The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[Trigger Time]

This constitutional thing is a dog whistle to me. Any administration of any size has different "affinity groups" (my phrase). People who tend to like each other more, or be more aligned philosophically, or have a better sync about what to do and how to do it. These groups can sometimes be at odds with each other. All of them try to influence or guide the decisionmaker on the thousands of decisions that he or she really doesn't care about, but need to approve.

That doesn't make it a cabal.

There wasn't anything in the op-ed that makes me think there is an unconstitutional, unelected oligarchy running the government. That WOULD be the deep state.

Oh there is a deep state.
Yes you are right about different factions in any administration or political party. 100%

 

[T.Lex]

Oh there is a deep state.
Yes you are right about different factions in any administration or political party. 100%

This idea of a deep state is problematic for me. I know people who spend careers in the diplomatic corps, for example, and they are dedicated to US interests, regardless of the party in power. Others in federal law enforcement are (generally, in my experience) dedicated to that - law enforcement. Same with the career military people.

That they have worked their way up the .gov ladder does not make them part of some nebulous, nefarious deep state. It makes them good at what they do, in a very niche job.

Now, to me that's different from the career bureaucrats, who do also exist. But they are more incompetent than nefarious.

 

[BugI02]

It's possible that the op ed was written by someone on the left, who is claiming to be in the administration. It's also possible it's legit.

IÂ’m not claiming it was written by someone outside of govÂ’t. The motive could be the same regardless of source
Given that, I really don’t see a rationale for Pence to act this way. If Pence's goal is to have him removed over competency, it would be far more effective to do this in the clear. Nor would Pence be able to keep his hands clean if the stratagem worked - he would just become the next target and the NYT would put him likely in the same “don’t turn around fast, you might get stabbed in the face” manner
I can certainly envision this as another anonymous source disinformation gambit easily accomplished by an intelligence agency, but thatÂ’s because thereÂ’s no plot being executed to disrupt and destabilize TrumpÂ’s presidency - itÂ’s merely that IÂ’m crazy
If we ignore all the anonymous, redacted, unsubstantiated stuff there really isnÂ’t much left. If it doesnÂ’t seem like collusion or doinking and paying off whores will do it they may just think making him out to be unfit is the way to go. Trump is particularly vulnerable to this type of attack and I donÂ’t see him suddenly having a Kipling moment

 

[Trigger Time]

This idea of a deep state is problematic for me. I know people who spend careers in the diplomatic corps, for example, and they are dedicated to US interests, regardless of the party in power. Others in federal law enforcement are (generally, in my experience) dedicated to that - law enforcement. Same with the career military people.

That they have worked their way up the .gov ladder does not make them part of some nebulous, nefarious deep state. It makes them good at what they do, in a very niche job.

Now, to me that's different from the career bureaucrats, who do also exist. But they are more incompetent than nefarious.

I would hope all U.S. employees are dedicated to U.S. interests. America first should ALWAYS be an American policy no matter what administration is in power. Otherwise your country will eventualy fail and you've failed at your duty.
Someone who works for the government and has a problem taking orders from a new administration even if those policies go against that persons lifelong body of work within the government, should immediately retire if they cannot carry out their new mandate. There is no place for this.
Lets use enhanced interrogation for an example. Those practices at the time were deemed lawful. If someone refused to follow orders in regards to enhanced interrogation then they should have been removed from their job.

 

[Fargo]

This idea of a deep state is problematic for me. I know people who spend careers in the diplomatic corps, for example, and they are dedicated to US interests, regardless of the party in power. Others in federal law enforcement are (generally, in my experience) dedicated to that - law enforcement. Same with the career military people.

That they have worked their way up the .gov ladder does not make them part of some nebulous, nefarious deep state. It makes them good at what they do, in a very niche job.

Now, to me that's different from the career bureaucrats, who do also exist. But they are more incompetent than nefarious.

What is inconsistent between there been a large number of dedicated career government workers doing their job, and there being some who have decided that their agency/agenda is more important than the branch of government it supposedly serves?

Folks like Strozk, who were admin types running sections with huge discretion, are far different from your average special agent.

Clapper, Brennan, Comey etc. were not even career track employees.

 

[T.Lex]

I doubt Trump is familiar with Kipling at all.

 

[Trigger Time]

What is inconsistent between there been a large number of dedicated career government workers doing their job, and there being some who have decided that their agency/agenda is more important than the branch of government it supposedly serves?

Folks like Strozk, who were admin types running sections with huge discretion, are far different from your average special agent.

Clapper, Brennan, Comey etc. were not even career track employees.

Yep.
Strozk knew what he was doing was wrong too. He is exactly the type of deep state example I'm talking about. I hope he goes to prison along with Comey and Clapper and brennan

 

[T.Lex]

Watch for the ones who respond, "I won't even dignify that with a response."

This does give be some hope that Trump will decide that the situation is untenable, declare victory, and resign some time after January 20, 2019.

 

[Trigger Time]

I'd hope President Trump would use other options before he even thinks to resign. I love him as President and hes exposing the people who have put themselves before country. Let's throw those people out of government.
The real working men and women of this country have been awoke and are starting to fight the ruling class. It's about damn time

 

[T.Lex]

The real working men and women of this country have been awoke and are starting to fight the ruling class. It's about damn time

Che? Is that you?

(I keed, I keed.)

 

[Trigger Time]

Che? Is that you?

(I keed, I keed.)

lol

 

[nonobaddog]

Because the president would fire them? It only makes sense, that if this story is true, and this senior member is actively working to undermine the president, out of a sincere belief that the president is not only unfit, but a danger to the very nation's existence, that they would stay anonymous to continue doing so.

Now that is pretty drama queenie...

 

[T.Lex]

Related question: would Trump be justified in starting a DOJ (or other LE agency) investigation into the source?

I'm not sure what laws have been broken with the op-ed.

 

[foszoe]

Being sure a law has been broken isn't a criteria for launching an investigation though right? Just suspicion?

Related question: would Trump be justified in starting a DOJ (or other LE agency) investigation into the source?

I'm not sure what laws have been broken with the op-ed.

 

[T.Lex]

Being sure a law has been broken isn't a criteria for launching an investigation though right? Just suspicion?

Let's go with at least Reasonable Articulable Suspicion.

Can someone articulate a reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed in the publishing of an anonymous op-ed piece that admits to being a bad employee?

 

[foszoe]

I have no idea what kind of contracts these people sign. I doubt a crime was committed but I could see an ethical violation which companies will investigate internally all the time.

Let's go with at least Reasonable Articulable Suspicion.

Can someone articulate a reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed in the publishing of an anonymous op-ed piece that admits to being a bad employee?

 

[T.Lex]

Sure. Internally. Hire an outside firm or whatever. I'm curious if there's an INGOstablished opinion on whether he should use the DOJ or other LE agency to investigate.

 

[nonobaddog]

Let's go with at least Reasonable Articulable Suspicion.

Can someone articulate a reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed in the publishing of an anonymous op-ed piece that admits to being a bad employee?

Bad employee? That is one way to sugar coat subverting the President of the United States.

 

[Route 45]

https://twitter.com/johnpodesta/status/1037506265398894592

Sleeper cells. In the Executive branch of the United States government.

Let that sink in.

 

[PaulF]

https://twitter.com/johnpodesta/status/1037506265398894592

Sleeper cells. In the Executive branch of the United States government.

Let that sink in.

Wait...this is from John Podesta. When did INGO start believing anything that dude says?

He didn't know what was going on with his own White House staff, but you'll believe he speaks with authority about Trump's?

This is just the left celebrating prematurely. Nothing changed just because someone published an op-ed and used a word that Mike Pence likes. This reads like so much political theatre to me.