I've seen discussions on here about Biden winning this year because he works in the ruling class's interest.

If the CIA really did just push a button at Langley and decide the next president, why not Hilary?

She's a corporate ghoul like the rest of them, loves war, everyone expected her to win, and the election was close enough to be plausible either way. She would have been a more reliable, or at least knowable, asset to the deep state than Trump.

She would have been the same mid president as Trump, but it would have been more of a banality of evil approach. Everyone's material conditions would have gotten worse in the same way but there wouldn't have been the media circus around everything she did.

So why do you think the 'most qualified' person for the job didn't win last time? And what could that say about this year?

  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]
    ·
    5 months ago

    Wasn't the source of the leaks the Deputy Director of the FBI or something?

    Yes, he was.

    You don't have to be JFK-pilled to see Watergate and its consequence as Nixon being an outsider:

    1. They say Watergate happened because Nixon was paranoid. The question is: who was Nixon paranoid of? On a basic level, I don't think Nixon would be paranoid if he was part of the inner circle of national security ghouls.

    2. If Nixon was an insider and wanted Watergate to happen anyways for some stupid reason, he would've just gotten the FBI to break in for him instead of getting his personal staff to do so. And if the FBI got caught, all they would have to do is investigate themselves and find themselves of no wrongdoing.

    3. The media would've been told by various means and through various channels to stfu about the break-in, and it wouldn't have been the media spectacle it was.

    4. Deepthroat wouldn't have been a thing because like you said, he was deputy director of the FBI. In this alternative timeline, Felt would've probably blamed the break-in on the Soviets or something.