Assassinating Biden: Will the Deep State Do It?

Justin: You can follow my socials for more posts like this
(X Twitter) (Truth Social) (Substack) (Telegram)

A killing of a king is unfolding before our eyes.

Is the deep state about to do away with Joe Biden in a dramatic event to galvanize the anti-Trump movement? While this is arguably unlikely, there’s plausible reason to think there is a “killing of a king” operation unfolding. In this article, we’ll carefully examine the arguments for and against this theory, review narrative warfare, identity politics, and how the globalists maintain their power through the identity cults of modernity.

Would the same criminal deep state that helped steal the 2020 election, fosters human and drug trafficking, and is presently looting the US Treasury through the Ukraine war try to kill or otherwise get rid of Biden to maintain their power? These are arguably the same people who helped orchestrate the COVID pandemic, covered up the John F. Kennedy assassination, and have already committed elder abuse against the aging Joe Biden.

After watching the post-debate coverage and researching the rules for getting rid of candidate-Biden, it occurred to me that the deep state might not have many moves left. They seem to be positioning for Biden’s removal; I think that’s clear, but would they go as far as to kill a sitting president?

There are benefits I’ll list out later for why using the 25th Amendment isn’t as powerful as a more dramatic solution. This more dramatic solution would help create unity, drum up support, and help declaw Trump and the massive movement he represents to replace Joe Biden, and by extension, the globalist agenda Biden embodies.

As detailed in Biden Replacement Process: The Rules, Timeline, Contenders, and Polls | ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW, the DNC, donors, and Democrats in general can’t just remove Biden via majority vote. As a matter of fact, there is no rule to remove a candidate once they’ve been chosen. The only option they have is for Biden to step down. However, Biden has refused to step down, saying he has no intentions of doing so. Half the party is split between the shallow and obligatory support of Biden and the growing group of Democrats calling for his replacement.

After the disastrous debate between Trump and Biden, when in the post-debate aftermath the calls for Biden’s replacement rang out like a siren song into the political landscape, I began to consider the deep state’s options. What could they do to rid themselves of Biden and regain some political clout?

Clearly, no one who says they support Biden after the debate is genuine, or they’re suffering from their own cognitive decline. This implies the emergence of a plot, perhaps an attempt to replace Biden with something more dramatic and powerful.

For years, the intelligence agency that supports mainstream media has worked overtime and expended every ounce of clout they have with the general public to push the lie that Biden is intelligent, capable, experienced, and presidential. However, following the debate, the narrative has abruptly shifted. Biden is now a danger to democracy, as Joe Scarborough, one of his most staunch supporters, put it, not even 24 hours later.

The following post-debate mainstream media coverage summarizes the stark transition.

Source

Source

Source

How do you get all the layers of your compartmentalized control system to go along with a move to replace a sitting president, especially at this late stage of the campaign? Since these rank-and-file members, from low-income Democrats to mega-donors, don’t know all the plans and agendas of the deep state, you need a powerful yet coherent narrative that can galvanize the whole layer cake. As I will argue in this article, I believe the deep state has been planning and is currently executing their plot to kill the king.

In a cult-like civilization where blind belief, dogma, and groupthink are the norm, a sitting ruler, the king, must be “killed” in order for the herd to accept their new ruler. This is because the more dogmatic and uncritical the thinking of the population, the more dependent they are on official, carefully manufactured narratives to sway their opinions, as we’ll explore later.

In modern politics, no matter how good an incumbent is, the party they belong to often exaggerates their shortcomings, failures on key issues, and other flaws to get the once-loyal people to decouple. This was especially true in a primary between party candidates running for the same government office.

Here are three examples.

1. 2008 Democratic Primary: During the 2008 Democratic primary, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama engaged in negative campaigning against each other. One notable example was an ad released by the Clinton campaign that questioned Obama’s preparedness to handle a national security crisis, which was criticized for being misleading and fear-mongering.
2. 2016 Republican Primary: During the 2016 Republican primary, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz engaged in a heated and often personal negative campaign against each other. One notable example was an ad released by the Cruz campaign that featured a picture of Trump’s wife, Melania, in a revealing outfit, which was criticized for being tasteless and hypocritical.
3. 2020 Democratic Primary: During the 2020 Democratic primary, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren engaged in a negative campaign against each other over their respective healthcare plans. One notable example was an ad released by the Warren campaign that accused Sanders of being unrealistic and not being able to pay for his healthcare plan, which was criticized for being misleading and overly negative.

The goal is to make the opponent seem like the enemy, and the candidate who uses the negative campaign strategy appears to be the one offering the solution—themselves. This methodology is based on another well-established and heavily used aspect of narrative seeding: the antagonistic-protagonist dynamic.

By strategically placing elements within a story to shape the audience’s perception or emotions, narrative seeding transforms the political campaign into a drama that portrays the candidates as characters. Heightened emotions lead to an investment in the narrative and its characters. The goal is to win over the audience (the electorate) by making them see one candidate as the hero and the other as the villain.

Both Trump and the globalists use these methods. And as I said, these things are critical for success when a civilization has devolved into competing camps of mostly unthinking people. Ideally, a population is educated properly through their healthy truth-centric culture, and these types of tactics aren’t needed to ensure civilization isn’t hijacked by a parasitic elite, as it most certainly has been for some time.

As a sidebar, the fact that these methods are being used by Trump and the Patriots is itself a point of confusion for some who believe their use at all proves that Trump is a bad actor.

It’s like sowing seeds that grow into specific ideas or sentiments. When it comes to the protagonist-antagonist dynamic, these characters play pivotal roles in shaping public opinion:

Protagonist

• The protagonist is the story’s central character, often portrayed as the hero or main figure.
• Their journey, struggles, and growth captivate readers or viewers, which is why many campaign ads have a good guy, bad guy theme.
• Protagonists contribute to character development by showcasing resilience, virtues, and flaws.
  • Trump is one of the most resilient people, unable to be affected by the fake news media and the lawfare thrown against him.
  • He is virtuous, speaking out against the horrors of globalism while he promises hope through his America First agenda.
  • And he has his flaws, like eating McDonalds, getting off topic at the podium, and calling people names as a brash yet honorable man.
• Their actions and decisions drive the plot forward, creating tension and engagement.

Antagonist

• The antagonist opposes the protagonist, representing conflict and challenge.
  • Trump characterizes Biden as the “worst president in history.”
• They can be a villain with malevolent intent or a more complex character with varied motivations.
• Antagonists contribute to plot dynamics by creating obstacles, raising stakes, and forcing the protagonist to evolve.
  • Biden, by “defeating Trump” in 2020, created obstacles, raised the stakes, and provided Trump with a narrative arc, despite the fact that Trump arguably hasn’t changed all that much.
• Exploring the villain’s perspective adds depth and nuance to the narrative.
  • Trump highlights Biden’s viewpoint and ambitions to add depth and further compel investment in the cause he represents.

Impact on Public Opinion

• The interplay between protagonist and antagonist influences how audiences perceive the unfolding story. Hence, the narrative of both Biden and Trump is different with each of them being portrayed differently in their respective political rhetoric.
• Public sentiment shifts based on which character gains sympathy or support using the respective narratives.
• The battle of wits and political jousting between them keeps the population engaged and invested, hopefully drawing in voters who normally tune out.

In terms of Biden, the sitting King, the story the deep state needs to craft has to be compelling, captivating, and engaging. The audience, their supporters, have to believe in the causes represented by the candidate, and most importantly, believe the candidate can actually beat their opponent. Biden is clearly not that person, as the debate proved to the world. A replacement is needed one who can rally support and who can capture the disillusioned population Biden has left in the lurch.

To be clear, I’m not putting all my chips on this theory. I’m simply exploring the idea because I think it’s plausible, which I’ll take the time to demonstrate in this article. However, just because a theory is plausible doesn’t mean it’s likely. That said, I think it’s beneficial to explore ideas in general, for which the ways the deep state manipulates the people through narrative are a good thing to understand and develop an immunity against.

The Democrats, by their own admission, are in a desperate panic to remove Biden. Trump and his supporters, including myself, believe that maintaining Biden’s position will enable us to achieve our desired outcome—another Trump administration in 2025.

In case any three-letter agencies want to interpret this article as a pretext to argue that I’m in favor of Joe Bide’s assassination, I refute such claims unequivocally now. I am in no way advocating for, promoting, or endorsing any plot to assassinate Joe Biden. I am fundamentally against the use of bad faith, coercion, violence, or murder in any capacity, as a Christian and a man who believes in the true rule of law. I have not used such techniques against the many people who have wronged me in life. And I will not advocate for such a position with Biden, or anyone, for that matter. On the contrary, I actually pray for God’s light and wisdom to pour into the hearts and minds of all those confused by evil, spiritual cowardice, or malevolent aims.

While there are some benefits the deep state can accrue from a dramatic method of doing away with Biden, there are some significant risks that, in my mind, make it unlikely they will choose this option. If they were going to do this, it’s likely they’d do a covert assassination, for reasons I will explain later.

Not sure how to make sense of this? Want to learn how to discern like a pro? Read this essential guide to discernment, analysis of claims, and understanding the truth in a world of deception: 4 Key Steps of Discernment – Advanced Truth-Seeking Tools.

Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammatical mistake? Send an email to [email protected], with the error and suggested correction, along with the headline and url. Do you think this article needs an update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at [email protected]. Thank you for reading.

<!–

–>