Category Archives: Government

Deep State: Spreading Socialism From Within The Bowels Of The Bureaucracy

Democracy, Government, Socialism, The State

It’s impossible to fire a government employer, so, for Stuart Karafa, subverting the will of the people is a perk of the job.

Karafa works for the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), while being paid by the State Department. That’s YOU.

Here is Project Veritas on how Deep Statists spread socialism from within the bowels of the bureaucracy:

Tim Fitton thinks the Deep State is real. But we already knew that.

CNN’s Gary Tuchman Ruthlessly Mocks Trump’s America

Constitution, Donald Trump, Government, Journalism, Left-Liberalism, Media, The State

The Deep State is a legitimate concept. It refers to the intractable, permanent state—the bureaucracy, or the unseen, unelected Juggernaut that reflexively maintains the status quo in government departments.

I first heard the concept in 2014, on … yes, PBS, courtesy of PBS’s Bill Moyers, who is considered an august force on the Left. On the Right, the great James Burnham wrote about the Deep State in 1941, except he termed it the Managerial State.

Reflexively, Trump supporters grasp the nature of the extra-constitutional processes and forces that make voter-supported change near impossible.

Intellectually, most ordinary Trump supporters will find it hard to explain a concept like the Deep State, The Managerial State, etc.

For that, a contemptible coward, Gary Tuchman of CNN, mocks these Americans in a most cruel and asinine way. This segment is statist Big Media in all its contempt for ordinary, sensible folks.

Tuchman’s Deep State mention is 2:14 minutes into this segment, when this contemptible man becomes particularly ugly and patronizing with a Trump-supporting lady. Again, it’s 2:14 minutes into the segment.

Why don’t you pick on thinkers who can explain the concept, you coward?!

UPDATED (7/30): The Robert Mueller Inquisition Is The Star(r) Chamber By Any Other Name

Donald Trump, Government, Hillary Clinton, Justice, Law, Republicans, Russia, The State

No matter how you slice it, support for the The U.S. Office of Special Counsel, with its “storm-trooper tactic” and overweening, extra-constitutional powers, is WRONG, whether headed by Kenneth Starr or Robert Mueller. The moniker Star(r) Chamber stuck for good reason. Republicans conducted such a witch hunt; Dems are doing it now  Tucker the Great expresses regret for supporting the first.

Another honest man is Democrat Mark Penn.

Via Real-clear Politics:

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS: Mark Penn was for many years one of the highest-level advisors to Hillary Clinton. He’s the author of the new book, “Microtrends Squared”, he joins us tonight. Mark, thanks a lot for coming on.

MARK PENN, FORMER HILLARY CLINTON CHIEF STRATEGIST: Thank you.

CARLSON: So, you wrote kind of an amazing piece the other day in “The Hill,” titled something like, questions I have for Robert Mueller. Tell us some of the questions that if you could ask, you would.

PENN: Well, remember, Tucker, I spent a year working with President Clinton against Ken Starr and that effort.

CARLSON: Well, I remember very well.

PENN: I just find that that was child’s play to what’s going on here. And I think Mueller has some questions about what the president was thinking when he fired Comey. Well, I certainly have some questions about what he was thinking when first he went to apply for the FBI job in the first place with Rosenstein. And then, turns around the next day, didn’t he already have a plan when he turned around.

Boy, when he put that team together, and there wasn’t a single Trump donor, what was he thinking then?

And when he looked at these dossiers and discovered that there was no foundation there, how did he deal with that? How does he justify these kinds of really stormtrooper tactics, I think is perhaps not an exaggeration, when you go guns drawn to political consultants, wiretapped all over the place over payments to porn stars?

This thing has gotten out of control. And while he wants to question the president, it seems that no one could really question either Mueller or Comey or Rosenstein, and that is precisely the problem.

CARLSON: Yes. It is the problem. And I hate to admit it since I supported the Ken Starr independent counsel investigation, and I look back in shame because of that. But that was the case that the Clinton people made at the time, there’s no oversight here. And that’s a huge problem.

And it turns out you were right about that.

In your piece, you made reference to his behavior in Boston when he worked there in the Whitey Bulger case. Briefly summarize that, if you would, because I thought it was really interesting.

PENN: Well, really the question – and I think Professor Dershowitz has really been out on this thing. But in the Bulger case, there were four innocent people in jail due to prosecutorial misconduct. And he was head of the office.

And so, you do not really find him in the legal cases, but that means he waited until the courts overturned things to release the people. And so, what was he thinking when that was happening? How did he permit that? How did he permit these kinds of gross abuses? And how does he then supervise an investigation now that seems to be filled with them?

CARLSON: Mark Penn, again, you have authority on this subject. And so, it’s nice to hear from you. Thanks a lot.

PENN: I went through it once. And I hope America doesn’t go through it again.

CARLSON: Yes. Hillary never would have allowed this. She’s too smart for this. There’s no doubt. Thank you.

An arm of the oppressor:

UPDATE (7/30): Title corrected: “An investigation in search of a crime.”

UPDATE (7/30): What-Aboutism: A Pale, Weak Defense Of Trump’s Pro-American Tactics With Putin

China, Foreign Policy, Government, Propaganda, Reason, Russia, The State

Limited government has a constitutional obligation to secure the peace by defending and protecting its constituents—not the world. Duly, and since my values are not yours and vice versa, a limited government doesn’t enforce “our values.” 

POTUS is doing just that with Mr. Putin.

Hence this Breitbart article amounts to a bit of “What Aboutism.”

In “The President’s Controversial Policy Toward Russia: The Good Guys Risk Losing If the Bad Guys Are United — Part One,” the author seems to galvanize FDR and Churchill to argue—what exactly?—that Putin is a Stalin, with whom we have to make strategic common cause?

No idea.

What Aboutism should be added to the list of logical fallacies. It is not a substantive argument to say, “Oh, lookie, FDR did it too, Churchill did it too. You like them. Why not Trump?”

The other “argument” here is that China is worse than Russia, the premise being that we should do battle with the former but not the latter. In other words, the American government, a paragon of perfection, has enemies more worthy than Russia.

It might be that Synophobia is more justified than Russophobia, but the point remains that an American president should pursue not war, but peace and prosperity, albeit through mighty strength. Those are pursued through diplomacy.

UPDATE (7/30):