Trump might have carried Utah. Might have.

This is from a book, Philip Dru, Administrator, by Edward Mandell House, the infamous “Colonel House” said to have sat watch on Woodrow Wilson during his presidency. The book was suggested to me by someone on the blog. It is good to feel the humanity of Colonel House coming through over the generations.

In the book a wheeler-dealer named Senator Selwyn is setting up an election, with the winner decided in advance, typical fare throughout history. I thought the mechanics interesting, as it is in a pre-technological era:

[Selwyn] began by eliminating all states he knew the opposition party would certainly carry, but he told the party leaders there to claim that a revolution was in the brewing, and that a landslide would follow at the election. This would keep his antagonists busy and make them less effective elsewhere.

He also ignored states where his side was sure to win. In this way he was free to give his entire thoughts to the twelve states that were debatable, and upon whose votes the election would turn. He divided each of these states into units containing five thousand voters, and at the national headquarters, he placed one man in charge of each unit. Of the five thousand, he roughly calculated there would be two thousand voters that no kind of persuasion could turn from his party, and two thousand that could not be changed from the opposition. This would leave one thousand doubtful ones to win over. So he had a careful poll made in each unit, and eliminated the strictly unpersuadable party men, and got down to a complete analysis of the debatable one thousand. Information was obtained as to their race, religion, occupation and former political predilection. It was easy then to know how to reach each individual by literature, by persuasion or perhaps by some more subtle argument. No mistake was made by sending the wrong letter or the wrong many to any of the desired one thousand.

In the states so divided, there was, at the local headquarters, one man for each unit just as at the national headquarters. So those two had only each other to consider, and their duty was to bring to Rockland [the appointed candidate pre-selected by Selwyn] a majority of the one thousand votes within their charge. The local men gave the conditions, the national men gave the proper literature and advice, and the local man then applied it. The money that it cost to maintain such an organization was more than saved from the waste that would have occurred under the old method.

I find this so adorable! Colonel House is telling us that votes were counted in his time, but that elections were still rigged. The candidate, James R. Rockland, was under control of the oligarchs, and if he decided to go an independent route once elected, would be warned to stay the course by various means. And anyway, if they feared him to be an independent man, he would not have been selected.

How much easier today when they merely tell us that by some magical process, a candidate has won, and that the result cannot be questioned. Did anyone else notice that recounts are illegal now? Green Party candidate Jill Stein, herself probably controlled opposition, challenged the 2016 results in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. In Wisconsin a judge ruled that the “recount” would merely be a re-tallying of machine counts, and not actual ballots. In the other two states, judges stepped in and stopped the process.

What does that tell you? If you do not see that something very large is hidden in plain sight, I cannot help you.

Anyway, Trump no more won the election than I did. The entire campaign was scripted, all the way down to the Billy Bush affair [note the name], misdirection from something obvious: Melania Trump is not his wife. She is his beard.

Of course I was surprised at the selection, assuming the contest had long been given to Hillary Clinton. I don’t know, cannot know, if that was the plan from the beginning or some mid-course correction. But her selection over Trump would have had no more bearing on national political policies than a rain storm in Peoria.

Trump might have carried Utah. Might have. We will never know.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in Election Fraud, The usual. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Trump might have carried Utah. Might have.

  1. steve kelly says:

    For whatever reason, the 2000 presidential election was a turning point, for me at least. I think it sold electronic voting to the masses. Once it went electronic, no trace of how real votes were cast could be counted “by hand” again. The MSM saw to that. Now, the courts keep us from knowing what happens when voters cast their ballots. Like the rest of what we’re brainwashed to believe, elections are a black box, never to be opened again.

    What’s truly funny is that most states have some sort of electronic voting system, most do not permit electronic signatures gathered online to satisfy the signature requirement — usually tens of thousands — to qualify independent and “monor party” candidates for the general election ballot.

    ps. If anyone believes the Gore v. Bush 2000 results, I have a bridge to sell you.


  2. fm says:

    Mark, the script might have been a bit more complex. Appeasing the frustrated lower class by first vilifying Trump and have him “elected” then was probably part of the plan.
    Comrade J. Stalin allegedly said once: “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.”
    Election fraud was not invented by you Americans around 2000 …

    Liked by 1 person

    • I agree in total. Prior to electronic vote fraud, there was ballot stuffing, intimidation, disappearing boxes, the usual. 2000 merely made all that unnecessary.

      The most common form of control was simply to offer controlled choices, Nixon/Humphrey, for instance, or a candidate nominated to lose, like McGovern. I doubt there’s ever been a clean election in our history.


  3. calgacus says:

    In my mind I still believe that the Republicans can get 60% of the White vote. They did enough to make Hillary look bad. But I don’t believe in the numbers provided. I assume they work to make the numbers believable enough at the district level.
    I also read Brandon Smith from alt-market, and I think his theory of a conservative trap is possible. He predicted Brexit and the Trump election. He is less sure about Marine Le Pen. The trap idea can be relevant even if the scenario is a bit different. Brandon believes that the economic collapse is a slow process and we are already in that process. He believes that they will pull some economic safeties (petro-dollar status, reserve status, low interest loans) in order to blame Trump and by extension conservatives. Similar things happening in Uk and maybe France.
    I don’t see an economic collapse (even a gradual one). I see a lowering of standards of living in the Western world and increase in inequality. I see a convergence of economies and increase of importance for the BRICS nations. They make create new religions or changing the old ones (like promoting a new Islam through various leaders like Fethullah Gulen and Aga Khan 4).
    We must think beyond the quote of Stalin. Who controls all the candidates decides everything. But these candidates don’t have to be controlled for the most part since they belong to the families. So the situation is even worse than controlling the candidates.


    • fm says:

      We must think beyond the quote of Stalin. Who controls all the candidates decides everything.

      Not that this hadn’t been done already.
      In the Socialist/Communist country where I grew up, the Socialist Party always won with 99.xx per cent of votes. And I think it did not even involve fraud.
      Why ? Because there were 4 or 5 political “parties” forming one block (they even called themselves that way !). No matter whom you voted for, you got the same result.
      The Western DemoCracys (sic) follow the same pattern, only the guiding hand behind the “candidates” is less visible. How many Trump supporter realize that he actually morphed into a Killary – decal after the elections ? And who with more than 3 brain cells left is surprised ?


  4. tyronemccloskey says:

    I lean towards the bloodline bastards public front theory. Blood bastards are plentiful if the IVF theories pondered here have any validity. From birth these bastards would be monitored and mentored to ID certain traits that fit well with certain tasks. The “politician” model would be nurtured and then installed behind the smokescreen of the voting process. These then are lifetime actors. Legends such as Nixon answering an ad in a newspaper that began his political career, or Dutch Reagan’s slow conversion from labor firebrand to corporate fascist mouthpiece suggest an organic process, corrupt though it can be at times. Barry O’bama is another fairy tale of high priced rags to riches with many a rabbit to chase in uncovering his fictitious past. Switching lanes in mid cycle to allow Trump in is another feint to suggest that control is maintained in real time, if you don’t believe the votes are quite counted. (Implying an intervention by the public to assure transparency is a remote possibility)
    Multi-generational planning is the most plausible form of control to me. The 2040 election is already set with specific names and agendas ready to be sold to a public deliberately starved for leadership.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Trump is, when all else is subtracted, an actor. It’s all he has done. Well, he does have that wrestling experience. If he was tabbed to be president long ago, then having a committee write his book, putting him on TV, putting his name on all those towers was just PT109 preparation. It makes sense, but also note he is no business tycoon, and no billionaire, not by his own abilities anyway. And no womanizer. (Am I the only one who can see that Melania has no interest in him?)

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s