Skip to main content

A Theory, Is Donald Trump Just a Ruse to Allow Hillary Clinton to take the Presidency Easily?

At this writing a few of my fellow conservative colleagues, Rand Paul is one, are thinking one thought. It's a scary thought - indeed frightening. First a background fact.


No matter what opportunistic swing he has made to present himself as a Republican, his record of voting, support for candidates - Especially Hillary Clinton - in the past, he is a bonafied died-in-the-wool Democrat.

Many of his supporters if not all of them seem not to care. He's saying what they want to hear, from having Mexico build a wall (not going to happen), to stopping ALL Muslims from entering the US. The last point of fact is a record of the Democratic Party - WWII Internment/Exclusion anyone?

However what Trump has promised over the years doesn't measure up to what he ultimately delivered. In other words he's a bunch of hot air saying things that the uniformed take as fact. It's no doubt that we have a dumbed down electorate. I know this from talking with Trump supporters here in Florida. When asked for specifics of his foreign policy (he has none), they sputter, get angry and rip about talking about he's the one to beat Hillary.

Generally all his support comes as not a vote for him personally, but as a "No Hillary" vote. People think because of his threats, bragging, veiled promises, he's a shew-in to beat Hillary in November.

But what if?

I have a theory and it's based on over ten years of blogging about politics and observing the game playing that takes place. I'm not a conspiracy theorist either. I'm not wearing a tin-foil hat either. But I have a theory.


Think about it. If Trump became president he would have to relinquish all interest in his building ventures because of the conflict of interest it would create. Remember Dick Cheney had to do the same with Halliburton when he signed on to be Vice President. Does anyone really think that Donald Trump would essentially give up control of his financial interests to play President for 4 or 8 years? Does anyone really believe that at all?

I don't and neither do some of the more in-the-know people that I converse with.

Again, it's just a hunch. If you need a bit convincing look at his positions in 1999 vs. 1998.

Cruz: Media sitting on Trump bombshells.


Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?


As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.


October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.


October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.


October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…