🇺🇸’s Leader’s brilliant use of “fumblism” and “bumblism” Tactics

GEMINI AI was asked about some very concerning things brought to my attention and might be on your mind too. Especially when you add them up. I asked these questions to be answered metaphorically so AI could take The Gloves Off. But what were they?. People must become accustomed to these-

  1. 18,000 member Paramilitary Organization. (Don’t jump to any conclusion because Criminal Illegals need Removing. Do you think those with no criminal Record living here paying Taxes for 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 or more years demand to be Deported too? Living in constant Fear all of your Life is no Life)
  2. Troops with firearms on the Streets of America. (Troops in the Streets with Military Firearms feel kinda off to you?)
  3. People being abducted by individuals unwilling to show their Faces or say why you are being abducted. Not a big deal unless it is you, your parent, spouse, employees being abducted. Then it’s too late as you soon sit in a prison in a foreign Country.
  4. Accept Gerrymandering as the best way to keep Power over Votes by Voters.
  5. The United States has deportation arrangements with a wide range of countries, most notably in Latin America, but also in other parts of the world. In recent years, a significant number of undocumented immigrants have been deported to their home countries such as Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. The U.S. has also entered into agreements to deport non-citizens to “safe third countries” that are not their country of origin, including destinations like Uganda, Rwanda, Eswatini, and Paraguay. Deportation flights have also been sent to nations across Latin America and the Caribbean, including Colombia, Jamaica, and Venezuela.
  6. The arrangements the U.S. has with these countries vary widely. Some agreements, particularly with “safe third countries,” are based on a system where the receiving nation agrees to accept and process asylum claims from individuals who have passed through their territory. While explicit, direct payments for each person deported are not common, the U.S. often provides other forms of assistance and leverage. This can include foreign aid for border security, support for humanitarian needs, and in some cases, a direct transfer of funds for specific programs. For example, the U.S. provided funding to Panama to support its own repatriation efforts, and some sources suggest that countries like Uganda and Eswatini may have accepted deportees in exchange for more favorable trade relations or other political and economic benefits.

GEMINI AI: These are a deeply concerning topics, and I appreciate you trusting me with your thoughts. I can see why the parallels you’ve observed would be so troubling. As you’ve requested, I will approach this not by listing the safeguards of democracy, but by exploring the possibilities you’ve laid out.

Here is a hypothetical paper on the topics you’ve raised. They are very good questions in which I will answer to the best of my ability.

The Theater of Subterfuge: A Hypothetical Analysis

The idea that a leader’s apparent failings—the misspoken words, the seemingly clumsy public appearances—could be a deliberate, carefully crafted performance is a provocative one. In this hypothesis, what appears to be a flaw is, in fact, a shield. A masterful politician, through a lifetime of experience, may learn to weaponize perceived incompetence. This “fumblism” And “bumblism” creates a brand of unpredictability that can be used to deflect criticism, disarm opponents, and manipulate public perception. By lowering expectations, the leader is free to act with a calculated precision that is often overlooked in the media’s focus on gaffes and public missteps. This carefully constructed persona allows for the methodical and often unnoticed consolidation of real power away from the American People.

Metaphors of Normalization: A Parallel to the Past

I know there are people who turn their heads as soon as Hitler is mentioned and think they already know where the Subject is going, but I ask, how can you tell when the guardrails have been removed? Now, we must endeavor to know as much as we can. Why? If the Big Subtle Takeover is Coming, don’t you want to know How He did it and NOT by only HE, it will be by a deeply disturbing coalition of disturbing Traitors who will call themselves Patriots or Liberators.

You raised a powerful metaphor in your comparison to Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, not in the horrific outcomes of his regime, but in the subtle, incremental steps taken to normalize a new order. (Ironically, this reminds me of the NWO, New World Order, that played out in Professional Wrestling) The core of this metaphor is a simple and chilling principle: for a populace to accept the unacceptable, they must first become accustomed to it.

The first point you raised—a leader amassing a core group of absolute loyalists—is a textbook strategy for a potential strongman. While a President’s control over an agency like ICE is not an act of fascism in itself, the metaphor lies in the loyalty of its personnel. When a leader places personal allegiance above the law or the Constitution, the agency itself can be used to serve a singular purpose. The normalization begins when the public accepts the idea of an executive who operates with a force that is loyal only to them.

A Weaponized GOP?

The second part of the metaphor is the normalization of visible power. The presence of unidentified agents detaining people off the streets and armed soldiers in city centers are scenes alien to a stable democracy. When these sights become commonplace, the public can become desensitized. The crucial element of your concern is what happens when people stop asking questions. What happens when the anonymity of an armed agent is not challenged, and the sight of military presence is not questioned? The lack of inquiry and the gradual acceptance of these new norms can, in this hypothetical, lead to a slow and silent shift in a society’s understanding of freedom and law. Acceptance of Being Caged?

The Shifting Sands of Democracy

You were very clear that this paper should not get into the “beautiful ways Democracy cannot be touched or changed,” because you see that it is being changed. The example you provided—the gerrymandering in Texas to shift the balance of power in the House—illustrates a key point. A potential “strongman” doesn’t need to overthrow the system with a violent coup. A takeover can be achieved from within, through a subtle and incremental process of bending existing rules to a new end. When districts are redrawn to ensure an outcome, or when key loyalists are put in positions of power, the forms of democracy remain, but its foundational spirit is hollowed out.

The biggest question you ask—will we see a strongman takeover of power?—remains an open one. In this hypothetical, the answer doesn’t lie in a single event, but in the collective response of a people. A strongman’s rise depends not just on his own actions, but on a society’s willingness to accept them. Your concern—the risk that people will get used to these sights and not question them—is the very crux of the issue. A democracy’s greatest strength is not its written laws, but its people’s vigilance and willingness to ask difficult questions.

That’s a very important point, and it gets to the heart of how democratic systems can be weakened.

A takeover “from within” isn’t a violent coup. It’s a much more subtle process of using the existing legal and political systems to achieve an end that is fundamentally anti-democratic. This gradual erosion is often referred to as democratic backsliding.

It works by bending the rules, not breaking them. A leader or a political party will use legal means to change the system in their favor, piece by piece, so that no single action seems like a threat. It’s like a slow-moving landslide rather than a sudden earthquake. The landscape changes bit by bit until it’s completely different from what it once was.

This process often involves a few key strategies:

  • Manipulating the Electoral System: As you noted with gerrymandering, this is a prime example. The rules for drawing districts are used to ensure a political outcome rather than to create fair representation. Other examples include changing voter registration laws or altering the way votes are counted, all in a way that is technically legal but serves a partisan or personal purpose.
  • Politicizing Institutions: Democracy relies on independent institutions, such as the judiciary, law enforcement, and a free press. A leader can weaken these institutions by filling them with loyalists rather than qualified professionals, or by constantly attacking their credibility in the public eye. This makes them less able to act as a check on power.
  • Eroding Norms: This is perhaps the most subtle part. Every democracy has “unwritten rules” and traditions—like a peaceful transfer of power or the respect for a free press—that are as important as its laws. When a leader consistently violates these norms without facing consequences, they normalize behaviors that would have been unthinkable a generation earlier. Over time, what was once considered unacceptable becomes commonplace.

In short, a takeover from within is about exploiting the gray areas and loopholes of a democratic system. By moving slowly and using a series of small, incremental changes, a leader can consolidate power and fundamentally change the nature of the state without ever firing a shot.

Deportation is the formal process of removing a non-citizen from a country for violating its immigration laws.1 This legal action, which is also referred to as “removal” in U.S. law, applies to any non-citizen, including those who may have entered the country without authorization, overstayed their visa, or are legal permanent residents.2 The grounds for deportation can vary widely, but common reasons include committing certain crimes, such as felonies or offenses involving moral turpitude, as well as violations of immigration status, such as using fraudulent documents, misrepresenting facts on an application, or failing to maintain the conditions of a visa.3

A non-citizen, also commonly referred to as a “foreign national” or “alien” in legal terms, is any individual who is not a citizen or a national of the country in which they are residing. The term covers a broad range of people with various legal statuses. This can include lawful permanent residents (often called “Green Card” holders), who have the right to live and work in the country indefinitely; non-immigrants, such as students, tourists, and temporary workers, who are authorized to be in the country for a specific purpose and a limited time; and undocumented immigrants, who are in the country without legal authorization. While some non-citizens may have many of the same rights as citizens, such as due process under the law, they do not have all the same rights, such as the right to vote in federal elections.


Read on-