Deep State? or Steady State?
17 responses | 0 likes
Started by joj - Sept. 6, 2018, 7:56 a.m.
By carlberky - Sept. 6, 2018, 8:12 a.m.
Like Reply

" There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans. "

Can anyone find fault with that ?

By mcfarm - Sept. 6, 2018, 9:22 a.m.
Like Reply

sure just what we need. an arrogant egotistical unelected group of bureaucrats who have temporarily lost their power trying to do what they think is best for all of us sheep.....elections have consequences, they were not elected, good bye. Those days are over, we will see if can finally rid ourselves of such wastes of oxygen users

By metmike - Sept. 6, 2018, 12:11 p.m.
Like Reply

I can't think of a better, more blatant example of a desperate "deep state" being aided by their ally, the liberal media.

There it is laid out for everybody to see............that is able to see it....... which is nobody that wants Trump gone because they agree with the deep state. 

Can you imagine the NYT publishing an article like this from somebody deep inside the Obama administration about his corrupt Iran deal? Or his completely bogus  Climate Accord science/deal that will have zero effect on the climate but cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars?

You don't think people on the inside knew this. How does some yahoo atmospheric scientist in Evansville Indiana know this with certainty based on overwhelming, authentic evidence shown here numerous times....... and the top minds of the deep state didn't?

Just read my points in this thread below on the deep state again. No need to repeat them.............just use this latest incident as another great example;

I find a handful of comments in this article loaded with blatantly biased hypocrisy  and entirely intended to manipulate the reader to one side with obviously disingenuous, altruistic assertions of their motives. 

"The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility."

Holy shiiiit. How low is it to sneak behind the back of the man you work for and stab him in the back to try to destroy him? Nobody is forcing half the American people to hate Trump and try to block everything that he tries to do..........regardless of the vast majority of the stuff being great for America. Nothing else matters..........we must stop Trump and his agenda..............even rooting and cheering for news that shows anything that might be bad for America because it's bad for Trump.

That's anti American. We are supposed to believe that Trump caused this with his "Make America Great Again"policies?  Trumps many character flaws have been well known since well  before he was elected by the people  No, its the resistance of Trump, which has contributed the most to the  lack of civility.

One side, basically has adopted the opposite belief system of Trump.........whatever he wants to do, they want to block it and to vilify him. DON'T make American great again should be their slogan.

Dang, I can't remember the last time that I read a stronger piece of evidence, being received by one group as evidence of something, where it's profound evidence of exactly the opposite.

By metmike - Sept. 6, 2018, 12:27 p.m.
Like Reply

" There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans. "

Can anyone find fault with that ?


That is a good statement and one that we should all try to follow and I know with certainty that you sincerely believe strongly in........I agree 100%.  You are a very good person.

If you and me were running the country, I'm betting we could agree on almost everything.

However, this particular article, while making that statement that we should rise above politics, is actually writing an article that states the complete opposite..........revolt and reject the political side that he disagrees with........Trumps side. 

The entire objective of the article is blatantly political..................while he  throws in a few disingenuous statements that completely contradict his main points to appear as being an altruistic individual to those he is trying to manipulate into agreeing with his idea of destroying the elected president of the US because HE(the expert) is telling us that Trump is not qualified.

Dude(author), the people voted and your person lost. Your policies and agenda are supposed to wait until you win the next election............THAT is the democratic process. I know that you deep state dudes are not used to this sort of thing but THAT is the democratic process!

By silverspiker - Sept. 6, 2018, 12:53 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks Mike...

 Disingenuous.... and altruistic behavior as in who does this guy think he/she is ....God ?...when labeling Trump amoral....

.... also thank you berkey for writing that as well.... I know that no matter what the election brought about that you are sincere about not making America not great again...

.... quite honestly I really think it's the new , Oriental dippchit lady, New York Times editor that wrote this that cannot stand an old white man as her leader and he is winning at every position of trying to make America great again..

By JP - Sept. 6, 2018, 1:52 p.m.
Like Reply

".... also thank you berkey for writing that as well.... I know that no matter what the election brought about that you are sincere about not making America not great again..."

I'm pretty sure I understand what you are saying here, but I'm having no problem with being unable to wrap my head around the double negative!

By GunterK - Sept. 6, 2018, 1:56 p.m.
Like Reply

metmike, you wrote (about carlberky) ".... You are a very good person....."

JI had the privilege of meeting Carl. He is a class act.

By metmike - Sept. 6, 2018, 2:35 p.m.
Like Reply


Carl has displayed being a class act here over and over and over.

We need more Carl's in this world!

By metmike - Sept. 6, 2018, 2:37 p.m.
Like Reply

Pretty funny JP. 

It took me a few seconds to recognize that SS was making a positive statement in behalf of carl.

Maybe when its done in double negative form, its doesn't hurt as much (-:

By GunterK - Sept. 6, 2018, 3:47 p.m.
Like Reply

I don't believe for one second that anybody in the WH would be crazy enough to write such an Op-Ed. People in the WH are not only witnesses to conversations about Mueller and Stormy Daniels, but also to matters of national security. They would know that they would eventually be found out and face severe consequences.

I couldn't think of a more perfect way for somebody on the outside to create havoc in the WH, such as we are seeing right now. My guess is this story originated at the NYT.

One person I heard of who would feel great satisfaction in causing this turmoil would be NYT editor Jeong

By carlberky - Sept. 6, 2018, 4:19 p.m.
Like Reply

 Nice one, John.  "  … no problem with being unable … "


By mcfarm - Sept. 6, 2018, 6:21 p.m.
Like Reply

there was a time Gunter when people would not we have the chief of the fbi {comey} actually taking notes of WH meetings and handing them off to the press -thru a commy close friend.....there is a new arrogance. As in they know perfectly well we have 2 sets of scales of justice one for the right and on for the left

By wglassfo - Sept. 6, 2018, 6:45 p.m.
Like Reply

Just a question, not trying to pass judgement on your internal problems. I already did a post about foreign actors/dictators possible re-action to perceived weakness of the commander-in-chief and his press conference, which contained remarks about national security [nuff said about foreign actors]

My question:

Can the FBI armed with subpoena power, enter the NYT bldg. and request all records, until they find out who wrote the op-ed and  obviously find the person being protected by the NYT

If the FBI did find the person, what would be the end game.

Is the journalist process protected some how or does the FBI over rule journalist protections and the NYT decision to protect their source??

I know some cases in court where a journalist refused to divulge a source and was slapped with contempt of court and was sent to jail

Could the FBI some how do the same, as in drag the NYT into court and have a judge rule on contempt of court if the NYT refuses to divulge the name, in public?? If the FBI finds the person do they have to go to court??

Then the question is??? is this the same process where the FBI investigated Hillary for alleged crimes of which it was decided by Comey there was not sufficient evidence of intent to go to court. [or is this apples and oranges]?? as to the power of the FBI to investigate

I am curious why the FBI or DOJ or DHS or DOD is so quiet, when the president declares this a matter of national security. Does anybody respond to a declaration of national security or is Trump being ignored?? [Palace coup]??

Isn't somebody supposed to investigate matters of alleged national security. I know you have an alphabet soup of agencies, all of whom seem to be more interested in protecting turf than sharing information. Just seems to me that national security should rank high enough to have an agency with the power and willingness to investigate

I have been out of circulation as of late doing business, but my limited impression is that everybody is focused on finding the person who penned the op-ed but nobody, with the power to investigate, is doing anything of consequence, Thus I may be behind the curve,, because somebody may be investigating the op-ed, with some real power to investigate. If so my apologies for being such a dumb bell.

I repeat, this post is in no way, intended to offer opinion or criticism of your affairs 

Just a question as I do not understand what should happen when a president declares a national security issue

By carlberky - Sept. 6, 2018, 7:36 p.m.
Like Reply

Wayne, the Op-ed would not have been written if the person wasn't guaranteed non-disclosure.

 Yes, the press has gone to jail to protect a source.

 The FBI would need more than curiosity to subpoena the Times. Can anyone tell me what law  was broken? Certainly  not the 1st amendment.

By mcfarm - Sept. 6, 2018, 10:27 p.m.
Like Reply

the fbi has a lot more than curiosity from this document. /There is a direct threat to the president involved not to mention who was that the other laughing out loud when I called Sessions Mr Invisible

By TimNew - Sept. 7, 2018, 3:07 a.m.
Like Reply

I'm with Carl on this.  The FBI has no grounds to compel the times to reveal their source; unless they used a "Trumped up" dossier?  <G>

I am also skeptical that the source was from within the Whitehouse.

By mcfarm - Sept. 7, 2018, 6:41 a.m.
Like Reply

also has been speculation the new wacked out  {supposed to be some kind of editor,ha}at the Times was involved...jeung or joeng or weirdo