard of the new Moscow dirty-dealings,  ‘dodgy dossier’ assault on Trump’s appointment. In this  Guardian article, the foreign country, in which John McCain picked up the document, was the Ukraine, on the front line of the American Empire, where he was visiting US Marines (and promising them a forthcoming offensive against Russia.)

Perfectly in keeping with the events outlined below, this new assault will almost certainly  (judging by the effectiveness of the global media campaign that has accompanied it) come to be judged as yet another ‘fake-news,’  CIA initiative. In effect, it accuses Trump of treason and would seem several degrees above the level of recklessness and desperation exhibited in this Part I blog.

If this new initiative fails to deflect Trump from his chosen path of entering the White House and draining the CIA’s and other agencies’ swamp, one has to suspect that assassination “by a lone and deranged patriot” patsy will be fully on the cards. If it succeeds, seeing that Trump has the support of a large portion of the American electorate, there will almost certainly be blood in the streets. Furthermore, what faith the American people (and of the rest of the world) have in the American constitution and in the credibility of their mainstream media will be permanently undermined.

It is still too close to the event for me to feel confident in commenting. I have therefore decided to divide my blog on the subject of Trump’s planned destruction into two parts. Part I is published now: Part II will be published in one or two weeks’ time, when the dust has settled somewhat and it will be possible to see whether or not President Trump has made it into office and looks as though he might have any security of tenure.


By the time anyone reads this blog, Donald Trump will have been installed in office as the new POTUS (President of the United States.) The uppermost worry the world should have had about a Hillary Clinton presidency, would have been a war with Russia. The next cause for alarm would have been the further destabilisation of the Middle East. Clinton’s declared policies could well have led to the installation of an al-Qaeda surrogate as president of Syria, with the inevitable consequence of another massive surge in refugee numbers, leading to a further destabilisation of the EU.

With Trump, those anxieties disappear, to be replaced by two different worries to occupy non-American minds. What will be Trump’s policy on climate change and what will be his policy towards China? Will he take the USA out of the Paris Agreement and will he force a showdown with China to the extent that those nations, such as New Zealand, which try to remain on friendly terms with both parties, are forced to choose sides?

I anticipate that both worries will prove unfounded. Despite surrounding himself with a  remarkable coterie of climate change denying idiots and Big Oil satraps,   when he is properly briefed and has faced a couple of climate catastrophes, Trump is likely to realise the economic imperative of adapting to, rather than exposing the US economy to climate change. He might even decide that there is money to be made in encouraging mitigating enterprises!

In regards to China, he must already realise the symbiotic relationship of the two economies (Apple alone derives $48.5 billion, 22.5% of its total annual revenue from trade with China.) My read of the ‘alarming’ and ‘destabilising,’ ‘anti-Chinese’ moves he has made so far, prior to taking office, is that he is pre-positioning himself for negotiating a better deal for the USA within the context of the continued relationship. The course being taken on both these matters should become apparent over several months.

Of more immediate interest will be Trump’s relationship with the US establishment and particularly with the ‘deep state’- actors within the intelligence and military/security agencies. His decision to take his own security personnel with him to the White House, rather than leave his life entirely in the hands of the Secret Service detachment, traditionally responsible for the President’s physical safety, could indicate the extent of his concern. He is well aware of the alarm that his electoral promise to ‘drain the Washington swamp’ will have caused in certain circles.

In my blog on the CIA’s awesome powers, I explained the extent to which Hillary was the CIA’s stooge. Her ascent to the presidency was in the vital interests of the CIA and of the members of the intelligence community; current programmes could be continued uninterrupted and past misdemeanours such as murders, coups, diverted budgets and misled presidents and populations, guaranteed a continued cover up. Given its control over the US and western media, confidence in Hillary’s victory was such that no other intervention in the election seemed necessary. What the CIA had failed to notice was the extent to which a significant portion of the electorate, having for so long been fed lies to further CIA and military ambitions, no longer believed in what it was being told by its leadership. Enter Trump as the bull in the CIA shop!

After Trump’s victory, there followed an unseemly and constitutionally debilitating scramble to reverse the electorate’s decision. The first move was a challenge by the Green Party (5% of the US vote) on the grounds that there had been corruption at the polls and the votes had been miscounted. With the failed Democratic candidate adding her voice to the cries for a recount, after weeks of legal arguments, such a recount was finally carried out in a single state – Wisconsin. Alas for the CIA’s candidate, the outcome was that Trump’s majority in that state was found to have been marginally larger than that declared on the night.

Back to the drawing board! One of the major excitements of the campaign was the emergence of Bernie Sanders as a rival Democrat contender to Hillary. Obama and the Democrat Party leadership viewed Bernie as too far to the left to have a serious hope of beating the Republicans. The Party therefore made a decision to undermine his campaign. This internal and undemocratic campaign was whistle blown by someone, who must have been a Bernie supporter, on the inside of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) apparatus. A massive dump of DNC internal emails was leaked to WikiLeaks

The DNC is meant to be neutral between candidates, but in this instance, it clearly wasn’t.

russian-hackersWhoever leaked the information did a major favour for those interested in the maintenance of an America based on the principles of democracy. At the same time they did a major disservice to the CIA team-effort and its Clinton figure-head. It is interesting to note that the leaks coincided with the murder of a DNC staffer. The CIA’s usual MO is suicide or accident, but perhaps stopping the leaks was a matter of undue urgency. No: I have no definite proof before making that incriminating suggestion, but working on past performance and the number of corpses strewn around the Clinton-CIA alliance, I feel fully justified in speculating.

dnc-deathsIt is at this point that that the CIA’s desperation turned to dangerous recklessness. So great were the stakes that decisions were taken that could  risk the traditional functioning of the American constitution and even a third world war.

It was the CIA that invented the term ‘Conspiracy Theory’ in order to debunk those sensible Americans who refused to believe the Warren Commission Report that claimed a lone gunman, with a scope that fired well off zero, was the sole shooter responsible for the slaying of President Kennedy. Subsequently, the CIA, using its deep influence over the western media, has worked hard to ensure that all questioning of the official version of events, which might call into question the integrity of the US government, have been discredited as ‘conspiracy theories. ’ Now, the CIA had to come up with a conspiracy theory of its own and hope that it hadn’t too effectively conditioned the American public to dismiss all such claims.

Given the value of the Wikileaks revelations to the preservation of US democracy and good government, the leaker could be seen as having performed a significant patriotic favour. Nevertheless, the CIA and the Clinton camp mounted a media campaign downplaying the contents of the leaked documents and designed to divert attention from the leak’s home-grown origin. They claimed that the Trump election should be declared null and void due to a foreign power, Russia, as the hacker that gave the DNC documents to Wikileaks, having intervened in a domestic American election to ensure a Trump victory. Of course the CIA has to judge people by its own standards. With the CIA habitually intervening in so many other countries’’ elections, its senior officials might be excused for believing that Russia might be capable of similar conduct.

Indeed, it would be amazing had Russia, with such a national interest in preventing the belligerent Clinton entering office, taken no notice of the election. Of course, it would have hacked every sensitive email it could penetrate – as too, no doubt did Israel, China and several European nations. It is however, one thing to gain access to such information and altogether another to risk the blowback of actively intervening in an attempt to manipulate the outcome.

The US constitution was designed to ensure that the views of less populated states could not be drowned out by those with massive concentrations of population. To this end the electorate votes state by state, not for the Presidential candidate, but for delegates who will cast votes on their behalf. As happened in this case, the party of a presidential candidate might gain a majority of all votes cast across the nation, but it is the candidate who has the majority of votes cast in the Electoral College that wins the election.

electoral-collegeShouting their case from every media rooftop under their influence, the Hillary team and supporters mounted an unprecedented lobbying campaign in the Electoral College. The idea was to subvert Trump’s Republican delegates at the College to change their party loyalty and cast their vote for Clinton. The grounds given were that the election had been tampered with by an enemy state. It was a fairly desperate effort, in that only on the rarest occasion have members of an Electoral College voted against the party that send them there.

Though an unprecedented, seven ‘faithless electors’ were persuaded to change sides, it did not suffice to change the majority outcome in Trump’s favour.

Nevertheless, the media battle by the CIA and the Hillary party to save themselves from a by now considerably baited bull, continued with ever increasing desperation. Obama, to demonstrate the credence he gave to the CIA’s version of how the Russians stole the US election, punished Russia by expelling a group of their diplomats. (A rather foolish move as it gave Putin a chance, by refusing to reciprocate, to make Obama look like a sorry loser.) To add to the odium being poured on to Putin and fed to the American public, an additional Russian crime and threat was conjured up. The Russians were hacking the American electricity grid.

A key battle for the trust of the American people in their security and intelligence community continues to be waged. Were the revelations of malpractice and corruption in the Democratic Party released to the public as the consequence of an illegal foreign hack of the party’s notoriously insecure computers, or as a result of a disgruntled staffer blowing the whistle and leaking the correspondence to Wikileaks? At the time of writing, ten days before his taking up his post, Trump does not appear at all convinced of the claims of the current leadership of the intelligence community.


Here are some views circulating the blogosphere. They are mostly from people better informed on the subject of Hacking than would have been President Trump before (and after) his recent meeting with the heads of the FBI and the intelligence agencies.

A hyperlink contained in the above leads to another blog written by Robert Steele. In which he mentions other bloggers arguing to discredit the CIA’s claims.

Something to add? Please leave a comment in the box below

One thought on “Trump’s election null and void? Part I

  1. easy_mil says:

    But almost surely Clinton will win elections if not FBI restart of investigations (of her private mail server) just few days before elections. Because of this It looks weird that now James Comey (FBI) is against Trump?

Leave a Reply

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