Yesterday, former President and current presidential candidate Donald J. Trump went to Iowa and did exactly what we expected him to do, which is remind the entire world who is still boss. Prior to the Iowa Caucuses, I penned a piece examining a bit of manageable panic on the part of the Intelligence Community causing it to augment the IC narrative script with planned revisions. In summary, I put it like this,
It’s clear that the IC is maneuvering to intercede on a set of “unavoidable circumstances” where it doesn’t matter what it does short of assassinating Trump, this is who the American people overwhelmingly want as President. This necessitates that the IC accept this fact and align accordingly.
Our entire point here is that alignment.
Leaving the assassination arrow in the quiver, the IC is preemptively constructing a deep chasm between an Executive and a Commander in Chief whom they could not effectively preclude from office in 2024. […]
Therefore, the IC narrative must be tailored to gaslight Americans into believing that former President Trump is a “security threat.
-Political Moonshine
[Read: Palpable Panic: Intelligence Community Tailors Narrative to Remove Trump for 2024 [1].]
That was before Iowa.
What about after Iowa?
What about the run-up to 2024?
[2]To answer the second question first, you may not have to go past this headline:
We May Not Make It to the [S]election At This Torrential Rate [3]
For our answer to the first question, we go to the Intelligence Community mouthpiece, The Washington Post [4] [the mouthpiece for DOJ/FBI is The New York Times [5]]: Trump scores decisive win in Iowa caucuses; DeSantis places second [6] [Ashley Parker/Tyler Pager].
Our lens for the WaPo article is the pre-Iowa analysis detailing the IC framing of Trump as a “security” threat, the pre-Iowa analysis projecting an unprecedeted level of historical messiness with profound outcomes for 2024 and the post-Iowa narrative established by WaPo ergo the IC.
We set the ominous stage with this:
Does it not concern everyone that the Intelligence Community/Central Intelligence Agency operates in darkness and that their mouthpiece operates under the mantra “Democracy Dies in Darkness”?
It should.
The piece is mostly left for independent consumption and in-part opens, “With 96 percent of the vote tallied, Trump was leading with 51 percent Monday night — more than his next two rivals combined. His wide advantage on a night when turnout was low put him on pace to shatter the previous margin of victory in the Republican caucuses, as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis [7] narrowly edged out former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley [8] for second place.”
WaPo/IC didn’t bother to mention the brutally frigid Iowa temperatures and a blizzard that certainly affected voter turn-out instead preferring to drive the established platform narrative borne out of the Capitol “insurrection” entrapment operation: “Trump’s victory came a little more than a year after…his incitement of the deadly Jan. 6 [9], 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.”
WaPo/IC does cite the weather farther down and then again near the end, but it only alludes to it as a factor for voter turn-out; never directly examining it.
This allows the IC to preserve its basis for manufactured narrative points.
The WaPo/IC piece goes on to line-out the already known future course:
- ”…a presidential contest expected to play out as much in the courtroom as the campaign trail.” [“91 charges across four criminal cases [10].”]
- “Trump to return to power to exact revenge on his political opponents, pursue a more extreme agenda and root out career bureaucrats that he dismisses as the “deep state” […] push false claims about the 2020 election, as well as use ominous and threatening rhetoric that historians have compared to that of authoritarian regimes.” *This is pure political projection being inserted by the IC to undermine Trump prior to any second term and to intercede on that term if it comes to be. In short, they are framing Trump and any application of the rule of law to pursue those who criminally targeted him, by saying that he is going to do to them what they have already done to him.
- “…roughly half of Republicans…voted against the former president, though broader trends may be difficult to discern given the low turnout.” *This is the pretext for what I described yesterday, “The IC’s clear objectives were to erode at Trump’s base and drive his voters to a suitable replacement, like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, at the same time it was removing Trump altogether.” This context will be used to shoehorn in a Trump replacement.
- “Thirty-one minutes after the caucuses began…the Associated Press called the race for Trump.” *Remember when the IC/Fox News called Arizona for Biden very early on election night 2020 to begin the cascade to an eventually stolen 2020 election? Apply that here. It tells us that the IC accepts the “unavoidable circumstance” of Trump as the nominee meaning our focus must remain on what the IC will do to intercede on that. The early call preempted Trump’s victory celebration because no one had time to arrive; including the bartender, allowing the IC to paint the win negatively.
- “Speaking roughly two hours after officially winning the caucuses, Trump offered an uncharacteristically unifying message.” *More outright political projection here. Since his candidacy back in 2015, Trump’s message has remained a steadfast one of unity for all American people despite what is reported by others. Identity politics and sown division are the tactics of anti-American Progressives and Marxists.
- “..with a third-place finish, Haley [said] “I can safely say Iowa made this Republican primary a two-person.” *This is an important narrative point being espoused by other MSM outlets like NBC at the same time it’s unbelievable fodder for fools. Like NBC [11], WaPo/IC are positing that somehow, a fight between two losers in second place DeSantis and third place Haley; with a huge gap to first, somehow impacts first place Trump. That’s only if Trump is subsequently removed according to plans. Nimarata Haley’s basic math skills deciphering the particulars of 1st, 2nd and 3rd are left for you to discern.
- “70 percent of Americans don’t want another Trump-Biden rematch,” IC asset Nimarata Haley said. This indicates a clear path to another stolen election in 2024. She’s wrong; however, in that Americans just don’t want anyone like Biden, her or the rest of them.
The piece wraps-up with several points including this one, emphasis added:
Beyond the 2024 stakes, Trump’s Iowa victory also holds outsize symbolic importance for the former president and his team. In 2016, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) narrowly edged Trump out for first place here, a loss that, despite becoming the Republican nominee, Trump has never forgotten.
– The Washington Post
Translated: Trump lost the Iowa Caucus in 2016 before going on to become the nominee so therefore and logically deduced, Trump winning Iowa in 2024 symbollically tells us that someone else is going to be the nominee.
As a part of a much broader plan, that’s the IC plan according to an entire stack of articles and evidence written before Iowa.
Not without a sense of irony, that plan could be entitled ‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’.
After Iowa, that plan hasn’t changed; only the narrative behind it has changed.
Democracy dies in darkness.
That’s the plan.
The rest is just the sordid details.
-End-
Not A Democracy, ‘A Republic, If You Can Keep It’ | Understanding America’s Government [12]