Now you're getting it.
Moles and double-agents and captured assets are commonplace in espionage, yet somehow "paranoid Conspiracy Theorists" are so fucking naive that they refuse to believe "deep capture" exists in politics.
Here's my scorecard:
Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama both work for the Republicans, from the get-go.
Trump & Rick Perry are captured assets of the Clinton Democrats (as opposed to the Carter/Obama "Democrats"). Clinton was recruited by CIA in the 1970s; refer to Jesse Ventura's comments on his first gubernatorial meeting with the CIA upon his election.
John Roberts: although little-known gay photographs very similar to Barack Obama's exist in the public sphere, his recent decisions may mislead one to conclude he is captured by the Left ... but it is a Rove strategy.
Other captured assets of the Right include Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, Anthony Kennedy, Eric Holder.
OK City was a classic organized crime-style "tainting operation" that implicates Clinton to the degree that he cannot oppose the official 9/11 story.
Trump is a classic "reductio ad absurdum" strategy, much like Rick Perry's "Niggerhead" and high-profile debate gaffes. The fact that many of their "most radical" gaffes serve to insulate society's weakest from the fascist direction of the national discourse is a hopeful sign: last election, Paul Ryan was tainted by Todd Akin's "legitimate rape" gambit; Rick Perry's gaffes took the most radical positions about "ending Social Security" off the table.
There are others. In a nation where there are over 1 million "top secret security clearances" and so many intelligence agencies that Conspiracy Theorists can't name them all, it's amazing how credulous the entire populace is about deception and moles and spycraft and compromises and blackmail.
In the case of Trump, blackmail is being used by ethical strategists to reduce the parameters of acceptable debate to exclude the entire Republican herd from declaring all Mexican immigrants "rapists."
Do you understand how beneficial it is, and how much harder it would be to stop an entire herd of Republican brinksmanship drifting into calling immigrants rapists? As opposed to creating a too-hot-zone using one individual candidate who goes too far too fast?