Somebody told me that Trump and Bannon may have killed a dozen prostitutes. There hasn’t been an investigation so we really don’t know. cite
Psychological theory would point out that the one he can’t ferret out is himself.
I’d agree that it’s difficult to see how Trump could pull something like this off - at the current time, anyway.
I could easily imagine something like a “Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?” scenario transpiring, though.
Trump is well aware that that the fanatical loyalty of his core supporters is so obsequious that it trumps even conventional morality:
Trump has shown that he is more than willing to publicly demonize his perceived enemies, recklessly so given his position as PotUS. In the past few days, he has denounced the “FAKE NEWS media” - specifically singling out NY Times, NBC News, ABC, CBS and CNN - as “a great danger to our country” and “not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!”.
I do not find it a stretch to imagine one or more Trump devotees interpreting such rhetoric as an exhortation or call to action and taking matters into their own hands, particularly if he starts attaching such “enemy of the people” labels to specific individuals.
Since I’ve never seen any evidence of Trump having any conscience or moral code, I don’t think it would follow that he would necessarily be dismayed by such an outcome, if it were to occur.
Here’s the Trump Administration’s false flag operation! Who knew Mike Pence would be the brainchild?
As the thread creator I’m not particularly interested in enforcing “staged-by-Bannon ONLY” as a limitation of the discussion.
Cuauhtémoc’s scenario–basically, that Bannon would discreetly direct law enforcement to place its resources somewhere other than in attempts to identify potential terrorists, thus making a terrorist attack more likely, with a view to benefiting from the attack–seems just as likely if not more likely than the ‘actively recruit a patsy’ scenario:
I suspect that Bannon et al expected the Travel Ban to stir the pot–they deliberately made clear that it WAS intended to target Islam by carving out exceptions for Christians, for example. They made the Ban as insulting and provocative as possible.
How dismayed they must have been that the reaction was peaceful marches and gatherings, world-wide, instead of what (I believe) they’d been hoping for: eruptions of violence by Muslim people. The sight of all those “Muslims are Welcome Here” and “I Fought Next to Muslims” and “#NoMuslimBan” signs* must have curdled their shriveled souls. (Or at the very least, sent them back to the drawing board.)