Is the Deep State Attempting a Coup?

So you insult those people who were astute enough to notice their gov't no longer represents them? Well, you should insult too the researchers from Princeton who evidenced what these trump supporters and sanders supporters also noticed. That you apparently did not notice this, makes you look far less intelligent than the people who did notice. And yet, to you, the people who voted for trump, because they wanted change, a change away from a total lack of representation, are stupid, perhaps even deplorable.

Obama won because he promised change, sanders got 43 percent of the states because he promised change and trump won because he promised changed. There is a commonality here, but it does not serve your hyper partisanship and hatred, and so you are blind to it. Hillary promised no change and she lost. I called this election for trump because I could see the importance of change, beginning with obama, even as I cast my vote for Stein. The evidence of me calling the eleciton for trump when the whole world said he could not win, including the polls and the evaluation by the pundits in MSM. So apparently, this change factor was the truth, which makes your opinion way off base. And your opinion of his voters as absurd. IMO, your impression of the people who are crying for change is driven by your own hatred, driven by emotions over rationality, and being able to discern reality. But many democrats today despise working class people, hate dirty finger nails, and would not do a damned thing to help the working class and middle class, as the DP used to do, which kept them in power for so long from FDR onward. It is no surprise they are where they are today given they no longer represent average americans, and seem to even despise working people, who they seem to think, are only white.

When and if, the DP is purged of the faux liberals, the voters who are rubes and cannot see what the DP really is, I figure your type will be purged with the politicians..for not being a traditional democrat, who did stand up for and represent the common man. So these people these common people had to vote for trump because hilary would have never stood up for them or represented them.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/02/politics/fbi-agent-removed-trump-investigation/index.html
for one of many.

 

Agree.
The real coup has been by the <doom> Federals <Darth Vadar breath sounds>.

What 10th Amendment?
What 4th Amendment?
etc.

Music for The End of the Republic
​

 

America's spies anonymously took down Michael Flynn. That is deeply worrying......

he United States is much better off without Michael Flynn serving as national security adviser. But no one should be cheering the way he was brought down.

The whole episode is evidence of the precipitous and ongoing collapse of America's democratic institutions — not a sign of their resiliency. Flynn's ouster was a soft coup (or political assassination) engineered by anonymous intelligence community bureaucrats. The results might be salutary, but this isn't the way a liberal democracy is supposed to function.

Unelected intelligence analysts work for the president, not the other way around. Far too many Trump critics appear not to care that these intelligence agents leaked highly sensitive information to the press — mostly because Trump critics are pleased with the result. "Finally," they say, "someone took a stand to expose collusion between the Russians and a senior aide to the president!" It is indeed important that someone took such a stand. But it matters greatly who that someone is and how they take their stand. Members of the unelected, unaccountable intelligence community are not the right someone, especially when they target a senior aide to the president by leaking anonymously to newspapers the content of classified phone intercepts, where the unverified, unsubstantiated information can inflict politically fatal damage almost instantaneously.

But no matter what Flynn did, it is simply not the role of the deep state to target a man working in one of the political branches of the government by dishing to reporters about information it has gathered clandestinely. It is the role of elected members of Congress to conduct public investigations of alleged wrongdoing by public officials.

As Eli Lake of Bloomberg News put it in an important article following Flynn's resignation,

Normally intercepts of U.S. officials and citizens are some of the most tightly held government secrets. This is for good reason. Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of anonymity. This is what police states do. [Bloomberg]

Those cheering the deep state torpedoing of Flynn are saying, in effect, that a police state is perfectly fine so long as it helps to bring down Trump......snip~

http://theweek.com/articles/680068/...-took-down-michael-flynn-that-deeply-worrying



With Intelligence Leaks, The 'Deep State' Resurfaces : …
https://www.npr.org/2017/02/19/516064645/with-intelligence-leaks...

 

Except they are not the same thing. One is the takeover of our constitutional republic (such as it is....), the other is the destruction of our constitutional republic (such as it were.)

 

I may be a cup of coffee short.
Please elaborate. "takeover" vs "destruction".


Moi
Californian hurrah

 

Well here let the Leftist Glenn Greenwald explain out to you. He brought it all out into the open back in Jan before Trump was sworn in.




The Deep State Goes to War With President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer
January 11 2017,

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss, as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry, and damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There is a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combating those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.....snip~

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11...-elect-using-unverified-claims-as-dems-cheer/

 

He nailed it there... at least the coup part. Though he has the same irrational fears about Trump that the rest of the Lefties do.

 

Greenwald is a gay leftist and doesn't think to much of Trump. He tried to tell the leftness and Demos back then. But they didn't listen to him or the Week or NPR.

Yet they want to bring up the source excuse. Same O same O.

 

And yet, Greenwald is guilty of journalistic standards, totally absent from MSM. And as you said, Greenwald is on the left, and yet this does not stop him from reporting, using real journalism, and being one of a few of outlets which is what a Free Press is supposed to look like. I am not sure how modern faux liberal dems take him except he must be ignored, since he gives them genuine journalism instead of the propaganda they would rather hear.

But greenwald who does lean left politically, isn't the modern faux liberal left at all. Like the old liberals he is not trusting of the CIA, because he understands exactly what they have turned into. And that they often act above our constitution and are allowed by congress to do so. Which busts out what congress has turned into.

I think it is safe to say that The Intercept is not a news outlet many democrats ever read. For they cannot tolerate genuine journalism, and have no use for it. And so, now another reason that I have to call modern democrats, faux liberals. And why they personally disgusts this old FDR democrat who is now and since clinton an ex democrat.

Greenwald is one of my sources for news, and I care not who the source is, for it could be a source which had conservative journalists. The requirement is not the political lean of the journalist, but is based upon whether or not they stick to journalistic principles and standards. And since MSM does not, and this includes FOX, no one should ever use these faux news outlets as a source for anything, other than if you want to just look at pretty women on FOX. But make sure you mute the sound, for it is all about the visuals.

 

What.....huh, what was that?

 

Oh rubbish. VIPS is made up of retired intel people, mostly democrats and they told us this early on, as they have the expertise and experience to discern it. Whereas IMO, you opinion here is the outcome of a partisan bias. And then you have the liberal Glen Greenwald who agrees with them, and again, he has the expertise and experience to discern this, where clearly you just cannot do it. Because you are clearly one of the most partisan people here, who will always put your party and ideology above all things, including facts and truth.

My money says you have no use for Greenwald nor the Intercept, because it would habitually disagree with your beliefs. Am I right? And you cannot blame greenwald or his publication for being trump supporters nor for being GOPhers.

I do not see you as a concerned and serious american, when it comes to your gov't nor the truth. I see you as a tribalized hyper ideological partisan, who will always put your party and its ideology, above all things. I mean, that much is obvious. But you have every right to do that. My only gripe is that it habitually disconnects you from reality, and that isn't a good thing. And anyone like Greenwald that might reconnect you, given he is indulging in journalism with standards, instead of propaganda, will cause you to run like hell from what the man has to say and report on. In no way IMO are you and other like you here on this forum and I could name them, serving anything worth serving, in fact, quite the contrary. You know, if the DP moved back to what it once was, the party of FDR, and the average guy, there would be no need for what your crowd serves up here habitually. No need for hyperbole, twisting the facts, hypocrisy and all of the rest. And the hatred let us not forget that! For genuine libealism/progressivism, does not need what your crowd are forced into using. All you need to arm yourselves with are...as Joe Friday said..."just the facts, ma'am" and a knowledge of democratic history post ww2.

 

Wowsa!! She even makes an old and impotent man like myself, have to exclaim, ain't mother nature just wonderful!!!

I always watch FOX with the sound muted. For who needs sound, when a picture can speak a thousand words!!?

Thank the good lord that I was born heterosexual!! Now, this lassie should be evidence that to choose a swingin' di*k over her gender just has to be a mental affection, a mental problem, or crazy as hell. And you do not need more evidence than that.

Like George Burns, I sure do love lookin' at beautiful women, and someone once called such gals, eye candy. What a great term! But then, I am also told that doing such a thing is really bad, and unacceptable, to turn a human being into an object for gratification. But why attack us for appreciating beauty? I also love to look at beautiful mountains, when the sun is hitting them just right, or even flowers, as the sun lights them up with the right quality of sun light. SO, how is appreciating those things different from appreciating the beauty fund in some women?

Have you ever looked at the typical Antifa female, in her olive drab old military uniform, with glasses that do not compliment her facial shape, as she cannot utter a coherent sentence without using a profanity every other word and wondered, how could god have screwed up like this? Now I have know women who were very plain looking, nothing special in the way of physical beauty, and yet what came from their heart, their personality was so beautiful? In fact, this one particular female I knew long ago, was so capitivating by her heart and personality, that you began not to notice just how plain she was in physical attributes. So when I also looked at a video of an antifa female, and she had no beauty at all, inner or outer, I remember the old saw.... beauty is only skin deep, but if you lack the other kind, the inner beauty,. a person can be ugly to the bone. why are so many of these loony libs, and antifa so damned ugly? No wonder they are mad at the world!! They are so ugly that their eyes can see nothing but god awful ugliness, in all things.

 

OK. You convinced me. I'm watchin' Fox!

 

Actually he is president of all americans. Even yours regardless of who you voted for, or even voted at all. Yet I am not surprised to hear this coming from one is his faux liberal haters. For hate makes people incapable of thinking straight, rationally, logically, objectively. And you revealed that fact when you said he is only the president of 25 percent, or those who voted for him. If we followed that line of faulty reasoning, then hillary is the president of all who voted for her! Except she isn't and the only president we have is trump, and he is your president.

But I do agree with you that trump is a troll, but I would go farther than that. I think he is the King of the Trolls. And I also think that his behavior has hurt that high office, its image. He is taking away from the dignity that we have associated with that office for its entire history. And it has nothing to do with his posts on twitter. It is the content and nature of some of his posts that present the problem. Of all of the different kinds of personalities I have seen as a 75 year old, trump owns the most infantile, juvenile, and reckless personality that america has ever seen. Let us hope he is the first and last one with such an abrasive personality. When he was younger, going by the old videos I have seen of him he seemed to have utilized much more tact and manners in those days when he was much younger. Not as abrasive nor egoistic when he was younger.

His voters can and will over look this though, especially if he can ever deliver on the economic promises he ran on. A certain percentage of his voters, given their mentality, actually like his demeanor but far more of them just put up with it, in hopes of him delivering. Yet with the very ugly attacks on the man, nonstop by the hatred of the left, even the voters who do not find his demeanor helpful, will not ever admit it, for they do not want to give his haters anything.

 

You went full tin foil...

NEVER go full tin foil!

 

you dont see a problem with mueller keeping the fact that his lead investigator has TDS a secret? If you dont you never will. Id get tested for TDS.

 

Yeah, it says Mueller removed him. Nothing about the Inspector general.

 

While you are a totally believing follower of the God-Emperor. You completely bought into Trump's con some time ago and now that he has shown us his true nature you spend half your time conning yourself rather than facing the truth of what a total mark you have been. It's nothing to be ashamed of, really, cons don't work on really stupid people, they function by tripping you with your own intelligence.

If you want a truly eye-opening picture of what you have become look up "The True Believer' by Eric Hoffer.

https://2405dc4b-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/kjhgyikjfhhhe546/yyfkjhgghjtk7654/The-True-Believer-Thoughts-.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7crbINHgmjYopm1a_ET9OK562NYOYz8N_x5hhteVf5yP0cwu7iVDz5pR7873ayo-Y2jCQ3I0l0A0k8-e6-FKQpEjUOxW38NimkASp7Wy_uY_V-3MPjZiVFZFyfwgD_W6v77NO4Znpmi5p2JOaXuh8YTsE5dJD1K4SLEuTqofznpzs-2a5vxWrVhzuY_6q0VPM5-gLHdeZ1lI2dy0Ypvx44B2FD8YoEBDWJft3syDAuDr52trGEewdY-yvHxd-HRvRcATRm0JuUknUCvvikA-ZcqJ6bAohg==&attredirects=0


Get back to us after you've gotten over the shock of having yourself staring back at you as you read.

 

So the Deep State is the Military-industrial complex?

 

Deep state is mainly considered to be members of management of government agencies who impose their own will on the direction policy takes.

 

Exactly. A good example is Lois Lerner of the IRS who purposely misinterpreted laws to mean conservative organizations should be held at a higher standard than non-conservative organizations, thereby helping Obama win the 2012 election when many conservative organizations weren't able to get tax benefited donations, not to mention legitimate donors being harassed.

It's only a step away from an authoritarian form of government.

Steve

 

Isn't that what members of management are supposed to do?

 

Uhm......No!

Those cheering the deep state torpedoing of Flynn are saying, in effect, that a police state is perfectly fine so long as it helps to bring down Trump......snip~

http://theweek.com/articles/680068/...-took-down-michael-flynn-that-deeply-worrying

 

What are managers supposed to do then? Doesn't managment presuppose that you are "influencing the direction your organization is going in?

How was Flynn "torpedoed", Did he do egregiously illegal things, yes or no?