The 'Deep State:' Fact Or Fable

[alang1216]

What is the logic behind immunizing Quid Pro Joe Biden 'cause he is running for President???

Better to charge him with selling influence after he is elected?

Better to charge him with selling influence after some evidence surfaces that a crime was committed.

Here's the evidence....a confession on tape.





The bribe at 02:15

Withholding aid in the interests of the US is rather different from withholding aid for your personal benefit. I've seen no evidence that Biden personally stood to gain anything since there was no investigation into Hunter at the time.

Let's check:


The President has the authority to ask Ukraine for help in rooting out corruption.....


If that is a problem.....
....why did Bill 'the rapist' Clinton sign a treaty with the Ukraine with exactly the same purpose?????


"Formal Title

• Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998, and with an Exchange of Notes signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application.

Date Received from President

• 11/10/1999 Text of Treaty Document available as:
  • TXT"
  • TREATY WITH UKRAINE ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
    
    __________
    
    MESSAGE
    
    from
    
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
    
    transmitting
    
    TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND UKRAINE ON MUTUAL LEGAL
    ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS WITH ANNEX, SIGNED AT KIEV ON JULY 22,
    1998, AND WITH AN EXCHANGE OF NOTES SIGNED ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, WHICH
    PROVIDES FOR ITS PROVISIONAL APPLICATION
    
    Text - Treaty Document 106-16 - Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

I see no evidence Trump cares about corruption, except his own. If that is untrue you should be able to name other examples where he made similar comments.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"It is hard to respond to some unattributed text but some of those testifying were at the Ambassador level, hardly middle-level bureaucrats."

Which of the 'witnesses' were constitutionally authorized to make foreign policy for America?

Which of the witnesses MADE foreign policy? Which tried to execute US foreign policy, made in the interests of the country, before it was co-opted by an cadre working for the personal interests of the President?

It is the reason they were called as 'witnesses,' you dunce.

The PRESIDENT didn't follow their instructions!!!!!




. Witnesses called by the Democrat Intelligence Committee showed their anger at Trump for not following their instructions…
Their job is to carry out whatever policy the President determines......either that or resign.



“The experts don’t like to be challenged—especially by non-expert voters or the politicians they elect to limit administrative state power. Here, finally, we come to the “truest cause, though least in speech” of the impeachment freight train: the administrative state is striking back at a mortal threat. As Marini explained in a recent speech,

Many great scandals arise not as a means of exposing corruption, but as a means of attacking political foes while obscuring the political differences that are at issue. This is especially likely to occur in the aftermath of elections that threaten the authority of an established order. In such circumstances, scandal provides a way for defenders of the status quo to undermine the legitimacy of those who have been elected on a platform of challenging the status quo—diluting, as a consequence, the authority of the electorate.”
The Empire Strikes Back



The only real crime being pursued is Trump having defeated the career criminal.

The witnesses were called to say what they knew. Any anger came from seeing the interests of the US playing second fiddle to a presidential campaign.

False.

None ....except the one who stated that Trump wished no Quid Pro Quo, had met Trump.

They were there to claim he didn't follow their dictates.

You don't have any problem following the Left's dictates, huh? Learn to do that in government school?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is The “Deep State” A Fable?

No…it’s a fact.




1.Government school grads will deny the fact 'til their dying day.
There are two reasons why government school grads regularly claim that there is no “Deep State:”

a.They are trying to obviate the argument that there is a cabal in our government that is aimed at reversing the 2016 election.

b.They are ignorant of the Progressive doctrine, from Woodrow Wilson on, that government should be run by unelected bureaucrats who will do a better job than the deplorables.

“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.




3. “People capable of feeling shame would not have immediately followed up the Russiagate hoax fiasco with another transparently phony—and in “substance” nearly identical—attempt to remove President Trump from office, overturn the 2016 election, and shower deplorable-Americans with contempt and hatred. But our ruling elites have no shame.”
The Empire Strikes Back

4. Those people….described here…..ran, and testified at the recent Democrat committee hearing, mislabeled as the ‘Impeachment Inquiry,’…

“Beginning in the late 19th century and intensifying in the mid-1960s, elites inside and outside our government have centralized authority in a “fourth branch,” the executive branch’s agencies and bureaucracies. Marini refers to those institutions, the people in them, and their governing philosophy and methods as “the administrative state.” Administrative state rule is fundamentally anti-democratic and anti-constitutional, intended to be rule by “expert consensus.” Ibid.



This is the Deep State.

It claims to be the real American government.

It is and remains a conspiracy theory. A Deep State by definition is deep, hidden and thus cannot be proved. The closest to a deep state was exposed recently, when Rudy and the Three Amigos engaged in seeking dirt on the Biden's under the direction of The President.

Only to the uneducated.

Don't worry....I can help you understand, .....


Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government



Have you ever read a book?

 

[Uncensored2008]

They are trying to obviate the argument that there is a cabal in our government that is aimed at reversing the 2016 election.

Super secret cabals have it in for Trump

Wow, how crazy, right shitflinger?

Say, ever read the Peter Strzok text messages?

Players referenced:
John Brennan (KGB), Andy McCabe (FSB), Bill Clinton (Mafia) - funny dat, given that Strzok was the lead on a case involving his wife...


EXCLUSIVE: Read The Strzok-Page Texts The DOJ Handed Over To Congress

 

[Uncensored2008]

Ma!

Where is my tin foil hat?
Some lady is talking about the Deep State on the Internet

Maybe you're just not keeping up.
1. Do you know how the Strzok/Page texts showed not only bias, but active opposition to Trump?
2. Do you recall Strzok's "insurance policy" in case Trump won?
3. Do you recall Vindman's pushing for the "inter-agency" foreign policies instead of Trump's
4. Do you recall the coup attempts using the 25th Amendment by wearing wires to the WH?
5. Did you see the witnesses for Schiff, especially Dr. Hill say one thing for the Obama admin, like not providing the Ukraine lethal weapons when fighting Russia, and then whine about Trump's two week delay in funding, after Trump already gave the Ukraine Javelin anti-tank missiles? Totally hypocritical. My question would be "who sets US foreign policy"? Hint: not the deep state.
6. The Obama DOJ and FBI illegally setup Trump in order to spy on his campaign. Note: Carter Page was 100% innocent of anything. So the FISA warrants were total deep state bullshit.

There are deep state conspirators in the government. Look at the whistle-blower, the "anonymous" author, the leaker named "Reality Winner", and the others in government who can't toe-the-line. If you can't support Trump's policies, resign and do something else.

Shitflinger is a troll. He is here to blow smoke and fling shit. He is NOT here to have a rational discussion about anything.

 

[lennypartiv]

Eric has already been investigated by the FBI for fraud in skimming millions from the money he raised on behalf of St. Jude's. Ivanka is currently under investigation in Vancouver for bank fraud in the construction of the Trump Hotel there, the $500 million loan Don Jr. negotiated with the Chinese government for the Trump Indonesia looks hinky as hell.

Links?

 

[alang1216]

What is the logic behind immunizing Quid Pro Joe Biden 'cause he is running for President???

Better to charge him with selling influence after he is elected?

Better to charge him with selling influence after some evidence surfaces that a crime was committed.

Here's the evidence....a confession on tape.





The bribe at 02:15

Withholding aid in the interests of the US is rather different from withholding aid for your personal benefit. I've seen no evidence that Biden personally stood to gain anything since there was no investigation into Hunter at the time.

"Withholding aid in the interests of the US is rather different from withholding aid for your personal benefit."

It is no more 'personal benefit' than this is:


....we have proof that the Democrats did exactly what they claim was a crime when Trump does it…..


"Dear Editor:

In May, CNN reported that [Democrat] Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake.
Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”
https://hudsonreporter.com/2019/10/...o-investigate-trump-in-may-2018-please-share/






“… in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

So, it’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...tigation-might-do-more-hurt-biden-than-trump/




Democrats threatened the Ukraine should it fail to support their attack on their political enemy.

Sounds just like what they're claiming Trump did.




The letter from Menendez, Durbin and Leahy is here:



https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/...cutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

The difference is that none of them were running against Trump so there was no 'personal' benefit. Mueller was investigating Trump for obstruction of justice and suddenly an investigation was terminated. Seems reasonable to assume this may have been another case of obstruction.

 

[alang1216]

"It is hard to respond to some unattributed text but some of those testifying were at the Ambassador level, hardly middle-level bureaucrats."

Which of the 'witnesses' were constitutionally authorized to make foreign policy for America?

Which of the witnesses MADE foreign policy? Which tried to execute US foreign policy, made in the interests of the country, before it was co-opted by an cadre working for the personal interests of the President?

It is the reason they were called as 'witnesses,' you dunce.

The PRESIDENT didn't follow their instructions!!!!!




. Witnesses called by the Democrat Intelligence Committee showed their anger at Trump for not following their instructions…
Their job is to carry out whatever policy the President determines......either that or resign.



“The experts don’t like to be challenged—especially by non-expert voters or the politicians they elect to limit administrative state power. Here, finally, we come to the “truest cause, though least in speech” of the impeachment freight train: the administrative state is striking back at a mortal threat. As Marini explained in a recent speech,

Many great scandals arise not as a means of exposing corruption, but as a means of attacking political foes while obscuring the political differences that are at issue. This is especially likely to occur in the aftermath of elections that threaten the authority of an established order. In such circumstances, scandal provides a way for defenders of the status quo to undermine the legitimacy of those who have been elected on a platform of challenging the status quo—diluting, as a consequence, the authority of the electorate.”
The Empire Strikes Back



The only real crime being pursued is Trump having defeated the career criminal.

The witnesses were called to say what they knew. Any anger came from seeing the interests of the US playing second fiddle to a presidential campaign.

False.

None ....except the one who stated that Trump wished no Quid Pro Quo, had met Trump.

They were there to claim he didn't follow their dictates.

You don't have any problem following the Left's dictates, huh? Learn to do that in government school?

If Trump is innocent why does he prevent those with first-hand knowledge from testifying? Isn't that akin to pleading the 5th?

 

[blastoff]

They are trying to obviate the argument that there is a cabal in our government that is aimed at reversing the 2016 election.

Super secret cabals have it in for Trump

Along with lots of other low info lefty dweebs dripping TDS down their legs.

 

[Questioner]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What is the logic behind immunizing Quid Pro Joe Biden 'cause he is running for President???

Better to charge him with selling influence after he is elected?

Better to charge him with selling influence after some evidence surfaces that a crime was committed.

Here's the evidence....a confession on tape.





The bribe at 02:15

Withholding aid in the interests of the US is rather different from withholding aid for your personal benefit. I've seen no evidence that Biden personally stood to gain anything since there was no investigation into Hunter at the time.

"Withholding aid in the interests of the US is rather different from withholding aid for your personal benefit."

It is no more 'personal benefit' than this is:


....we have proof that the Democrats did exactly what they claim was a crime when Trump does it…..


"Dear Editor:

In May, CNN reported that [Democrat] Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake.
Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”
https://hudsonreporter.com/2019/10/...o-investigate-trump-in-may-2018-please-share/






“… in May, CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe. In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

So, it’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...tigation-might-do-more-hurt-biden-than-trump/




Democrats threatened the Ukraine should it fail to support their attack on their political enemy.

Sounds just like what they're claiming Trump did.




The letter from Menendez, Durbin and Leahy is here:



https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/...cutor of Ukraine on Mueller investigation.pdf

The difference is that none of them were running against Trump so there was no 'personal' benefit. Mueller was investigating Trump for obstruction of justice and suddenly an investigation was terminated. Seems reasonable to assume this may have been another case of obstruction.

And Democrat or anti-Trumper is 'running against ' Trump.


It appears that honesty is beyond your ability.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"It is hard to respond to some unattributed text but some of those testifying were at the Ambassador level, hardly middle-level bureaucrats."

Which of the 'witnesses' were constitutionally authorized to make foreign policy for America?

Which of the witnesses MADE foreign policy? Which tried to execute US foreign policy, made in the interests of the country, before it was co-opted by an cadre working for the personal interests of the President?

It is the reason they were called as 'witnesses,' you dunce.

The PRESIDENT didn't follow their instructions!!!!!




. Witnesses called by the Democrat Intelligence Committee showed their anger at Trump for not following their instructions…
Their job is to carry out whatever policy the President determines......either that or resign.



“The experts don’t like to be challenged—especially by non-expert voters or the politicians they elect to limit administrative state power. Here, finally, we come to the “truest cause, though least in speech” of the impeachment freight train: the administrative state is striking back at a mortal threat. As Marini explained in a recent speech,

Many great scandals arise not as a means of exposing corruption, but as a means of attacking political foes while obscuring the political differences that are at issue. This is especially likely to occur in the aftermath of elections that threaten the authority of an established order. In such circumstances, scandal provides a way for defenders of the status quo to undermine the legitimacy of those who have been elected on a platform of challenging the status quo—diluting, as a consequence, the authority of the electorate.”
The Empire Strikes Back



The only real crime being pursued is Trump having defeated the career criminal.

The witnesses were called to say what they knew. Any anger came from seeing the interests of the US playing second fiddle to a presidential campaign.

False.

None ....except the one who stated that Trump wished no Quid Pro Quo, had met Trump.

They were there to claim he didn't follow their dictates.

You don't have any problem following the Left's dictates, huh? Learn to do that in government school?

If Trump is innocent why does he prevent those with first-hand knowledge from testifying? Isn't that akin to pleading the 5th?

Innocent of what?

There is no crime, other than defeating the career criminal.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

 

[Questioner]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

There isn't a such thing as "government school" - the Founders themselves came from "government" schools by that definition, given that they were originally British citizens under a monarchy, I believe their schools were funded by the "state", not entirely privately funded (which is a false dictomy anyway - since private schools are eligible to receive public funding, and vice versa with government schools).

America was intended to be "free" in terms of its enumerated rights, not an anarchy or "direct democracy", which seems to be what you're advocating; citizens are still subordinate to the Common Law or state law (which affects them in day to day life moreso than the federal government does anyway) - in an anarchy, there would be no "rights" anyway nor any means of enforcing them, at least none in practice, even if in theory. So yes, representatives were mean to have some margin of "power" over the average person, at least within the limits and constraints of the law and morality - people who are corrupt being in positions of power is as old as human nature - it doesn't not prove a "deep state" conspiracy, or anything that at odds with human nature, no.

So no, most of what you imagine your rights to be are fictional, or faith-based sentiments, not in the Constitution, nor the law, nor common sense - or how the law actually works in practice, as opposed to ignorant theory.

If you want "freedom" of that variety, you'll have to go take it by force, and best of luck to you on that. You probably don't even know your states' law, or the domain of power it has over you in day-to-day life, but merely take it for granted.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

There isn't a such thing as "government school" - the Founders themselves came from "government" schools by that definition, given that they were originally British citizens under a monarchy, I believe their schools were funded by the "state", not entirely privately funded (which is a false dictomy anyway - since private schools are eligible to receive public funding, and vice versa with government schools).

America was intended to be "free" in terms of its enumerated rights, not an anarchy or "direct democracy", which seems to be what you're advocating; citizens are still subordinate to the Common Law or state law (which affects them in day to day life moreso than the federal government does anyway) - in an anarchy, there would be no "rights" anyway nor any means of enforcing them, at least none in practice, even if in theory. So yes, representatives were mean to have some margin of "power" over the average person, at least within the limits and constraints of the law and morality - people who are corrupt being in positions of power is as old as human nature - it doesn't not prove a "deep state" conspiracy, or anything that at odds with human nature, no.

So no, most of what you imagine your rights to be are fictional, or faith-based sentiments, not in the Constitution, nor the law, nor common sense - or how the law actually works in practice, as opposed to ignorant theory.

If you want "freedom" of that variety, you'll have to go take it by force, and best of luck to you on that. You probably don't even know your states' law, or the domain of power it has over you in day-to-day life, but merely take it for granted.

"There isn't a such thing as "government school"

And yet you just proved you are a victim thereof.

 

[Questioner]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

There isn't a such thing as "government school" - the Founders themselves came from "government" schools by that definition, given that they were originally British citizens under a monarchy, I believe their schools were funded by the "state", not entirely privately funded (which is a false dictomy anyway - since private schools are eligible to receive public funding, and vice versa with government schools).

America was intended to be "free" in terms of its enumerated rights, not an anarchy or "direct democracy", which seems to be what you're advocating; citizens are still subordinate to the Common Law or state law (which affects them in day to day life moreso than the federal government does anyway) - in an anarchy, there would be no "rights" anyway nor any means of enforcing them, at least none in practice, even if in theory. So yes, representatives were mean to have some margin of "power" over the average person, at least within the limits and constraints of the law and morality - people who are corrupt being in positions of power is as old as human nature - it doesn't not prove a "deep state" conspiracy, or anything that at odds with human nature, no.

So no, most of what you imagine your rights to be are fictional, or faith-based sentiments, not in the Constitution, nor the law, nor common sense - or how the law actually works in practice, as opposed to ignorant theory.

If you want "freedom" of that variety, you'll have to go take it by force, and best of luck to you on that. You probably don't even know your states' law, or the domain of power it has over you in day-to-day life, but merely take it for granted.

"There isn't a such thing as "government school"

And yet you just proved you are a victim thereof.

Nope, and I'd venture that given how low the level of education is, that "school grads" who don't do any additional reading or learning on their own won't know much of anything one way or another. Private schools receive government funding or sponsorship as well, and I'm sure that some public institutions receive private funding, so it's one big false dichotomy.

Who's someone you don't consider a victim? Ron Paul? He's still a member of the government, regardless of his ideals.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

There isn't a such thing as "government school" - the Founders themselves came from "government" schools by that definition, given that they were originally British citizens under a monarchy, I believe their schools were funded by the "state", not entirely privately funded (which is a false dictomy anyway - since private schools are eligible to receive public funding, and vice versa with government schools).

America was intended to be "free" in terms of its enumerated rights, not an anarchy or "direct democracy", which seems to be what you're advocating; citizens are still subordinate to the Common Law or state law (which affects them in day to day life moreso than the federal government does anyway) - in an anarchy, there would be no "rights" anyway nor any means of enforcing them, at least none in practice, even if in theory. So yes, representatives were mean to have some margin of "power" over the average person, at least within the limits and constraints of the law and morality - people who are corrupt being in positions of power is as old as human nature - it doesn't not prove a "deep state" conspiracy, or anything that at odds with human nature, no.

So no, most of what you imagine your rights to be are fictional, or faith-based sentiments, not in the Constitution, nor the law, nor common sense - or how the law actually works in practice, as opposed to ignorant theory.

If you want "freedom" of that variety, you'll have to go take it by force, and best of luck to you on that. You probably don't even know your states' law, or the domain of power it has over you in day-to-day life, but merely take it for granted.

"There isn't a such thing as "government school"

And yet you just proved you are a victim thereof.

Nope, and I'd venture that given how low the level of education is, that "school grads" who don't do any additional reading or learning on their own won't know much of anything one way or another.

You'd like to compare educational resumes?

 

[Questioner]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

There isn't a such thing as "government school" - the Founders themselves came from "government" schools by that definition, given that they were originally British citizens under a monarchy, I believe their schools were funded by the "state", not entirely privately funded (which is a false dictomy anyway - since private schools are eligible to receive public funding, and vice versa with government schools).

America was intended to be "free" in terms of its enumerated rights, not an anarchy or "direct democracy", which seems to be what you're advocating; citizens are still subordinate to the Common Law or state law (which affects them in day to day life moreso than the federal government does anyway) - in an anarchy, there would be no "rights" anyway nor any means of enforcing them, at least none in practice, even if in theory. So yes, representatives were mean to have some margin of "power" over the average person, at least within the limits and constraints of the law and morality - people who are corrupt being in positions of power is as old as human nature - it doesn't not prove a "deep state" conspiracy, or anything that at odds with human nature, no.

So no, most of what you imagine your rights to be are fictional, or faith-based sentiments, not in the Constitution, nor the law, nor common sense - or how the law actually works in practice, as opposed to ignorant theory.

If you want "freedom" of that variety, you'll have to go take it by force, and best of luck to you on that. You probably don't even know your states' law, or the domain of power it has over you in day-to-day life, but merely take it for granted.

"There isn't a such thing as "government school"

And yet you just proved you are a victim thereof.

Nope, and I'd venture that given how low the level of education is, that "school grads" who don't do any additional reading or learning on their own won't know much of anything one way or another.

You'd like to compare educational resumes?

No, but most of my learning is from reading on my own, not merely from "government school", and a high school education, whether "government" or private is not much of anything anyway compared to advanced learners.

 

[Questioner]

In some ways, media corporations may be "deep state", but that's party because people watch them, instead of reading books.

Even Alex Jones is a "globalist", at least in terms of his audience - which is why I don't buy into most news and short form media, it's mostly just rhetoric which sells.

 

[anynameyouwish]

If "deep state" merely means "shadow government", then yes, I'm sure there are many people not holding office who influence it indirectly, whether "corporate" executives, or anyone else. And I doubt that there has ever been a time in history where that has been the case, so I prefer not to worry about it myself; I think that information is power.

Sooo....you're a government school grad, huh?


Let's try again....


“Rather than the people being governed by elected representatives, the three branches, “Woodrow Wilson gave the administrative state its rationale: he held that government by nonpartisan, public-spirited, Ivy League–trained experts making rules in such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission would be infinitely wiser, more efficient, and more responsive to changing conditions and the evolving spirit of the age than the Framers’ government of limited and separated powers, a clockwork relic in the electricity age.

….ever since the New Deal supersized Wilson’s system, administrative agencies have multiplied like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice’s brooms, so that federal regulations now spill out of 240 volumes—and not only overregulated businessmen, infrastructure planners, and a few law professors, but also Supreme Court justices, have begun to wonder by what legitimate authority unelected bureaucrats can make rules like a legislature, carry them out like an executive, and adjudicate and punish infractions of them like a judiciary, usurping powers that the Constitution places solely in the Congress, the president, and the courts, with no two powers concentrated in the same hands.” The Court Moves Right
The Court Moves Right




2. Government school grads have been totally weaned away from the Founder’s view that free citizens elect….vote into office….those who rule them. Hence, the indoctrinated deny that they are the sheep being herded by unelected bureaucrats, diplomats, career government workers who are in charge….the Deep State.

And the Deep State….which clearly exists….is fighting to prove that the great unwashed must be chastised for electing a candidate not of their choosing…..giving us, first Russiagate, and now Ukrainegate.







Now...if you are serious about gaining the education that government school deprived you of....begin reading

"The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government"
The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government

There isn't a such thing as "government school" - the Founders themselves came from "government" schools by that definition, given that they were originally British citizens under a monarchy, I believe their schools were funded by the "state", not entirely privately funded (which is a false dictomy anyway - since private schools are eligible to receive public funding, and vice versa with government schools).

America was intended to be "free" in terms of its enumerated rights, not an anarchy or "direct democracy", which seems to be what you're advocating; citizens are still subordinate to the Common Law or state law (which affects them in day to day life moreso than the federal government does anyway) - in an anarchy, there would be no "rights" anyway nor any means of enforcing them, at least none in practice, even if in theory. So yes, representatives were mean to have some margin of "power" over the average person, at least within the limits and constraints of the law and morality - people who are corrupt being in positions of power is as old as human nature - it doesn't not prove a "deep state" conspiracy, or anything that at odds with human nature, no.

So no, most of what you imagine your rights to be are fictional, or faith-based sentiments, not in the Constitution, nor the law, nor common sense - or how the law actually works in practice, as opposed to ignorant theory.

If you want "freedom" of that variety, you'll have to go take it by force, and best of luck to you on that. You probably don't even know your states' law, or the domain of power it has over you in day-to-day life, but merely take it for granted.

"There isn't a such thing as "government school"

And yet you just proved you are a victim thereof.

Nope, and I'd venture that given how low the level of education is, that "school grads" who don't do any additional reading or learning on their own won't know much of anything one way or another.

You'd like to compare educational resumes?

Got yours from Trump U?

I see that even when someone is debating with you civilly you can't help but attack.....

how conservative of you.