You've all been Trumped!
The surname of the current US President is somewhat ironic when compared to numerous playing-card games where the suit of hearts are played as trump cards - that is - the highest ranking suit in the pack.
Those who don't follow politics much would most likely be of the opinion that Mr Trump does, indeed, think he's the highest ranking suit in the pack. Perhaps this is reflected by his vast business experience where there is only one leader at the top who calls the shots. Or perhaps this is just the divisive aim of the media; to deliberately mislead the public.
Just to throw a completely unrelated example out there; we witnessed the media directly causing the LA Riots by sensationalizing police abuse against Rodney King. It's what the media chose not to say that swung public opinion so dramatically in the negative direction. For example, had it also been reported King was a previously convicted armed robber, far fewer people would have opposed the excessive-force used on him and the LA Riots might never have happened.
Unsurprisingly, when Aussie Insider started investigating the Trump phenomenon, it took some major digging to find out what Trump ACTUALLY said and in what context he said it. As demonstrated in the King example, context is an extremely important factor that separates facts from feelings.
This part of the exercise gives Trump's 'false news' allegations some validity; there is certainly a lot less fact out there than one might first imagine. But don't take our word for it, do the search for yourself, look for media snippets that are ACTUALLY Trump doing the speaking and you'll find they are, indeed, very few and far between.
In fact, here's a fun mission for readers: find any unique pictures of Trump looking all presidential and regal like and post them in the comments area, along with a number between 1 and 10 to indicate how difficult it was to find.
There is absolutely no argument that Trump has said a great number of things that no other US President before him dared utter, no matter the context. But so did Princess Diana who, by her very nature, forced the monarchy to humanise its otherwise inhuman public persona. And, most notably, Diana's public influence did not destroy the monarchy or democracy in Britain.
The most hilarious part of the entire exercise by far was listening to anti-Trump protesters try to give an explanation as to what they were protesting against. Although very entertaining and uninformative, it provided a unique contrast to the opposing protests thus enabling us to list many topics with which to begin our research.
Without further ado...
What's The Media Up To?
Firstly, what has the media got to gain by only reporting negative propaganda about the US President? He was popular enough to win an election, so why isn't the mainstream media interested in publishing anything matching the popular opinion? Or asked another way, why is it so invested in changing the popular opinion?
The media had ample opportunity to take Trump down before the elections; nearly everything leveled at him to date was allegedly done BEFORE the the elections. So what exactly is the media up to?
In the Rodney King case, human-rights were clearly the catalyst but in this case, the catalyst appears to be a whole bunch of sore losers driving a soft-coup on America's democratically elected government; losers who have control of the media, losers who ARE the media, losers who put all their eggs in the Clinton basket and were ultimately left with (pardon the pun) egg on their faces.
For those who are unfamiliar with the term 'coup' - it is an unlawful, illegal, undemocratic and unconstitutional declaration of war to bring down a government. We witnessed a hard-coup in Turkey last year involving an attempted military take over of government. A soft-coup, although no less divisive, is a non-violent take over of government.
There is absolutely no other explanation that can be drawn from the mountains and mountains of propaganda and the very little reporting of any facts. The media wasted billions on the Clinton campaign and are now wasting billions more trying to destroy their OWN democratically elected government.
If the American people are paying attention, they should be outraged that their democracy means so little to the mainstream media. They should be holding the media accountable for interfering with their elections, not the President.
What's Russia Up To?
Nothing! It's as simple as that. The Russian interference allegations have gone absolutely nowhere other than round and round in the media, for two main reasons.
The first reason being: the investigative body looking into the allegations do not have the constitutional power to prosecute the President for impeachment. If they did exercise this power, as the media suggests they have, it would be Ultra-vires (a latin law term that means: invalid/without power).
The second being: The only body of power who CAN impeach Trump, by way of majority vote, is primarily made up of his own party... because HE won the elections. This means the only way for impeachment to occur is solid, hard evidence that would convince the Senate majority, beyond reasonable doubt.
Obviously, such evidence does not exist, but that doesn't stop the media from digging around in the nether regions of circumstantial evidence. Essentially, what this amounts to is attempts to pervert the course of justice.
So, what have the American people got against Russia anyway? Russia is one of their allies. US leaders sign these peace treaties and ally agreements with Russia and then turn around to the public and claim Russia is their enemy. Why are they signing contracts with the enemy, then? It's so illogical it's laughable.
One fact that Putin got right is: computer hackers can route attacks through every single country in the world within a fraction of a second and without any trace of the origin. This isn't an opinion, it's science. All it takes is a simple understanding of internet routers.
Not-with-standing, the most obvious source of foreign interference in any western democracy would NOT be its allies, but those who despise democracy with a passion and will stop at nothing to attack it.
Hrrmmm... Who might THAT be? Think about it.
Hint: it's not Russia.
What's The Leaker Up To?
We keep hearing stories about information being leaked to the media from inside the US government, leaks which have caused everything from Russiagate to Pizzagate and beyond. So, who has both the motive and opportunity to feed inside information to the press?
It didn't take much digging at all to find the answer. As the next potential candidate to run against Trump in 2020, and while all eyes are conveniently trained on the White House, Bernie Sanders is quietly building one of the most powerful media outfits in America.
Filming Sanders' own show in the Senate Democrats' studio, the team operates directly out of Sanders' Senate office, proudly admitting they're harnessing the power of the media to depose Trump - a position which is noticeably contrary to Sanders' previous railing against the "corporate media" during his own campaign rallies.
It's fairly obvious which way previous Clinton supporters are going to swing if she's not in the 2020 race; thus Sanders' has, not only the media's undivided attention as their next hero and savior, but he also has access to all the inside dirt from Clinton's team.
The exact same dirt, incidentally, that Wikileaks exposed from the Clinton campaign which was originally designed to take Sanders down as he was seen to be the only threat to her leadership at the time.
Australia's coalition government came about in much the same way; those parties who normally opposed each other were forced to join allegiances and amalgamate their votes to regain power.
Our media also swings largely left and plays an equally powerful role in swaying public opinion and we have witnessed the same media-driven leadership coup played out here to depose Prime Minister Kevin Rudd - the only PM since 1975 to enjoy a clear majority of public popularity.
So, Is Trump Trumps?
Well, the funny thing about democracy is: if there was only one leader at the top who calls the shots, it wouldn't be a democracy.
That the media can so easily convince the public the President is to blame for everything bad, is also to deny that leadership in all democratic governments is a shared responsibility of the members of parliament.
That it would spy on the internal operations of the government in order to bring about a leadership coup and would go directly to Russia to dig up dirt on its own President in order to depose him, are outright acts of espionage.
That it would cheat democratic elections and the very public it claims to represent is an act of treason.
That it can do all these things with full impunity from even the highest laws in the land, makes the mainstream media the highest ranking suit in the pack - thus the largest threat to western democracy, over and above Trump.
Has nobody noticed how western media gives blanket world wide 24 hour coverage to terrorist attacks? What the hell is that about?
Hint: it's got nothing to do with Russia or Trump!