“He publicly accepted the election results and suggested that a series of bipartisan agreements and deals could define the final two years of his presidency.” (Nationalsecurityjournal.org)
As predicted, the Democrats have won historic victories in the midterms. The proverbial butt whooping was so bad they gained power in states where they have had none for nearly 80 years. Even Texas flipped blue. This is bad news, as it has been suggested the Republicans would never win the presidency again if this were to happen. I am not sure if that is true, but it is a distinct possibility. So, what happened? That is a question many people are asking. In hindsight, it is a question that shouldn’t have to be asked at all. Donald Trump, a man who was given a golden opportunity to represent conservative values and set the country straight, acted a fool and betrayed his biggest supporters. We went from big promises on the Epstein files, with Dan Bongino and Pam Bondi promising justice, to Donald Trump calling the whole thing a hoax and berating his supporters for believing any of it. After promising an end to never ending middle east entanglements, he started an unprovoked war against Iran, sending energy prices soaring. Between his two terms, Trump increased the national debt by twelve trillion dollars, making him responsible for nearly thirty percent of it. Conservatives started the Tea Party movement in response to Obama’s eight trillion but said nothing as Trump continued to increase spending. Trump stood in front of God and country and said in plain English that he is not concerned about the American people’s financial situations. Finally, while campaigning, he said right in front of his audience that he “could say the stupidest things and they would still cheer for him.” To prove this, he later made some peculiar comments about the male anatomy, which was met with thunderous applause no less. Gee, it is hard to believe that he could lose so much support. Truthfully, and I alluded to this in last week’s article, this victory was more of a vote against Trump than a vote for Democrats. If you remember, the same thing happened to Obama. Many Republican voters, upset with the direction Bush had taken the country, voted for hope and change. When it became apparent that Obama was dropping more bombs than Bush, engaging in new wars, and spending us into oblivion, his voters turned on him and in 2016, voted in Trump to make America great again. Most voters are not ideologically rooted to any party and will vote for one simply to punish the other. Still, the question that needs to be asked isn’t what happened, but why Trump behaved this way? It is almost like he deliberately threw this election to the left. It is hard to imagine that a guy who was known as a New York Democrat, and having a long friendship with the Clinton’s, would do such a thing. Isn’t it?
Alex Jones, a man who has praised Trump and pushed the trust the plan narrative, is now suggesting that Trump is working as a Democrat and is purposefully discrediting the conservative movement. I am not sure how much stock you can put in Alex Jones, as William Cooper once referred to him as controlled opposition. However, since 2015, I have been trying to draw attention to many anomalies and inconsistencies in Trump’s alleged conservative positions. I once wrote an article for the Western Free Press suggesting that we should be wary of his so called “pro-gun positions” because he wrote in his own book that he supports many gun control proposals. We saw this manifest in 2018 when he said to Mike Pence that he likes to “take the guns first and go to court later because court takes too long.” This green lighted a rash of states instituting red flag laws, which William Barr helped fund with taxpayer dollars. I was mocked and ridiculed for this by many Trump loyalists. The Western Free Press asked me to change the content of the article for fear of moving people away from Trump. The administration has gone to great lengths to present themselves as pro-2A but have done nothing to go against red flag laws. I have also written many articles explaining persuasion theories like fear-then-relief, suggesting that Trump voters, feeling elated that he defeated Clinton after eight years of Obama, and rightfully so, went into a mindless state of compliance, never questioning anything. No matter what Trump did, it was accepted because he saved the country from the radical left. Another theory I discuss often, also falling under the categories of persuasion and even cognitive dissonance, is something called effort justification. This theory suggests, and it is discussed by B.F. Skinner in Beyond Freedom and Dignity also, that people are under the powerful control of the effort they put into something. In other words, a lot of work and a lot of hope was put into Trump, almost as a last-ditch effort to save the country. This created, just as the fear-then-relief theory did, a non-questioning, compliant attitude among his biggest supporters. The problem is that not everyone who voted for Trump was ideologically rooted to the conservative ideology. They just thought he could repair what Obama had damaged. In other words, his victory wasn’t necessarily a pro-conservative thing, but more of a recognition that Obama, and the democrats, didn’t live up to the promises they made. Go figure.
Should the idea that Trump was a democrat all along be taken seriously? Let’s go back to the 2016 election debates a moment. Then candidate Trump, promised his audience, right in front of Clinton no less, that she was going to be arrested. The whole thing seemed like a theatrical production. What most people don’t realize is that it was. You see, as early as the 1950’s social scientists, marketers, advertisers and psychologists were beginning to apply what they knew about getting people to buy things they didn’t need, to selling the American people political candidates. This was referred to as depth psychology. While I have an entire chapter dedicated to this subject in my latest book, it is information that is readily available in another book called The Hidden Persuaders. What happened after the election? Trump thanked Bill and Hillary for their wonderful service to the country, while saying he had tremendous respect for them. Donald Trump has donated large sums of money to not only the Clinton foundation, but Democrats like Chuck Schumer as well. As soon as Trump became the presidential nominee, countless news paper articles came out claiming that he and the Clinton’s were no longer friends. Why? Because everybody knew they had a long history of friendship. Trump’s first big spending bill was the result of extensive collaboration between him, Pelosi and Schumer, while excluding any Republican involvement at all. He basically gave the Democrats everything they wanted, then stood in front of all of us promising to not do it again. Since then he has taken ownership of thirty percent of the national debt, far surpassing what Obama and Biden spent.
I always found myself a little befuddled that conservatives would accept a man that has been known to associate with the one couple that has been at the heart of destroying America by any means necessary. While Barack Obama had a reputation of being a master of the Alinsky model, Hillary Clinton personally knew Saul Alinsky and wrote her college thesis on Rules for Radicals and how to change the government from within. It was called “There is only the fight,” implying that the fight for their utopian vision is all that matters. This has more bearing than what people want to acknowledge because the radical left is willing to employ any means necessary to achieve their objective. They operate on an entirely different level of morality than most of us can imagine. For instance, Alinsky says in Rules for Radicals that believing “corrupted means would corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles.” What does that mean? Have you ever looked up the term immaculate conception? It has to do with the idea that the mother of Jesus, from the moment of her conception, was free from original sin because of her intended role as the mother of Christ. What Alinsky is saying is that the left believes their objectives can be morally pure no matter what methods are used to achieve them. He is not only mocking religion, but the idea that corrupted methods will necessarily corrupt the end result. The left believes the vision they are pursuing is more important than an individual’s personal morality, and that corrupting oneself is in fact, a higher level of said morality. Consider the following quote—
“In action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of personal salvation; he doesn’t care enough for the people to be corrupted for them.”
That puts the title of Clinton’s thesis in a different perspective, doesn’t it? The only thing that matters to the left is the transformation of America from the imperialist, racist country they believe it is, to their socialist utopia. They believe they know what is best for everyone and because of this, are willing to corrupt themselves in pursuit of this goal. To them, this is salvation, as they believe their compassion for mankind justifies whatever means they employ.
Does this necessarily equate to Donald Trump posing as a conservative in order to give the election to the left? What about all of the good things he has done, especially during his first term? I will admit that most of this is purely speculative and would be difficult to prove. However, there are some interesting things to keep in mind. Especially considering the majority of conservatives think the democrat party is made up of communists. Have you ever read The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn? He was a Soviet propaganda specialist who defected to the west with a warning about communist strategy. He claimed that the entire defeat of Soviet Russia was a propaganda operation, and that the so-called capitalist reforms adopted by Russia were a smoke screen to placate the west. He also mentions that the use of controlled opposition and deliberate misinformation are key strategies used to transform free, democratic societies into communist nations. Furthermore, and this is an important point, he highlights the difference between communist long range strategic planning, and the west’s short term thinking. To the United States, for example, strategy is usually understood in the terms of short term goals which are immediately achievable. Comparatively speaking, the communists viewed strategy as a “grand design, or general party line which governs the party’s actions over a long period and contains one or more special maneuvers designed to help the party achieve its ultimate objectives.” What are some of the democrats’ ultimate objectives? Getting the conservatives out of the way, perhaps? Destroying the Republican party, maybe? Who knows? But I would say those are pretty good guesses.
What about QANON, and the “trust the plan, four dimensional chess” strategy that seemed to mesmerize everyone? There is so much to discuss here. First of all, I need to remind you that propaganda works best when it reflects popular sentiment. Trump was able to tune in perfectly to the conservative ideology. Ellul states that a propagandist cannot be a believer in the ideology he professes to belong. He is nothing more than a man in service to a political objective, using the ideology as a propaganda tool. Ideology, according to Ellul, is merely an accessory to be used as propaganda to mobilize the masses with the ultimate aim of getting them to support state power. Doesn’t that sum up the QANON narrative? Isn’t the entire Trump presidency able to be defined this way? Conservatives demonstrating a willingness to give Trump unprecedented power to fight the left, and restore American greatness? Do you remember Edward Bernays’ definition of propaganda?
“To mold the mind of the masses so they will direct all of their efforts to the desired ends of the shadow government, who use the powers of propaganda to gain approval from the people on issues they may have at one time, disapproved of.”
There is no question at all, that if Biden, Obama, or even Kamala Harris, were to deploy masked, federal agents in the streets, conservatives would oppose. That is the purpose of propaganda. To gain acceptance of growing state power. QANON convinced many voters that there was a secret plan in place to arrest the “deep state” and bring them to justice once and for all. All we had to do was get out of the way and let the plan unfold. This became so ridiculous that people were saying they would accept Trump as a dictator long enough for this to happen. This narrative was a perfect reflection of what Trump voters were hoping for. After eight years of Obama mocking American values, this message resonated so deeply that people closed their minds and went along in the hopes that one day these arrests would happen. These hopes continued on right through Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election. People were sitting on the edge of their seats as the trust the plan narrative convinced them that Mike Pence was going to refuse to certify the election results. Of course, that never happened. What did happen however, were mass arrests of Trump voters who were accused of storming the capital after Trump himself encouraged them to go protest. We are seeing this same type of fabricated story develop as many people are claiming that Trump set the democrats up, and is about to spring the final four dimensional trap.
The best that I can tell is that the QANON narrative is based on a Soviet operation simply called trust. It was essentially the same thing. This can be found in Anatoliy Golitsyn’s book, New Lies For Old. He says that Operation Trust was a controlled opposition strategy used to convince the masses that the old security services were establishing themselves within the communist hierarchy, and that they just “had to trust the plan.” The objective was to placate the masses so they wouldn’t resist the communist revolution. I have discussed this before in a previous article and was called a milk toast patriot by someone who feels patriotism means blind loyalty to a particular person. True patriotism is the exact opposite. It requires robust skepticism of anyone who seeks power, the jealous defense of liberty, and an unwavering dedication to principles. Blinding yourself in awe of one person’s promises, prowess, and political astuteness is not patriotism.
Does this prove that QANON was based on this Operation Trust? No, however, we have to go back to one of the prevailing beliefs of the Republican party. The Democrats are communists. If you believe your opposition is made up of communists, it will behoove you to actually study the tactics and strategies of communism. When you do, you find that deception, misinformation, and controlled opposition are the primary methods used to take over a country. Unless you take the time to study this, along with the research on propaganda, persuasion, and what is known about our responses to it, you could live your entire life not realizing you are being propagandized at all. Furthermore, a failure to at least acknowledge the possibility of this article being true will lead to people making the same mistake all over again. The Democrats are going to take a hard left turn. When it comes time to vote in 2028, there will be a slick, smooth talking republican telling everyone exactly what they need to hear. They will promise big change to a conservative electorate that once again feels betrayed, let down, and lost in a country they no longer recognize, and they will be looking for direction.
Whether Trump was a sincere conservative, a democrat operative, or simply doing a favor for his good old buddies Bill and Hillary, the bottom line is that the Republican party is demolished. All of the hype surrounding the Q narrative amounted to the very deep state people thought Trump was defeating taking over the house and senate in record numbers. Several states known to be republican strongholds were flipped blue. The next two years will be very interesting. He will either veto the democrat’s agenda or go along with them. My guess, and I hope I am wrong, is that he will sign a national red flag law as this has been a top priority item for the left for a long time. He already said he supports it, and there isn’t enough republican opposition to stand in the way. Only time will tell, I suppose. In the meantime, we will have to live with the fact that he “suggested that a series of bipartisan agreements and deals could define the final two years of his presidency.” If I am wrong? Well, I can’t think of anything else I would rather be wrong about.
Enjoy this content?
Be sure to check out my latest book! The Psychology of Persuasive Propaganda: The Things You Should Know.
Check these out as well.
Without a Shot Indeed: Inducing Compliance to Tyranny Through Conditioning and Persuasion.
and A Critical Look at CRT in Education, Research and Social Policy
Copyright 2026. This is the intellectual property of David Risselada and defenseofournation.com
