Everything about this latest change in presidency in the US has felt slightly off.
Amid everything else that drew attention around the event of Donald Trump‘s inauguration, I missed something that could be quite significant.
It’s a comment the freshly inaugurated president made at a rally: a comment that should’ve drawn much more attention than it did.
It concerned the role of Elon Musk in the election – something we have already established some suspicion about (see here).
Well, here’s what Trump said from the stage on the 19th.
In his customary rambling manner, the president says: “He journeyed to Pennsylvania, where he spent a month and a half campaigning for me in Pennsylvania, and he’s a popular guy. He was very effective…”
He continued: “And he knows those computers better than anybody. All those computers. Those vote-counting computers. And we ended up winning Pennsylvania like in a landslide. So it was pretty good, pretty good. So thank you to Elon.”
That’s a rather odd remark. Why did he say that? What did he mean?
And, once again, it’s odd that the US broadcast media, as well as the political opposition, hasn’t raised any concerns over these statements.
Which again, reinforced for me that the corporate and media establishment has been largely on-board with the Trump victory – despite surface-level appearances to the contrary.
Otherwise questions would be asked.
This comment by Trump should be viewed in relation to other curious statements, which we covered previously.
Just to recap a couple of key points from the article published here right after the election in November: there was the thing with Trump weirdly telling audiences that “we don’t need votes”, and there was the slip up by Joe Rogan about Elon having a special ‘app’ that allowed him to know vote-counts ahead of time.
The not needing votes thing was said by Trump on a few different occasions (“You don’t have to vote, don’t worry about voting. The voting, we got plenty of votes, you gotta watch…’), one of which included reference to some special arrangement or plan between Trump and Republican House speaker Mike Johnson (“He and I have a little secret – we will tell you what it is when the race is over…”).
There hasn’t been any explanation for that statement. Mike Johnson was asked about it and simply replied that ‘a secret is not meant to be shared’.
Both of these oddities, in theory, should’ve been much more picked up on – but for some reason, they’ve been largely ignored.
This latest remark by Trump about Musk and the voting computers in Pennsylvania is highly suspect – and again being largely ignored.
But as I’ve said multiple times already, the same establishment media and government institutions that entirely went along with the July 13th assassination hoax would also, logically, be willing to go along with an illegitimate or hacked election result in Trump’s favour.
Note that the assassination hoax was also in that key state of Pennsylvania: and that Elon came to Pennsylvania to cameo in Trump’s recreation of the assassination rally just before the election (pictured below).
But, in both cases, the aim was to establish a second Trump presidency.
It’s presumably the same reason, as discussed here, that so many have been providing cover for Musk’s fascist salute at the Inauguration, with some broadcasters even helpfully editing out that moment from its live broadcasts.
One would therefore have to conclude that this is all staged theater and a controlled series of events.
Otherwise questions would be raised about these tell-tale statements that strongly imply a fraudulent election: just as questions would’ve been raised about the reality of the July 13th assassination hoax.
The complete silence from the Democrat side and various institutions is becoming deafening at this point.
Contrast this to the drawn-out pantomime of the Russia-Gate impeachment proceedings back in 2016, which wasn’t even based on legitimate claims – and you can see the vast difference.
This time around, unlike in 2016, there’s actually real basis for suspicion and investigation – but apparently no interest.
It can’t be laziness. And if it isn’t laziness, then you have to assume it’s complicity.
Even though that still doesn’t make sense to me, I’m not sure what other conclusion to draw.
As I wrote in the November piece, the thing about Trump is that he’s very loose-lipped. Because he rambles so much in an off-the-cuff fashion, he always lets things slip, always says the quiet part out loud.
That’s why he said all the stuff about not needing the votes. And that’s why he said this thing about Musk and the voting computers.
It’s also the behaviour of someone who thinks they’re invincible and not in any danger of consequences: someone protected and therefore unselfconscious.
It’s the same reason he was able to say, months before any voting for the 2020 election, that the election would be rigged and that he wouldn’t accept the result.
In other words, it’s all laid out ahead of time: it’s just that Trump, like Deadpool in the movies, can’t help breaking the fourth wall all the time and giving the game away.
At any rate, I’m even more convinced now that the 2024 election result was rigged.
And the most curious thing about that is not the possible conspiratorial machinations of the winning side (which would be predictable), but rather the meek acquiescence of the losing side.
They were, after all, humiliated by the scale of their apparent loss. Yet they seem unperturbed by the apparent indicators of foul play.
Maybe this even explains some of the conspicuous behaviour lately: like Joe Biden’s notably upbeat appearances with his supposed adversary or the footage of Obama and Trump sharing a laugh at Jimmy Carter’s funeral.
I generally considered those sorts of spectacles as harmless: just a case of people like Obama and Biden being polite and respecting the institutions.
But, in the context of what we’ve discussed here, I’m starting to reconsider.
The implication of Elon Musk’s involvement also is cause for further concern: specifically in the context of his heavy involvement in the upcoming German election and his obsession with British politics.
By the way, the apparent acquiescence of the opposition is something others have picked up on as well: including Jon Stewart, who in a recent podcast with Alexandra Ocasio Cortez expressed confusion over it.
One wonders if, some day in the future, things will come out about this 2024 election and be more widely looked at.
Or maybe it’s all been covered up and will remain deliberately unaddressed.
