Ahhhh, now it's tha "Deep State"! Oooooo..............

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You obviously have no understanding of what the "Deep State" is.

What were you expecting?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

It seems to me that Moyers' piece states the obvious (and reflects what I posted above that everybody below the top political levels at Federal agencies are there before a new President arrives and remain after he leaves (by design, might I add)). In other words, without the experience and institutional knowledge of career professionals, there would be nobody left to run the agencies because the political appointees are largely figureheads (do you really believe that Ben Carson and Rick Perry know the slightest thing about their respective agencies?)

Trump's take on it, however, are the ramblings of a paranoid, uniformed lunatic.

So you're suggesting that Moyers agrees with you? That the "deep State" really is, as you put it, nothing more that the "career professionals" inside government agencies?

I'm pretty sure that NOT what Moyers is saying here, for example:

[I]We are faced with two disagreeable implications. First, that the Deep State is so heavily entrenched, so well protected by surveillance, firepower, money and its ability to co-opt resistance that it is almost impervious to change. Second, that just as in so many previous empires, the Deep State is populated with those whose instinctive reaction to the failure of their policies is to double down on those very policies in the future. Iraq was a failure briefly camouflaged by the wholly propagandistic success of the so-called surge; this legerdemain allowed for the surge in Afghanistan, which equally came to naught. Undeterred by that failure, the functionaries of the Deep State plunged into Libya; the smoking rubble of the Benghazi consulate, rather than discouraging further misadventure, seemed merely to incite the itch to bomb Syria. [/I

EDIT: the essay is by Mike Lofgren, not Moyers, but appears on Moyer's web site.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

So you're suggesting that Moyers agrees with you? That the "deep State" really is, as you put it, nothing more that the "career professionals" inside government agencies?

I'm pretty sure that NOT what Moyers is saying here, for example:

We are faced with two disagreeable implications. First, that the Deep State is so heavily entrenched, so well protected by surveillance, firepower, money and its ability to co-opt resistance that it is almost impervious to change. Second, that just as in so many previous empires, the Deep State is populated with those whose instinctive reaction to the failure of their policies is to double down on those very policies in the future. Iraq was a failure briefly camouflaged by the wholly propagandistic success of the so-called surge; this legerdemain allowed for the surge in Afghanistan, which equally came to naught. Undeterred by that failure, the functionaries of the Deep State plunged into Libya; the smoking rubble of the Benghazi consulate, rather than discouraging further misadventure, seemed merely to incite the itch to bomb Syria.

I'm not a Moyers fan, a person I find to be a far left alarmist for the most part. I'll watch some of his feature shows on PBS, knowing full well the POV he has.

I disagree with his point above. Those screw-ups he notes were not the fault of the "Deep State." They were the fault of the political leaders in power at the time. Blaming the Iraq War or our Libya misadventures on the Deep State is a cop-out for those who held political power.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I'm not a Moyers fan, a person I find to be a far left alarmist for the most part. I'll watch some of his feature shows on PBS, knowing full well the POV he has.

I disagree with his point above. Those screw-ups he notes were not the fault of the "Deep State." They were the fault of the political leaders in power at the time. Blaming the Iraq War or our Libya misadventures on the Deep State is a cop-out for those who held political power.

So you agreed with him until you disagreed with him???

By the way, it was the "deep state" folks - at least the article defines them - that assured Bush that the intel on Iraq was "a slam dunk".

Not to get off track here, but it was my point - in opposition to the OP - that the term "deep state" was not somehow an invention of the current admin or its flack catchers. It has been around a while, and likely comes from the Turk expression "derin devlet", so it's likely not a term that even has its origin in the US.

[BlueStreak]

I remember Bush mentioning the possibility of going to war, people cheering and Bush grinning like a Cheshire Cat. He enjoyed it. Sending thousands of American soldiers to their deaths brought him joy. If that isn't evil, what is?

[BlueStreak]

I understand what Finn is saying when explained the"Deep State" as it exists. What these idiots at Fartbreight peddling is something entirely different. More bullshit Republican fear mongering.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

I understand what Finn is saying when explained the"Deep State" as it exists. What these idiots at Fartbreight peddling is something entirely different. More bullshit Republican fear mongering.

Indeed. The notion that Obama is still leading a shadow government is ridiculous fear-mongering and a cover-up for Trump's incompetence and dishonesty. It is certainly true that a number of government professionals are appalled by Trump's dishonesty, incompetence and malice, some so much that they become leakers and whistle-blowers (as in every administration).

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Indeed. The notion that Obama is still leading a shadow government is ridiculous fear-mongering and a cover-up for Trump's incompetence and dishonesty. It is certainly true that a number of government professionals are appalled by Trump's dishonesty, incompetence and malice, some so much that they become leakers and whistle-blowers (as in every administration).

Really? I thought it was just a month ago that folks were warning not to screw with these career gov't types in the CIA because they were going to "get even with him" after Trump supposedly insulted them. The"bureaucracy has power" we were told.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rZt...ature=youtu.be

You guys on the left need to get your stories straight.

[BigElCat]

My awareness of the 'deep state' goes back to 1983, when I attended a lecture by this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_S...l_(CIA_officer)

My latest read was Snowden's autobiography.

When I say Trump is a puppet / figurehead of unseen forces, I don't mean to exonerate the man. I'm not fear mongering, just telling what I think is going to happen. It all makes sense to me, the withdrawal of US troops from Syria, the release of ISIS terrorists. The whole War On Terror is a fabrication. The CIA made Bin Laden what he was. Trump's in office, apparently to me, because they wanted or felt they needed a clown.

[BigElCat]

IMHO, the bipartisan dog and pony show is just there to project an image, an illusion.

And this is how things really get done...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octobe...spiracy_theory

Carter was the last one that wasn't a puppet.