Wait a minute, we supposedly got this onipotent "deep state" entity that conservatives are telling us so powerful they threaten the Nation and they can't rig a national election?
Sounds more like the Keystone Cops than Ludlumian
Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’
- Thread starter BRUTALITOPS
- Start date
Wait a minute, we supposedly got this onipotent "deep state" entity that conservatives are telling us so powerful they threaten the Nation and they can't rig a national election?
Sounds more like the Keystone Cops than Ludlumian
- Presidential Appointments with Senate Confirmation (PAS): These positions require a congressional hearing and a confirmation vote of the full Senate under the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. As of 2016 this category includes 1,212 senior leaders, including the Cabinet secretaries and their subordinates at the Deputy Secretary, Under Secretary, and Assistant Secretary levels; the heads of most independent agencies; and ambassadors.[SUP][1][/SUP] It also includes United States Attorneys and United States Marshals.[SUP][2][/SUP]
- Presidential Appointments without Senate Confirmation (PA): These appointments do not require a Senate hearing or vote. As of 2016 there are 353 PA positions, most of which are concentrated in the Executive Office of the President.[SUP][1][/SUP] Some positions in other agencies were added to this category by the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011.[SUP][3][/SUP]
- Non-career Senior Executive Service (NA): The Senior Executive Service (SES) forms the level just below the presidential appointees. While the SES largely consists of career officials, up to 10%, or (as of 2016) 680 positions, can be political appointees.[SUP][1][/SUP]
- Schedule C Appointments (SC): Schedule C appointees serve in confidential or policy roles immediately subordinate to other appointees. As of 2016, there are 1,403 Schedule C appointees.[SUP][1][/SUP]
no one said the deep state is at the point of actual rigging votes yet, dumbass. that doesn't mean they aren't powerful, influential, and highly corrupting. They woudln't really even need to risk that when they are basically in control no matter who is elected.
Sirthinksalot
Verified User
He was working to ensure Trump wouldn't win, wasn't he...
Hate to say, and I know you can't accept it, but that is all inneundo, narratives compiled by generalizing circumstantial evidence that is framed and echoed until some accept them as fact
And don't bother to reply with some "fact based" opinion piece you think validates your interpretation, seen them all, one can't disprove that which has yet to be proven
So, if as you are telling us "they wouldn't really even need to risk that when they are basically in control no matter who is elected," why are you now accusing them of attempting to control the election? Why would they even have to bother if they "they are in control no matter who is elected?"
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Like Erdogan before him he's using it as an excuse to purge the beaurocracy of dedicated and nonpartisan civil servants and replace it with Trump loyalists. What about when he loses the next election? Do you expect us to keep the mindless Trump loyalists? No they're going to be fired en masse. And then we're back to the fucking spoils system.
Nope..
How could Steele and Orbis know in June 2016 that the Russians were working actively to elect Donald Trump and damage Hillary Clinton? How could Steele and Orbis have known about the Russian overtures to the Trump Team involving derogatory information on Clinton?
We have also subsequently learned of Trump’s long-standing interest in, and experience with Russia and Russians.
A February 2017 New York Times article reported that phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Trump’s campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian officials in the year before the election.
The New York Times article was also corroborated by CNN and Reuters independent reports. And even Russian officials have acknowledged some of these and other repeated contacts.
Although Trump has denied the connections, numerous credible reports suggest that both he and Manafort have long-standing relationships with Russians, and pro-Putin groups.
In August 2017, CNN reported on “intercepted communications that US intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort…to coordinate information that could damage Hillary Clinton’s election prospects” including “conversations with Manafort, encouraging help from the Russians.”
We learned that when Carter Page traveled to Moscow in July 2016, he met with close Putin ally and Chairman of the Russian state oil company, Igor Sechin. A later Steele report also claimed that he met with Parliamentary Secretary Igor Divyekin while in Moscow.
Renowned investigative journalist Michael Isikoff reported in September 2016 that U.S. intelligence sources confirmed that Page met with both Sechin and Divyekin during his July trip to Russia.
http://www.newsweek.com/what-exactly-does-steele-dirty-russian-pee-tape-dossier-trump-contain-660327
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Trust me, there is no deep state.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
If the deep state exists they support Trump absolutely. They are right wing fanatics, and they did rig the election. They're also loyal to Russia rather than the United States.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Literally just a conspiracy that the right invented to explain why they have absolute control over all branches of government and yet all white males aren't existing in a state of constant euphoria while barfing rainbows.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Hillary won the popular vote so it’s kind of hard to argue that point lol.
Lots of money involved in their loyalty to Russia.
http://www.newsweek.com/what-exactly-does-steele-dirty-russian-pee-tape-dossier-trump-contain-660327
you can be in control of something and still have preferences, or still have an easier time with a different candidate, or an easier time going to war. that doesn't mean you don't exist, or don't have influence, or aren't powerful. they pulled out all the stops with bill kristol and romney and others trying to tank trump as much as possible, but they still (at least publicly) have to exist within legal parameters.
wrong. the deepstate hates russia and wants conflcit with them. see romney, see bill kristol. they are neocons. trump is not a neocon.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
He is a populist who defines his majority differently. He weights non-desirables (non-white males) lower than actual Americans.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Much like the National Party of South Africa was populist - only toward a certain segment of society.
https://theintercept.com/2017/07/17...rehabilitate-and-unify-with-bush-era-neocons/
ONE OF THE most under-discussed yet consequential changes in the American political landscape is the reunion between the Democratic Party and the country’s most extreme and discredited neocons. While the rise of Donald Trump, whom neocons loathe, has accelerated this realignment, it began long before the ascension of Trump and is driven by far more common beliefs than contempt for the current president.
A newly formed and, by all appearances, well-funded national security advocacy group, devoted to more hawkish U.S. policies toward Russia and other adversaries, provides the most vivid evidence yet of this alliance. Calling itself the Alliance for Securing Democracy, the group describes itself as “a bipartisan, transatlantic initiative” that “will develop comprehensive strategies to defend against, deter, and raise the costs on Russian and other state actors’ efforts to undermine democracy and democratic institutions,” and also “will work to publicly document and expose Vladimir Putin’s ongoing efforts to subvert democracy in the United States and Europe.”
It is, in fact, the ultimate union of mainstream Democratic foreign policy officials and the world’s most militant, and militaristic, neocons. The group is led by two longtime Washington foreign policy hands, one from the establishment Democratic wing and the other a key figure among leading GOP neocons.
...
This Democrat/neocon reunion had been developing long before anyone believed Donald Trump could ascend to power, and this alliance extends to common perspectives, goals, and policies that have little to do with the current president.
It is true that neocons were among the earliest and most vocal GOP opponents of Trump. That was because they viewed him as an ideological threat to their orthodoxies (such as when he advocated for U.S. “neutrality” on the Israel/Palestine conflict and railed against the wisdom of the wars in Iraq and Libya), but they were also worried that his uncouth, offensive personality would embarrass the U.S. and thus weaken the “soft power” needed for imperial hegemony. Even if Trump could be brought into line on neocon orthodoxy — as has largely happened — his ineptitude and instability posed a threat to their agenda.
But Democrats and neocons share far more than revulsion toward Trump; particularly once Hillary Clinton became the party’s standard-bearer, they share the same fundamental beliefs about the U.S. role in the world and how to assert U.S. power. In other words, this alliance is explained by far more than antipathy to Trump.
Indeed, the likelihood of a neocon/Democrat reunion long predates Trump. Back in the summer of 2014 — almost a year before Trump announced his intent to run for president — longtime neocon-watcher Jacob Heilbrunn, writing in the New York Times, predicted that “the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy.”
(more at article, i just posted a few paragraphs)
ONE OF THE most under-discussed yet consequential changes in the American political landscape is the reunion between the Democratic Party and the country’s most extreme and discredited neocons. While the rise of Donald Trump, whom neocons loathe, has accelerated this realignment, it began long before the ascension of Trump and is driven by far more common beliefs than contempt for the current president.
A newly formed and, by all appearances, well-funded national security advocacy group, devoted to more hawkish U.S. policies toward Russia and other adversaries, provides the most vivid evidence yet of this alliance. Calling itself the Alliance for Securing Democracy, the group describes itself as “a bipartisan, transatlantic initiative” that “will develop comprehensive strategies to defend against, deter, and raise the costs on Russian and other state actors’ efforts to undermine democracy and democratic institutions,” and also “will work to publicly document and expose Vladimir Putin’s ongoing efforts to subvert democracy in the United States and Europe.”
It is, in fact, the ultimate union of mainstream Democratic foreign policy officials and the world’s most militant, and militaristic, neocons. The group is led by two longtime Washington foreign policy hands, one from the establishment Democratic wing and the other a key figure among leading GOP neocons.
...
This Democrat/neocon reunion had been developing long before anyone believed Donald Trump could ascend to power, and this alliance extends to common perspectives, goals, and policies that have little to do with the current president.
It is true that neocons were among the earliest and most vocal GOP opponents of Trump. That was because they viewed him as an ideological threat to their orthodoxies (such as when he advocated for U.S. “neutrality” on the Israel/Palestine conflict and railed against the wisdom of the wars in Iraq and Libya), but they were also worried that his uncouth, offensive personality would embarrass the U.S. and thus weaken the “soft power” needed for imperial hegemony. Even if Trump could be brought into line on neocon orthodoxy — as has largely happened — his ineptitude and instability posed a threat to their agenda.
But Democrats and neocons share far more than revulsion toward Trump; particularly once Hillary Clinton became the party’s standard-bearer, they share the same fundamental beliefs about the U.S. role in the world and how to assert U.S. power. In other words, this alliance is explained by far more than antipathy to Trump.
Indeed, the likelihood of a neocon/Democrat reunion long predates Trump. Back in the summer of 2014 — almost a year before Trump announced his intent to run for president — longtime neocon-watcher Jacob Heilbrunn, writing in the New York Times, predicted that “the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy.”
(more at article, i just posted a few paragraphs)
neocon bill kristol has created a group called "hamilton 68" that stokes fear of russian bots on twitter, and has pushed numerous false stories that have later been retracted.
the russia hysteria is neocon propaganda, the same type used to whip america into a frenzy over iraq, and dumbass liberals have fallen for it this time because they think in doing so they are opposing trump. The neocons have planned this since before trump even announced his candidacy.
the russia hysteria is neocon propaganda, the same type used to whip america into a frenzy over iraq, and dumbass liberals have fallen for it this time because they think in doing so they are opposing trump. The neocons have planned this since before trump even announced his candidacy.