I was just in my car and heard Rush Limbaugh explain that he thinks that the so called deep state is attacking Trump because they don't think that the American people ought to get to choose their own leaders. "How dare those rubes pick someone who could disagree with us" is the basic question that drives the deep state. They've really been pushing that since Trump came on the scene.
I disagree. In my opinion, the motive behind the plan to get Trump is nothing more than basic self-preservation. The leadership of the FBI, DOJ, and the intelligence agencies were seeking to protect themselves from the consequences should a Republican like Trump learn the details of all that they previously had done. In this sense, you need to go back to about the beginning of the Obama years to understand what I am talking about. Consider this:
1. At the start of the Obama first term, the DOJ signed off on a crazy scheme to supply assault weapons to the Mexican drug cartels. It was called "operation Fast and Furious" and it was approved by even the then attorney general Eric Holder. Supposedly, this whole thing was done so that the feds could "follow" the guns and see how they got to Mexico and where they ended up. That seems untrue. After all, there were 2000 guns including assault weapons sent by the Obama DOJ to the cartels and we have never heard how the guns got to Mexico or where they ended up. All we know is that they periodically turn up at crime scenes and that one was used to kill border agent Brian Terry. If the purpose of the operation was as promised, we surely would have heard some results after eight years, but there's just nothing. So what can this mean? Most likely, the operation Fast and Furious was designed to get American assault weapons into the hands of Mexican drug cartels so that when they were used, the government could use the resulting outrage to put new gun control measures into place. Instead, Fast and Furious (which was never supposed to be disclosed) was made public and the DOJ and ATF had to scramble to explain it away.
2. Then there's the actions of DOJ and the intelligence agencies including the FBI to thwart the activities of the media. Given the strong support for the Obama administration by the media, this is a funny one. Remember, however, that early in the Obama years, the government ran massive spying operations on the media. One target was Fox News; coming from Obama, that is not surprising. You may recall that then Fox reporter James Rosen was targeted for surveillance and named as a criminal suspect so that warrants could be obtained to wiretap Rosen, his co-workers and even his family. There was nothing to support calling Rosen a suspect, but the DOJ and FBI signed off on the warrant application anyway. But that wasn't it. These same agencies also did close surveillance of the AP office in DC. Seriously, when was the last time (if ever) that the federal government conducted wiretapping of a press agency like the AP? It hasn't happened before or since. If one wanted to chill the communications between the press and potential sources, what better way than to wiretap the phones of the media? This effort was surely a very bad act by the DOJ and FBI leadership.
3. And what about the efforts of the IRS to prevent conservative and Christian charities from getting approved as charitable organizations? This effort began in 2009 and hit a bunch of groups that opposed the Obama agenda. It was a completely illegal effort to let conservatives and Christians have equal rights to free speech. When it was first uncovered, the higher ups in the deep state told us that this was just the work of some "rogue agents" in Cincinnati. Of course, that was a lie. Think back to Obama's reaction to the whole thing. At first, he said he knew nothing about it but what he read in the papers, but he promised to end the targeting of conservative groups. By a year later, when many details about Louis Lerner and her cabal of people targeting these groups had been made public, Obama switched and said that there was "no corruption" there; in other words, Obama claimed nothing improper had happened. What would happen if the new administration found evidence that the targeting by the IRS had been approved by the Attorney General and other high up members of the deep state?
4. Then there's Benghazi. On the anniversary of 9-11, the USA had taken no precautions to protect its diplomatic missions in the Arab world. It also had done nothing to prepare a response to an attack should one occur on that very significant day. Then the worst happened. The Benghazi mission was attacked by terrorists and there was no response from Washington. Obama to this day has never explained where he was during that attack. We do know that he wasn't in the Situation Room coordinating the protection of our personnel. The lack of preparedness by the government required that this be a surprise attack. As a result, they hatched the story of the youtube video that inspired a riot in Benghazi. The fact that the video had been seen by fewer than 300 people in the three months it was posted didn't matter to the deep state people who came up with this excuse. They needed to cover their behinds. They missed the terrorist preparations. They failed to take precautions on the 9-11 anniversary. So they made up the lie about the video and used Susan Rice to spread that lie to the nation. What would happen if the Trump administration spent time finding out the truth of who had been involved with this cover up?
5. Let's jump to Hillary's email system. We know a few things of importance. The existence of Hillary Clinton's unsecured private email system and its use for national security business was not a secret inside the government. The president himself emailed Hillary to that address, so he surely knew. There were also email to or from various people in the intelligence agencies. That means Hillary used an illegal system for over four years and in all that time no one in the deep state stood up and said she had to stop. The deep state deferred to Mrs. Clinton even though she was both violating the law and putting our national security at risk. There was just silence from the DNI, the CIA, the FBI and all the other high ranking intelligence officials.
When Hillary's email system was brought to public attention in 2015, there must have been a major panic in the intel agencies. How would they explain letting Mrs. Clinton put our security at risk in this way. Remember, it was just reported that the Chinese have a complete copy of all of Hillary's emails. Sure, we can blame Hillary for setting up the system, but to the deep state, the main fear was how to explain why they knowing let her do it.
When you put all this together, it's pretty clear why the deep state dreaded a victory by Donald Trump (or any other Republican for that matter.) If Hillary won, she surely wouldn't be interested in uncovering scandals that would implicate herself along with the members of the deep state. Trump was a different story. His victory was a real threat to the leaders of the intel agencies and the Obama attorneys general. That is the reason why the whole bogus effort to get rid of Trump was born. Ultimately, this is a CYA move by the deep state. After all, none of them want to go to prison.
I disagree. In my opinion, the motive behind the plan to get Trump is nothing more than basic self-preservation. The leadership of the FBI, DOJ, and the intelligence agencies were seeking to protect themselves from the consequences should a Republican like Trump learn the details of all that they previously had done. In this sense, you need to go back to about the beginning of the Obama years to understand what I am talking about. Consider this:
1. At the start of the Obama first term, the DOJ signed off on a crazy scheme to supply assault weapons to the Mexican drug cartels. It was called "operation Fast and Furious" and it was approved by even the then attorney general Eric Holder. Supposedly, this whole thing was done so that the feds could "follow" the guns and see how they got to Mexico and where they ended up. That seems untrue. After all, there were 2000 guns including assault weapons sent by the Obama DOJ to the cartels and we have never heard how the guns got to Mexico or where they ended up. All we know is that they periodically turn up at crime scenes and that one was used to kill border agent Brian Terry. If the purpose of the operation was as promised, we surely would have heard some results after eight years, but there's just nothing. So what can this mean? Most likely, the operation Fast and Furious was designed to get American assault weapons into the hands of Mexican drug cartels so that when they were used, the government could use the resulting outrage to put new gun control measures into place. Instead, Fast and Furious (which was never supposed to be disclosed) was made public and the DOJ and ATF had to scramble to explain it away.
2. Then there's the actions of DOJ and the intelligence agencies including the FBI to thwart the activities of the media. Given the strong support for the Obama administration by the media, this is a funny one. Remember, however, that early in the Obama years, the government ran massive spying operations on the media. One target was Fox News; coming from Obama, that is not surprising. You may recall that then Fox reporter James Rosen was targeted for surveillance and named as a criminal suspect so that warrants could be obtained to wiretap Rosen, his co-workers and even his family. There was nothing to support calling Rosen a suspect, but the DOJ and FBI signed off on the warrant application anyway. But that wasn't it. These same agencies also did close surveillance of the AP office in DC. Seriously, when was the last time (if ever) that the federal government conducted wiretapping of a press agency like the AP? It hasn't happened before or since. If one wanted to chill the communications between the press and potential sources, what better way than to wiretap the phones of the media? This effort was surely a very bad act by the DOJ and FBI leadership.
3. And what about the efforts of the IRS to prevent conservative and Christian charities from getting approved as charitable organizations? This effort began in 2009 and hit a bunch of groups that opposed the Obama agenda. It was a completely illegal effort to let conservatives and Christians have equal rights to free speech. When it was first uncovered, the higher ups in the deep state told us that this was just the work of some "rogue agents" in Cincinnati. Of course, that was a lie. Think back to Obama's reaction to the whole thing. At first, he said he knew nothing about it but what he read in the papers, but he promised to end the targeting of conservative groups. By a year later, when many details about Louis Lerner and her cabal of people targeting these groups had been made public, Obama switched and said that there was "no corruption" there; in other words, Obama claimed nothing improper had happened. What would happen if the new administration found evidence that the targeting by the IRS had been approved by the Attorney General and other high up members of the deep state?
4. Then there's Benghazi. On the anniversary of 9-11, the USA had taken no precautions to protect its diplomatic missions in the Arab world. It also had done nothing to prepare a response to an attack should one occur on that very significant day. Then the worst happened. The Benghazi mission was attacked by terrorists and there was no response from Washington. Obama to this day has never explained where he was during that attack. We do know that he wasn't in the Situation Room coordinating the protection of our personnel. The lack of preparedness by the government required that this be a surprise attack. As a result, they hatched the story of the youtube video that inspired a riot in Benghazi. The fact that the video had been seen by fewer than 300 people in the three months it was posted didn't matter to the deep state people who came up with this excuse. They needed to cover their behinds. They missed the terrorist preparations. They failed to take precautions on the 9-11 anniversary. So they made up the lie about the video and used Susan Rice to spread that lie to the nation. What would happen if the Trump administration spent time finding out the truth of who had been involved with this cover up?
5. Let's jump to Hillary's email system. We know a few things of importance. The existence of Hillary Clinton's unsecured private email system and its use for national security business was not a secret inside the government. The president himself emailed Hillary to that address, so he surely knew. There were also email to or from various people in the intelligence agencies. That means Hillary used an illegal system for over four years and in all that time no one in the deep state stood up and said she had to stop. The deep state deferred to Mrs. Clinton even though she was both violating the law and putting our national security at risk. There was just silence from the DNI, the CIA, the FBI and all the other high ranking intelligence officials.
When Hillary's email system was brought to public attention in 2015, there must have been a major panic in the intel agencies. How would they explain letting Mrs. Clinton put our security at risk in this way. Remember, it was just reported that the Chinese have a complete copy of all of Hillary's emails. Sure, we can blame Hillary for setting up the system, but to the deep state, the main fear was how to explain why they knowing let her do it.
When you put all this together, it's pretty clear why the deep state dreaded a victory by Donald Trump (or any other Republican for that matter.) If Hillary won, she surely wouldn't be interested in uncovering scandals that would implicate herself along with the members of the deep state. Trump was a different story. His victory was a real threat to the leaders of the intel agencies and the Obama attorneys general. That is the reason why the whole bogus effort to get rid of Trump was born. Ultimately, this is a CYA move by the deep state. After all, none of them want to go to prison.
1 comment:
Why does Jeff Sessions take no action.
Post a Comment