|

Beware the Deep State

untitled (5)
If you at least occasionally visit right-wing media — Fox News Channel, for example —  you’ve probably come across recent cryptic references to “the Deep State” and may have wondered exactly what it is.

Well, it’s nothing new, actually. It’s just a new term for an old bugaboo. In the 1950s, the foe was the “international communist conspiracy,” as notorious paranoiac Joseph McCarthy put it.

But no matter what you call it these days,  the Deep State is a reference to the so-called conspiracy among powerful elements of the government fiendishly working against the best interests of the general populace.

Of course, there have been, in fact, elements of the government that have conspired to work against the best interests of the American people. Richard Nixon and some of his minions were perfect examples of such stuff. In the end, however, Nixon and his bad guys were headed off at the proverbial pass by the good guys in the government — and by vigilant forces in the media, it should be noted.

It comes as no surprise to me or anyone with an ounce of common sense that Donald Trump is said to believe in the Deep State theory. His notorious birtherism seems to have been born of his suspicion that the Deep State had saddled us with a foreign-born pretender as president.

Which brings us to a worthy argument by David Remnick in The New Yorker:

The problem in Washington is not a Deep State; the problem is a shallow man—an untruthful, vain, vindictive, alarmingly erratic President. In order to pass fair and proper judgment, the public deserves a full airing of everything from Trump’s tax returns and business entanglements to an accounting of whether he has been, in some way, compromised. Journalists can, and will, do a lot. But the courts, law enforcement, and Congress—without fear or favor—are responsible for such an investigation. Only if government officials take to heart their designation as “public servants” will justice prevail.

 

 

Share:

20 Comments

  1. Robert Hazz Geaunads

    Beware China should also be included.

    If this article is correct, China is not our friend and I suspect never was. We have given China just about every mfg secret our nation had, through our corporations greed for cheaper labor and more profits.

    What made America great was the ingenuity of our diverse immigrants who came here to be an American and be a part of the American dream. Now I think many, not all but many, immigrants come here for the freebies. Trump was right to place skill and language expectations in the new guidelines for new immigrants.

    It should be very evident that China backs North Korea and is probably assisting that country in gaining the technologies NK is now threatening us with. NK is nothing but a proxy for China.

    As the article notes, China needs to further their position by saying if NK continues lobbing rockets at us, China will not step in to protect NK if America retaliates with military force.

    As I see it, NK is just a front for China’s intentions.

    Our corporations gave China everything that made the USA strong. What can we mfr here that doesnt have some need for products made in China.

    F the globalist. We American citizens have been so screwed over by the very corporations our labor and ingenuity built.

    Bill Clinton played a big role in enabling that loss of our mfg base and both parties enabled their corporate masters.

    Now we have our govt and the services it provides being privatized so we can be charged for them again by for profit corpoations who are going to buy up our hwy system, water systems, public transportation systems, and every other agency and service that our tax dollars built but our politicians mismanaged to their own personal gain.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4780602/China-stop-America-attacks-North-Korea-first.html

  2. Shawn Robinson

    “Globalist” is also a nonsense term in the way the far right uses it. It alludes to their usual bugaboos of the US giving up its sovereignty, removing its borders and any leverage in trade. But who are the actual “globalists?” I think it would be anyone who believes the US should dictate what is good for foreign countries. I probably fell for this idea when I heard Christopher Hitchens say it was fine that the US and Britain should control the world’s oil. In fact, they could control it by by taking their business elsewhere than the Middle East and developing new fuel sources. Prices would fall in a hurry. But yes, the US is the global superpower, for better or worse. Russia and China are competitors. Anyone with international assets, including any stockholders in foreign-based companies are “globalists” by definition. They would want governments in power friendly to their stock. This probably includes every major player in the political parties including Trump. To say he is not a globalist would mean that he has no interest in his overseas businesses.
    So right wing revisionist terms now include “deep state” and “globalist.”
    Read about the mentality of the people using the Trump administration. Someone seems to think Black Lives Matter, the media, the ACLU, the deep state (here defined as long-term government employees) have a coordinated effort to stymie the Trump administration. In reality, we can see that the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society and Fox News actively lied about and attempted to block any efforts of the Obama administration, including shutting down the government and refusing to fill judicial positions. The level of psychological projection here is off the charts. Accusation in the mirror.
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/08/11/politics/mcmaster-memo-wh-struggle/index.html

  3. What do you think of the term “nationalist”? Is it another bugaboo nonsense descriptor too? Or because its what the far left uses to demonize those they disagree with, its a legitimate term?

  4. Shawn Robinson

    A lot of these terms are selected by people describing themselves. If you are describing yourself as a nationalist, go for it. Others might be nationalists. What’s it attached to? American nationalism? I guess i think it’s alright as long as it’s not at the expense of the liberties and freedoms of other nationalities. White nationalism? Christian nationalism? Whole countries just for whites or just for Christians to segregate themselves away? I’m not for it but people describe themselves that way. Black nationalism like Louis Farrakhan? I don’t like it.
    But really, who describes themselves as a globalist? Who is promoting globalism? No one that can be indentified. It sounds like a synonym for internationalism. That sounds a lot like free trade but it could mean an international law. It’s just a vague word now possibly used to describe outsourcing or colonialism or anything that crosses an international border. It’s non-specific and probably contradictory.

    • Robert Hazz Geaunads

      What about Maxine Waters pondering the creation of an all black political party? Is that a good idea or furthering the divisions and making way other parties to seek a plarform based on racial identity?

  5. The globalist are those planning and implementing the definition below. I see no need to re-invent the wheel when the definition below is self explanatory.

    The creation of the European Union is an expression of globalism in process as its still ironing out all the kinks and many native cultures don’t like the loss of national identity to the open borders crowd.

    The loss of American factories can be blamed on a globalist ideology.

    glob·al·ism
    ˈɡlōbəlizəm/
    noun
    noun: globalism

    the operation or planning of economic and foreign policy on a global basis.
    “millions have lost jobs to the new globalism”

  6. Shawn Robinson

    The opposite of globalism would be isolationism. I’m not for that either. The loss of American manufacturing to overseas countries has been supported by anyone who believes in free trade. This means I can buy a product or sell one to anyone in the world and they can do the same. I’m not sure what the benefits and drawbacks are of reverting to isolationism. If people support tariffs, taxes and trade barriers be explicit and direct about it. Make the positive argument. I think all of our electronics and internet culture is a direct result of global trade. I’d love to hear counter-arguments.
    Also, I don’t know anything about Maxine Waters suggestions or ideas. Ethnic political parties will exist if people are judged and grouped by their ethnicity. Also, if you support preventing globalism from destroying national identities, racial and ethnic groups and organizations are probably a way to do that. I think race and ethnic groups will exist despite globalism.

    • Robert Hazz Geaunads

      In the times we currently live in, identity politics is already in place. Thats the theme Hillary ran on and same for Trump. The identity of American has taken a backseat to the racial, religious and cultural identities that use to be the secondary.

      Haven’t you just called yourself a globalist by supporting globalism?

      Haven’t you just said you support the dismantling of the nation state identity in favor of open borders and unregulated immigration? If thats what dems-liberals support, why is there any need for reference to any nation as an identity?

      I do support isolationism if the opposite means our military is the police force for the world, which it has become through the lobbying efforts of the military industrial complex. Or is the MIC term another bugaboo nonsense word for you?

      If you live in a city like Rockford, why would you support the very construct of globalism that destroyed that town and many cities like it across the nation you no longer support?

      Its that very perspective that caused Trump to be elected. Its the new liberal perspective that national identity is the enemy and that people should be viewed by what divides us, not unites us under one identity that nationalist want back.

  7. Shawn Robinson

    I don’t think I’ve made a large claim supporting globalism or free trade. I am aware of the positive and negative consequences. I don’t think Trump is your guy if you really believe that the military industrial complex is to be stopped or mitigated. Trump wants to expand our military and supposedly upgrade our nuclear program. I’ve read there have been more civilian casualties in the entire Trump administration than during Obama’s. I’m not for these overseas wars either, but Trump is not the man who will get us out of them. I don’t see how you think Obama or Clinton ran on identity politics. That is all Trump. IRobert, think your distaste for the Black Lives Matter group or some black politicians has pushed you to supporting someone who supports nothing of what you claim to believe. I can’t say I was enthused about HRC but I don’t know how people can adopt a worldview like Trump claims to have based on anything other than conjectures, speculations and wishful thinking.
    http://www.newsweek.com/president-trumps-isis-war-course-double-obamas-civilian-deaths-637538

    • I appreciate your reasonable responses. My distaste for Black Lives Matter is over the hypocrisy of their agenda and their failure to look inward at the violent crime consuming the inner city Black neighborhoods. Instead and as usual, the Black activist blame everyone else for all the ills in their community. Notice I said Black activist, not the Black community.

      I think BLM is a Black Nationalist organization that doesn’t get called out for what they are, Black racists. The media sucks up to them. They have no desire to fix or work on all the killings of young Black men but have no problem demonizing the police who have to respond to all that crime in an anti-police environment the BLM group created. It also offends me to see a young man like Michael Brown elevated to martyr status. He was a thug who attacked a policeman. The FBI, DOJ under the leadership of a Black AG both found the policeman was in the right, but that thug’s parents get a settlement for his death. That’s wrong.

      My reason for not voting for HRC was her Neocon associations and goals for antagonizing Russia as I’ve noted many times and the role that NATO plays in that scene. Trump, in the beginning tried to see Russia as an ally in our quest to conquer ISIS and radical Islam. The MIC will have no part of it and he is now in bed with them. I would venture to say, the MIC really runs our govt but that would that be too deep state in nature for you.

      No politician really respresents me and you’re right in that Trump isn’t my answer either. But, he does have a way about him that is anti-establishment and acknowledges all the people that the dems forgot about, that is White lower and middle class people who use to have a better sense of future than they do now. I’m also tired of hearing white people demonized and in particularly, white males. All Lives Matter and I don’t care who that offends.

      • Correction,

        They have no desire to fix or work on all the killings of young Black men by other Black men, that make up the majority of killings in the Black community. You know that. Everybody knows that, but it can’t be made a national story and I think that’s wrong.

        • Robert Hazz Geaunads

          Three people shot dead at
          point blank range in front of a food vendor at an event that attracted 5000 people in Wisconsin, and I had to search multiple articles to find a description of the shooter.

          The shooter was a 20 something black male, but somehow the liberal media wanted to bury that because the better selling narrative is the white supremacist story in Charlottesville that helps sell the false narrative that Trump supporters and voters are white racists. Just another example of the anti white bias that is becoming the norm now in liberal media outlets. Let’s see how long this Charlottesville story gets multi day coverage over the past story of that republican politician shot by a white Bernie supporter during baseball practice.

          http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_59914460e4b08a2472756620?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

          • Robert Hazz Geaunads

            The headline from WREX TV is about protest across the nation to decry white supremacists.

            How come there’s never a multi day, let alone one day story headline, protest across the nation to decry black gang violence destroying the lives of families and whole communities? Why is the subject of black gang violence untouchable but white supremacist gets headline coverage day in and day out for weeks?

            Inquiring minds want to know.

            http://www.wrex.com/story/36127316/protests-vigils-around-us-decry-white-supremacist-rally

  8. Shawn Robinson

    I think the Charlottesville story got a large media presence because of public demand. We have a capitalist, consumer driven media. It’s all I heard about on social media. It eclipsed North Korea. The story has the major elements of today’s popular stories.
    1) Conflict between political ideologies
    2) Lots of marchers and counter protesters
    3) Confederate statues coming down
    4) The alt-right championed by Steve Bannon
    5) Video footage from many angles of a car knocking another one into a crowd.
    All this stuff makes clickwothy news.
    Robberies are tragic, routine and local. They shouldn’t be routine, of course, but they are. I bet the ideology confrontation was more interesting to viewers. I hope you are not saying that newspapers aren’t focusing enough on black crimes. In fact, you found out about these crimes from a news site. Today, I’ve heard the preposterous, even evil and slanderous claims that Hillary Clinton and George Soros are connected to the car driver. The levels of trying to switch the subject are preposterous.
    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/aug/14/alex-jones/infowars-alex-jones-falsely-says-george-soros-hill/

    • Robert Hazz Geaunads

      Specious is what I call your response.

      Of course what that Nazi sympathizer did was worthy of the coverage it got, but in the world of daily tragedies, how many people in the USA have been killed by white nationalist, white separatists, Nazi sympathizers as opposed to the number of black people shot and killed daily in the black community by out of control
      black on black crime?

      Yet to listen to the black activist, its racism that is the biggest threat to the black community. Its not, but the false narrative that it is, serves to radicalize the leftist snowflakes because the goal of the liberals, and the John McCain type republicans and deep state status quo
      , is to destroy the president they see as illegitimate and to blame white supremacy for every failure that liberal people of color encounter. Notice I said liberal people of color as there are many centrist and conservative people of color that don’t agree with the antifas and leftist rioters who are being radicalized by the liberal msm.

      That same radicalization process the left rags like the Huffington Post is using is also causing the far right to become radicalized as every action has a reaction.

      Shawn, I hope you realize where our nation is heading as a result of this radicalization by the left who can not say how Trump has harmed them other than hurt their feelings. But in their mindset that level of hurt is enough to induce violence as a response. That violence will be countered by the far right that has been awakened as we saw this weekend. Dont shoot me, I’m just the messenger .

      • And please, keep your response current. We’re talking about the last 10 years. How many USA domiciled Nazi’s, White Supremacist, White Nationalist have murdered people compared to the daily shootings and killings happening in the Black neighborhoods and in some cases whole cities?

        Here’s some Chicago stats for you, but its across the nation.

        http://heyjackass.com/

  9. Shawn Robinson

    I’m only explaining why the Charlottesville murder made the news more than other crimes involving fatalities. I think people should pay attention to the causes of local crime.
    To say that the MSM and the deep state are trying to undermine Trump leaves out the fact that there are always groups attempting to undermine whoever the president is. The right usually gets a pass for doing it to Obama. The right is not used to being actively fought. It’s usually Democrats enduring investigations, having their legislation blocked, getting called unAmerican. It’s the Democrats who don’t get to pick judges if they win the election. It’s the Democrats to don’t get to be president because of the electoral college. The Republicans can investigate the Democrats but not vice-versa. Only Republicans can investigate Republicans. How long do you think that will last?

    • Shawn Robinson

      Some of the things I mentioned were brought up in a Daily Kos article but I can’t find it. I remembered if enough to paraphrase it about where I start “It’s usually the Democrats enduring investigations,…”.

      • Robert Hazz Geaunads

        Yes, both sides can be vicious. If I recall right, Darrell Issa, a California republican had threatened an investigation of Obama. Don’t recall the details though or how that ended. Obviously Obama survived it.

        They spend more time blocking the others agendas than working on the business of the people through compromise.

        As I’ve noted in the past, the poisoning of the political system began with Newt Gingrich and his forbidding of any republican house member to be friendly to any democrat.

        I look at Trump though and it seems the entire msm is out to get him and even many in his own party. Ive never seen anything like it. He is such an anethema. It seems even if he has the best of intentions in addressing any issue, its turned into an unforgivable event. He calls out the hypocrisies of our status quo political system and he becomes the issue, not the issue itself.

        I fear we’re entering into a new McCarthy type era where were all going to have our allegiances questioned and then judged by the irrational anger of the moment, that the media is fanning by creating a society that is outraged at everything, because it makes them money and fills up that awful 24-7-365 news model that is destroying civility.

        .

        • Robert Hazz Geaunads

          Trump is right, both sides are culpable. Ive seen the violence the antifas inflict but some how the media has decided one sides violence is a more appropriate response than the others. We’re heading into very irrational times. We will all be affected personally as we all become targets of the pc police and the media that feeds their irrational anger.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA

*