Is Trump really an Outsider? Or will he be another Jimmy Carter?

By Dennis Edwards

In 1976 Jimmy Carter pulled an upset victory over Gerald Ford to become the 39th President of the United States. He ran as a Washington outsider, similar to Barack Obama's call for "Change." Donald Trump has also won a similar victory as a Washington outsider. The American people want change from the established inside political agenda that seems to haunt every President whether he is either Republican or Democrat. 

The truth is Carter won the election, but lost in the formation of a government. How is that? Instead of filling his Cabinet with people also from outside of Washington, he did what every single President of modern times has done and that is pick men from the Rockefeller Council on Foreign Relations and,or the Trilateral Commission. Anyone who has studied the Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission knows that they are organizations of people with a globalistic agenda, rather than an American agenda. 

When Carter won the election his top staff member from Atlanta, Georgia, Hamilton Jordan said, 

"If  after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of National Security, then  I would say we failed. And I'd quit. But that's not going to happen." 

But that´s exactly what did happen although Jordan did not quit. Carter filled his Cabinet with Council on Foreign Relations members and Trilateral Commission members, both Rockefeller one-world-government agencies. The people were conned once again. They had voted for a Washington outsider because they were tired of the corruption in Washington. What they got with Carter, was a Washington outsider, with a reorganized same old bunch of Rockefeller/Rothschild disciples working together for the global interests of their financial barons. 

I will include below the excerpt from Perloff's book the Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline referring to the Carter administration. Let us take note. If Trump is truly an independent he will fill his Cabinet with independent leaders. If Trump is a Washington outsider, but working together with the Rockefeller/Rothschild group, (which it seems hard to believe he is not,) he will fill his Cabinet with leaders who are members of the Council on Foreign Relation or Trilateral Commission, or others who work closely with the Financial Elite.

So keep your eyes open. If Rudy Giuliani gets a Cabinet post or Chris Christie, then we may be having a Rockefeller bloodless coup from the inside. Let's pray Trump is a force for good. The fact that Trump is so avidly pro Israel means he may be just as hawkish as Clinton in the Middle East. That's a bad thing. But, the fact that he is willing to work together with Russia for peace in the Middle East could also be a good thing. 

At a later date we will look Bible prophecy and see if the Bible can give us any indication of what the future holds for the Middle East, especially if we have a more inward looking USA and a more cooperative alliance with Russia regarding the problems in the Middle East. 

We are living in exciting times. It seems to me that God may be giving America a further chance at repentance. We know that there are many good and godly people living in America. Let us hope Trump's Cabinet reflects a true revolution of Washington outsiders. In Jesus' name, I pray.

Here is a short summary[1] of  James Perloff's book The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline followed by the excerpt from the book on the Carter administration.

The book The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline chronicles American history during most of the 20th century, examining major national and international events occurring during each of the Presidential administrations by focusing on the activities of the Establishment elite running the secretive and powerful political organization the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

This extremely informative book details world history more accurately than most commonly taught mainstream accounts, explaining how the most influential political power of the United States has existed in the CFR since it’s inception in 1921, with members of the CFR continually shaping the creation of policies which forward secretive globalist agendas at the cost of creating much human suffering throughout the world.

The information in the book can be thought of as an important puzzle piece being dropped into place where it was assumed that a space did not even exist, adding new meaning to a large number of well known historical events by showing mainstream history and media accounts as often being contrary to what had actually happened.

The CFR has been the ”unofficial club” of the Establishment power elite, having membership of most of the high ranking members of politics, media, and finance. It is a ”front group” that is a secretive organization but not a ”secret society,” however many of its members do belong to secret societies.

The CFR has had a history of forwarding ”Globalist” agendas which involve long-term strategies of dissolving national sovereignties and boundaries of Nations in order to eventually form a ”one world government” which is controlled by the United Nations via privately owned international banks.

Another key aspect of the CFR which is very surprising to most people is its history of secretively implementing and supporting Marxist Communism in nations of the world as a part of its globalist strategy, including installing totalitarian Communism in Russia, China, and Eastern Europe, and more recently in Latin America and Africa, which is a topic that is a major focus of the book as well as this article.[End of short summary]

Excerpt from the Shadows of Power by James Perloff.[2]

Chapter 10 Carter And Trilateralism 

The CFR's Little Brother (the Trilateral Commission) is Born 

With the information from the book None Dare Call It Conspiracy putting the heat on the CFR, David Rockefeller moved to form a new internationalist organization — the Trilateral Commission.

For some three decades, CFR members had pushed for "Atlantic Union," a bilateral federation of America and Europe. The Trilateral Commission (TC) broadened this objective to include an Asiatic leg. 

How did the TC begin? "The Trilateral Commission," wrote Christopher Lydon in the July 1977 Atlantic, "was David Rockefeller's brainchild."  George Franklin, North American secretary of the Trilateral Commission, stated that it "was entirely David Rockefeller's idea originally,"  Helping the CFR chairman develop the concept was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who laid the first stone in Foreign Affairs in 1970: 

 A new and broader approach is needed — creation of a community of the developed nations which can effectively address itself to the larger concerns confronting mankind, In addition to the United States and Western Europe, Japan ought to be included, . . , A council representing the United States, Western Europe and Japan, with regular meetings of the heads of governments as well as some small standing machinery, would be a good start.

That same year, Brzezinski elaborated these thoughts in his book Between Two Ages. It showed Brzezinski to be a classic CFR man — a globalist more than lenient toward Communism. He declared that "National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept," and that "Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man's universal vision. Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief . . ."

The Trilateral Commission was formally established in 1973 and consisted of leaders in business, banking, government, and mass media from North America, Western Europe, and Japan, David Rockefeller was founding chairman and Brzezinski founding director of the North American branch, most of whose members were also in the CFR, In the Wall Street Journal, David Rockefeller explained that "the Trilateral Commission is, in reality, a group of concerned citizens interested in fostering greater understanding and cooperation among international allies."

But it was not all so innocent according to Jeremiah Novak, who wrote in the Atlantic (July 1977):

The Trilateralists emphasis on international economics is not entirely disinterested, for the oil crisis forced many developing nations, with doubtful repayment abilities, to borrow excessively. All told, private multinational banks, particularly Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan, have loaned nearly $52 billion to developing countries, An overhauled IMF would provide another source of credit for these nations, and would take the big private banks off the hook. This proposal is the cornerstone of the Trilateral plan.

Senator Barry Goldwater put it less mercifully. In his book With No Apologies, he termed the Commission "David Rockefeller's newest international cabal," and said, "It is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States."

Zbigniew Brzezinski showed how serious TC ambitions were in the July 1973 Foreign Affairs, stating that "without closer American- European- Japanese cooperation the major problems of today cannot be effectively tackled, and . . , the active promotion of such trilateral cooperation must now become the central priority of U.S. policy." The best way to effect this would be for a Trilateralist to soon become President. One did. 

Jimmy Carter Goes to Washington 

After Watergate tainted the Republican Party's image, it became probable that a Democrat would win the 1976 Presidential election. Candidate James Earl Carter was depicted by the press — and himself — as the consummate outsider to the Washington Establishment. He was, the story went, a good old boy from Georgia, naive to the ways of the cigar-puffing, city-slicker politicians. People magazine even showed him shoveling peanuts in denims. 

Typical of press comment at that time were the words of columnist Joseph C. Harsch of the Christian Science Monitor, who asserted that Carter has that nomination without benefit of any single kingmaker, or of any power group or power lobby, or of any single segment of the American people. He truly is indebted to no one man and no group interest. But Harsch belonged to the CFR, whose members are loath to disclose the power of the group, or of its kingmaker, David Rockefeller. 

In 1973, Carter dined with the CFR chairman at the latter's Tarrytown, New York estate. Present was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was helping Rockefeller screen prospects for the Trilateral Commission. Brzezinski later told Peter Pringle of the London Sunday Times that "we were impressed that Carter had opened up trade offices for the state of Georgia in Brussels and Tokyo. That seemed to fit perfectly into the concept of the Trilateral." Carter became a founding member of the Commission — and his destiny became calculable.

Senator Goldwater wrote: 

David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski found Jimmy Carter to be their ideal candidate. They helped him win the nomination and the presidency. To accomplish this purpose, they mobilized the money power of the Wall Street bankers, the intellectual influence of the academic community — which is subservient to the wealth of the great tax-free foundations — and the media controllers represented in the membership of the CFR and the Trilateral. 

Seven months before the Democratic nominating convention, the Gallup Poll found less than four percent of Democrats favoring Jimmy Carter for President. But almost overnight — like Willkie and Eisenhower before him — he became the candidate. By the convention, his picture had appeared on Time's cover three times, and Newsweek's twice. Time's cover artists were even instructed to make Carter resemble John F. Kennedy as much as possible.

Carter's Elitist Regime 

The Trilateral Commission's predominance in the Carter administration has been pointed out by critics as disparate as Ronald Reagan and Penthouse magazine, (The latter ran an article entitled "The Making of a President: How David Rockefeller Created Jimmy Carter,") During the campaign, however, only a few conservative sources seemed to spot the connection. 

One hint that Carter was more than a peanut-chomping hayseed came in June of 1976, when the Los Angeles Times described a "task force" that had helped the candidate prepare his first major foreign policy speech (which began; "The time has come for us to seek a partnership between North America, Western Europe, and Japan"). 

The Carter advisers enumerated by the Times were: Brzezinski, Richard Cooper, Richard Gardner, Henry Owen, Edwin O. Reischauer, Averell Harriman, Anthony Lake, Robert Bowie, Milton Katz, Abram Chayes, George Ball, and Cyrus Vance. There was one problem with the above list. Every man on it was a member of the CFR.

We alluded earlier to Cooper's Foreign Affairs article proposing an international currency, and Gardner's piece calling for "an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece."

In a speech in Boston, candidate Carter said: "The people of this country know from bitter experience that we are not going to get . . . changes merely by shifting around the same group of insiders.The insiders have had their chance and they have not delivered." 

After the election, top Carter aide Hamilton Jordan remarked: "If s after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of National Security, then I would say we failed. And I'd quit. But that's not going to happen." But it did happen, and Jordan did not quit. Carter simply shifted around "the same group of insiders" turning, like his predecessors, to the institutions built by Wall Street and the international banking establishment. 

The new President appointed more than seventy men from the CFR, and over twenty members of the much smaller Trilateral Commission. Zbigniew Brzezinski acknowledges in his White House memoirs: "Moreover, all the key foreign policy decision makers of the Carter Administration had previously served in the Trilateral Commission . . ." (Carter is considerably less candid in his own memoirs: he does not even mention the Commission.)

Brzezinski, of course, became National Security Adviser, the same position Kissinger had held. Victor Lasky observed in Jimmy Carter: The Man and the Myth: "The Polish-born Brzezinski was to David Rockefeller what the German-born Kissinger was to Nelson Rockefeller." 

Secretary of State Cyrus Vance (CFR-Trilateral Commission) was a nephew of John W. Davis (founding president of the Council on Foreign Relations). Vance, who had served in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, has been called "a product of the inner sanctums of Yale and Wall Street." Robert Moskirt commented on the CFR makeup of his departmental staff: 

When Cyrus Vance was called to Washington to be secretary of state in 1977, he took along members of the Council's staff as well as of a study group on nuclear weapons. He explains: "We work with people at the Council, and know they are good."

Vice President Walter Mondale (CFR-TC) had flown his colors in the October 1974 Foreign Affairs, where he encapsulated much of the Establishment line in a single sentence: 

"The economic cooperation that is required will involve us most deeply with our traditional postwar allies, Western Europe and Japan, but it must also embrace a new measure of comity with the developing countries, and include the Soviet Union and other Communist nations in significant areas of international economic life."

Other Carter appointees who were in both the CFR and Trilateral Commission: Defense Secretary Harold Brown; Federal Reserve Chairman Paxil Volcker; Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher; Under Secretary of State Richard Cooper; Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke; Under Secretary of the Treasury Anthony M. Solomon; Deputy Secretary of Energy John Sawhill; Special Assistant to the President Hedley Donovan; Ambassador at Large Henry Owen; and several others.

And of course there were "plain" CFR members like Treasury Secretary W, Michael Blumenthal, HEW Secretary Joseph Califano, SALT negotiator Paul Warnke, and dozens of others. To paraphrase one commentator, by the time Carter got to the White House, virtually the only thing Georgian about him was his accent.

Jimmy Carter wrought record deficits and double-digit inflation. But it was probably his foreign policy that most singed the nerves of America, In the July 1980 issue of Commentary magazine, Carl Gershman reviewed a number of articles that appeared in Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy during the early-to-middle 1970's, (Foreign Policy, published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, was founded by Council members as a congenial rival to Foreign Affairs.) 

Gershman saw that these articles proposed a new foreign policy for the United States — one that disdained the "cold war mentality," renounced the use of force against Communism (based on the Vietnam experience), and advocated assisting the type of movements we had previously opposed (i.e., national liberation movements on the left half of the political spectrum). Gershman then disclosed that many of these essays authors were tapped by the Carter administration for top foreign-policy jobs. This "new foreign-policy establishment," as Gershman called it (really just the same old CFR without the anti-Communist pretense), helped Carter translate its ideas into reality — and a nightmare for the Free World.

Latin America.

When the Sandinistas moved to seize power in Nicaragua, Carter took measures that hastened the downfall of President Anastasio Somoza, a West Point graduate and devoted friend of the USA. Somoza, it should be noted, was the duly elected leader of his people. Nicaragua had an election system modeled on that of the United States. There were two major parties, and additional parties could qualify to run their candidates simply by securing enough petitions. 

The 1974 election that brought Somoza to the presidency was overseen by the OAS, which found no irregularities. Nicaraguans enjoyed full civil liberties, including freedom of the press. American journalists there were permitted to roam at will; nevertheless, most of them portrayed Somoza as a man of consummate evil. This enabled Jimmy Carter to undermine him without significant protest within the United States.

On January 23, 1979, Valeurs Aetueltes, the French political and economic weekly, reported the following comments by Mexico's President Lopez Portillo:

When President Carter visited me I told him: "I do not particularly like Somoza or his regime, as you know. But if the Sandinistas unseat him and replace him with a Castro-picked Government it will have a profound effect on Nicaragua's neighbors and certainly touch off a slide to the left in my country," It was as though he did not hear a word of what I had said. He told me: Oh, Mr. President, you must do something to help me get rid of this Somoza." 

Carter forced the IMF and World Bank to halt credit to Nicaragua; embargoed its beef and coffee; and most importantly, prohibited weapons sales to its military and pressured our allies to do the same (even compelling Israel to recall a ship bound for Nicaragua with munitions). Unknown to most Americans, President Somoza, before his brutal assassination, exposed the Carter conspiracy to depose him in his book Nicaragua Betrayed. It contains the transcripts of tape recordings Somoza made of visits to his office by U.S. officials.

After the Marxists took power in Managua, the Carter administration pushed through Congress $75 million in aid for them. The new Nicaraguan rulers met the approval of one William M LeoGrande, who wrote in the Autumn 1979 Foreign Affairs that their "program guarantees freedom of the press, speech and association, including the right to organize political parties irrespective of ideology" which at least proves the magazine is not always prophetic. Incredibly, in his Presidential memoirs, Keeping Faith, Jimmy Carter avoids any discussion of the Sandinista overthrow of Somoza, even though it could pass as the most significant foreign policy event of his White House career. 

When campaigning in 1976, candidate Carter said in one of his televised debates with Gerald Ford: "I would never give up complete or practical control of the Panama Canal Zone." But that is just what he did, as had been favored in Foreign Affairs, even though the Canal Zone is strategically vital, and was no less U.S. territory than Alaska or Hawaii. Americans were goaded into consenting through exploitation of the legacy of no-win warfare: we were told that, unless we surrendered the canal, we would face "another Vietnam."

The Middle East. 

Iran was an important U.S. ally, not only as an oil source, but as the leading obstacle to Soviet ambitions in the Middle East. The Shah of Iran, who had governed his country since 1941, suddenly, like Somoza, became a mass media arch villain, even though he was probably the most progressive leader in his nation's history. He was attempting to quell uprisings by Islamic fundamentalists and Marxists, but was forced to ease up and make concessions to them when Carter threatened to withhold U.S. support. 

General Robert Huyser, a Carter emissary, persuaded the Iranian generals not to intervene to save the Shah's government. Khomeini later slaughtered many of those generals. In 1979, Iran collapsed; today it is a world center of terrorism. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan later that year, Carter's response was essentially passive; this was not surprising since he had been unwilling to use forceful measures even to release our citizens held hostage by Teheran.

The Far East. 

As we have noted, the CFR had for many years appealed for U.S. recognition of the Chinese Communists. In the October 1971 Foreign Affairs, Jerome Alan Cohen wrote that "the question is no longer whether to establish diplomatic relations with China, but how to do so. Heaven may be wonderful — the problem is to get there."  Jimmy Carter found a way. 

The Red Chinese were eager for U.S, credit and technology, but how sincere was their friendship? In 1977, Keng Piao, the Party's Director of the Department for Foreign Liaison, stated in a Peking speech: "We should carry on indispensable struggle against, as well as making use of, the soft and weak side of the United States. Just wait for the day when the opportune moment comes, we will then openly tell Uncle Sam to pack up and leave." 

That same year, Vice-Premier Teng Hsiao-ping explained before the Party's Central Committee: "In the international united front struggle, the most important strategy is unification as well as struggle. . . . This is Mao Tse-tung's great discovery which has unlimited power. Even though the American imperialists can be said to be the number one nation in scientific and technical matters, she knows absolutely nothing in this area, In the future she will have no way of avoiding defeat by our hands, , . . We belong to the Marxist Camp and can never be so thoughtless that we cannot distinguish friends from enemies. Nixon, Ford, Carter and future "American imperialist leaders" all fall into this category (enemies). . . What we need mainly is scientific and technical knowledge and equipment." 

Carter's right to break our long-standing defense treaty with Taiwan was questionable- Constitutionally, any treaty must be ratified by the Senate. Whether or not Congress must also approve the abrogation of a treaty was never specified in the Constitution. In 1978, however, the Senate voted ninety-four to zero that the President should consult that body before trying to change our agreement with Free China. 

Carter ducked this by waiting for Congress to adjourn for Christmas. On December 15, 1978, his announcement came. He unilaterally terminated the treaty, broke relations with Taiwan, and recognized the Chinese Communists, even though they had killed more people than any other government in history. This challenged the credibility of Carter's stand on "human rights," which he had said was the cornerstone of his foreign policy.

Carter was silent about the Cambodian genocide, which does not rate a single mention in his memoirs. And he sought to remove our troops from South Korea, which could have brought renewed Communist invasion. 

Africa

Carter maintained a trade embargo against Rhodesia, and refused even to meet with Prime Minister Ian Smith when he came to America to plead for his country. Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, the dominion of Marxist Robert Mugabe. And in other African regions, the Soviets and Cubans stepped in with little if any U.S. opposition. 

To his many injuries to freedom-loving peoples, Carter added a slap in the face: he handed over the Crown of St. Stephen (Hungary's symbol of national independence and faith, which had been smug- gled out of that country before the Communists took over) to the Red regime in Budapest. 

Like the Grim Reaper wielding a scythe, Jimmy Carter left behind a bloody trail of betrayed allies. Communism had been strengthened in every corner of the globe. One is hard pressed to find major Carter foreign policy decisions that served the interests of the American people or the Free World. It would appear, however, that he very satisfactorily executed the Trilateral- CFR game plan. 

[1] http://www.newsofinterest.tv/politics/book_summaries/shadows_of_power_book.php
[2] https://archive.org/details/ShadowOfPowerTheCouncilOnForeignRelationsAndTheAmericanDecline