Trump has thwarted Soros and other globalists

Donald Trump has been formally voted the next president of the United States by the Electoral College. The effort funded by George Soros and driven by his surrogates to railroad the process failed. Only six electors ended up voting for neither Trump nor Clinton, despite a drive by a foreign entity, a George Soros organisation.

The MoveOn.org petition, funded by Soros, had gathered 500 000 signatures towards “[amending] the Constitution to abolishing the Electoral College”. Particularly Republican electors, often bound by state law to support Trump, were inundated with threats demanding that they vote for someone else.

Leaders of groups that were lobbying the electors were confident enough that Republicans would defect, denying Trump an Electoral College majority and thus steer the election to the House of Representatives. But by late Monday, only a handful of electors had broken ranks, suggesting that lobbyists would more or less promise anything in return for lavish funding.

The irony will not be lost on most. While Clinton supporters and the CIA bemoan undue “Russian” influence in the past election, Soros has not been afforded the same scrutiny as a foreign agent wishing to interfere in US domestic matters.

After the result was announced, Trump vowed to “work hard to unite our country and be the president of all Americans.”

“The official votes cast by the Electoral College exceeded the 270 required to secure the presidency by a very large margin, far greater than ever anticipated by the media,” Trump said in a statement.

What was going to be a mere formality, turned into a landslide victory for Trump, with electors from Texas pushing their candidate over the 270 threshold, according to reports, bringing his tally to 304. Clinton received only 228 votes. Four voters in Washington state, which supported Clinton, did not select the Democratic nominee.

Trump called it a “historic electoral landslide victory” during presidential elections.

In the House chamber, where the electors met, the outcome was greeted with a standing ovation by citizens and Republican officials who had come to witness the event.

Outside, only 100 demoralized protesters turned up. They waved placards and shouted: “Save our democracy” in a vain effort to persuade electors to reject the Republican nominee.

The electoral vote acquired an unexpected element of drama when Trump’s electoral victory spawned an effort by Soros globalists to block his path to the presidency who saw him as a threat to their interests.

But a review of American economic history suggests that something fundamental has changed: Increased globalization has contributed to the widening of inequality in US incomes and wealth, and voters have been on the receiving end of this outcome.

To globalists, the fix for growing inequality was for America to negotiate more and better free-trade deals, which is what Washington had tried accomplish until recently with efforts to bring China into the World Trade Organisation.

These developments have also been accompanied by a steady increase in America’s annual trade deficit, from the roughly $20 billion in 1980 to the current $500 billion, and the offshoring of almost all US production.

The results of the election seem to indicate that America is about to change course on trade policy. “A new order might operate to prevent the misalignment of currency valuations, to abolish or offset the impact of tax subsidies, and to mitigate the implicit subsidization of state-owned enterprises. It has been largely forgotten that one of the key objectives of postwar free-trade policy was to maintain a roughly balanced trade account,” The Atlantic has suggested. Such policies would not just extend to trade, but to investments, currency, technology, and labour as well.

Similar dynamics to the recent US presidential election, in which voters largely rejected globalisation, played a part in Brexit, and continue to unfold throughout Europe. There has been little or no real economic growth since 2005 for many Americans and Europeans. Good quality jobs for native-born Americans and Europeans are rare, and employment opportunities in the minimum-wage sector are being swamped by immigrants.

The white middle classes have seen zero or negative interest rates eviscerate savings income, and now threatening their pensions. The political malaise of the elites has been their own creation: an economic malaise. By blaming “Russian hackers” or President Vladimir Putin for their present conundrum, the elites hope to create a handy scapegoat.

As one former CIA officer and US national intelligence co-ordinator, Graham Fuller puts it: “And now, in perhaps the most volatile delegitimization gambit ever, Trump is now whispered to be ‘Putin’s candidate’, a Russian pawn who has infiltrated the White House itself …

“This is all very ugly stuff. Worse, it looks like questioning the electoral process and the legitimacy of the election itself may become a permanent feature of our domestic politics, inciting further divisiveness and bitterness on both sides of the political divide, rendering the country (even more) ungovernable.”

Alastair Crooke, a former British diplomat and senior figure in British intelligence and European Union diplomacy observed too, “Russia is not responsible for the widespread opposition to globalization in the US and Europe: simply, the original theory behind globalization (David Ricardo’s comparative advantage theory) no longer retains validity or meaning in the changed reality of today’s world.”

Leftists who promoted “value-based”, identity politics, and the rights and interests of a vast industry producing all kinds of “victims” in society, have riled hardworking mainstream Americans and Europeans, whom they disparagingly refer to as “deplorables”, “bigots” and “racists”.

A recent Pew survey supports both their views: “The Republican Party made deep inroads into America’s middle-class communities in 2016. Although many middle-class areas voted for Barack Obama in 2008, they overwhelmingly favored Donald Trump in 2016, a shift that was a key to his victory … In 2016, Trump successfully defended all 27 middle-class areas won by Republicans in 2008. In a dramatic shift, however, Hillary Clinton lost in 18 of the 30 middle-class areas won by Democrats in 2008 … Overall, Democrats experienced widespread erosion in support from 2008 to 2016. Their share of the vote fell in 196 of the 221 metropolitan areas examined. The loss in support was sufficiently large to move 37 areas from the Democratic column to the Republican column …”

The charge of Russian involvement tipping the scales in favour of Trump is without substance and lacks evidence. No hard intelligence to sustain the claims, exists. It is rather about constructing a pernicious conceptual framework to establish political group think, for a cloud of illegitimacy to shroud the Trump Administration.

As Graham Fuller rightly observes, this supposed illegitimacy, will continue as a divisive force in America, gouging a greater schism between the two political families.

Pat Buchanan too has no doubts: “The [New York] Times editorial spoke of a ‘darkening cloud’ already over the Trump presidency, and warned that a failure to investigate and discover the full truth of Russia’s hacking could only ‘feed suspicion among millions of Americans that … (t)he election was indeed rigged’.

“Behind the effort to smear [Exxon’s Rex] Tillerson and delegitimize Trump lies a larger motive. Trump has antagonists in both parties who are alarmed at his triumph, because it imperils the foreign policy agenda that is their raison d’être, their reason ‘for being’.

[Globalists] do not want to lift sanctions on Moscow, they do not want an end to the confrontation with Russia and judging by their machinations in Montenegro, they want to enlarge NATO to encompass Sweden, Finland, Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova.

They have in mind the permanent US encirclement of Russia … Their goal is to bring down Putin and bring about ‘regime change’ in Moscow.”

In short, globalists want to reignite the Cold War. As Buchanan succinctly concludes: “early in his presidency, if not before, Trump is going to have to impose his foreign policy upon his own party and, indeed, upon his own government. Or his presidency will be broken, as was Lyndon Johnson’s.”

The war in Syria has had, it seems, a hugely corrosive effect on services such as the CIA and MI6, Crooke says. “By becoming the echo chamber of claims, however improbable, however false, thrown up by sundry armed movements and their paymasters — with the intent to force the hand of Western military intervention. In short, these services cease to be observers; they became investors. They become lost in a maze of contorted realities, false propaganda, and of acquired hubris. Like Prometheus, they think to secretly steal from Zeus, the god of war: they aspire to dictate war and peace.

“Into this heady world of ‘strategic communication’ warfare, has intruded Mr. Trump, spoiling their Syria gambit — and promising détente with Russia. It must indeed seem intolerable.”