Trump wins the elections! How come?

Presenter: Good evening, Valery Viktorovich.

Valery Pyakin: Good evening.

Good evening, dear viewers, radio listeners and guests in the studio. Today is November 14, 2016.  Naturally, the most popular question asked lately by the visitors to our site, is, one way or another, connected with the election of the US president. And a lot of people, in particular,  are interested in the fact that everybody had said, so to speak, and shouted that Clinton would win, but the candidate who has won is Trump. Why were they so sure?

Valery Pyakin: In general, the question is very interesting and very deep. I must say that the event, which took place on November the 8th in the United States is a fundamental event of the recent time. It is the kind of event, which will determine the development of politics around the world in the near future, that's for sure. In other words, now it is being defined in what way the United States will be restructured as well as how the whole world will be restructured.

And here one should understand the following thing. Everybody says, or some politician or MP says: "How come? How could we all have been mistaken? All analysts, all the polls showed Clinton winning. Clinton had to win! "It’s not that I want to brag ... but I just remind you. Did I read some other kind of books, polls or bulletins? Why did it happen two months ago that I already said: “That’s it – Clinton’s spine has been broken.”  Over the previous month before the election, I gave a series of interviews, in every of which I said: “There’s no longer a question of Clinton’s victory, Trump has already won. But there’s a task before the country "elite": how to steal this victory, how to do so, that they could repeat the trick with their ears, which had been made in Russia in the year 1996, when Zyuganov arranged that from unequivocal victory benefited Yeltsin. That's what the problem was!

When I talk to some people, who I used to tell everything to, and who somehow were supposed to use this information in whatever way – I have a feeling that they just can’t hear. But I did say: "Pay attention to the actions of the country "elite" exactly in this direction.”  The globalists in this regard, have paid attention, and they have worked very well and let happen what should have happened.

Trump’s  won because he won with a distinct advantage. Everything! No matter how they stole  his votes, how the machines lagged, stuffing, calculations, carousel voting... Everything! He’s won anyway. The whole question was what to do next. What the country "elite" should do.

This applies to all analysts and all media – you need to understand that there is Analytics and there is "analytics", i.e. what should you have done?

Some people do analytics to understand what is happening. And others do " analytics " in order to form a certain information field, suitable for their own management. In this case we are faced with the fact that the analysts, who were trying to understand what was happening, not having the methodological basis of knowledge, simply ... Analysis is a dynamic process of identifying processes and phenomena. It is understanding of the processes and the mutual influence of the processes.  They are not static pictures, which need to be combined! And all our analysts dealt with statics. They have no understanding of how analytics is based on the dynamic development of the processes. What should they have done? It was necessary to monitor the process, where  Trump came from, what powers are involved, what kind of goal-setting was, how this or that event triggers the process.

What correction has to be made, because each step changes the position? It is necessary to identify the process! If the process is not detected, no static image can  give the clarity of understanding.

And this was what the US country "elite" used, disseminating "analytics", according to which Clinton would win. It was a pure unadulterated propaganda. They knew that they had no chance of beating Trump. But they needed to create such a public opinion where they win, so that everybody was confident that Clinton was winning, not Trump! And both, those who were responsible for the "stuffing", and those analysts who do not understand how the process of co-management is carried out - all went on and on: "Clinton is winning, Clinton is winning." Let me remind you once again – all the time in my every speech every week I constantly said, "The real winner is Trump!" Was it really so difficult for some of our comrades to pay attention and say: "Well, let's see, what his statement is founded on." But it was the case when everybody was crushed by the authority: Trump can not win! Clinton is winning. That’s it! There is such a power behind her, which is impossible to defeat!

Again, let us remember, that in January, I said: "Globalists have chosen Trump and taken a punt on him." [Then there was around] a number of various candidates. But how come? No, there is one, there is another. And yet. And most importantly: Clinton, she is unbeatable!

When some politician, or a statesman says that he, personally, made a mistake, because everything pointed to the fact that Clinton would win, but not Trump, then this politician or analyst says that, personally, he has neither the expertise nor that he’s qualified for this kind of administrative positions  as a Duma deputy, a public official or an analyst.

 I say once again, I did not have any insight, I used the same information, the same information, that's poured on everybody, completely open sources! Everything - TASS, RIA "News" - everything is open, just use it! I went to read foreign sites. But they’re all open. And I never go to pre-paid sites, I do not pay anyone anything on principle. If the publication is open – I take the information, if closed then: "No thanks."  Everybody knows the truth!  There’s plenty of information. If someone tries to make money on this, they just limit their own audience, therefore they lose in earnings. The so called "managers" are everywhere! That's why they use pre-paid guides.

So, nothing surprising has happened. Trump's victory was objective and expected. This victory has been achieved with a regard to  the current state of  of the US society  and the tasks of the USA restructuring, set by global "elite". It was necessary to eliminate and to overcome the opposition of the country "elite" in the USA. And here everything has been done magnificently! 

If about 2 months ago the question concerning Clinton and the clan corporate groups standing behind her was practically solved, their spine was broken, there still was a “people” question of the country "elite", which doesn’t understand a word about global politics…

They have no idea, they confuse foreign policy of the United States with the global policy and they think, that that's the way it is: the limits of their management is international relationship, and that there is no such thing as supranational Institutes, they can't even see the United Nations – “We rule the way we see fit”. 

You can just look at how Samantha Power behaves.  It's clear that nothing comes out of it, which is why she becomes even more hysterical, which is followed by even bigger failure.

It's like a vicious circle for her. But, supranational management doesn't show itself even structurally, to say nothing about the fact that not structurally it has existed for a long time. That is why Trump has won expectedly.

In this situation the globalists by conducting this information campaign connected with the election of Trump,  checked how adequate the governmental structures of management and country "elite" are when it comes to understanding of the processes of management. And here, as they say, " with the result we are satisfied" -  everybody turned out to be mentally slug, nobody has coped with it!  Not even a soul. 

Which is why right now the most difficult task is how to discuss all the  complex of questions and all the complex of tasks,  connected with the choice of Trump.

There are so many things implied. We might look at them step-by-step, or we might not even  discuss them, I mean if there are no questions  or if  there are so many questions that we accidentally forget to discuss something.