The Real Deep State Is the Old-Money Plutocracy - Bureaucrats Are Their Operatives

6300 words. This is an in-depth analysis of exactly what the Deep State is, and a look at efforts to water-down the term as it becomes widely accepted as a legitimate concept. From a long-time Russia Insider contributor, see his other excellent articles here.

---

The concept of the Deep State just made a massive breakthrough in the wake of the release of the Memo authored by the House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes. The Memo incriminates the Obama administration, the FBI and the Clinton campaign for collusion to abuse the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and illegally target and wiretap the Trump campaign with the pretext to investigate the entirely fabricated affair of an alleged Trump-Russia collusion.

With this and as a result of the soon two-year long establishment witch hunt on President Trump, the term Deep State, which formerly belonged to the realm of ridiculed conspiracy theories has really gone mainstream. But a new line of defense has been drawn by way of redefining the meaning of the term and whom it includes. The establishment and conformists are now willing to concede that there in fact is a Deep State, but no worries, it’s just the entrenched government bureaucracies looking after their vested interests in line with their long-formed ideologies.

This represents a sanitized and benign definition of the Deep State, which is being advanced in order to keep the limelight away from the true flesh and blood core of the Deep State: the American oligarchs or plutocrats, the Wall Street bankers and other assorted billionaires. It is the plutocracy that is the Deep State, and they own the US Government. The officials from the Pentagon, the security agencies, law enforcement, FBI and the Department of Justice, the Treasury, the State Department, etc., are merely assets of the Deep State plutocracy, best referred to as Deep State operatives.

Deep State originally a Turkish concept now landed in America

The deep state terminology originated in Turkey, signifying behind-the-scenes power machinery and a network of relationships among selected members of the military, intelligence, judicial, and bureaucratic elite in league with the mob, who antidemocratically either hold absolute power in the country or strive towards it.

In the United States, the concept has steadily gained traction since 2010 when Washington Post journalists Dana Priest and Bill Arkin published a series of articles titled “Top Secret America: A hidden world, growing beyond control.”

Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government. The Trump-supporting media like Breitbart News and Infowars.com picked up the term during and after the 2016 presidential campaign to describe the establishment foes Trump was challenging. Correspondingly, the establishment media turned the concept around and labeled “Deep State” a “conspiracy theory” of Trump supporters. The anti-establishment media claims that there is a secret cabal of the elite exercising super control over the elected government from behind the scenes as a shadow government or state within the state, whereas the establishment media uses basically the same definition of a Deep State but in the meaning of a loony tinfoil hat conspiracy theory.

The Deep State concept has been preceded by the terms shadow government, state within a state, and elite or establishment conspiracy, which together have a long history of pointing to basically this same sort of conspiracy. (It is probably the timing of Mike Lofgren’s book coinciding with the presidential campaign of 2016 that gave the present prominence to the Deep State concept).

Attempts to downgrade the Deep State to signify bureaucratic inertia

Now, as the concept has gone mainstream and the evidence is so clearly out there that the Deep State is an American reality, the establishment consensus has decided to downgrade the concept and remove its essential conspiracy element by redefining it. According to this sanitized version, the Deep State represents the class of entrenched unelected civil servants, who act basically in a manner of bureaucratic inertia to further their own carrier interests and in the pursuit of the ideologies that they have been conditioned to believe in. This would entail, from time to time, an opposition to the policies of elected institutions by way of obstruction, resistance and subversion. But all this without any sinister conspiracy, god forbid. The author Mike Lofgren under apparent pressure to conform has himself gone out of his way to state that what he meant by Deep State was that it “is simply the institutional culmination of illiberal tendencies that have developed in [the American] theoretically liberal democracy, an institution that provides an extensive support network for its loyal operatives.”

In this benign version of the Deep State, it would consist of the top military brass, the leaders of the intelligence community, top State Department, Department of Justice and law enforcement (FBI) officials, and other influential government servants, such as congressional staff, together with the coterie of experts from think tanks etc. (Notably absent from the definition are the representatives of America’s vaunted Free Media). Lofgren originally defined it as “a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry effectively able to govern the US without reference to the consent of the governed.”

Lofgren then went on to list the members of the Deep State as: the national security agencies of government, Treasury, the FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court). Other observers have counted in the Pentagon, FBI, Department of Justice and the State Department. (The State Department hosts a powerful group of individuals self-referred to as the Shadow Government). 

But then after all this, Lofgren takes it all back by stressing that the “Deep State is not a conspiracy” – saying so in several interviews and in his blog post. Frankly, these revisions seem to amount to some kind of life insurance policy.

The denial of the conspiratorial nature of the Deep State runs deep and even turns up in alternative media stalwarts like Consortiumnews of the late Robert Parry. In a recent article of their following the Memo release, Caitlin Johnstone argues that the term deep state does not refer “to any kind of weird, unverifiable [emphasis added] conspiracy theory.” Instead, she continues, it is a concept “used in political analysis for discussing the undeniable fact that unelected power structures exist in America, and that they tend to form alliances and work together in some sense.” In this vein, she adheres to the sanitized version of the concept claiming that the deep state is just the entrenched bureaucracy, or in her words, “America’s permanent government, U.S. power structures that Americans don’t elect,” looking out for their vested interests.

Rather than being willing to admit a flesh and blood conspiracy of a limited group within the plutocracy, these kinds of writers would rather address the question from point of view of class warfare. As Johnstone argues in another Consortiumnews article, it is the question of the “the plutocratic class which effectively owns America’s elected government” which work in league with “the intelligence and defense agencies” and “operate behind thick veils of secrecy in the name of national security to advance agendas which have nothing to do with the wishes of the electorate, and the mass media machine which is used to manufacture the consent of the people to be governed by this exploitative power structure.” – But it’s OK to say so, because this is quite a different thing than “any kind of weird, unverifiable conspiracy theory” - because this is just your plain vanilla class war theory, that’s how they must be thinking.

One surface conspiracy has been revealed

Now in connection with the Nunes memo scandal, many respected political observers have noted that the events described in the memo in fact amount to a conspiracy. 21st Century Wire writes that the memo demonstrates the fraudulent nature of the politically motivated Russiagate and reveals proof of a conspiracy to defraud candidate and president-elect Trump and meddle in the US electoral process by “a conspiracy which runs right through the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton Campaign and operatives at Fusion GPS.”

Obviously, the mainstream media is denying it and mocking those who claim so. Here are a few samples on how they treat the subject and the Deep State controversy in general.

Huffington Post: The key players in Trump’s ‘Deep State’ conspiracy theory are all Republicans.

Newsweek: Deep State: How a conspiracy theory went from political fringe to mainstream.

Politico: The Deep State is real.

But in fact there is a more fundamental conspiracy of the elite cabal

The Nunes memo does not in itself prove a wider conspiracy of the elite cabal. But it sure does add to the bucket of already existing proof.

A keen observer of US domestic and foreign policies would have been able, over the last decades, to detect a welter of information that points towards the existence of just that – an elite cabal that runs the US Government from behind the scenes. Let’s just remember that everything Donald Trump has been subjected to from the side of the establishment institutions during his campaign and after the election clearly points to a premeditated conspiracy.

Within the scope of this article, we cannot dig in to all the incidents; suffice therefore to point at a few. Very early on in Trump’s campaign, we could detect a remarkable bipartisan hostility against Trump. It was not only the Democrats and their media assets that attacked Trump, as they were soon joined by a uniform chorus of almost all the bigwigs of the Republican Party, including the two Bush ex-presidents. We have the near total endorsement of Clinton by the US 100 largest newspapers, while only 2 endorsed the Republican candidate Trump. The uniform character assassination of Trump by the mainstream media (only the traditionally Republican cheerleading Foxnews maintained a partially neutral coverage on Trump). And since the election, there has been a constant slew of imaginary stories about Trump, culminating in the totally fabricated Russiagate collusion story.

To be fair, I should have warned from the start of this article, that you should not read any further if you think there is any substance whatsoever to the Russiagate hoax under the “Russian hacking,” “Russian Meddling,” and “Russian Collusion” labels. They are nothing but blatant and banal lies, aimed at containing the President and ultimately removing him from office. Yet, the whole American mainstream media keeps spewing out the mantra of those lies. And the American political elite – including some of the people holding the most important positions in the Trump administration, like Secretary of State Tillerson – keep peppering their statements with the “Russian meddling” lie rather in the way Soviet officials made their mandatory references to Marxism-Leninism.

Such a uniform and concentrated series of attacks from the side of the establishment cannot signify anything else than that they are the manifestation of a well-planned centrally orchestrated campaign against the president. One must remember that a few members of the plutocratic elite together own the six media corporations that now totally dominate the American information sphere. So, what does that tell about the country, its media and its government. Well, for me it says they’re fake. Seriously fake. And not only that, they are conspiratorially fake. It is not possible that the brightest people of country with such history of individualism, democratic and intellectual traditions would all of a sudden display this totalitarian tendency to support outrageous fabricated propaganda lies like these if they were not compelled to do so.

What we have is a conspiracy inference

This brings me back to the emphasis, I added above to Johnstone’s claim that the Deep State does not refer “to any kind of weird, unverifiable conspiracy theory.” – “Unverifiable,” well how are you supposed to verify it when the adversary is all powerful, acts behind the scenes, and owns the media, law enforcement and intelligence agencies?

In fact, what I am advancing here is a conspiracy inference, a conclusion about the elite conspiracy reached by way of reasoning on the basis of observable facts and events. Maybe that’s what we should do, substitute the term conspiracy inference for conspiracy theory. At the very least, what we are doing is advancing a working hypothesis based on empirical facts and observable public behavior.

In this connection, we are well advised to remember that the whole concept “conspiracy theory” is a label devised by the CIA specifically for the purpose of discrediting legitimate criticism of their very own covert operations. In its first massive use, it was directed to counter the groundswell of public skepticism toward the CIA-led Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. In this connection in 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch, which coined the term “conspiracy theory” and recommended methods for discrediting such theories and their authors. Back then, the CIA was still quite naively formal in its approaches and actually marked the dispatch “psych”, short for “psychological operations” or disinformation, and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.

Here – one has to give it to them – the CIA pulled a remarkably effective psyop with lasting effects, so that even otherwise intelligent observers and critics are still today afraid of embracing “any kind of weird, unverifiable conspiracy theory” although the evidence is there right in front of their eyes, and goes into everything they otherwise write about. They just cannot take the final push to admit the unspeakable.

We have a lot of facts to build our case

In fact, it is baffling to try to get to grips with what these people mean by “unverifiable” versus “verifiable” evidence in this context, after all they are political pundits, who are in the business of trying to analytically figure out how things stand and build their case by speculating based on observed events. It is a court of law that must demand verifiable facts, whereas the court of opinions precisely works by arguing a case most often by means of anecdotal evidence. And boy, do we have anecdotal evidence!

We have all those facts already referred to above and all the facts that Lofgren listed (before chickening out) about “a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry effectively able to govern the US without reference to the consent of the governed,” that is, the schemings and dealings of the banking-military-industrial-spook-media complex.

We have the fact, that the revolving doors through which top-level Treasury officials, CIA officers, and Wall Street bankers and their retinue of lawyers have been passing from private to public service and back ever since the 1930s. The system was really put firmly in place by the mastermind behind the CIA, Allen Dulles, originally a Wall Street lawyer with Sullivan and Cromwell. In his advisory group tasked in 1947 with drafting the proposals for the operating models and organization of the future CIA, all but one of the six men were Wall Street bankers and lawyers.

We know that there’s the plutocracy-operated Council on Foreign Relations, which has drafted US foreign policy since WWII, and from whose ranks (or with whose blessing) all the presidents have come ever since. At least half of all top positions in the U.S. government since the 1940s have been occupied by Council members, no matter whether the presidents have been from the Democratic or Republican party. Then there’s the Trilateral Commission, an offshoot of the Council and brainchild of Council sponsor David Rockefeller and professor Zbigniew Brzezinski. The Trilateral Commission took over the government after its handpicked candidate Jimmy Carter took office. (More about the Council and the Trilateral Commission in the Appendix).

There’s the fact that money buys American elections. Only multimillionaires or those backed by billionaires, banks and mega corporations can successfully contest an election for a higher office. The US Supreme Court in a 2010 ruling essentially removed all restrictions on corporate spending on election campaigns. The New York Times wrote that in 2016, candidates running for federal office spent a record $6.4 billion on their campaigns.

On top of that, lobbyists spent $3.15 billion to manipulate the central government. These figures naturally only represent what is in the official books, the real sums could be much more, including by means of all kinds of subtle ways to circumvent accountability. There are also many other ways to corrupt the government, such as for example by assigning capital expenditure into the areas of a congressman’s constituency in return for falling in line on crucial votes. In the last decades, a deferred method of bribing has become widely used. In this method, Pentagon generals and other government officials gain lucrative jobs in the private sector as consultants or board members after resigning their government jobs. It is widely believed that in this category fall Hillary Clinton’s extraordinary speaking fees. In 2013, she received in total $9,680,000 for her speaking engagements.

Of her 41 talks, Wall Street banks funded 14. In addition to Goldman Sachs, the list includes Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Fidelity Investments, UBS and Bank of America. Her benefactors also included hedge funds and private equity firms like Apollo Management and Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts. That somebody would have wanted to pay such huge sums for hearing Clinton speak is doubly questionable in the face of the reports that nobody wanted to pay even $9.90 to read her election year book Stronger Together, which sold only 2,912 copies in its first week of sales and was never heard about afterwards.

Follow the money                                                                    

The fact is that those who pay for the American political system own it, as well as own the government, including the two parties (although there seems to be a partial rebellion in the second tier of the Republican Party for the moment). The Pentagon and the government agencies like the FBI, the Department of Justice and the CIA belong to the Deep State (the latter being its chief executive organ). But the these agencies and the influential people there are not the Deep State as such, they are merely Deep State operatives or assets. It is the plutocracy behind the scenes that call the shots – they are the Deep State. Take a look at the spineless, sneaky James Comey – did he ever give the impression that he was a big shot? Or consider the ever-changing sequence of CIA directors – see any impressive guys there who could be mistaken for real decision makers? Hardly – and that’s because they are nothing but servants for the big guys of the Deep State plutocracy. (Maybe there is a reason for having such figureheads coming and going).

Just as an example of the myriad of evidence that can be dug up on the way the plutocracy operates, I refer to this article from 2016 in the New Republic.

New Republic tells that the WikiLeaks dump on John Podesta’s emails revealed that the Wall Street plutocracy had already decided for the future president Obama who was to be in his administration even before he had won his first election. At the time of the WikiLeaks revelations, Podesta was Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager but at the time of the email in question he served as co-chair of Barack Obama’s transition team. Michael Froman, a then executive at Citigroup, wrote the email (originating from a Citigroup email address) to Podesta on October 6, 2008, with the subject “Lists.” As the New Republic writes, he attached three documents: a list of women for top administration jobs, a list of non-white candidates, and a sample outline of 31 cabinet-level positions and who would fill them.

In his email, Mr. Froman showed that he possesses a nearly divine prophetic vision as his cabinet list ended up being almost entirely on the money. It correctly identified Eric Holder for the Justice Department, Janet Napolitano for Homeland Security, Robert Gates for Defense, Rahm Emanuel for chief of staff, Peter Orszag for the Office of Management and Budget, Arne Duncan for Education, Eric Shinseki for Veterans Affairs, Kathleen Sebelius for Health and Human Services, Melody Barnes for the Domestic Policy Council, and more. For the Treasury, three possibilities were on the list: Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, and Timothy Geithner.

Who are in the Deep State plutocracy?

Following this line of thinking, I would say that there are two tiers in the Deep State, the true Deep State of the plutocrats, which we could also call the Deep State regime, and the second tier of Deep State servants, or operatives. People like the Clintons belonging to the second tier of Deep State servants, although (formerly) of great importance.

Then who exactly are in the Deep State plutocracy? I cannot name them exactly, because of the very fact that they are shrouded in secrecy and very little research about this is in the public domain, for various reasons, one of which is that most of the able people would not want to risk the label of “conspiracy theorists” that such a study would entail. But we can say with certainty that this overwhelmingly includes the people that control the big capital in America and to a certain extent also Britain. They are the big name capitalist and bankers who controlled US banks and other industry from the beginning of the 20th century. There are the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Naturally, the new generation billionaires also make it to the Deep State plutocracy, but to what extent is not clear.

The Deep State is super powerful and all-powerful in relation to ordinary citizen, but they have not reached an absolute totalitarian power. Neither is the Deep State an absolute monolith and a group of people with a total agreement on details of policy. In the previous normal circumstances (before the Trumpian revolt), their power was enough to put their people in needed positions of government and gradually march towards a total control of it. With that and by virtue of their media control they have been able to exercise overwhelming, supreme power in the country. Consider also the power of the establishment to freeze out dissenting people from organizations and institutions, and on the contrary promote servile people. And the power that the FBI and the other branches of the secret police wields over people by way of blackmailing people by reference to disparaging information that they may hold on them (or as we have seen, with the threat to fabricate such information and dossiers) as well as direct threats of violence (including following up on the threats when needed). They have not used these powers in the way other major totalitarian states have done in the past, for example, Stalinist Soviet Union or Hitler’s Germany. But, it does not mean that they would not possess those powers, which they very much do, and that they would not do it when countering resistance, which they have. They have instead created a much more intelligent design of totalitarianism, which works under the framework of a seeming liberal democracy on its way to gradually eat into full control and absolute power.

It is this framework of a democratic surface and a work-in-progress totalitarianism, which allowed Donald Trump to exploit the system gaps and essentially to sneak through their guard to grab the presidency of the United States. That probably has a lot to do with the fact that the Deep State was slow to realize he was a real threat, and who knows, maybe too many of them where influenced by their own propaganda and thought it impossible.

What does the Deep State plutocracy want?

Naturally, there are frictions within the Deep State plutocracy as among any group of people, but they seem to be in agreement about the main policy goals, the globalist agenda, which is to establish an uncontested absolute US world hegemony under their unelected rule. They are not in the habit of publishing their political agenda, but it is available for anybody who cares to follow the mainstream media and the talking points of leading politicians, both in the USA and the Western world at large. Domestically (in all the Western countries) it is a policy of a cultural Marxist change agenda and ethnic engineering by means of mass immigration in order to wipe out the national states.

The logic behind cultural Marxism is to wipe out all traditional values and the allegiance that comes with them to the country, community, church and family in order to make people more governable for the Deep State. The destruction of the ethnically dominated national states follows the same playbook with the idea that an ethnically fluid or indifferent mass is more easily governed than ethnic nationalities that insist on their culture and traditional interests. The electorate that made Trump president precisely confirmed this. (I have discussed these issues more in detail in my essay EU’s Infowar On Russia – Putting In Place A Totalitarian Media Regime And Speech Control). 

Geopolitically, the overriding goal for the two last decades has been the subjugation of Russia. During the previous Cold War, the policy was to contain Russia, but after the demise of the Soviet Union, the Deep State’s appetite grew, leading to the strategy of full subjugation of Russia in order to remove it from the world stage as an independent state actor. But this is not due to some unexplainable Russophobia or hatred of Russia and Russians. No, the anti-Russian propaganda is just a means to an end, which is to establish an absolute world hegemony under the rule of the American plutocracy (the Deep State regime). It is for the sake of this objective that the American plutocracy has assigned its government assets and the media to whip up anti-Russian hysteria. It is required for the public (in the Western countries, and around the globe as much as it is possible) to sign up to the war efforts against Russia, both the economic warfare, which is already under way under the guise of sanctions, and the actual hot war, and the preparations of such, which preparations are in full swing every day as the NATO war alliance pushes closer to encircle Russia.

Russia is crucial in the Deep State’s world hegemony project, because were Russia to fall, then China would also be eliminated by way of its total encirclement. And after that there would not be any powers in the world that could possibly oppose the American hegemon.

There’s an interesting parallel between Trump-Russiagate and the two-decade long anti-Russian propaganda, inasmuch as both are equally devoid of factual grounds. While the Trump-Russiagate narrative is fabricated out of thin air, the anti-Russian propaganda has in all essentials proceeded on the same fictional and factless path. Naturally, though, in a huge country of 150 million people, from time to time you would identify things around which to build the tales. (Here a link to my satirical account on the way the Russia bashing propaganda stories are made up). Most likely, the conspirators figured that when you investigate a globally active billionaire like Trump something promising would crop up that could season the stew, but in vain, nothing ever materialized.

The danger of not understanding the essence of the Deep State illustrated

Geopolitical analysis can go seriously awry when the essence of the US Deep State is not sufficiently understood. This is illustrated by a recent article by Andrew Korybko where he draws entirely wrong conclusions about the Deep State based on the sanitized version of the concept, arguing that the US Deep State is the entrenched bureaucracies, or as he defines it, the “military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies.” Thinking that these indeed are the Deep State, he even assigns rationality to their actions, while admitting that they “bear primary responsibility for the deterioration in US-Russian relations under both the Obama and Trump presidencies.”

Korybko’s piece actually comes as a rebuttal of the thesis put forward by Andrey Kortunov in the annals of the Valdai Club, the famous geopolitical discussion club. Kortunov is the General Director of the prestigious diplomatic think tank Russian International Affairs. These gentlemen do not, however, seem to have any disagreement as to the nature of the Deep State as Kortunov also has embraces the entrenched bureaucracies version of the definition, which is evident from the way he refers to it as including “the State Department or the CIA officials, the Congress staff, experts from the main think tanks.” Instead, their argument is about whether the US Deep State – in this fatally wrong understanding of its nature – is good for Russia or not. Further, Kortunov argues – seemingly from the underlying idea that the two are extensions of each other – that Russia should not only embrace the Deep State but the Democratic Party as well.

In an interesting logical twist, Kortunov, points out that the Deep State that he thus defines “can hardly be considered stubborn paranoids, exalted conspiracy theorists or genetic Russophobes.” Well, naturally they would not entertain any conspiracy theories about their own essence, it is we who are exposing the conspiracy that does it. And surely, as I have pointed out, their policy is not based on any kind of Russophobia, while it manifests Russophobia purely for propaganda purposes. And naturally, some of the lower operatives are indeed Russophobes, and have been hired in order to spread the fervor.

Everything about Kortunov’s argument is seriously wrong, and it would be a veritable catastrophe if that kind of thinking were to be embraced by the Russian leadership. As we have demonstrated, the US Deep State is not the entrenched government officials functioning on bureaucratic inertia, but the plutocracy behind these operatives, which is hell-bent on destroying Russia.

APPENDIX - ON THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION

The Council on Foreign Relations, by far the most important and core organization among the publicly acknowledged globalist organizations, being the main promotional arm of the Deep State’s world hegemony agenda. The Council has been immensely successful in coopting all the members of the American elite who aspire to have an influential job connected with the sphere of foreign policy. Although public by format, the Council is a secretive organization which was set up from the beginning with the specific mission to push the global hegemony agenda of the global masters. Members of the Council on Foreign Relations dominate key positions in the U.S. government, its military, the economy, the media, and academia.

The Council was founded by the “Money Trust” a cabal of international bankers including the houses of Rockefeller, Morgan, and Rothschild, who had taken over the US financial system by creating the Federal Reserve System in 1913. They pushed for an early globalist agenda after World War I and after buying the elections that launched Woodrow Wilson as their president, they assigned him to create the League of Nations, which was done, but due to the resistance of the Congress, the US did actually not join it. In the face of this set-back the globalist cabal set-up the Council on Foreign Relations with the immediate purpose to lead America into the League.

This Money Trust bought the elections launching Woodrow Wilson as their president, whom they tightly controlled throughout his presidency, even sending their front man, Edward Mandell to live in the White House for daily continuous control over the president.

The United States never joined the League of Nations, but the Council on Foreign Relations itself thrived and grew to become America’s absolute foreign policy power center, that is, of the visible power, the global masters behind the scenes remaining the real power.

In the late 1930s, money started to pour into the Council from the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation. The final breakthrough was achieved in 1939 when the Rockefeller Foundation started to finance a super-secret chapter of the Council called the War and Peace Studies. One of the study groups was called the security and armaments group and it was headed by Allen Dulles who gained prominence in the CIA’s predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services, and then became pivotal in founding the CIA and subsequently its third and longest serving director. Ever since, the Council has successfully promoted globalization on the terms of the global masters, free trade, reduction of financial regulations on transnational corporations and economic and political consolidation into regional blocs such as NAFTA and the European Union.

Russia has been in the crosshairs of the Council from the very beginning. The infamous US geopolitical strategy of containment of Russia was launched by one of the Council’s secret study groups. President Dwight Eisenhower, a Council member himself, appointed John Foster Dulles, a fellow Council member and brother of the CIA director Allen Dulles, as the Secretary of State in January 1953. (Allen Dulles was appointed the CIA director the following month in February 1953). Dulles then announced Eisenhower’s revised foreign policy direction, which was based on acquiring massive nuclear retaliator power, that is, by an immense build-up of nuclear weapons aimed at a possible annihilation of Soviet Russia.

Nearly every U.S. President since the inception of the Council has come from its ranks or otherwise been tightly in its clutches. And at least half of all top positions in all the U.S. governments since the 1940s have been occupied by Council members, no matter whether the presidents have been from the Democratic or Republican party – it doesn’t really matter because the masters behind the Council own both parties. Among the presidents, its members have included: Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter George Bush, Bill Clinton. Lyndon Johnson was not a formal member of the Council, but owed his position entirely to its activities, and most directly to the murder of President Kennedy on orders of the global masters. 57% of all top positions of Johnson’s administration were taken over by Council members. Barack Obama was not a formal member of the Council, but he was the Council’s own pick for the presidency. The strategists at the Council had figured that under the guise of a black president they could substantially enhance the appeal of the geopolitical aims of America as formulated by the Council on behalf of the global masters. This was important after the U.S. standing in the world had suffered a serious blow under the universally detested presidency of George Bush Jr. The forces behind the Council also own the American mainstream media, and therefore it was easy for them to ensure the victory of their preferred candidate.

Virtually every U.S. national security and foreign policy advisor of the president has been a Council member since the 1950s. Since 1940, every U.S. secretary of state except one, has been a member of the Council, or of its affiliate structure, the Trilateral Commission. The same goes for every secretary of war (also called secretary of defense), who have all without exception been Council members since 1940. Also, most of the CIA directors have come from the ranks of the Council.

During the Eisenhower administration, 40% of the top U.S. foreign policy officials were Council members; under Truman it was 42%. Kennedy made the fatal error of stocking the top positions of his administration with 51% of Council members, and as soon as they had him killed they stuffed the top administration of his successor, Lyndon Johnson, with 57% of Council members. By the time of President Clinton, almost all the White House cabinet positions were occupied by the Council members. Presidents come and go, but the Council’s power stays.

During the Clinton and Bush area, some 90% of key positions in Pentagon and the State Department were held by Council members, among them, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright. And naturally the real leader during George Bush’s presidency, Dick Cheney, was a Council member.

The enormous influence and over-representation of Council members in the top echelons of the U.S. Government is all the more astonishing when one considers that the total membership of the Council has been in the numbers of a few thousands over the years, and presently numbers less than 5,000.  And yet this secretive globalist society completely dominates the U.S. Government and through the agency of its transatlantic affiliates it has infiltrated the governments of the rest of the Western world. The Council members are best compared to the privileged inner circle of the Soviet Communist Party. Although they formally belong to either one of the two dominating US political parties it is a de facto one-party system, which is led by the Politburo of the global masters behind the scenes.

The Trilateral Commission

The Trilateral Commission is an offshoot of the Council on Foreign Relations. Financed by the Council sponsor David Rockefeller, this organization was founded in 1973 and has been the pet project of the prominent New World Order strategist and mad professor Zbigniew Brzezinski. Similarly, the Bilderberg Group reaches out to the transatlantic elite, having added as a specialty Japan in its scope. In reality, most of its activities has centered on taking control of the U.S. Government in concert with the Council on Foreign Relations. The Trilateral Commission met with early success in grooming Jimmy Carter for the presidency and having him elected in 1977 on a wave of a massive propaganda operation by the globalist media. Brzezinski identified the then-obscure one-term Democratic governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, as a latent talent and perfect breeding material and asked him to join the Commission.

As soon as Carter had been installed by the globalists as the president, Brzezinski and his mentor Henry Kissinger proceeded to pack the young president’s cabinet and administration with Trilateralists, who appeared to be an inner circle of the Council on Foreign Relations. Their total membership number was only about 300, but they nonetheless managed to take hold of 19 of the absolute top positions, among them, vice-president Walter Mondale, Cyrus Vance (Secretary of State), Zbigniew Brzezinski himself as national security advisor, Paul A. Volcker (Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board), W. Michael Blumenthal (Secretary of Treasury), Harold Brown (Secretary of Defense), and Andrew Young (Ambassador to the United Nations). All in all, about 40% of the American Trilateral members joined the Carter Administration.