Post New

I think it's important to stay focused on the big things. For me there is one - and only one - question that matters in this election cycle.

If I vote for this person, will we still have our Democratic Republic at the end of 2028?

I cannot answer "yes" to that if Trump wins a second term. The best I can say is "maybe". But I know we will with a second term for Biden.

I ask the same question all the way down the ballot, from Senators to US Representative, to governor and state legislators, to mayors and city councils and county officials. Do they support our current form of government or are they willing to throw it away to get themselves elected?

All of this talk about criminal convictions and age and tax policy and budgets and foreign affairs pales in comparison to this question. If the candidate is willing to tear apart the basic fabric of our country to get themselves elected, they do not deserve to be elected. Because if enough of them do get elected, they WILL tear apart the Constitution and reconstitute the country so that they and their friends will remain in power despite the will of the people.

Vote carefully this time around, or you vote may never again matter.

--Peter

Project 2025. If someone supports it, vote against them. Implementing that document would effectively end our Republic.

If I vote for this person, will we still have our Democratic Republic at the end of 2028?

Paranoia, it's what's for dinner.

Yeah, I'm sure that's what Russians during Boris Yeltsin's tenure were saying when Putin was elected.

You guys keep chanting this. It won’t make it true.

Trump could have made himself dictator during Covid and didn’t. Meanwhile Biden brags about ignoring the Supreme Court.

Fear. That’s all this is, the left selling fear to its voters.

Trump could have made himself dictator during Covid and didn’t.

Trump is a moron. Had he known what he could do he may have done it. But he didn't, because he's a moron.

Trump is a moron. Had he known what he could do he may have done it. But he didn't, because he's a moron.

Unfortunately, he's learned a bit during his time in office and the years since then. And what he's learned is how to become the dictator he wants to be. He didn't do it last time, but he could next time. That's why there can't be a next time.

Dope1: Trump could have made himself dictator during Covid and didn’t.

Gotta' hand it to the cult and it always turning a blind eye. Here's just one example of what Trump said during the Covid-19 pandemic as he ignored rising cases and deaths in blue states:

“If they don’t treat you right, I don’t call,” Trump said of those state leaders.

“I think they should be appreciative. Because you know what? When they’re not appreciative to me, they’re not appreciative to the Army Corps, they’re not appreciative to FEMA. It’s not right.”

Trump said that Pence “calls all the governors. And I tell him, I’m a different type of person, and I say, ’Mike, don’t call the governor of Washington. You’re wasting your time with him. Don’t call the woman in Michigan.”

So deciding which states receive federal assistance and which states do not based on the way they treat Dear Leader sure sounds dictatorial.

Vote carefully this time around, or you vote may never again matter.

Agree with the theme of your post, but let me point out that in the presence of the Electoral College together with my residence in a reliably blue state, my vote for any Federal official in any foreseeable national general election already doesn't matter. (I'll vote anyway, of course. Haven't missed one yet)

-sutton
(conversely, my vote certainly does count in my purple, majority-wins county. Any R candidate who contacts me gets a blunt explanation that no R at any level will get my vote until the R party has publicly repudiated That Man. Not holding my breath on this one)

"Here's just one example ..." Commonone


This rebuttal has a left wing bias. It's specific & fact based and so a little hostile to opposing views.
It has that same annoying certainty that Galileo used with the Holy Roman Inquisitors.

CmoreBmore

"North Korea has won political backing and promises of economic support and trade from Moscow."

How much economic support can Russia give NK? One would think Russia was stretched pretty thin. = CB

=================

Despite disagreeing with you about the direction of media bias, I still had to LOL at your prose. I loves me some good snark.

Yikes, I failed to copy CB's post in my reply above. Where is that edit function? Meanwhile, here is how my reply was supposed to read

---------------------------------

>>"Here's just one example ..." Commonone<<

This rebuttal has a left wing bias. It's specific & fact based and so a little hostile to opposing views.
It has that same annoying certainty that Galileo used with the Holy Roman Inquisitors.

CmoreBmore

=========

Despite disagreeing with you about the direction of media bias, I still had to LOL at your prose. I loves me some good snark.

You guys keep chanting this. It won’t make it true.

It might as well be true Dope, the man has said he will be a dictator, plans are in the works to enable him,(Project 2025),and he now has a mean disposition stating he was too "nice" last time around. We're just informing ourselves of the danger, and talking amongst ourselves. I do happen to think it is very prudent to recognize that is is highly likely to be true. So we vote him out and put you into a position where you get to disavow Trump as he's convicted in the future of attempting what amounts to a self coup.

It's specific & fact based and so a little hostile to opposing views.

A statement that's specific and fact base is logically a little hostile to opposing views? Doesn't follow unless you believe that being specific and fact based is hostile to opposing views, which I don't.

conversely, my vote certainly does count in my purple, majority-wins county.

I’ve heard an argument that those local elections have more of an impact on your day to day life than national or even state elections. There’s some truth to that.

Those local elections can also have some influence on how future elections are run. Given the GOP’s penchant for tilting the tables in their favor, that’s not an insignificant thing.

—Peter

Unfortunately, he's learned a bit during his time in office and the years since then. And what he's learned is how to become the dictator he wants to be. He didn't do it last time, but he could next time. That's why there can't be a next time.

And even more impactfully, he's hired, or will hire, only Trump loyalists who have bought into Project 25 and it's anti-democratic prescriptions hook line and sinker. A second Trump term will be an unmitigated disaster for America and the World.

A statement that's specific and fact base is logically a little hostile to opposing views? Doesn't follow unless you believe that being specific and fact based is hostile to opposing views, which I don't.

I believe CmoreBmore was being facetious, or at least that's how I HOPE it was intended. I.e., that fact-based logic is ALWAYS hostile to views that deny those facts and a shared common reality.

It might as well be true Dope, the man has said he will be a dictator, plans are in the works to enable him.

lol, sure. What was that bit about taking everything he says literally? For some reason regular people can understand him but lefties can’t.

And Project 2025? Hahaha. Isn’t that about making sure the bureaucracy actually functions properly?

Trump didn't have the playbook "Project 2025" when he was in office. If he were to win, someone will hand it to him. Implementation would end our Republic. No matter who is in charge, or how benevolent they might see themselves to be. Those powers implemented would turn almost anyone.

"Agree with the theme of your post, but let me point out that in the presence of the Electoral College together with my residence in a reliably blue state, my vote for any Federal official in any foreseeable national general election already doesn't matter. (I'll vote anyway, of course. Haven't missed one yet)"

I used to think like this and I still would think like it in normal times. However.......

Yes, it is the Electoral College that matters, not the national popular vote, so those living in a reliably blue or red state, their presidential vote doesn't really make a difference in the election. That is in normal times. Unfortunately, currently our whole system of voting is under attack by one party. They are trying to delegitimize the vote through either disenfranchising certain voters or through attacking the integrity of the voting process.

With the integrity of the vote under attack, the perception of the vote is important as well.

I think it is important that the winner in this next presidential election put up overwhelming numbers nationally just to help the perception that whoever wins it was the choice of the nation.

I think that is what helped a lot in 2020. Biden crushed Trump so badly in the national vote that it was much harder for people to accept Trump's claims that the election was stolen. The will of the people clearly prevailed.

It should also be noted that right now, neither candidate is popular. This means that there are a lot of voters who do not like either candidate and will probably feel very apathetic about voting. They are probably not going to jump through hoops and go out of their way to vote. I bet turnout for 2024 is way down from 2020. What this means is that some down ballot races might be more competitive than normal even in reliably colored states. So your vote in those races might matter more.

What this means is that some down ballot races might be more competitive than normal even in reliably colored states. So your vote in those races might matter more.

Yes! And if people turn out to vote for down ballot candidates it will help whichever POTUS candidate is of their party.

It would be a disaster to lose because of the electoral college but if Biden can win the most popular votes that is at least something to provide hope for the future.

Implementation would end our Republic.

Do you people even know what it is? The bubble you get your news from is teaching that it's a FAR RIGHT PLOT TO DESTROY THE GOVERNMENT.

Hardly.

https://www.project2025.org/

It is not enough for conservatives to win elections. If we are going to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative Administration.

This is the goal of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. The project will build on four pillars that will, collectively, pave the way for an effective conservative Administration.

How, exactly?

The Presidential Administration Academy is a one-of-a-kind educational and skill-building program designed to prepare and equip future political appointees now to be ready on Day One of the next conservative Administration. This academy provides aspiring appointees with the insight, background knowledge, and expertise in governance to immediately begin rolling back destructive policy and advancing conservative ideas in the federal government.

Whoa. Teaching people about the jobs they'll be taking. There's some revolutionary stuff.

Certificate programs:
Prepared to Serve.

The Prepared to Serve certificate program provides aspiring appointees with background information about the role of political appointees in federal service, job opportunities in an Administration, how the background investigations and clearance processes work, and steps you can take now to get ready for the rigors of the hiring process.

OMG. How horrible.

Conservative Governance 101
Throughout the Conservative Governance 101 certificate program, you will learn from a distinguished roster of former political appointees who will impart crucial institutional knowledge and best practices to succeed within federal appointed service.

Again, just shocking they would teach this.


The Administrative State & the Regulatory Process
Whether you are entering political service for the first time or you are a seasoned policy professional, The Administrative State & the Regulatory Process certificate program contains essential information to be an effective policy professional in the next conservative administration. Throughout this certificate program, our experts walk you through the intricacies of the regulatory and rule-making processes within federal agencies.

Heaven forbid they learn about how to do their jobs!!!


Conservative Governance: Advancing Policy
By participating in this program, both former and prospective political appointees will develop a comprehensive understanding of how to advance the President’s agenda. This includes learning about executive order drafting and implementation, how to leverage federal grants and contracts, optimizing the functioning of cabinet government, exploring best practices for social media, and more.

Yup. Che Guevara has nothing on these guys. Real threat to our democracy all this stuff is.

That’s all the nice sounding stuff. When you get into the details of the specific policies, it gets much less benign.

I have just begun to read through their 900 pages of explanation of their plan. But so far, their support of “family values” is to outlaw abortion, take away gay rights, and castigate black men for abandoning their families.

Hmmm. I think a series of posts outlining some of the details of this plan might be interesting. Stay tuned. Gotta do a bunch more reading first.

Until then, here’s a link to their plan.
https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLead...

—Peter

Another "Just So" bedtime story by Dope who lives up to his name. If this were implemented, America as we know it now would end, be something in the past.

Wiki

Project 2025, also known as the Presidential Transition Project, is a collection of conservative policy proposals from The Heritage Foundation to reshape the United States federal government in the event of a Republican Party victory in the 2024 presidential election.[2][3] Established in 2022, the project aims to recruit tens of thousands of conservatives to the District of Columbia to replace existing federal civil servants—whom some Republicans characterize as part of the "deep state"—and to further the objectives of the next Republican president.TRUMP[4] It adopts a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory, a disputed interpretation of Article II of the Constitution of the United States,[5][6] which asserts that the president has absolute power over the executive branch upon inauguration.[3][7]

Note: The unitary executive theory is a legal theory in United States constitutional law which holds that the president of the United States possesses the power to control the entire federal executive branch.

The status quo is that the President of the United States does exercise significant authority over the executive branch, but that there are some exceptions. For example, there are independent agencies such as the Federal Reserve, and independent personnel such as special counsels.[1][2] These limits on unitary executive power can be created by the legislative branch via Congress passing legislation, or by the judicial branch via Supreme Court decisions and interpretation of the law. Exceptions to unitary executive power in the United States have existed since the founding of the country, for example the at-the-time independent positions of Comptroller and Postmaster General, the independent Sinking Fund Commission, and parts of the United States Constitution that limit executive power such as the Opinions Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause.[1][2]

There is disagreement about the strength and scope of the doctrine.[2] In 2008, Steven Calabresi and Christopher Yoo described the unitary executive theory as ensuring "the federal government will execute the law in a consistent manner and in accordance with the president’s wishes." This stands in contrast to other scholarly literature, such as MacKenzie in 2008 and Crouch, Rozell, and Sollenberger in 2020, that stresses the fact that federal employees have to faithfully execute the laws enacted according to the process prescribed in the U.S. Constitution.

Project 2025 envisions widespread changes across the government, particularly economic and social policies and the role of the federal government and its agencies. The plan proposes slashing funding for the Department of Justice (DOJ), dismantling the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), sharply reducing environmental and climate change regulations to favor fossil fuel production, eliminating the Department of Commerce, and ending the independence of federal agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC).[8][9] The blueprint seeks to institute tax cuts,[10] though its writers disagree on the wisdom of protectionism.[11] Project 2025 recommends abolishing the Department of Education, whose programs would be either transferred to other agencies, or terminated.[12][13] Funding for climate research would be cut while the National Institutes of Health (NIH) would be reformed along conservative principles.[14][15] The Project urges government to explicitly reject abortion as health care[16][17] and eliminate the Affordable Care Act's coverage of emergency contraception.[18] The Project seeks to infuse the government with elements of Christianity.[19][20] It proposes criminalizing pornography,[21] removing legal protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity,[21][22] and terminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs,[4][22] as well as affirmative action.[23] More at WIKI

Project 2025, also known as the Presidential Transition Project, is a collection of conservative policy proposals from The Heritage Foundation to reshape the United States federal government in the event of a Republican Party victory in the 2024 presidential election.

Great idea! Let’s make all our decisions based on political dogma, not expertise, facts, rationality, science, and reality.

What could possibly go wrong?

How many Americans have any idea about Project 2025. How many MAGA morons have even heard of it?

Comb the whole thing. I’m sure you can find at least one thing you can have a street screaming session over. Just be sure to get a permit first.

Great idea! Let’s make all our decisions based on political dogma, not expertise, facts, rationality, science, and reality.

What could possibly go wrong? - AW

------------------

However, the deep state being 90% democrat and close to 100% in some agencies is not and can not be any sort of problem, because the democrats are just so damn good at setting their politics aside when executing their official duties.

I get what you are saying though however the other side of this coin is the potential disenfranchisement of voters who elected a president whose policies they more or less wanted to see implemented, eg a secure southern border or Bragg running on a promise to get Trump or transferring about 90% of what the Dept of Education does back to the states.

However, the deep state being 90% democrat and close to 100% in some agencies is not and can not be any sort of problem, because the democrats are just so damn good at setting their politics aside when executing their official duties.

I get what you are saying though however the other side of this coin is the potential disenfranchisement of voters who elected a president whose policies they more or less wanted to see implemented, eg a secure southern border or Bragg running on a promise to get Trump or transferring about 90% of what the Dept of Education does back to the states.

Amazing how all our anti-fascist friends are all in on denying the will of the voters. I wonder why that is?

Do they secretly...just want power regardless of what anybody says?
Do they...just know better than the American people do?

Obviously the answer is yes and yes, although it's not really a secret that the dems just want power and will do anything for it. As we get closer to this election cycle we'll see more smears as they - like petty thieves who work themselves up the crime ladder - escalate their behavior towards the inevitable conclusion: violence.

the deep state

is a made up boogeyman to keep people distracted while your rights and money are stripped away from you.

—Peter

the deep state

is a made up boogeyman to keep people distracted while your rights and money are stripped away from you.


It is anything and anyone who stands in the way of Donnie's fascist agenda.

BHM
However, the deep state being 90% democrat and close to 100% in some agencies is not and can not be any sort of problem, because the democrats are just so damn good at setting their politics aside when executing their official duties.

The Federal workforce is more balanced than you think. from 2022

SNIP Federal employees are slightly more likely to vote for Democrats over Republicans in the upcoming midterm elections, according to a new poll, though they disapprove of their top boss—President Biden—by a slim margin.

For their House members, 46% of federal workers are planning to vote for the Democratic nominee and 35% are planning to vote for the Republican, according to the survey from Market Connections, a research arm of GovExec. Independents favored Democrats by a similar margin, but 41% of them are still undecided. Thirteen percent of Republicans are planning to vote for the other party, while just 6% of Democrats will do the same. The margin tightened for Senate races: just 37% of feds are planning to vote for a Democrat in those races, compared to 33% for a Republican. The rest of the respondents were either unsure or did not have a Senate race in their state. SNIP

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/11/poll-fed...

The bigger worry, Peter, is that they will reclassify large chunks of the civil service as political appointees (in effect). So if a public servant isn't doing what the administration wants, they'll remove them and put someone in that WILL do what they want. It's called "Schedule F".

They also want to eliminate NOAA because it "is the primary source for climate change alarm" (or words to that effect). There's a lot of stuff like that. But the Schedule F reclassification is the horrifying part. We can debate various policy differences (e.g. the Project 2025 wants to outlaw pornography entirely, outlaw abortion entirely, the roles of the FBI and DOJ would be significantly curtailed, etc). I'm OK debating that. But I'm NOT OK with reclassifying much of the civil service so that they can be replaced based on loyalty rather than competence and experience.

THAT is what will end our republic. And it doesn't even have to be Project 2025. If the Dems came up with their version, and it included a Schedule F type of reclassification, that also would end the republic. Having the civil service be "loyal" to whomever the leader is, above doing their jobs, is a recipe of tyranny.

The bigger worry, Peter, is that they will reclassify large chunks of the civil service as political appointees (in effect). So if a public servant isn't doing what the administration wants, they'll remove them and put someone in that WILL do what they want. It's called "Schedule F".

That's what I've heard. But like I said, I'm still reading. This topic deserves more than one-line zingers, so I want to do my research before I get down to some serious posting.

I suspect that the posts from ges on "If Trump Wins" are based on Project 2025 as well.

--Peter

What is the "deep state"?

The whole point of Schedule F is to assign civil servants based on loyalty. Because that isn't happening right now. Presently, they are hired based on merits and experience. If we end that practice, and go to one based on loyalty to a particular leader or ideology, then we will have a "deep state" because it will be ideological.

Right now it's based on rule of law.

Ben Franklin appears to be becoming more relevant today...

But I'm NOT OK with reclassifying much of the civil service so that they can be replaced based on loyalty rather than competence and experience.

This has been fought over since early in our Republic and the end result was a Civil Service based on merit, not cronyism and spoils of political victory. To take that away would send us down a path of deep corruption leading us to something like Putin's gawdawful oligarchical kleptocracy.

Republicans, are you really this stupid?

Fair enough. Reading the entire 900 pages would be daunting. I've read the wiki, and some excerpts. Most of what I've read is policy differences, and we can have honest debates about that. I will have criticisms for them, but that's fine. The Schedule F is the really scary bit. At least IMHO.

Yes, and think ges's posts are based on the Project 2025, also.

BHM
However, the deep state being 90% democrat and close to 100% in some agencies is not and can not be any sort of problem, because the democrats are just so damn good at setting their politics aside when executing their official duties.

The Federal workforce is more balanced than you think. from 2022

SNIP Federal employees are slightly more likely to vote for Democrats over Republicans in the upcoming midterm elections, according to a new poll, though they disapprove of their top boss—President Biden—by a slim margin. - Lambo

----------------

OK, that how they "say" they will vote reflective of the unpopularity of Biden

Now lets look at how they "actually" spend their dollars, reflective of the political leanings in their soul.

The Department of Justice had more than $2.3 million in donations with 87.6% going to Democrats.

https://www.fedsmith.com/2021/02/12/political-dona...

Several agencies have employee donations in the 2020 political cycle that total in the millions. The agency with the largest total donations was the State Department with more than $5.2 million. This agency also had the largest percentage of donations to Republicans (46.14%). The Department of Defense was a close second with more than $5.2 million donated during the same political cycle. 65% of donations from these employees went to Democrats.<?I>

The Department of Justice had more than $2.3 million in donations with 87.6% going to Democrats.

The agency with the highest percentage going to Democrats was the Federal Communications Commission (also, probably the smallest agency depicted and the one with the smallest amount of total donations). 99.29% of donations from people in this agency went to Democrats.
... more at link

"For some reason regular people can understand him but lefties can't."

If true, Mr. Trump should have been smart enough to obtain the services of a "regular people attorney".
Presumably, Trump employs "regular people" to work for him, and forms friendships with "regular people".
It perplexes me that so many "regular people" testified for his prosecution and that a jury of "regular people" made him a convicted felon.

Help me sort these characters; "regular people" or "lefties" ?

Vice President Dick Cheney
Vice President Mike Pence

Senator Jeff Flake
Senator Judd Greg
Senator William Cohen
Senator John Danforth
Senator Mitt Romney
Senator Bob Corker
Senator Dan Coats
Senator Alan Simpson
Senator Rob Portman
Senator John Sununu
Senator Susan Collins
Senator Lisa Murkowski
Senator Todd Young
Senator Jerry Moran
Senator Pat Toomey

Repr. Paul Ryan
Repr. John Boehner
Repr. Liz Cheney
Repr. Adam Kinzinger
Repr. Will Hurd
Repr. Tom DeLay
Repr. Fred Upton

These are all registered Republicans, consistently elected by millions of voters over the past 25 years. (The entire list is yet more exhaustive.) They have all publicly pledged to oppose Mr. Trump ... before he was convicted on criminal charges.

CmoreBmore

Having the civil service be "loyal" to whomever the leader is, above doing their jobs, is a recipe of tyranny. - 1pg

--------------

Them being unaccountable to anyone like tenured college professors is not a panacea either.

They are accountable. They cannot be fired without cause (in general), but they can be fired.

Those people are professionals with no axe to grind. They just do their jobs, regardless of whom is in power. They were hired because they had the necessary qualifications for their jobs, not because they ticked "D" or "R" on an application. And not because they knew someone who knew someone. I went through OPM before entering grad school. The applications are very impersonal, and you didn't get to talk to any real person. You just mailed it in.

They were going to make me a military cartographer, but I opted for grad school instead. Otherwise my next step would have been some security clearances.

Presently, they are hired based on merits and experience. - 1pg

--------------

You are forgetting that DEI is most important. And as much as I detest it, that is what you get with Biden. Thankfully, at least for now, voters can periodically re-orient priorities if they get too far out of hand.

bighairymike: However, the deep state...

Writing or saying "the deep state" instantly tells me you're in the Trump Cult and are completely detached from reality. It's as accurate a looney tunes self-identifier as a MAGA hat.

DEI is a factor, but the first screening of the applications just matches up qualifications with openings. After that, I'm not sure how they balance DEI. But they start with qualified candidates.

BHM: "You are forgetting that DEI is most important"

Man, you certainly have all the MAGA buzzwords down.

Darn them woke commiefascistdemocraps who think anybody but white men should get the good jobs.

"Diversity, equity, and inclusion are organizational frameworks which seek to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people"

They are accountable. They cannot be fired without cause (in general), but they can be fired.
It's very difficult to actually fire a federal employee.

Those people are professionals with no axe to grind.

Oh, really? Russiagate taught us otherwise. Ditto all the FISA games the FBI was playing and their coverup of Hunter's laptop.

Russiagate...the one that resulted in several people going to prison? So that Convicted Felon Trump had to pardon them? That Russiagate? You're not supporting your position very well.

However, the deep state being 90% democrat and close to 100% in some agencies is not and can not be any sort of problem, because the democrats are just so damn good at setting their politics aside when executing their official duties.

I’m not sure I understand. The life of a bureaucrat is at most about 40 years in service, maybe 45 from age 20 to 65. If I go back and look to see how many people could have been appointed during that span it takes me back to roughly 1980.

Since then the Presidents, who appoint the heads of agencies and some number of supervisors below that have been:

Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan
George Bush
Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton
George Bush Jr.
George Bush Jr.
Barack Obama
Barack Obama
Donald Trump
Joe Biden

That’s 6 Republican terms, or 24 years, and 5 Democratic terms, or 20 years. How is it you think that the Democrats have managed to take over the government, when Republicans have been in charge for longer ?

Here is what I know to be true about government bureaucrats. They are mostly just regular people, trying to do a decent job at whatever the task assigned is. I know one who was in the Social Security administration who worked her way up to a decent level before retiring. I have a niece who works at the FDA approving the testing of drugs used in veterinary care. There’s a lady up the street who worked for the IRS who just retired. I know a retired mailman and a scientist who worked at Oak Ridge on alternate fuels, and a guy who was in Homeland Security for a while. Some of those are clearly Republicans. Some are Democrats.

All of them, by most Republican’s definitions are “the deep state”, but in truth I will tell you most are just average people, working for a paycheck so they can pay the mortgage and raise their kids, doing their 9 to 5 and taking the kids to Little League practice.

Honestly, I have never seen such things as Republicans who have an excuse for everything that has ever gone wrong (and ever will go wrong) and find a boogey man to blame it on. Oh, it’s the DEEP STATE. In Louisiana it’s because we don’t have the Ten Commandments on the wall. For some it’s because Hillary is running a secret cabal of pedofiles, or maybe George Soros is corrupting the country with, what, ads for Democrats?

Seriously. Suck it up. You guys stopped meaningful border reform. You guys stopped assault weapon and bump stock regulation of any kind. You guys praise the guy who wants to inject bleach or swallow lightbulbs to stave off a virus, and you’re prey to any nut job who comes down the pike telling you that it’s Democrats stopping you from getting ahead, even as Republicans lard their already wealthy with even more tax cuts and subsidies that the poor could only dream of.

The level of stupidity is astonishing. If it didn’t make me puke, I’d try to figure out a way to cash in on it too, and it wouldn’t be hard. There’s so much of it around and done by clearly malignant and clueless people. The whole thing sickens me.

However, the deep state being 90% democrat and close to 100% in some agencies is not and can not be any sort of problem, because the democrats are just so damn good at setting their politics aside when executing their official duties.

Your attempts at irony are so lame and silly. And, of course, as usual you are wrong. "Deep State" is a bullshit concept designed to keep MAGA fooled and riled up. It is nonsense. And the idea that the Civil Service is the Deep State and a bunch of lefties is bullshit.

I attended training at the Federal Law Enforcement Center in Georgia. At the time there were over 50 agencies training there (I know...WTF?). All the TVs all over the campus were tuned to FOX 'news' all the time. This is your Deep State. Right.

And the FBI is targeted by the right for being too leftie? Are you kidding me? It is now and has always been a very conservative agency filled with conservative agents.

Sheesh. It's not about reality, it is about forcing the rightwing narrative to support their authoritarian ideology.

"Oh, really? Russiagate taught us otherwise. Ditto all the FISA games the FBI was playing and their coverup
of Hunter's laptop."
Dope1

Who are these nameless civil service employees? Some are toxicologists, or customs inspectors, others manage our national forests & parks or protect our food supply. My cousin was such a federal employee. His career included tracking down counterfeit US currency and protecting elected US officials.

It's easy to attack "federal employees", because you don't have to name one - that would carry with it a responsibility for specifics and fact based evidence, something that ambiguity cowardly evades.

Are there ever federal employees, whose actions deserve scrutiny? Sure, and they are accountable with due process. The vast majority of civil service workers are honorable people, whose kids play on teams with your kids. They worship with you and fight traffic just the same as everyone else.

The drivel of this post relies entirely on ambiguity. It's screams scandal and outrage, but it offers nothing in the way of detail, specifics, evidence or context. At best, it's intellectually lazy. I feel generous today, so let's leave it at that.


CmoreBmore

Russiagate...the one that resulted in several people going to prison? So that Convicted Felon Trump had to pardon them? That Russiagate? You're not supporting your position very well.


Russiagate was about finding excuses to surveil people.

liberals used to be about civil rights. Now liberals are about abusing civil rights.

Kinda ironic for a bunch of people who chant "we are anti-fascist". Quite the opposite, but then liberals lie to themselves before they lie to anyone else.

Who are these nameless civil service employees? Some are toxicologists, or customs inspectors, others manage our national forests & parks or protect our food supply. My cousin was such a federal employee. His career included tracking down counterfeit US currency and protecting elected US officials.

It's easy to attack "federal employees", because you don't have to name one - that would carry with it a responsibility for specifics and fact based evidence, something that ambiguity cowardly evades.

Peter Strzok and Karen Page to name 2, Lois Lerner to name another, and I could go on.

So there goes your idiot "cowardly" charge. Try again, and with feeling this time.

The drivel of this post

Lame. You people are seriously boring. Isn't there one, single liberal here with any amount of game, or are you all just a collection of insult spewing automatons?

Russiagate was about finding excuses to surveil people.

Bullshit. That suggests that investigators are casting a net over millions of 'people' just to see what pops up.

Is there a name that applies, a logical fallacy or something for the tactic of burying the subject in a larger group?

The relevant investigations were not about 'finding excuses to surveil people.' The subjects were not just any people. They were people correctly suspected of commiting crimes. The Orange Felon's cult doesn't approve of law and order when Orange Cultists are the suspects.

The relevant investigations were not about 'finding excuses to surveil people.' The subjects were not just any people. They were people correctly suspected of commiting crimes. - sano

------------------

Damn straight, just from a cursory look at Carter Page, it was clear he was an ingenious and well-placed KGB asset who had infiltrated Trump's campaign. The issue was so dangerous that the FBI could not risk even telling Trump there was a possible breech of security in his organization. Since Trump himself was a Putin operative, the FBI had reasonable cause to obscure the true scope of their investigation, even from the FISA court.

"Damn straight, just from a cursory look at .....

Pardon me if I don't accompany you down the yellow brick, er, orange cult conspiracy theory road.

"Liberal" and "fascist" do not go together. They are on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

And the only one in this conversation whom is lying to himself is you. As others in this thread are pointing out to you.

Peter Strzok and Karen Page

Oh, I see. So federal employees are not allowed to oppose the POTUS? They are not allowed to have political opinions? You realize they were fired, yes? (Oh, what did you say? Federal employees can't be fired?) They sued over violations of their 1st Amendment rights (i.e. they were fired for having political opinions, not for cause).

And even if you somehow managed to find a few employees whom crossed some sort of line, generalizing that to the entire civil service is a logical fallacy (and trivially disprovable).

I could also list a few Jan 6 rioters that were public employees, like Paul Lovely. Worked for NSA. Doesn't prove (or even imply) that the civil service at large supported Jan 6, or Trump. But you're making that same kind of leap bringing up Strzok.

"Liberal" and "fascist" do not go together. They are on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

LOL. It's a textbook case of 'flooding the zone with shit."

Is there anybody on Shrew'm of a tender age or temperament that needs to be protected from the language used by the orange felon and his cult?

Didn't some right-wing religious cult just have a group 'bullshit' chant in church? If it's okay with their sky-daddy....

It's easy to attack "federal employees", because you don't have to name one - that would carry with it a responsibility for specifics and fact based evidence, something that ambiguity cowardly evades. CmoreBmore


"Peter Strzok and Karen Page to name 2, Lois Lerner to name another, and I could go on.

So there goes your idiot "cowardly" charge. Try again, and with feeling this time." Dope1




Peter Strzok:
Strzok worked for the FBI over a 22 year career, one that concentrated in the FBI's Counterintell Division. He was a key FBI team member who identified, tracked & monitored the shortwave instructions to 10 Russian spies in the Boston area from the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). These Russian sleeper agents secretly living in the US for years plead guilty in 2010 as unlawful agents of the Russian Federation.

Strzok's standard security clearance interview of Michael Flynn revealed that Flynn lied to the FBI about inappropriate communication he was having with the Russian ambassador in the waning days of the Obama presidency. Flynn was later indicted & criminally convicted of lying to the FBI.

Strzok was part of an ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 American election. He advocated for an FBI search of Trump tax records & financial details to assess what potential existed for kompromat to be used to manipulate a US president for strategic Russian interests. A similar review of Trump's business records was subsequently completed and resulted in a felony conviction in a jury trial.
So the substance of Strzok's concerns were validated. Trump might/would act to cover up wrong doing.


Intrestingly, the actual work product of Strzok has never been repudiated, rather the content of private communications he had with "Karen" (Lisa Page)reveal someone convinced that Trump was not up for the challenge of the US presidency. Considering the personnel turnover blizzard in his cabinet during his four short years, his disastrous mismanagement of the Covid crisis, his naïve acceptance of Putin's denial in Helsinki of election interference over the assessment of the US government's entire intelligence community
and his failure to act decisively to protect Congress in an attack on the US Capitol ... reasonable people would conclude that Strzok was clairvoyant & patriotic.

Look Dope1, I'm not interested in a food fight with you. Your political slant is your right, an American right. I would just ask that you have the decency to avoid demonizing Americans whose only "crime" is not acting with the same political zeal that you exercise. You name drop Lois Lerner without any clear charge that conveniently enables you to act as judge and jury. The facts show that in her professional role with the IRS, she was looking at the appropriateness of tax status claims from both "conservative" & "liberal" groups. She was encouraged and agreed to resign during the Obama administration, but the September 2017 Treasury Department IG concluded that the IRS did not act in a partisan manner. Still, if you have a shred of evidence to the contrary, bring it. If you don't, consider your role in preserving the Shrewd'm culture of civility and substance.

CmoreBmore

P.S. I'm happy to give you the last word. You are an active sign of a tolerant board.

A similar review of Trump's business records was subsequently completed and resulted in a felony conviction in a jury trial.
So the substance of Strzok's concerns were validated. Trump might/would act to cover up wrong doing. - CB

---------------

CB, you were doing well up until this. This seems to equate Strzok's plausible review of Trumps tax records "to assess what potential existed for kompromat" (serious) with the franken-crime (misdemeanor boot strapped into a felony) brought to life by Bragg to fulfill his campaign promise.

Still liked your post anyway.

"Liberal" and "fascist" do not go together. They are on opposite ends of the political spectrum.


Wrong. Totalitarianism is a circle where the extremes on either end wind up in the same place.

A bunch of left wingers chanting things in unison is a seance, not an intervention.

Look Dope1, I'm not interested in a food fight with you.

You threw out the first insult; not me. I find that boring and unoriginal as there are 40 other people here who do the same thing.

No, not wrong. Look it up.

You didn't say "totalitarianism". If you had, that exists at both ends of the spectrum. But the left version is not fascist. It may be a subtle point to some, but there are nuances to fascism (plus a lot of history) that belongs firmly on the right. Not the left.

You didn't say "totalitarianism". If you had, that exists at both ends of the spectrum. But the left version is not fascist. It may be a subtle point to some, but there are nuances to fascism (plus a lot of history) that belongs firmly on the right. Not the left.

We’ve done this dance. Somebody cites a left wing textbook that claims fascism is 100% of the right (and can never mention what a left wing dictatorship is, wonder why) and then I counter with Mussolini figuring out that instead of destroying the state he would co-opt it.

Oh, and then somebody here says, “Nuh uh” and starts name calling. That’s how this always goes.

Totalitarianism is a circle where the extremes on either end wind up in the same place.

Such magnificent, breath-taking ability to be so absolutely and confidently wrong. Look up the horseshoe theory.

There have been left-wing dictatorships, of a sort. The USSR tried to utilize left-wing economic ideas (e.g. communism and socialism). As opposed to the Nazis where capitalism was still in vogue, and not everything was owned by the state.

You just don't like the label "fascist", and want to try to pin that on the left. Well, you can't. It's an extreme right-wing ideology. Extreme left-wing ideology may involve totalitarianism in some cases, but they aren't fascist. Pretty much by definition. (That doesn't make the authoritarianism any less odious, but it's not fascist.)

There have been left-wing dictatorships, of a sort. The USSR tried to utilize left-wing economic ideas (e.g. communism and socialism). As opposed to the Nazis where capitalism was still in vogue, and not everything was owned by the state.

You think if Hitler didn’t want a company around it would still be in business? There were a lot of Jewish business owners who’d like a word with you about that.

You just don't like the label "fascist", and want to try to pin that on the left

The left use the tactics of the fascist: Orwellian lies and winks/nods at political violence. I’m sorry that offends you, but you really should take a good hard look at what you say you support.

It doesn't offend me. I have taken a good hard look. I used to be Republican. For over 20 years. And I took a good hard look, and I left the Party. Registered as "independent". Lately the Reps have forced me to change again to "D" because of their policies and antics.

I look very closely. You're seeing the world upside down. If anyone is Orwellian, it is the right-wing.

Right. That explains the avalanche of gaslighting coming out of the Biden administration.

Yeah…it’s not the Republicans doing the Orwell thing.

"The left use the tactics of the fascist: Orwellian lies and winks/nods at political violence" - Dope

As usual Dope has it completely backwards.

There is a reason that judges and prosecutors have worked to put gag orders on Trump. It is because there is ample evidence that has shown when Trump attacks jurors, witnesses, law enforcement, or innocent court personnel, verbally, his cult follows through and threatens the targets with violence.

It takes a whole lot of willful ignorance to ignore all of that though.

Dope: Yeah…it’s not the Republicans doing the Orwell thing.

Don's dementia appears to be contagious.

Alternative facts ring a bell?

Listen to KellyAnn Conjob try to spin her way out of answering the question.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSrEEDQgFc8

"Alternative facts ring a bell?"

Yes! Dishonest Don lied a total of 30,573 times over his 4 year presidency. Averaging about 21 erroneous claims a day. This is a Documented fact. Trump is a PROVEN LIAR.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/24...

And for the "religious" folks,

The 9th Commandment says,

"You shall not bear false witness."

Explanation: This commandment forbids bribery and forgery and even the least suggestion contrary to truth. It forbids libel, slander, and backbiting, and calls for the truth and nothing but the truth.

In Revelation 22:15, we are told that "whoever loves and practices a lie" will be outside the gates of the New Jerusalem.

https://www.bibleinfo.com/en/topics/ten-commandmen...

Russiagate was about finding excuses to surveil people.

You're confused, or most likely deliberately overstating to get a response - but that was the Patriot Act enacted after 9-11. There was a discussion about whether to go after the "thin thread" or use a vacuum cleaner and just suck everything up. I have yet to see a MAGA questioning the Patriot Act - but they get upset about the FISA warrants. We could have told you that any process that isn't reviewed breaks down and get very sloppy.

No Russiagate wasn't a vacuum, it was narrowly tailored to just those with a good probability of yielding findings, even narrower than the "thin thread" discussion from the Patriot Act.

You're confused, or most likely deliberately overstating to get a response - but that was the Patriot Act enacted after 9-11.

No, you have a selectively poor memory. You forget that all the cooked-up FISA warrants were used to go after Carter Page..or really, he was the excuse, they then vacuumed up whatever they wanted on anyone connected with it.

It’s amusing you say no MAGA complains about the Patriot Act. Funny. It was passed by a Republican administration to fight terrorists.

liberals complained about it then. Now that democrat administrations use it to spy on Republicans, you’re all for it.

But you guys are anti-fascist, right? Thanks for playing.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.