The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Was the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Against President Trump a Trans-Atlantic Affair?

Posted on | November 22, 2018 | 2 Comments

 

When Steve Bannon and others began speaking of the “Deep State,” many people dismissed this as a paranoid conspiracy theory, without bothering to investigate what this phrase actually signifies. Let me summarize briefly: During the past 25 years or so, since the end of the Cold War, a general consensus about the shape of the international order has emerged among the policy-making elite, and the bureaucracies of the federal government are staffed with people who share this consensus. On a host of issues from climate change to immigration to trade, this consensus has solidified into a sort of secular religion among government employees, who oppose any attempt to disrupt the existing arrangements (e.g., “Brexit” or revising NAFTA). In 2016, those who share this policy consensus were “all-in” for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, because she was committed to a continuation of the status quo, whereas Donald Trump vowed to disrupt the existing order.

The “Deep State” refers to the fact — and it is a now an established fact, not a paranoid theory — that efforts to prevent Trump’s election were supported by personnel of national-security agencies, including the CIA and the FBI. Anyone who has paid attention to the texts between FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Pages can see this. And U.S. allies have also been implicated in the effort to prevent Trump’s election:

MI6 [the British intelligence agency] is locked in a secret battle with US President Donald Trump to persuade him not to disclose documents linked to the Russian election-meddling probe — it has been revealed.
Intelligence sources on both sides of the Atlantic told the Telegraph that spy bosses in London were frantically appealing to Trump not to make the classified documents public.
The President’s aides have reportedly hit back with questions over why Britain wants the documents to be kept secret.
But authorities in the UK say they have ‘genuine concern’ about sources being exposed if classified parts of the wiretap request were made public.
Other sources also said MI6 was concerned the publication of the documents would set a ‘dangerous precedent’ for the release of top secret information, and may dissuade future sources from coming forward.
A US based intelligence source said: ‘I think that stuff is going to implicate MI5 and MI6 in a bunch of activities they don’t want to be implicated in, along with FBI, counter-terrorism and the CIA.’
The documents in question concern an FBI request to wiretap former Trump policy adviser Carter Page, submitted a month before the Presidential election in 2016.
Documents show the FBI suspected Page of being lured in by Russian intelligence, and the bureau was given leave to place him under intense surveillance for several months. . . .
Memos describing alleged ties between Trump and Russia compiled by former MI6 officer Christopher Steele are contained in the papers, which may form part of the reason for Britain’s concern.
Steele is most notable for authoring a dossier which claims Russia collected a file of compromising information on Trump.

Whatever policy quarrels Americans might have amongst ourselves, we ought to be able to agree that policy should be determined by elected officials, and not by the “hired help.” Employees of the FBI and the CIA are not independent policy-makers, but must answer to the President and to Congress. If federal employees are permitted to use their offices to interfere in the electoral process — effectively, to choose their own bosses — then the government ceases to be the servant of the people, and becomes the master. The manufactured outrage over “Russian collusion,” claiming that Trump is a Putin puppet, is a distraction from the issue of how the bureaucratic apparatus of the federal government has become a subversive influence in our politics and an obstacle to real reform.

What the alarm in British intelligence agencies shows is that “Deep State” operatives like Peter Strzok had the assistance of “Deep State” operatives in the U.K. in attempting to prevent Trump’s election. The claims by MI6 that declassification of these wiretaps might reveal sensitive counter-terrorism secrets are almost certainly a bogus argument, as what they actually seek to conceal is the extent to which Her Majesty’s government was part of a corrupt project intended to help elect Hillary Clinton.



 

Category: Corruption

Comments

2 Responses to “Was the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Against President Trump a Trans-Atlantic Affair?”

  1. Was the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Against President Trump a Trans-Atlantic Affair? | Western Rifle Shooters Association
    November 23rd, 2018 @ 8:55 am

    […] Yes, because “the Deep State” is an international affair. […]

  2. Saturday Links | 357 Magnum
    November 24th, 2018 @ 1:09 pm

    […] The Other McCain wants to know Was the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Against President Trump a Trans-Atlantic Affair?. […]