Blavatsky’s Return

The Evidence Says Yes.

HPB: “There is no religion higher than truth.”
JFK: “Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer.”

Born: Aug 12, 1831
Died: May 8, 1891
Born: May 29, 1917
Died: Nov 22, 1963

These pictures of John F. Kennedy and H. P. Blavatsky bear a haunting resemblance. Look first at the eyes. Even more than the similarity of the physical images of the eyes is the look of them both has a haunting correspondence.
Also note the shape of the face, the nose, mouth and ears are very similar.

These above pictures provide interesting food for thought but do not provide enough proof to convince the the sincere seeker. The real seeker will want something more concrete. In this rare case we have the something more. We have something as concrete as the fingerprints of these two entities. We have their handwriting.


The above sample of Kennedy’s writing is a draft of his inaugural address in 1961. Next to it is a  sample from HPB. Below is another sample of Kennedy’s writing from about 20 years earlier. Note that there are as many superficial difference between the two Kennedy samples as there is between the two above samples of the two entities.



Even though the pictures provide an interesting clue it was the handwriting of the two who clued me in. A friend gave me a web address containing H. P. Blavatsky;s handwriting. Up to this point I had only seen her signature, but when I finally got a chance to see a page of her writing I thought to myself: “There’s something familiar about this handwriting. It seems that I have seen it before.”

Having forty (now sixty) years experience with hand writing analysis, I rarely forget a script. I reflected a few moments and then it hit me. It seemed that the handwriting of Ms. Blavatsky was very similar to that of JFK.

I immediately retrieved several samples of the late President’s handwriting and made comparisons. As I compared the two side by side I could immediately see why Blavatsky’s writing had a familiar ring. They were very close indeed ­ close enough to make a powerful case that H. P. Blavatsky reincarnated as John F. Kennedy and became President of the United States.

It is interesting that many students of past lives believe that JFK was Abraham Lincoln in a past life because of the many synchronicities between the lives and associations of the two men. I never believed this, however. The reason is that I compared the handwriting of these two and concluded the differences were too basic for them both to be the same entity, even if we take into consideration that there will be some changes from life to life. Since there are changes in handwriting and personality from decade to decade within a single life it is only logical that there would be changes from life to life.

But the question is this: What would change from life to life and what would stay the same?

That which would change would be personality characteristics, cultural attitudes, the tendency toward being an introvert or extrovert and other more superficial things.

That which would remain similar would be related to intelligence. The intelligence would rarely be less as we progress from life to life, but would increase.

The intensity of feeling would also be quite similar as well as the emotional response ­ though emotional response does vary with time, especially if the person faces a trauma of some kind.

That said, take a look to the two handwriting samples and follow me in comparing them.

The most impressive thing to note is the basic intelligence manifested between the two ­ not only brain intelligence, but also emotional intelligence. When we look at the whole picture of the speed of thought, the perception, the passion, the ability to simplify, the aggressiveness etc we see here the handwriting of two of the most intelligent individuals in our history.

JFK is a little more intelligent overall than HPB but this is to be expected if the two are the same entity with JFK having a few years of extra learning under his belt.

Now let us itemize the similarities.


The easiest thing for the layman to see in the handwriting is the general slant. If one makes even a cursory look at the samples above he can see that the slant is very similar. This reveals the general outward emotional makeup.

More subtle and not so easily seen by the layman are the upstrokes in m’s, n’s and other letters which reveal the more inner emotional makeup.

These strokes revealing this inner makeup are also very similar.

This is revealed by the pressure of the writing. Heavier pressure is usually revealed by heavier strokes, but since these samples were created with different pens and we do not have the originals it takes the skill of experience to make a judgment here. In my judgment the pressure is very similar. As evidence of this even the untrained eye can look at the samples and surmise that all of them were written with great intensity and higher than normal pressure applied to the pen.

Now we will examine more closely some other interesting similarities of the handwriting between the two entities. We could belabor this by going through them all one by one, but we will limit our investigation to the more unusual characteristics not found in most handwriting samples.

If, for instance we pinpoint two strokes found in common to 50% of all handwriting that does not present us with much proof, but if we present two items found only on one handwriting out of 100 then we have something. Then if we present two such characteristics we have an increased probability of 100X100 or one chance in 10,000 for the two showing up.

In the next section we will present enough similarities to increase the chances to over a million to one that H. P. Blavatsky and JFK are the same person.

First let us examine the similarities of words that are common to both handwritings. Since I have limited samples of each I was only able to pull a few exact word matches, but this is enough to be impressive indeed. They are more similar than one would expect even if it were a known fact that the two are the same entity separated by 60-80 years of time and circumstance.


One of the most significant similarities between the writings are the gaps within individual words. These two also have short breaks with similar regularity within various words. This is fairly common and shows an intuitive nature, but these larger gaps are fairly rare, especially among the very intelligent.

Such gaps reveal a disconnected thinking that breaks somewhat from reality and is often found among those with low intelligence, drug users or someone physically ill. We know that JFK took an enormous amount of drugs throughout his life and was also plagued with painful illness which he attempted to mask.

Correspondingly, H. P. Blavatsky also suffered from painful illness. It is quite possible that she took some strong medications for them but I do not have any data on this. It is on record that she smoked up to 200 cigarettes a day and this by itself would inject an enormous amount of nicotine in the system.

Even so, neither illness or the use of drugs provides the full explanation. The reason is this. Most people who are ill or use drugs will have a half dozen signs of it show up in the writing. The handwriting of these two entities reveal a very powerful vitality, intelligence, clear thinking and strength, except for this one characteristic. This tells us that both of these individuals exercised the power of tremendous will to divorce themselves from their physical maladies to live life as if they were healthy, vital personalities.

This leads me to draw an unorthodox analysis of the gaps for both entities. I think the gaps would be there for both of them with or without ill health or drug use. While ill health or drug use may make the gaps more pronounced I think the cause is related more to a virtue than a vice.

I believe that both of them contemplated the abstract/spiritual world in his own way and periodically divorced themselves from orthodox thinking and reality as wee know it in the search for answers. The gaps thus show a disconnect, but an intelligent disconnect that added to their creativity.

Whatever the case, such gaps are not at all common among the super intelligent and are rare in this writing combination. Take a look. The first gap in the word “ask” is particularly synchronous.

Examples of Gaps
JFK ………………. HBP


One thing that amateur forgerers do not realize is that the handwriting expert will detect him by too much consistency. When people write they do not sign their names exactly the same each time. Neither do they cross their T’s or dot their I’s in exactly the same place. All of us vary our handwriting as we vary our moods. One thing we look for in finding a handwriting match is a similar amount of variance between any two scripts.

There is an amazing amount of consistency in both small and large gaps in the handwriting of Kennedy and Blavatsky, but how about other factors?

Let us now examine the lower zone of the two handwritings. In this area there is usually some variance, but not like that expressed by Kennedy and Blavatsky. Note that within the variety of the strokes still exists a hauntingly close correspondence.

Again, note the first one which is vary rare ­ consists of two strokes. Maybe one out of a 1000 handwritings would have this oddity.

Lower Zone
JFK ………………. HBP

Another interesting trait revealed is the T cross. The layman may think that there could be only a couple variables in this, but they are mistaken. There are hundreds of ways to cross a T.

Among them are:

(1) The location of the cross on the stem varying from low to above the stem.
(2) Does the cross ascend, descend or go straight from left to right?
(3) Is the pressure heavy or light?
(4) Is it long or short?
(5) Does it create an arc?
(6) Is the arc convex or concave?
(7) Does the stroke increase of decrease on strength?
(8) Does it go to the left or right of the stem?

Considering the number of variables the chances are very high against the fact that we would have two handwritings matching up like these two.

JFK ………………. HBP

An ending stroke that boldly extends shows courage or gutsiness. Again, this is revealed in both scripts.

JFK ………….. HBP


Waves in writing show charm. We know that JFK certainly had this, but so did H. P. Blavatsky. Too bad we do not have her on film so we could have witnessed her personality.

JFK ………….. HBP


Both JFK and H. P. B had the odd habit of making extra heavy i-dots or periods every so often and then making dots with regular pressure the rest of the time. Blavatsky used a fountain pen so her strokes are not as thick as JFK’s for that reason.

JFK ………….. HBP

Note that in the two signatures below they both placed two dots under their names. This is another oddity showing up in both writings. In the 1963 signature Kennedy was under stress. The 1961 signature shows him at his best. From an analyst’s point of view this is a very beautiful signature.

Both individuals underlined items as they wrote.

JFK ………….. HBP




I could spend a lot of time going into small details but here are a number of other important similarities.
(1) The speed of the writing is very similar. They both have a quickness that is shared by less than 1% of the population. The overall intelligence in both handwritings from my analysis is over one out of a million.
(2) The simplification of the writing is very close, with JFK using the fewer strokes ­ another sign of him being a little ahead in evolution.
(3) Perception revealed by the points on m’s, n’s are similar. The similarity is closer if we use JFK’s earlier handwriting.
(4) Both stretch their words out to a similar degree showing them both to be extroverts.
(5) All three zones of the handwriting are similar. We already illustrated the lower zone as with the Y’s, F’s etc. In addition to this the middle and upper part of the writing is very similar.
(6) JFK’s intelligence is a little higher than HPB. This would be true if he was H. P. Blavatsky in a later life.

Is anything in the writing different?

Yes, of course. Just as there are differences in Kennedy’s two samples spanning decades even so will there always be differences in the personality and the handwriting in different lifetimes.

Even so, the differences are less pronounced than expected giving us an excellent case proving reincarnation.

The two most obvious differences are:

(1) The space between the lines of the first two samples. H. P. Blavatsky’s is quite a bit closer together. But then note that the earlier sample from JFK (closer to the HBP lifetime) has his lines with less space between them. This tells us that this characteristic was an evolving trait during the JFK lifetime ­ probably a result from his rising fame which caused him to desire more “space.”
(2) H. P. Blavatsky’s ending stroke on her D’s had an upward flare that was missing in Kennedy’s writing. This is explained by the fact that many handwritings from the 1800’s had this characteristic. This trend became rare in the next generation. As we progress from life to life we often adopt the strokes that are popular. For instance, during the Hippie era many were dotting their eyes with happy faces. Few would consider doing this today.

Overall, the similarities are amazing and from this analysts’ point of view we have here a proof of identity comparable to fingerprints.

Jan 6, 2004

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE



Handwriting Analysis of Bush and Gore

Handwriting Analysis of Bush and Gore

Since everyone is getting a smile out of the fake Nostradamus prediction I thought I would make some comments about it. Let me quote:

“Come the millennium, month 12,
In the home of greatest power,
The village idiot will come forth
To be acclaimed the leader.”

First of all, the fact that Bush is attacked with a fake prediction scores him two points off the bat in my book. Nine times out of ten it is the person who is closest to the truth who has the most fabrication created against him.

But putting that aside it seems that many have attempted to make a Dan Quayle out of the guy so I thought I would look at the handwriting samples of both Bush and Gore to see who would have been the brighter president.

I speak with some authority here having 40 years experience in this art.

As I look at their handwriting samples I see that both men are above average in intelligence, but their intelligence is guided in different directions.

Al Gore is quite intelligent in the way he projects his thoughts and personality. He has good people skills, but has a loner consciousness and appears stiff because he has to force himself to perform, but when he finally decides how he is to project and the course he is to follow he is able to proceed quite intelligently.

He is a quick thinker, but not a perceptive one. His brain activity is quick, but his thoughts are not deep. He sees the answers in what is the obvious and is able to project that solution with credibility in the eyes of many.

When he makes a decision he is able to pursue it aggressively. This in itself is a sign of intelligence.

Even though he is a good debater he does not like conflict and seeks to avoid it.

He has good organizational abilities – another sign of intelligence.

His thought process is very quick and never lacks for a vocal expression.

One surprise is that he lacks self esteem and that it varies quite a bit with the situation. This is probably why he hired a consultant to tell him how to dress during the campaign.

Three things would concern me if he were President – and keep in mind this is from handwriting alone, putting politics aside.

(1) He seeks for surface answers and is good at selling them.

(2) He suppresses emotion. This would make his actions unpredictable in an intense situation. It would be possible that he could take us to war on an impulse.

(3) He is very secretive. As president there would be many things going on behind the scene that most would be unaware of. He is also deceptive when the pressure is on.


Overall the intelligence of Bush and Gore is quite comparable, but while Gore directs his intelligence to the projection of image and ideas. Bush directs his more internally. He is perceptive and when his interest is aroused he will look below the surface to dig up the facts or the truth. He is much harder to fool that is Gore. When talking with him in person he will perceive your point quickly and likes to cut through the BS and get to the point.

He is fairly intuitive. Although he does not like to take risk without calculation he does trust his instincts.

He has a strong consistency to himself. We will not be seeing two Bushes. He has a mental focus of attention on this consistency and dependability, and this is one of the areas where his intelligence is directed.

He is aggressive similar to Gore.

He sets high goals for himself and has a strong sense of purpose and drive to reach them. He also has a strong self image and is confident in himself.

About the only reason I can see that Bush may be accused of lacking intelligence is that when he is under pressure he has some difficulty in sorting out his thoughts and may go on automatic pilot for a short time.

He has a handful of secrets which he doesn’t want to tell anyone (such as his DUI arrest) but aside from some items that he feels strongly about he is quite open with his thoughts. Under normal circumstances he will be quite open with the American people and he is above average in honesty.

He has no suppression of emotion, even though he has very strong feelings and is quite sensitive. When he gets angry he will let the offender have a piece of his mind and that will be the end of it.

The most positive note for him is he is willing to look below the surface and obtain all possible facts when solving a problem. This characteristic is lacking in too many politicians.

Does the handwriting reveal any warning signs about him?

No real obvious ones as I saw in Gore, but this does not mean he will not have problems or that he will not make some blunders.

Here are some possible red flags:

(1) He is emotionally sensitive and has a critical thought process. He is likely to offend a number of people during his term, especially when he feels attacked or under pressure.

(2) He is likely to get overconfident at times and let is guard down.

(3) Even though he has a practical side he is likely to bite off more can he can chew at times diminishing his chances for success.

All the presidents since Kennedy have been of similar intelligence, but have expressed it differently – and this includes Bush.

Overall we should be able to trust him to make reasonably intelligent decisions. He seems to be surrounding himself with intelligent people and this is a good sign.

As far as intelligence goes (again using handwriting) John Kennedy was the most intelligent president of this century – a very impressive thinker and extremely quick mental processes. He would have been a fun person to have had in this group.

Jan 3, 2001

Copyright by J J Dewey 

Index for Older Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Handwriting and Past Lives

March 13, 2016

Handwriting of Trump and Mussolini

In addition to comparing pictures of Trump and Mussolini on the internet to prove Trump is Mussolini reincarnated some have also compared their handwriting and noted similarities. Let us take a look and see how they match up. The point of comparison has been with the signatures so let us examine them first.

Here are three samples of Mussolini’s signature:

Mussolini Signature x3

And here are three samples from Trump:

Trump Signatures x 3

What is usually compared is Mussolini’s second signature with its strong points to the strong points in Donald’s handwriting. What is not mentioned is the other two signatures with more rounded letters seems to be more of the norm with the Duce whereas the points are more the norm with Donald.

It is true that there are some similar points in the samples though the consistency of them are different. The other similarity is how there is no space between the first and last name, but both are joined together as if they are one word. However, this is a common trait among politicians, leaders and business executives.

There are hundreds of different things to look at in handwriting and two handwritings of any two intelligent people will have a few things in common.

To get a clearer picture let us look at their regular handwriting. Keep in mind that the signature tells us how the writer wants the world to perceive him and the regular writing tells us more of what the person is like when he is not trying to impress anyone.

Here is some of Mussolini’s handwriting:

Mussolini Letter

And here is some of Trump’s


Even the untrained eye can see there is quite a bit of difference in the handwriting. I could point out dozens of them, but I do not think it is necessary.

I have examined a number of people I have suspected of being a certain person in a past life and it is rare that two writings are close enough to be taken seriously.

Now in each life our character and handwriting will be somewhat different. When one is older both his writing and personality are often significantly different than when young. My writing now at age 71 is quite a bit different than when I was twenty, for instance.

There are several things that will remain quite similar as we progress from one life to the next. Here are a few.

(1) Intelligence. Intelligence usually improves from life to life but gradually.

(2) Speed of thinking which will also show up in the speed of the writing.

(3) A sense of values

(4) Passion and emotional makeup will often be similar.

If an analyst is lucky enough to find the real handwriting of an individual’s past life he will generally find a few idiosyncrasies that stand out.

It is not impossible that Trump was Mussolini, but there is just not enough evidence to take it seriously.

A reader suggested that maybe Putin was Mussolini. I checked out the handwriting and again there is not enough evidence to take this seriously, but who knows? There is always that slim chance.

Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey


Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Handwriting Analysis of Pope Francis

Handwriting Analysis of Pope Francis

Here are some samples of the Pope’s handwriting.

Samplr4 Sample2

What stands out the most about him is that his focus, most likely for many years, has been more on the inner world than the outer. He’s happy being by himself with his prayers, his books and messing with whatever things he enjoys. He likes his space and does not like to feel crowded by atmosphere or people. He is suspicious and apprehensive about the motives of others, especially new people coming into his life. Yet at the same time he has good social skills and is charming and would draw people to him.

He is a humble man and has not attained his position because he has sought power, but has a good mind and has thought through what he wants to accomplish in life and has moved toward it. To accomplish his goals requires that he have a lot of interaction with people. If his mission in life didn’t require such interaction he would be happy spending a good portion of his time alone pursuing his personal interests.

As it is he forces himself forward attempting to reach out and pursue his version of what he sees as the works of a good shepherd.

He doesn’t have a big ego and is not working for self glorification, as are many leaders.

He is above average intelligence. He has good powers of focus and concentration and is capable of sustained mental pursuits without being distracted and needing few breaks. His mind is flexible and can shift attention rather easily. In speaking he is rarely at a loss for words.

He would make a good student and scholar in the traditional sense. He could be quite happy spending a lifetime in research and learning, except his feeling the need to serve his fellow men takes him a different direction.

His approach to things that interest the average person is fairly dispassionate and mentally controlled. He doesn’t let himself get excited about them, but he feels very strongly about things that will further his path of service. He has a strong emotional memory and well as a good regular memory.

Even though he has a good mind he does have several weaknesses that hamper his intellect.

(1) He is insecure and likes to play things safe. This trait probably wouldn’t have worked well for him if he had been a businessman or worked in some competitive industry, but it worked for him in the church for there playing it safe keeps you away from drawing negative attention and negative attention can hurt your step by step climb up the ladder in a conservative religious organization. He is a plodder and keeps moving ahead a step at a time.

(2) He doesn’t like conflict and tends to follow the line of least resistance. Even so, he likes to make his own independent decision and tries to think out of the box. His out of the box thinking will produce safe directions that will gather more support than he would lose.

Let us take his views on global warming and the evils of capitalism. He’s gotten a lot of support from the media on these and other stands. This support will cause him to feel he is avoiding as much conflict as possible while still moving ahead with his ideas.

(3) He doesn’t look at all sides of a problem so he doesn’t apply the full power of his mind to analyzing his views and find the flaws in his ideas and reasoning. He could be easily misled because he relies too much on standard authority and does not analyze all things for himself.

Again let us take global warming. Because the authorities he has come across give a certain view on it then he supports them without studying it out for himself.

Because it seems Christian to him to not build walls he accepts this and misses the quote from the New Testament telling us that even God has a wall around his city. Rev 21:9-12

Donald Trump may well be right that Mexican authorities misled him about his views. Instead of finding out Trump’s exact words he reacted to what he was told Trump said which may not have been accurate.

He likes to be open with his emotions but is fairly secretive with his words. He doesn’t tell all he knows by a long shot.

In summary his most positive traits are: Good intellect, creative mind and is not in his line of work for the ego. I doubt if he can be bought.

The negative is he can be fooled and captivated by illusion and tends toward the line of least resistance.

He doesn’t like stirring up controversies, but feels he can handle them because of the public and media support he receives. He has a 78% favorability rating with his followers.

There is much more I could write concerning his personality but this should give some food for thought.

Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Handwriting Analysis of Prominent 2016 Presidential Candidates

Jan 23, 2016

Handwriting Analysis of

Prominent 2016 Presidential Candidates


Donald Trump

Donald has the most interesting handwriting of any recent presidential candidate. He is the most intelligent candidate since JFK.



What is quite interesting is that he is not seeking attention toward self so he can get recognition and draw attention, as is the case with most candidates. Indeed he draws attention, but not because of a personal need, but because of his passion, intelligence and charismatic personality. Most any project he tackles with his creative mind will draw attention to himself whether he wants it or not. He is not the egomaniac that is conjured up in the minds of his enemies. He draws attention to himself to further his goals, not for a need for attention.

The thing that stands out in the handwriting is the great difference between his regular handwriting and his signature.

The signature shows how the person presents himself to the world and the regular handwriting reveals more of what the person is like away from the spotlight.

You’ll notice that his signature has sharp points in every stroke, almost like spikes whereas the regular writing is much softer. The signature gives the impression that if you mess with him you will suffer puncture wounds. That is what he wants you to think. He is indeed the dealmaker he claims to be. His tactic is to come across as hard as nails, but then when the real negotiations get underway he will soften up, make friends and the guy on the other end of the table will often think he came out on top when it was Donald that really got what he wanted.

He doesn’t give in easily though. If you want to change his mind you have to make a solid case. This can be done but one has to make perfect sense. Otherwise, he will go full stream ahead with his own ideas. He hates to change his mind but will if the situation warrants it.

The problem people have in dealing with him is that most will not understand what is going on in his mind. Donald rarely will put all his cards on the table. His inner circle and loved ones will see quite a different side of him than the general public or those doing business with him.

He is extremely versatile and intelligent and has great organizational ability. He is great about visualizing a thing on the physical plane and then turning it into a reality.

Notice the beginning and ending strokes on his name. They look like two buildings. He had to go out of his way to get that effect at the end because the P looks nothing like a P. If there was ever a signature of a builder then this is it.

In this one small sample we see three different modes of writing. The first is the regular writing in the note. The second shows up in the word, AMAZING. And the third mode is in his signature. This shows a versatility and adaptability that few people possess. If the situation calls for it he will change on a dime to make things work out as desired, though his inner goals and mindset will change slowly.

He is not as hardnosed as many think and is influenced by others and willing to listen and consider thoughts of others. He is willing to make what he considers to be reasonable compromises to make things work, but he is not a pushover. He always proceeds with the end in view.

So, how would he deal with world leaders like Putin and the Chinese leaders? Some are afraid he would start World War III.

Indeed he has strong passion, but he has the best self control of any of the candidates. He is very measured and puts a lot of thought into the actual actions he takes.

He says he would have a good relationship with Putin and he probably would. He would first present the image that we are not to be messed with, but then in private meetings he would break the ice and find much more common ground than would other lesser thinkers. He would make deals and both sides would come out feeling positive, but Trump would make sure our country got the best advance possible.

To fix the economy we need someone very bright who can see through the illusion and resist the selfish influences of those who would continue the status quo. Trump has the intelligence to be the man for the job.

Ted Cruz

I found numerous samples of Ted’s signature but only one sample of his regular writing. Here it is along with three sample signatures.

Cruz Samples

It is interesting how much Cruz has in common with Trump. There are four that stand out.

(1) The signature is a much different style than the regular writing.

(2) They both write in all capital disconnected letters in their regular writing.

(3) They are both driven and passionate men.

(4) They are both very intelligent.

The most similar trait is that they both write in all printed caps wit disconnected letters.

This reveals a rebel instinct in both of them. Neither is afraid to go against the grain. They do things the way they see as the right way to go. In work or play they are competitive and strive hard to win or it is not much fun. Neither wants to reveal the full hand they may be playing.

As I said the signatures of both men have quite a bit different style than their regular writing. This tells us that both men desire to project an image that may not correspond to their true self in order to achieve certain ends. Trump wants to project an image of a person you don’t want to mess with, but his bark is worse than his bite.

Cruz tries to project the image that he is more of a team player than he is and that he should be looked upon as someone others can lean on to win the good fight. He has more glamour about this than most.

It is a little surprising to learn that Cruz is partially driven by the desire for recognition and a desire to be the center of attention. He shares this characteristic with Obama, but with less intensity. Even so, he loves the limelight more than does Trump. People assume that Trump wants to be the center of attention because he keeps winding up being at that center, but his efforts are more focused on accomplishing his goals rather than drawing attention to himself. On the other hand, attaining center stage is a strong motivating factor with Cruz. Not the only one to be sure, but it is a strong factor.

Both men are very intelligent, but Cruz is more one directional, focused on a limited range of goals. This could work fine to make him an above average president for he would focus strongly on the job and try and limit distractions.

Trump’s intelligence is more versatile, diverse accompanied by great passion. Whereas Cruz would devote 100% of his energy to being president as the job requires, Trump may figure he can do the orthodox job successfully using half of his energy and intelligence and then expand his endeavors into new territory and go where no president has gone before. We would have to wait and see to see where that would be.

Even though Cruz is very independent and likes to do things his own way he is willing to compromise more than the public image of him reveals – as long as his principles are not violated.

Cruz is honest, straightforward and likes to make efficient use of his time. He likes to cut through the red tape and stick to the essentials. He would like to see rules, regulations, taxes etc honed down to what was necessary for the health of the nation.

Cruz is very driven, has a strong sense of purpose. He makes his goals challenging to himself looking into the far future with his planning. He has good self control and desires to improve himself. He places a lot of attention on the material side of things despite being a religious person. He wants this physical earth to be a heaven as well as the hereafter.

Let me add that one thing that handwriting does not reveal is the ideology and belief system that motivates a person. One must examine the words and works of the person to determine that. Some people with a lot of intelligence and talent could make bad decisions based on illusionary beliefs they have picked up. This always needs to be taken into consideration when assessing a leader through his handwriting.


Hillary Clinton’s Handwriting Analysis

I analyzed Hillary in 2008. I will include that analysis below but first make an update with some new analysis. I have more samples this time which provides some additional insights. Here is a sample:  Hillary writing

New Insights

Critics may wonder if her perceived flaws would show up in her handwriting. For instance, she obviously lied about the Benghazi attack being caused by a video as evidenced by an email to her daughter at the time that the attacks were from an “Al Queda-like group.”

Overall her honesty level is about average. With her friends and inner circle, when not under pressure, she is likely to be fairly open and honest. She has two flaws that may lead her to be deceptive. First, she has a tendency to take the line of least resistance, to make the easier of two choices, even though the more difficult would work out for he best in the long run. The immediate future is important to her.

The second flaw is her willingness to accommodate or please those important to her or having authority over her. A certain amount of this trait can be a good thing, but too much creates problems. She sometimes shows this characteristic to an excess. To illustrate note this signature:

Hillary Signature

Look at the two L’s in Hillary and the stem on the H in Rodham. Note how they bend much more than typical writing. This shows a bending of the will in an effort to please others.

My guess on the video lie was that it was done in an effort to please or help the president. It is quite possible she was ordered to report the story and didn’t want to let her boss down.

Many think it is odd that she actively helped suppress the Bill Clinton sex scandals even to the point of attacking the female victims and minimizing them. Critics figured she did it to save her own skin so she could eventually run for president herself. That may have been a factor, but the writing reveals that a most likely bigger factor was pressure put on her by Bill to cooperate and a desire to accommodate him. It was also appealing because it seemed to be the best short term solution.

Many wonder why she would have been so careless with her emails. Why would an intelligent woman put herself in such a perilous situation? Some think it is merely because she doesn’t think the rules apply to her. It goes deeper than that.

Having the server in her home was following the line of least resistance for her and a reason for carelessness in sending and receiving classified data is indicated in this sample signature:

Hillary_Signature 3

Notice how letters are blurred out. This is significant because it is different than her regular fairly clear signature in the past. Nixon’s signature went through a similar evolution as he approached Watergate. This change indicates that she is not being as careful about covering her tracks and taking care of details as in the past.

In the past samples her signature I had on hand revealed a normal desire for attention, as the signature is a similar style as the regular writing. But then I came across this signature in her book

Book Signed

Note the size. It is huge indicating a tremendous desire to be the center of attention. It is interesting that this anomaly appears in a book that tells her story. This variance indicates that in normal relations she tries to appear as one of the people but deep within she has a powerful desire to be the ultimate center of attention as president.

I’ve been looking over several samples of her general writing I did not have in the past and see that there are quite a few changes depending on her mood. Normally she is quite controlled, but she goes through mood changes from time to time.

Highlights of my 2008 Analysis

Hillary is fairly intelligent. This must be respected whether one agrees with her or not. She has a very sharp mind, very perceptive and almost psychic in tapping into her gut feelings. Overall her basic intelligence is higher than her husband’s. This doesn’t mean she will be right more than him but that her capacity to use her brain to get what she wants is higher. If she had an affair she would be much less likely to get caught than Bill would be.

She’s very good at thinking on her feet and strategizing. Critics often have said that nothing happens by accident with her but everything is planned. There is probably some truth in this as she is much more capable than average of staging events to create an outcome.

Her writing reveals that one area where she does not hold back on compromise is with her husband. Some think she stays with him for political reasons only, but this is not fully the case. She sees him as a fun-loving guy to be with and goes out of her way to accommodate him. He brings out the free spirit within her and she likes that and this causes her to cover up and forgive his sins as much as political ambition.

She has been much more aware of his infidelities that she has let on and has calculatingly formed a defense time and time again.

She has a healthy emotional intelligence and does not suppress. If she gets angry she will release it and if she is hurt she will work through it.

She loves politics because she is a true believer in her ideology. She actually has lower self-confidence and esteem than average and doesn’t have as much faith in herself as appears.

She overcomes this self-image problem with dogged determination, self-control and a calculating mind.

As far as revealing her thoughts goes she is all over the map. With some people she will be very open and candid and they will feel special because she is extremely open. With others she will hold back and reveal little. With some groups (probably Republicans) she will be very secretive as well as deceptive.

She has a lot of male energy and if I did not know who had written the sample I see I could not tell if she were male or female.

She is careful about choosing her close friends.

She has many things she wants to accomplish but has difficulty in creating the steps to accomplishment the follow through even though her desire to accomplish is great.

She is sensitive to criticism.

She likes to make up her own mind and doesn’t like people making decisions for her. Once she makes a definite decision she holds to it strongly and proceeds with determination.

The bottom line is this. If she has a practical belief system she can accomplish much good, but if she has illusionary beliefs then she can take many people with her along an undesirable path.

You can’t tell belief systems from handwriting alone, but it can help in making an educated guess. From her public record we can get a good idea of her belief system and the handwriting can give us indications of where it may lead.

Before I analyzed her handwriting I assumed she was in politics for the glamour as are most politicians. There is much less glamour than I expected and much more calculation. I would guess that she reached certain conclusions when she was young and decided that was what was needed by the world and she was going to do her darndest to act as an agent of change. People who give her too much adoration probably bore her, though she wouldn’t publicly acknowledge this.

We know she has a very socialistic leanings and supports the basic democratic ideals. Her handwriting reveals that this is not because of strong emotional empathy as she is very emotionally reserved and holds them in check in many cases. Her belief system is an intellectually calculated one and probably inspired by a number of authors and teachers in her past.

The bright spark is that she is capable of changing her mind and following a practical solution.

If elected she would try and please her supporters while implementing her ideas, but would back off when dead ends are reached.

She would probably get on well with most heads of state and leaders but if someone seems to be opposed to her she is likely to act as they do not exist.

She is an interesting combination of being aggressive yet lacking confidence so it is difficult to predict what she would do in a crisis. She may overreact to prove herself on one occasion and be overly cautious in another.


Bernie Sanders

Here is a sample of his writing plus a full signature.

Bernie Letter Bernie Signature

Bernie’s strong emotional sensitivity catches my eye first. The previous three candidates seek to control their emotions with their minds. They are all three intense and passionate, but also calculating about the steps they take. Not so much with Bernie. His direction is governed more by his emotions than any calculating mind.

He is sensitive and caring and has empathy for the pain and distress of others. When we add to this the fact that his mind dwells a lot in the abstract ideological side of life with his mind consistently expanding on ideas he likes – accompanied by a desire to share and give – it is no surprise that he is a socialist.

He is evidently drawn to this belief because he sees it as a vehicle to relieve humanity from the pain, distress and suffering they have. Because he has good emotional intelligence and appeals to emotional people with his speech he has an ability to attract many not so interested in the three other major candidates who are more mental.

His intentions are good and he wants to help people, but decisions on how to go about it are governed by his feelings and strong idealistic view of how the world should be. Unfortunately, he has not thought through how he will accomplish is vision.

And vision is a key word here as he is driven more by his ideals and vision than he is in accomplishing any personal gain. A huge part of him would rather not run for president because of personal insecurities, but he pushed himself forward because in his mind it was the right thing to do for the greater good.

With Bernie what you see is what you get. He has no interest in projecting any image in public that is any different than in private, though he is secretive and most are not aware of all his thinking. His emotional connection is part of the reason he has been as successful as he has.

There are several drawbacks to him accomplishing his goals as president.

(1) He does not think things through to their logical conclusion, but just feels that if he does the right thing (in his eyes) that things will work out.

(2) He doesn’t always finish what he starts – if too many problems get in the way he will stop and do something different leaving the job undone.

(3) He is more insecure than he lets on.

(4) He can be fooled by adversaries more than the other three candidates.

(5) He bottles up emotion and this can be dangerous. He is normally warm and friendly but if too much internal pressure mounts he is likely to make a quick retaliatory decision or outburst on impulse that he would regret.

(6) He is very secretive. There are a lot of things in his past he does not want to discuss and if he were president he would not share with us all of his plans.

(7) He is not much in to making deals or compromising.

His intelligence is a little above average, but his emotional appeal is quite a bit above average. He is quick on his feet though and never lacks for something to say.

We’ve covered the major candidates. Now I’ll go over a few points on three others who have an outside chance.



Michael Bloomberg

Here are a couple samples of his writing.

Bloomberg Final

The first question one might ask is how is it that the guy made about $40 billion?

Take a look at his Y for a huge clue. Notice how far down into the lower zone it extends. The depth of the lower zone shows the amount of attention one places on the material side of life and his focus there is pretty intense. Another clue is found in two huge hooks. The most prominent is found in the Y on the bottom signature and a second is the beginning stroke on the M in the top signature. These huge hooks show a powerful desire to acquire that which he desires (and he has strong material desires) and even more powerful impulse to keep the gains which he has achieved. This focus plus considerable influence though charm and emotional appeal – plus an aggressive drive for what he wants gives us some insight into his success. I would guess that he has also had considerable good luck, as many others with similar traits are not billionaires.

The strange thing about one with such a material focus is that his mind also stretches into the philosophical, spiritual abstract areas of life. In this way and emotionally he has a lot in common with Bernie Sanders. The two would find each other interesting when the conversation is centered on political philosophy, but Bloomberg would lose Bernie when he started talking finance or capitalism.

Bloomberg is more honest with his words than most politicians, but is careful about revealing his feelings. He doesn’t like conflict and tries to get along with fellow workers by being more cheerful than he feels at times.

He loves variety and change. That is one reason he wants to be president – it would be an interesting change for him, though he would complain about the isolation of the office if elected.

Marco Rubio

Marco Final

The thing that first catches my attention in Marco’s writing is his unusual treatment of the latter part of his name – Marco. In the first sample the first two letters are legible and the latter two are just a large smudge. In the second sample all but the M is represented by a small smudge. In the third he just writes Ma and leaves the last two letters out completely. Finally, we note that the capital letters are much larger than the lower case. Putting this all together it appears that there is a part of his life he would like to blot out from existence, but another part that he wants to draw attention to. It would seem that there is a part of himself he just wants to leave behind and concentrate on who and where he is now. There appears to be some emotional pain in his past he wants to forget.

He likes the limelight he has achieved and getting recognition for his strengths is one of the things that motivates him. A strong sense of responsibility is another motivator. He sees what he thinks is the right direction and feels responsible to do something about it.

He oscillates from time to time between being very conservative to fairly liberal. Sometimes he takes a stand and no ne can change his mind and other times he relaxes and goes with he flow.

He is charming, likeable and likes to concentrate on essentials. He tries to take a mental approach, rather than emotional to situations that require a decision.

Ben Carson

Ben Carson

You wouldn’t think that Carson has a stronger desire to be center stage than does Trump. He shares this with the other Republican candidates analyzed here.

What has garnered his success though is that is a plodder, a team player and has good determination and organizational skills. His journey through life has been a step-by-step process, ever moving onward to greener pastures and more recognition.

He is a dreamer and is anchored enough to the real world to make some of his dreams come true. He focuses a lot of attention of the spiritual, philosophical side of life.

He doesn’t like a lot of friction and is hesitant to sharply criticize. He has a secretive side and doesn’t want to reveal all his thoughts.

He has the intelligence and stability to make a competent president.

I could write much more about all the above candidates, but this should suffice to give a few useful highlights.


Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Joseph Smith’s Handwriting

This entry is part 10 of 50 in the series 2011A

John Crane asked me to analyze Joseph smith’s handwriting and gave me this reference to some samples.

Handwritten Documents Here

The first two samples are consistent with Joseph’s handwriting but the third one from Carthage in 1844 looks like a dictated letter – as it doesn’t look like his handwriting. The mystery is who wrote it? It definitely does not match Hyrum or John Taylor’s writing. That leaves Willard Richards who was also in prison. I can only find a small sample of poor resolution handwriting belonging to him and the match is possible but there are differences. The other possibility is that Emma made a copy or had one made after she received it. I do not have a sample of her handwriting handy so I cannot compare it to hers. The back of the page does have the word “copy” on it.

That said I will give a few details from the handwriting that we know belongs to him.

Joseph had an outgoing friendly personality and came across with lots of warmth, empathy and a sense of emotional understanding.

He had very strong feelings, was very passionate and had a magnetism about him. He liked sharing on an emotional level whether it be romantic or strong outward expression. He didn’t like to keep his feelings in and if he was pleased, displeased or angry he usually communicated these feelings quite clearly and honestly.

His consciousness was not centered on any one aspect of living, but all aspects. We know he was interested in the spiritual side but he was equally at home when centered on he social side of life, the material side, or the intellectual side.

Most people as emotionally centered as he was are not that intellectual yet he had a strong desire to explore new knowledge and would leave no stone unturned in discovering it. He was also very perceptive and a quick thinker. He would have been a good debater.
He was one of those people who could come across as all things to all people. He had a good sense of charm and could get people to do things his way when they did not realize they were being influenced. He was very inclusive and would associate with the high and the low. He was very trusting but difficult to fool.

He was more of an extrovert than introvert and loved variety and change. He didn’t have strong feelings of self importance and was fairly humble for such an outgoing personality.

He had secrets but did not like keeping them forever and was always pleased to find someone he thought he could trust to share them with.

Cayce and Wilcock

This entry is part 62 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Dec 3, 2010
Sarah writes:
A friend of mine sent me a link to these youtube videos of a seminar given by a man named David Wilcock at The Conscious Life Expo in San Francisco in Spring of 2008. I find it to fit in nicely with the ‘puzzle’ (at least the one I have been driven towards) so to speak and he answered some questions I had been pondering within myself concerning OBE’s. I wanted to know what the Keysters thought. He claims to be the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce.

The 2012 Enigma (There are 10 parts, here is part 1)
Click here for video

I came across this guy (David Wilcock) a number of years ago and wasn’t impressed at the time.  It seemed his only desire was to prove he was Edgar Cayce reincarnated.

I figured he was just one more person wanting to be someone famous without earning the fame.

I was pleasantly surprised at watching the video to see Wilcox giving a very intelligent presentation outside the real of claiming to be Cayce.  Even though the presentation raises more questions than it answers it is well worth watching.

I do not know if Wilcock is Cayce or not but at least he is probably as intelligent as him.

Speaking of videos I found one that is very interesting about the moon – giving evidence that intelligent life was once and maybe still is there.  This is in 9 parts beginning at:
Moon Video

Also this page gives an actual photograph taken by an orbital that shows the moon landing spot for Apollo 11.  This should forever dispel the conspiracy theory claiming the moon landing was a hoax.  Go to:
Apollo Landing

I decided to take a look at the charts of David Wilcock and Edgar Cayce to see if there is anything that stands out.

Probably the most significant thing, as the online astrologer pointed out, is their moons are very close in Tarus, about a degree apart.  Also both have Saturn, Mercury Venus and the Sun in the most emotional and sympathetic sign of Pisces.  Both also have Mars in Capricorn.

There are two ways to interpret this seeming coincidence.  One could say that it indicates that David could have been Cayce because of the coincidental sameness. But there is another more logical view and that is this.

On any given day there are about a half million people born so there are many thousands of others who have a similar chart. Anyone with such a chart who studies Cayce will feel an affinity for him and if such a person studies him deeply he will feel a strong identification with him.  This particularly applies to someone with a moon only one degree different in location.

When a person contemplates his own past lives he is likely to guess he may be someone who dealt with similar astrological forces as he is.  That is not strong evidence that Wilcox was Cayce in a past life.  Instead it is evidence tat Wilcock is drawn to Cayce because of emotional similarities.

A chart can give subtle evidence of a past life but astrology is a very weak tool in identifying or proving one.  A chart is merely a description of forces that surrounds us and saying two people are the same because of two charts is like saying Jim and Bob are the same because they both live in Denver and deal with the same traffic problems each day.

It is also notable that a person’s chart will often be very different from life to life as the entity faces new challenges.
That’s not to say that Wilcock is not Cayce.  He could be and it should be easy to prove.  He claims that several of his friends were associated with Cayce.  All he has to do is regress everyone who he thinks was associated with Cayce in a past life (including himself) and see if they can retrieve information that is not in any book but can be validated.

Another thing to do is compare handwriting samples.  Whereas thousands of charts are very similar no two handwritings are the same.  Unfortunately handwriting is usually not solid proof because it changes over the years as does character – but similarities will remain.

Susan wrote:
I was impressed how similarly his associates looked to Cayce’s associates. That
is one of the signs you have taught in the past.

Yes, I’d say that was his best evidence so far.

Actually, Cayce didn’t come up with much on his own, but in the trance state –
so unless Wilcock goes into the trance state he doesn’t have to go too far to
duplicate Cayce’s intellect.

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey