Clinton said Trump shouldn’t be trusted with nuclear weapons. … When Hillary Clinton spoke directly to the danger of Donald Trump having access to the United States’ nuclear arsenal, she may have tapped into a familiar angst with the public. Although the country is decades removed from the Cold War, people are still anxious about nukes. – Morning Consult
Hillary Clinton is battling back on the “trust” issue – that has caused her to lose support – by using her “national security” experience to rebuild credibility.
She’s not trusted by the American people because of numerous well-publicized actions going back decades.
We’ve listed many of them in the past, including the firing of the entire White House Travel Office and their subsequent FBI prosecution because she wanted to put in her own people.
Then there is the hounding of Bill Clinton’s apparent rape victims using intimidation and blackmail.
And there are even swirling rumors about various murders carried out on behalf of her and her husband.
The American public is split about much of this. Some believe that Hillary and Bill are psychopathic and evil. Others seem to distrust her generally but are still willing to vote for her.
One reason she is electable, apparently, is because voters believe she will be more responsible with America’s nuclear weapons.
Of course, we have published numerous articles now questioning the US nuclear narrative.
As with 9/11, we don’t know exactly what’s happened to it, or even to its antecedents, but we know it’s not exactly what’s been portrayed.
Such weapons seem as much political as they are military. And Hillary is building up “trust” by wielding “nukes” as an electoral weapon.
A new poll by Morning Consult shows that voters definitively prefer Clinton to Trump when it comes to nuclear weapons. When given a choice, almost half of respondents (46 percent) say they trust Clinton rather than Trump to handle the country’s nuclear arms.
Voters also say they trust Clinton (44 percent) more than Trump (39 percent) to handle the country’s overall national security, although the margins are tighter.
National Security is without a doubt the most manipulated single element of US politics. Its manipulation buttresses America’s trillion-dollar military-industrial complex and worldwide warfare.
The current $4 trillion-a-year US fedgov has built its expansion on the myth of providing “security” to the American people.
It is increasingly evident that for the past century, anyway, the military has manufactured the threats it seeks to confront. Both world wars and numerous serial wars in the 20th century probably did not have to be fought. The enemies were exaggerated and various probable false flags like Pearl Harbor were generated to drag the US into war.
Hillary used a private email server instead of a government one and supposedly compromised national security. But we have a lot of trouble with “national security” anyway, believing like the enemies that the Pentagon creates out of proverbial thin air, it’s mostly a fiction.
This is why it’s perfectly feasible that Hillary is rebuilding “trust” based on such issues. Because in large part they may not exist, and thus the narrative becomes whatever Hillary supporters wish it to be She can be portrayed as a wise and judicious leader, willing to commit troops to “harm’s way” only as necessary.
Trump can question the necessity for the US’s endless warring, but the military narrative can be embellished to Hillary’s benefit. Her “trust factor” can be supported and expanded by emphasizing the gravity of national security issues and her competence in dealing with them based on her “experience.”
Of course, she doesn’t really have an national security experience because the problems she’s supposedly solved never existed in the first place.
She is rebuilding trust using fedgov’s most untrustworthy narrative.
When it comes to health care, voters trust Clinton (50 percent) over Trump (31 percent).
Conclusion: The Pentagon, CIA and other facilities are perpetually at war and thus can justify perpetual lying. Ironically, her increased credibility is thus based on pervasive untruths.
Subscribe to The Daily Bell and immediately access our free guide:
Freedom in Two Years
How to stop caring about political “sides” and focus your efforts on what will truly make a difference in your life.
This is a guide to individual, not political, action.Yes, deliver THE DAILY BELL to my inbox!