Derek Hunter: I Used to be Skeptical of the Existence of a "Deep State." I'm All Out of Skepticism Now.
Extraordinary claims require extraodinary proofs.We now have extraordinary proofs.
The Deep State Is Real, And Much Bigger Than You KnowI used to be a doubter who would cringe, just a little, at any mention of "the deep state." I admit it, it all seemed a little far-fetched to me that there was this cabal of careerists conspiring from within the government to harm President Donald Trump when I first heard it. I never doubted there were individuals doing it, but a wide net of conspirators seemed like something out of a bad movie more than anything that could actually happen in the United States.
I was wrong, very wrong, the deep state is real. But there is much more than just this small group of powerful people working toward a common goal, there is an entire infrastructure created by the left not only to destroy Trump, but to indoctrinate unsuspecting Americans into their agenda.
As the curtain is pulled back on the Obama administration's unprecedented efforts to spy on the Trump campaign, there is a good possibility many of the perpetrators could face criminal charges, or at least should. But it's important to understand that liberals didn’t just create this out of the blue in 2016, it's the culmination of everything they've worked toward for decades.
The infrastructure they used to spy on the Trump campaign was something inherently governmental, simply planting a mole in the campaign couldn't tap phones or access emails. But the ability to cover up that fact requires a level of media complicity that takes time to create.
Getting the desired message out is only part of the battle, it has to be believed by a significant percentage of the public for it to really matter. Conditioning the public to be receptive to that message, without questioning how it came about or why they should care required subtle indoctrination over a lifetime.
As it stands, liberals have that infrastructure in place, they had that support system ready to go. And, not to get all Scooby-Doo on you, they would've gotten away with it were it not for the existence of conservative media.
....
None of this is by accident, and it didn’t start on November 8, 2016, it just sprang into action. Nearly every aspect of life, to one degree or another, has been or is ready to be weaponized against anyone who dares to stand up to the liberal agenda. And none have stood up to it in a more threatening way than Donald Trump.
But the clock is ticking, the fuse is burning down low.
Derek's got a book coming out called Outrage, Inc.: How the Liberal Mob Ruined Science, Journalism, and Hollywood, available June 19th. I just got an advanced copy and will be reading it soon.
Andrew C. McCarthy has also seen the light on the Deep State. Months and months ago, he was largely taking the line that the Armed Wing of the Democratic Party was just a bunch of great ethical heroes who should be trusted in their judgment.
Since then, he has been a steadfast critic of Mueller and the Russia Narrative. He constantly points out that the special counsel law requires the factual statement of an actual crime to be investigated, which Rosenstein and Mueller have completely ignored, instead basing their authority -- lawlessly -- on the premise of a counterintelligence investigation.
But the Special Counsel law says that a crime must be named. You can't evade that requirement by just saying "It's a counterintelligence operation." A Special Counsel cannot be appointed to conduct such an investigation.
Chuck Grassley has picked up on that, and is now demanding that Wray and Rosenstein explain what part of what law they rely on for the proposition that a Special Counsel can be appointed in absence of a named crime:
he regulations authorizing the appointment of a special counsel state that the Attorney General (or Acting Attorney General) may appoint a special counsel "when he or she determinations that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted." The Appointment Order proscribes the Special Counsel's jurisdiction by citing specifically "the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017." In his March 20 testimony, former Director Comey referred to "the investigation" as a counterintelligence investigation -- not a criminal investigation.Please explain which portion of which regulation authorizes the appointment of a Special Counsel to conduct a counterintelligence investigation.
That letter also has some other "bombshells" in it, btw:
A new letter from Grassley to Roseinstein seems to have a number of bombshells in it. For starters: did Rosenstein secretly (and improperly) grant to Mueller wide-ranging spy powers that belong only to the Attorney General? judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…
McCarthy also wrote a good column recently comparing the kids-glove treatment of Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, who obviously lied to the FBI -- Hillary claiming she didn't know what (C)meant in a classified report (hint: It stands for "confidential"), and Cheryl Mills claiming she didn't know about Hillary's secret server, despite ample evidence that she did, compared to the Squeeze Their Family Members and Threaten Them With Jail pressure put on former Trump associates.
You can either read that, and/or read Hot Air's John Sexton's take on it.
More:
Weird: FBI spied on Trump campaign.
Weirder: Alleged FBI spy endorsed Hillary.
Weirdest: He endorsed her in an exclusive interview *w/ state-owned Russian media.*
2018: The alleged campaign spy then tried to become an internal Trump admin spy.sputniknews.com/politics/20161…
The reference to the "spy" seeking a job in the Trump campaign is from Axios.
No comments:
Post a Comment