Raid on Trump!

W.J. Astore

So the FBI has raided Donald Trump’s compound in Mar-a-Lago, where Trump allegedly had classified material squirreled away. Apparently, Trump is being hounded under the Espionage Act passed by Woodrow Wilson during World War I more than a century ago.

Was Trump holding classified material? Was he being careless with this information, perhaps to the extent of endangering national security? I doubt that very much. A few boxes of files (mis)appropriated by Trump, perhaps in his usual careless manner, hardly pose a threat to America’s existence.

I’m much more concerned about the heavy-handed use of the Espionage Act against a former president, even a president I think was a chimp, and the precedent it sets for the future. Are we now going to see the FBI and other law enforcement agencies sent against political opponents in openly partisan attacks? If the Biden Justice Department can openly sic the FBI on the previous president, and Biden’s most likely challenger in 2024, then shouldn’t we expect Trump or some future Republican do the same to Biden? Or Kamala Harris? And on and on?

I can’t help but think this raid on Trump’s home will only help Trump in 2024. This only seems to confirm what Trump always says: that the Deep State is after him, and that only he can take it on, because only he is on your side against big government and its many abuses of power.

Ironically, the Espionage Act is typically used against honorable whistleblowers. People like Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, Daniel Hale, and Julian Assange. To think that Donald Trump’s name might be linked to these principled people, however tangentially, beggars belief. Trump’s name shouldn’t be mentioned in the same galactic breath as these truth-tellers, but now it can be, impossible as that seemed a few days ago.

I don’t get it. Trump is a nincompoop who shouldn’t have been president, but this kind of politically motivated raid can only generate sympathy for him among so many people who are tired of a government that pays virtually no attention to their real needs and real security.

It’s safe to say that if Trump runs in 2024, he almost certainly will win (again), because of the stupidity of establishment Democrats who seem to think the only way they can beat him is to turn him into a pariah. Their actions, however, are much more likely turn him into a martyr. And few people deserve that status less than con-man Trump.

173 thoughts on “Raid on Trump!

  1. For those who don’t subscribe to Matt Taibbi on Substack, he posted an excellent take on this sloppy, silly, solipsistic SNAFU: The Espionage Act Gets An Instant Makeover – A law reviled by liberalism ten minutes ago is now Savior to All. I’ll just quote the last several paragraphs:

    [begin quote]
    . . . The case against the onetime liberal hero Julian Assange boils down to one half-assed charge of allegedly agreeing to help (but never following through) source Chelsea Manning crack a hash to protect her identity, wrapped around 17 insane charges under the Espionage Act. I wrote at the time his indictment was “the work of attorneys who probably thought the Sedition Act was good law.” A list of the charges:

    Count 1: Conspiracy to Receive National Defense Information. Counts 2-4: Obtaining National Defense Information. Counts 5-8: Obtaining National Defense Information. And so on. The indictment is an insane tautology. It charges Assange with conspiracy to obtain secrets for the purpose of obtaining them. It lists the following “offense”:

    “To obtain documents, writings, and notes connected with the national defense, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense…”</i>

    The Espionage Act is an embarrassment that would make Marcos or Suharto squeamish, but it’s of course not completely impossible there’s an actual espionage offense in Trump’s case somewhere (just as obviously, no evidence of this has been produced). Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were tried under the Act for giving bomb secrets to the Soviets, as Michael Beschloss and Michael Hayden just helpfully reminded us. However, in modern times, the Espionage Act is more associated with talking to the Times, ABC, The Guardian and The Intercept than with actual spying. The defendants are more often conscience-stricken heroes like Hale than villains.

    That’s the problem with this law. “Information relating to the national defense” can essentially be anything the government decides, and they can put you in jail a long time for “mishandling” it, which in Assange’s case included merely having it. Trump or no Trump, if you think that’s okay, you’re an asshole. It’s totally un-American, which is why Robert Reich shouldn’t be surprised if Donald Trump acts proud of being investigated for it. This law is more infamous than he is, and everyone but a handful of blue checks can see it.
    [end quote]

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank You. Saved me from posting it myself. This should be required reading for every American who gives a shit about the future of her or his country.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. If what trump had squirreled away was indeed SCI (code word) etc material then I commend the DOJ and FBI for doing their job. Having worked with this kind of highly sensitive material for a good portion of my Air Force career I know the great lengths taken to safeguard it. Trumps should have returned EVERYTHING to the National Archives as required by law upon leaving office. He could have then requested whatever he wanted after the doc were reviewed and properly declassified if possible just as former President Obama did.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I also worked around Nuclear Weapons Systems as a Sky-Cop 73-77 SAC, and know firsthand the lengths we took to provide Security for these Systems. A Terrorist Organization being Number 1 to guard against stealing one…Then when I returned to Civilian life before I became a Professional City Firefighter I worked a short time for a Company that made the LAWS Rocket/ Anti-Tank weapon in Massachusetts. Well long story short one day a Worker tried to take one home with him for whatever reasons, and before you could say “Jack Robinson” a FBI contingent descended on him and his place of Residence. Never heard about him again needless to say…!


          1. I don’t get it PHILIP and FDIMIKE. Why are we getting our panties all in a knot when all ex presidents are guarded 24/7 by a secret service detail. That’s right isn’t it? How could anybody possibly get a classified document or SCI materials from Trumps home under these circumstances?


            1. Much fuss about something that mostly means nothing, depends tho. if he had Malfeasance on his mind as in selling them Secrets, or using them to Frame, or Plant on say your Enemy then Bribe, Defame, or Destroy them… i.m.h.o.!


            2. The point of the matter is simply this. SCI (code word) Restricted & Formerly restricted Data etc material is not authorized to be removed from its SECURE storage for any other reason but to work with it. This kind of material is what’s known as “Compartmented” so that only certain individuals with the correct Code Word access will have access to it. It cannot be just stored wherever one pleases. You sign it out to work with it and then sign it back into secure storage when finished.

              Liked by 1 person

        2. One point here. Too much is classified by our government, and often the motive isn’t national security. It’s not SCI, it’s CYA, as in cover your ass.


          1. That’s correct Bill. A 100% democratic government by the people for the people has NOTHING to hide from the people. Only corrupt government’s need to cover their ass.

            The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) published annually by the non-governmental organization Transparency International is an index which ranks countries by their perceived levels of public sector corruption.

            Sadly the USA is down in 27th in their ranking. Down there with those bastions of democracy, Qatar and Barbados. In 2020 New Zealand was the least corrupt country. Dropping to 2nd after Denmark this year.

            (Not surprisingly in the exceptional USA, US lawyers have advised US businesses against using the CPI when attempting to measure the risk of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations in different nations. The Minnesota Journal of International Law for instance wrote that since the CPI may be subject to perceptual biases it should not be considered by lawyers to be a measure of actual national corruption risk! They would say that wouldn’t they?)


            1. It will be interesting to see where Russia, Ukraine, China, Taiwan, England, France, Germany, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, North and South Korea, Australia, Vietnam, and Japan come in on that list.


              1. Russia 136, Ukraine 122, China 66, Taiwan 25, England 11, France 22, Germany 10, Turkey 96, Israel 36, Saudi Arabia ?, North Korea 182, South Korea 32, Australia 18, Vietnam 87, and Japan 18


                1. Ahh, Thanks. Interesting numbers. i look forward to learning how they arrived at them from their website.


          2. On November 1, 2013, from his place of then-temporary political asylum in Moscow, Edward Snowden issued “A Manifesto For Truth” that went like this:

            “In a very short time, the world has learned much about unaccountable secret agencies and about sometimes illegal surveillance programs. Sometimes the agencies even deliberately try to hide their surveillance from high officials and the public. While the NSA and GCHQ seem to be the worst offenders – this is what the currently available documents suggest – WE MUST NOT FORGET THAT MASS SURVEILLANCE IS A GLOBAL PROBLEM IN NEED OF GLOBAL SOLUTIONS.

            “Such programs are not only a threat to privacy, they also threaten freedom of speech and open societies. The existence of spy technology should not determine policy. We have a moral duty to ensure that our laws and values limit monitoring programs and protect human rights.

            “Society can only understand and control these problems through an open, unbiased and informed debate. At first, some governments feeling embarrassed by the revelations of mass surveillance initiated an unprecedented campaign of persecution to suppress this debate. They intimidated journalists and criminalized publishing the truth. AT THIS POINT, THE PUBLIC WAS NOT YET ABLE TO EVALUATE THE BENEFITS OF THE REVELATIONS. THEY RELIED ON THEIR GOVERNMENTS TO DECIDE CORRECTLY.

            “TODAY WE KNOW THAT THIS WAS A MISTAKE AND THAT SUCH ACTION DOES NOT SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. The debate which they wanted to prevent will now take place in countries around the world. And instead of doing harm, the societal benefits of this new public knowledge is now clear, since reforms are now proposed in the form of increased oversight and new legislation.




          3. As in “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”. We’re not in Kansas anymore. We’re in Washington DC. “Dysfunctional City”?


  2. The Deep State is afraid that if Trump is re-elected he might pull us out of NATO. Which he might. So they’re falling back on their LCS tools. Lie, Cheat, and Steal.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Can You, Alex, name one part of the “Deep State” ~

      the military-industrial-congressional complex, the banking-finance-printing press web, the techno-infotainment matrix, the petro-food-guns-n-drugs cartels, the pharmo-medico-insurance-legal cabals, and the surveillance-secrecy-security-safety panopticon that owns and operates and commands and controls the elected politicians and career civilian and military bureaucrats at center stage in America’s reality-tv extravaganza; and America’s $ 1 = 1 Vote system of government and governance that gets, puts, and keeps them there ~

      can You name even ONE part of that Deep State that wasn’t better off after the reign of POTUS Maxximmuss XLV than it was after the reign of Obomber?

      And can You name one part of that Deep State that isn’t doing even better today under the reign of Comatose Joe?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. One thing Trump did that I admired was to order federal agencies to delete two rules for every additional rule they made. I’m sure they didn’t like that, as rule-making is what agencies love to do. It’s their raison d’etre so to speak. Another hundred years of Trump management and we might have gotten back to some semblance of self-rule as opposed to rule by bureaucrats. But it was not to be and Biden quickly made up for it. And more. Unfortunately.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. Oddly enough, Russia also wants the US to pull out of NATO. And nobody else does. Coincidence? Oh that reek of toady smell is starting to creep into my nostrils.


        1. Again I must apologize, the Trumpist madness has severely depleted my store of patience with irrational and fundamentally destructive assertions. As I mentioned in an earlier post, when the bullets start flying the middle ground disappears… I did NOT write that rule.


  3. You failed entirely to establish the basis for your “doubt” beyond a blanket condemnation. Frankly, it looks like the government has fallen all over itself to avoid the appearance of partisanship. Yet here we are. Do you have ANY evidence to support the charge that this is partisan except that the perp is from the other party? Does that mean the Democratic administrations can only accuse Democrats and vice-versa?

    And this continuously repeated “Deep State is after Trump” schtick is simply not credible. In what sense did Trump threaten the Deep State? Oh this should be good, I can hardly wait.

    One one hand, the risk, as you indicated, is “Are we now going to see the FBI and other law enforcement agencies sent against political opponents in openly partisan attacks? ” Where have YOU been for the last 75 years? This risk has been, is, and will probably always exist. On the other hand, we have the risk that this mutant hybrid of P.T. Barnum and Mussolini will sell the Republic down the river for a bag of silver shekels, a Republic he has already done a fabulous job of destabilizing by following the Russian playbook. You know the Russian playbook, I presume. Whether he read it or not is irrelevant.

    Quit your whining. In any other country and time, that jackass would have long ago been stood against a wall with a blindfold on.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. (1) How could Trump or anyone else, follow a “playbook” (assuming one exists) which they had never read, either in the original Russian or in translation?

      (2) What have you got against Russians, either the people or their government? What have they done to America other than ferry our astronauts to and from the International Space Station for a decade during which time our own country couldn’t manufacture and operate the relevant technology?

      (3) I consider Donald Trump a narcissistic con-man and fraud (bankrupt casino, defrauded investors, risible TV game show host, Trump University, etc.) but he did narrowly defeat the snake-haired Medusa run against him by the Democratic Party in 2016 whose “Pied Piper” strategy was to build up Donald Trump as the weakest possible opponent only to watch him lead their own “NAFTA Rust Belt” electoral “children” out of the party and into the opposition camp.

      (4) Blaming Russia or its political leadership for anything to do with the United States and its manifest, self-inflicted miseries constitutes the weakest possible argument that anyone could make in an informed discussion. You might want to try harder.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. A rather myopic perspective. But you could ask the CIA if Russia has a playbook. Mueller determined that Fat Donnie was not following it illegally. But he sure was, and still is, singing in harmony with it.


        1. So when and where did YOU see that “Russian Playbook,” Reed, that enables You to tell us so confidently that Trump is still “singing in harmony with it”?

          You speak with the certainty and air of authority of somebody who has actually seen and read it himself.

          Or is that another one of Your “dumb questions” You don’t answer?


    2. So you think the raid was justified and non-partisan?

      Trump is a potential threat to the deep state because he’s unpredictable and not as beholden to them as establishment figures in both parties.

      Advocating the execution of the man is beyond the pale. Yes, I know, you merely insinuated “any other” country in “any other” time, but Trump isn’t the big problem here. It’s the abandonment of ordinary people by Congress and corporate overlords that drives desperate people into the arms of Trump. As a con man, he does have a lot of practice, but in some sense people have to be desperate or otherwise open to be conned.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Like i asked Alex, Bill: Which part of the Deep State was not better off after Trump than it was after Obama? And which part of it is not even better off now under Biden?

        Trump is no threat to the Deep State. He is as owned, operated, scripted, and controlled as every other elected politician in or enroute to Swampland.

        If the Deep State didn’t want Trump to be on the scene, he would not be here. And would never have been.

        That’s why You are absolutely correct when You say that “Trump isn’t the big problem here.” Trump, Trumpatismo, and Trumpatistas [now termed “MAGAts”] are not the Disease, but the Signs and Symptoms of that Disease.

        And the Road to Trump and what has followed and will follow has been in the makings for quite some time.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Are you noticing what’s happening. The never-ending Jan 6 committee? Two impeachments? The raid on Trump’s home? If that isn’t evidence of the Deep State resisting then I don’t know what is.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Which part of the Deep State is driving all that? Other than the techno-infotainment matrix at all ends of the spectrum ~ Left to Right ~ who else has benefited? More importantly, has any other sector of the Deep State been negatively impacted by any of that?


            1. Jeff my theory is that these examples are not so much of the Deep State resisting en masse – but examples of the Democratic Party bosses watching too much of Jimmy Dore and realizing that Jimmy, and more and more Americans, have it right about their POS Party’s malfeasance. They know their only chance is to make Trump and the GOP look worse – if that is possible!


    3. i agree completely that not only is Trump not a threat to the Deep State, but further, that he has been and still is one of its most effective agents to advance its agenda.

      And one could go back a lot further than just 75 years to see federal law enforcement agencies deployed against the political and/or economic enemies of those holding political and/or economic power at the time. That has always been a major function of America’s federal government.

      But PT-Benito had a lot of help from the folks at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue and in the media to bring about his “destabilizing” of America.

      So do You have any factual, evidence-based details on this so-called “Russian playbook” that Trump was allegedly following, even if he doesn’t know how to read?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I’m not saying Trump was a big threat to the deep state; just that he was unpredictable compared to tools like Clinton, Biden, Harris, and the like. The moneymakers and powerbrokers crave predictability, and they also like to put a happy face on their activities. Biden is the happy face. Trump? Not so happy. But Trump wasn’t serious about making any real changes, so the deep state persevered as it always does.

        Anyone who promises real change gets eliminated before they can run and win.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Democrat politicians are more predictable. Join the government. Grow the government. Get rich. Grow the government some more. Get really rich. Retire. Get really really rich. Or you can do a Ted Kennedy and die while you have political power and count on the news media to worship at your grave for a week or two. And then you’ll be consigned to the history books as a great man who grew the government.


        2. i’m curious, Bill. Do You include Carter, Reagan, Bushes I and II, and Obama among the “predictables”?

          But i’m glad that we agree that anybody who proposes real change declares war on the Deep State, and must be prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

          i’m trying to remember the last time this nation had somebody proposing “real change” to the relationship between the Deep State and America’s system of government, thus governance, and thus politics.

          i’m also trying to remember the last time anybody in national politics even talked about the Deep State without being dismissed as a conspiracy theorist along the lines of Joe McCarthy, the John Birch Society, and that crowd.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Of the men on your list, Jeff, I’d rate Carter as a partial exception. His cancellation of the B-1 bomber was a bold move. (Of course, Reagan uncanceled it and we got 100 of these flawed planes at a cost of $280 billion, if memory serves.)

            All those others were the predictables.


  4. If Trump runs and wins in 2024, Bill, that will not be due to the stupidity of “establishment Democrats,” but the stupidity of the American People who will no doubt be left once again with the same kind of choices they had in 2016 and 2020: first, The Donald or The Hillary; and then POTUS Maxximmuss XLV or Comatose Joe.

    And even if Trump doesn’t run in 2024, it is virtually guaranteed that the American People will once again have no real Choice, or Alternative to, and Antidote for what our Ruling Elites will be jamming down our throats and up our butts.

    But talk about Trump and 2024 is a bit premature in that it assumes that there will in fact be a national election that year. Which assumes, in turn, that there will be a midterm election this year. Or, even if there is, that America will not be in a state of literal ~ if not official ~ Civil War two years from today.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. To the rest of the World American politics is just like some never-ending big dumb silly sitcom. With screen writers sitting around coming up with the next days preposterous plot! The more outlandish the better! A huge soap opera of unmitigated bovine excrement! That Americans take it seriously has always had the rest of the World shaking there heads in wonderment.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Not to worry. I shake my head in wonderment as well. Although it does sound like some countries in Europe for instance could give us a run for our money. Perhaps that’s just the nature of democracy.


        1. Well we all get a vote, which is sort of the definition of democracy. Every two years I get to connect some lines on a piece of paper. I have a fair amount of control over my daily life. And I can deal with merchants who can buy and sell things to me (free-market capitalism, for which I am thankful). But too much, in my opinion, is controlled by a faceless bureaucracy, which tries to expand its authority at every turn. This is not good.


          1. Is that “faceless bureaucracy” comprised strictly of agencies of the federal government?

            Or does it include all the rest of the various sectors of the Deep State who own and operate the bureaucrats running that bureaucracy via the elected politicians the Deep State also owns, operates, and controls?


            1. We look at things differently. You I think tend to blame the big corporations and think they control the government. But it’s the government that makes the rules. Are you familiar with the Federal Register? It contains rule-making by the government. You’ll never see, for instance, Lockheed-Martin making rules in the Federal Register. You will see the EPA though. Lockheed-Martin didn’t put sanctions on Russia. That was the Treasury Department, as ordered by the President. Russian sanctions resulted in big U.S. businesses losing hundreds of billions writing off their previous deals with Russian companies. Or consider the 87,000 new IRS agents in the recent bill Congress passed. No business wanted that. That’s the government seeking to grow itself. That’s the problem.


              1. Of course You won’t see Lockheed-Martin [or Exxon, or Bank of America, or Goldman Sachs, or anybody from any other industry or business sector] making rules in the Federal Register, Alex.

                That’s what all those elected politicians on all those corporate payrolls [sorry, Contribution Lists] ~ the folks who control all those bureaucrats ~ do in order to get and stay on the Contributions Lists. And they all have lobbyists who keep very close eyes on those politicians to ensure that an adequate Return On Investment is forthcoming.

                Hell, the folks in the banking/finance/investment sector don’t even need those bought and paid for politicians. That’s what they have the Federal Reserve System for, the Fourth branch of the American government.

                And i’m sure that somebody in Washington is already working on how to make the American taxpayer pay for all those written off deals with Russians. You can rest assured that those firms with sufficient stroke in Swampland will do just fine.

                Plus, how else is the IRS going to raise more money to meet ever greater federal expenditures than by hiring more agents and doing more audits, especially on what’s left of what used to be called the “Middle Class”?


                1. Jeff, I always think of the Deep State as being made up of people who were not democratically elected. A deep state of governance is one made up of unauthorized networks of power operating independently of a state’s political leadership in pursuit of their own agenda and goals. If you will, a shadow government seeking to manipulate the public state.

                  For me during Trump’s presidency , the Deep State described a “permanent government” of entrenched career bureaucrats acting in accordance with the unspoken mandates of their agencies, often in conflict with the Trumps administration. They went behind his back and did things contrary to what Trump directed them to do. And he was too weak to stand up to them. ” I think we should get out of Afghanistan”. “Oh no you don’t!” “You’re right, that wasn’t a good idea”. Beneath all the bluster Trump was not a powerful leader with the courage of his convictions.

                  The intent of a Deep State is continuity of the status quo state. Job security for civil servants, enhanced power and authority of unelected people, and the pursuit of ideological objectives is their modus operandi. It operates in opposition to the agenda of the people, and their elected politicians, by obstructing, resisting, and subverting their policies and directives. Why Trump was unable to carry out a lot of the good ideas he ran on during his campaign. Getting the US out of NATO for example. Which was a great idea. Except the MIC did not agree.

                  Have you ever watched the British satirical TV Comedy “Yes Prime Minister”? Tony Blair said: “You cannot underestimate how much they (the Civil Service) believe it’s their job to actually run the country and to resist the changes put forward by people they dismiss as ‘here today, gone tomorrow’ politicians. They genuinely see themselves as the true guardians of the national interest, and think that their job is simply to wear you down and wait you out.” The show brilliantly shows the UK Deep State in action. And what we see in the UK, is doubly strong in the US.


                2. Thank You, Dennis, for the link to “Yes, Minister/Yes. Prime Minister.” i just watched a couple of segments and will definitely watch some full episodes, if not all three seasons. What little i saw was absolutely brilliant and delightful.

                  But to be perfectly blunt: Given the bullshit Tony Blair spouted about the “Downing Street Memo” and then the “Liberation of Iraq” in 2003, i have little interest in anything that he has to say about anything pertaining to government. Or anything else, for that matter. Just another War Criminal along with Bush the Lesser, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, and all the rest of those scumbags.

                  But i look forward to meeting and getting to know Minister (later, Prime Minister) Jim Hacker and his Band of Merry Pranksters. Thanks again. ~ jeff


                3. Well, Dennis, at least we agree on one thing: That the Deep State is unelected and that it consists of networks of power.

                  But it and its networks do not operate “independently of a state’s political leadership.” The only way it can pursue its agenda and goals is directly thru that political leadership; which it very successfully owns, operates, and controls. And then and thus ~ thru those owned and operated politicians ~ does it control all those “entrenched bureaucrats” [civilian and military].

                  And what was different about how the Deep State dealt with Trump than how it has always dealt with every other politician on its payroll?

                  And what were all those “good ideas” he ran his campaign on that didn’t get carried out because of the Deep State?

                  He certainly got his Tax Breaks. He pulled the US out of the Paris Accords. What other of his “good ideas” got sabotaged by the DS?

                  And can You cite some specific examples of where and when those entrenched bureaucrats “went behind his back,” and did something contrary to his orders?

                  And speaking of Afghanistan, just remember that it was Trump who signed the deal with the Taliban ending our military war there, not Biden. Apparently, it was a good enough idea for everybody with skin in the game ~ entrenched career bureaucrats and owned and operated elected politicians alike. Especially since they get to keep their economic war going.

                  But we do agree on something else; at least in parts.

                  And that is the intent of the Deep State: ie, for the continuity of the status quo of government and its politicians, bureaucrats, and judges, its wholly-owned and -operated subsidiary “public” sector. Either that, or else to get more power into the hands of those politicians, bureaucrats, and judges.

                  And finally, You declare that the Deep State “operates in opposition to the agenda of the people, and their elected politicians, by obstructing, resisting, and subverting their policies and directives.”

                  Can You clarify exactly what You mean by “the agenda of the people,” and exactly which “people,” their agenda, and their elected politicians You are referring to?


                4. @JG MOEBUS,
                  Jeff, in my naivety I like to think the “the agenda of the people,” is an anti-war agenda. Especially now after all these many years of the US’s costly illegal wars of aggression against countries that never attacked the US. And the acres of white crosses in military grave yards one sees in travelling the US.

                  And I think one sure way sure to enforce this agenda would be to bring back the draft. Something I seldom ever see discussed on this site by commenters on the Lt. Col writings. In fact I don’t think you have ever posted your opinion on this issue Jeff.


                5. The “agenda” of the American people is an “anti-war agenda”?

                  Since when? When’s the last time the American people DEMANDED an end to any ~ let alone All ~ of America’s Wars and the dismantling of the MICC and the Surveillance/Secrecy/Security Panopticon?

                  And ~ except for the individuals and their families, loved ones, colleagues, and compeers who have fought and been killed or physically or psychologically maimed in all those “costly illegal wars of aggression” ~ the American people have not suffered one single bit since 9/11 and the launch of The Forever War.

                  The $7-8 TRILLION price tag for that War hasn’t cost current American taxpayers a dime; it’s all been put on Uncle Sam’s credit card for future taxpayers to have to confront and deal with.

                  And very few of those “acres of crosses” hold the bodies of American fatalities from that Forever War.

                  As far as bringing back the Draft, i view forcing individuals into a situation in which they will be required to fight, kill, and maim ~ and/or be killed or maimed ~ to be simply another form of Involuntary Servitude, aka Slavery. Exactly like i view forcing a woman to carry to full term a fetus she does not want to be Involuntary Servitude/Slavery.

                  If Slavery is the only way a nation can find individuals with the necessary qualities in sufficient quantities to serve in and as that nation’s “National Defense,” and if the People of that Nation go along with it, then those People will get the wars that the individuals, organizations, and institutions who own and operate their government inflict upon them.

                  And for those not thrown into Slavery, it will be the “Patriotic Duty” of every Citizen to “Support Our Troops” so that more costly, illegal wars of aggression can be waged.


                6. The way I’ve heard it expressed is that in the U.S. 18th century ideas of government came from Britain, with its emphasis on Parliament. 19th ideas came from Germany, with its emphasis on bureaucracy.


                7. I wonder, Alex. I think of Germany in terms of efficiency and precision, but perhaps I’ve seen too many BMW ads. 🙂

                  I think we developed the bureaucracy on our own. Let’s not blame Germany for our insanity.


                8. Back in the 70’s my research advisor had a Porsche. He loved it but did say it was expensive to work on. Several hundred for a front end alignment as I recall. Although I guess if you own a Porsche you can afford to get it worked on.


              2. Alex, I’ve asked you more than once to tell me why there are federal regulatory agencies and you have remained silent. So again I ask, why do we have the FCC, FAA, SEC, EPA, ICC, etc.?


              3. “The government is the problem”, a phrase made famous by Ronald Reagan. Well, Reagan was governor of California and President of the USA, meaning, Reagan WAS the government. Ergo, Reagan was the problem.


                1. REED, as you know the USA is not an autocratic monarchy were the King or Queen has absolute power.

                  The founding fathers wanted a strong and fair federal government. But they also wanted to protect individual freedoms and prevent the U.S. government from abusing its power. They believed they could do this by having three branches of government: the executive, the legislative and the judicial. This separation of powers is described in the first three articles of the U.S. Constitution.

                  What has proved troublesome over the years is that the president’s powers aren’t precisely spelled out in the Constitution. Neither executive orders nor signing statements come from the Constitution’s text. Executive orders were a power derived from the implied ‘executive power,’ ‘commander in chief,’ and ‘faithfully execute’ language of Article II, along with the power to command the opinions of executive officers, which led Washington to create the cabinet.”

                  And then we have Signing Statements. Many scholars do not believe that they are constitutional precisely because they violate the separation of powers in that they take on the legislative power by determining the letter of the law when ‘faithful execution’ merely means to follow the law according to Congress.

                  The concept of how the three branches work together, or against each other, also always been one of debate in the great American experiment. Arguably questions about removal of directors of administrative agencies by the President comes from is a separation of powers question. One that flows from innovations that the founders could not entirely envision.

                  One thing is for sure though: Reagan WAS NOT the government.


                2. Not quite. Reagan was neither “THE government”; nor was he ~ or any of his successors ~ “THE problem.”

                  But he was absolutely correct when he said that “The government is the problem.”

                  Reagan was referring to America’s federal government; and many, if not most American state and local governments. But he would have been just as correct if he was referring to virtually every other national and subsidiary government on this Planet.

                  The Problem with America’s government and system of governance is that it is “of, by, and for” the various and sundry “Special Interests” who buy, sell, own, operate, script, handle, command, and control the elected politicians and career bureaucrats running that system.

                  And these folks use the power and authority of the government granted by the politicians and exercised by the bureaucrats to advance their own specific agendas.

                  That’s what governments do and have always done. And that’s how Special Interests use them. And that is exactly why Reagan was spot on 40+/- years ago when he said that the biggest problem Americans have is their government.

                  And that is still exactly The Problem confronting America today. Some of those specific Special Interests have changed over these past four decades, but it is still those special individuals, organizations, and institutions that this government is “of, by, and for.”

                  And not, as Lincoln once claimed “Of the People, by the People, and for the People.”


                3. Yessir, the statements are logically equal: “Government is the problem” and “Reagan is (or was) the government” Per H. Truman: “THE BUCK STOPS HERE.” 12 years of Reagan-Bush I was not sufficient to dismantle the Welfare State? Perhaps you should read Stockman’s book, “The Triumph of Politics: why the Reagan Revolution Failed”. I recommend it highly


                4. Reed: What f*cking “BUCK” has ever stopped in the Oval Office?

                  With the possible exception of Nixon, can You name one President who has ever been held accountable for the various and sundry, complete and total failures of his domestic or foreign or any other policies and actions during his term in office?

                  Where’d the BUCK stop on Vietnam? And when were Bush the Lesser and his troupe of War Criminals held accountable and responsible for their complete and total failures to first prevent and then stop the Terror Event of September 11, 2001? Every one of those bastards should have been impeached for dereliction of duty, at a minimum.

                  And who in Swampland was held accountable for the open, bald-faced Lies Secretary of State Powell told the UN and the world about all those nasty WMDs that Saddam was stockpiling?

                  And when it comes to Bozo: Who held him accountable for Ollie North’s Cocaine/Contra Escapade? And who held him accountable for bankrolling Saddam’s Holy War against The Great Satan in Tehran?

                  And who held him accountable for creating ObL and Da Boyz over in Afghanistan in that Holy War against the Russkies? Which, of course, after the “liberation” of Kuwait, set the stage for what was to happen in and to that same country after 9/11. [Put that on Bush the Elder, not Bozo.]

                  But the defense budget more than doubled under his reign; so who cares about all that other stuff? Even if the National Debt virtually tripled to pay for Bozo’s own version of Making America “Great” Again. You remember his “Shining City on a Hill,” and other such Bullshit, i’m sure.

                  In any event, i’m curious as to what system of logic it is that You subscribes to that makes the statements: “Government is the problem” and “Reagan is (or was) the government” what You call “logically equal.”

                  But i’m also sure that that’s just another one of those “dumb questions” You can’t be imposed upon to answer.

                  Have a Great day.


            2. Faceless bureaucracy (FB) was basically invented by Otto Von Bismark to administer the German welfare state. It was administered by the Junker class, the elite. This had the advantage of keeping the elite busy and away from interference with Bismark’s foreign dealings and ensured that the program would be administered in an efficient manner. Theoretically it avoided the problem of individualized attention so prone to corruption (just slip the government clerk a ten spot if you want something done). Of course FB is also prone to corruption as the heads of the bureaucracy seek to expand their empires and move up the food chain. Alex Christoforou (of theduran) remarked that Greece, for instance, had always had its share of local corruption. When they joined the EU it just added a larger and higher level of corruption to the mix. Sigh. What can you do?


      1. Who would you give the Gold Medal Alex?
        Silvio Berlusconi/and Italian politics OR Donald Trump/and American politics?
        (The Donald may be a little lagging in bunga-bunga parties as far as we know?)


        1. Viktor Orban seems popular and seems to want to do right by his countrymen. The more powerful countries in Europe – Germany, U.K., etc. joined with Biden to put sanctions on Russian energy, food and fertilizer. And now they’re wailing about not having enough energy, food and fertilizer. It takes a certain kind of stupidity to accomplish that. Alex Christoforou at the end of his broadcasts has what he calls “clown world”, highlighting the dumbest things from the capitals those days. It almost always involves the U.K., Germany, and the U.S. although other countries chime in as well. Clown world.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “Viktor Orban seems popular and seems to want to do right by his countrymen”. Thank you for dropping all pretenses here. We are fellow citizens (I presume), and therefore I wish you the best personally. But IMHO you are not headed in the direction of the best interests of our country. As such, I will oppose you by all legal means. Good day, sir. And forgive me in advance if subsequent replies are not as well-mannered. There is a war on, and niceties are one of war’s victims.


  6. I see your point and mostly agree with it; especially the one about putting him in with Assange and all the others you listed who were brave truth tellers. But I hope the American public is smart enough to know the difference between a narcissistic conman and (hopefully) a principled candidate for president – that is assuming we get one in the next year and a half. On the whole I think the Democratic party is agreed that Biden should not run, and I don’t see a large push for Harris, so that leaves the next presidential candidate up for grabs. I really hope it’ll be someone I can vote for, otherwise I’ll have to vote Green Party. People who are still for Trump will be for him no matter what; I don’t think there’s much hope for them.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Sometime during the 1975-76 period, I remember someone saying: “As kids growing up in America we were taught that any one of us could grow up to be President of the United States. And now, with Gerald Ford in the Oval Office, any one of us is.”

    Then came the infamous preemptive blanket pardon of career Red-baiter Richard Nixon for any and all crimes Nixon may have possibly committed. This set the stage for presidential and “elite class” immunity that has lasted until the present day. How far beyond tomorrow it lasts — or whether it should last another minute — remains the question going forward.

    The Constitution stipulates only two requirements for election to the Presidency: (1) being 35 years of age and (2) native-born citizenship. If not for the second of these, Arnold Schwarzenegger would have probably had two terms as POTUS, the same as Ronald Reagan — and brought to us by the same Republican Party. So, based solely on Constitutional qualifications for office, Trump has those as much as did George “Deputy Dubya” Bush. Hard to feel disappointed in U.S. presidents when so many of them regularly test the lower limits of the absolute minimum expectations we set for them.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Dear All,

    There is no doubt that this raid by the FBI has attracted a great deal of attention. If the past is still a reliable guide on Trump’s behaviour, then one could reasonably conclude that the twice-impeached ex-POTUS would plot his revenge on the FBI and the DOJ if he were to reign in the oval office again. Some might conclude that his whole second term would be largely about vengeance, retribution and creating an oligarchy in a new governmental form. Perhaps worse still, he might transform the FBI into something akin to or indistinguishable from the FSB. The nightmarish Orwellian reality of 1984 could indeed merely be delayed by four decades until the 2024 United States presidential election.

    Yours sincerely,

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Yes. Trump is petty and vindictive. He’s a shallow man. Another reason why he shouldn’t be president, but if the Democrats run Sleepy Joe or Giggles Harris or Mayor Pete, I can’t say that I blame people for opting for a known and deeply flawed con man over total tools.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. And the beat goes on, as Sonny and Cher once put it…

    So first, we are informed by the usual “reliable sources” that former Trump National Security Adviser John Bolton was the target of a planned attempted “assassination” by folks connected with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard in retaliation for the assassination of that Iranian General, Qasem Soleimani, in Baghdad in January, 2020.

    Then there is the knife attack on Salmon Rushdie in upstate New York, a writer with a fatwa and $3.3 million price tag on his head and reward for his death placed by Iran’s government more than 30 years ago.

    Looks like we are being primed for the coming on stage of that fourth wing of the “New Axis of Evil” to join Russia, China, and North Korea: Iran.

    Like they used to say in the good ole days of Cheney/Bush the Lesser: “Everybody wants to go to Baghdad; Real Men want to go to Tehran.”

    Look for another supplemental rise in this year’s National Security Budget sometime soon.

    And don’t be too terribly surprised if some sort of 9/11-style “Terror Event” happens that will be easily and directly linked to Iran.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Israel is already planning for War with Iran.

      I know everyone hates it just like the Prophets of OT Israel were hated, and People can ignore and dismiss the Historical Newspaper records, but they can’t be changed.

      The Kansas City Times, September 13, 1976, 27 years before the US invaded Iraq in 2003 violating the very same International Law Russia is violating in Ukraine.
      ““He came to town for the Republican National Convention and will stay until the election in November TO DO GOD’S BIDDING: To tell the World, from Kansas City, this country has been found wanting and its days are numbered […] He gestured toward a gleaming church dome. “The gold dome is the symbol of BABYLON,” he said.” […] He wanted to bring to the Public’s attention an “idea being put out subtly and deceptively” by the government that we have to get prepared for a War with Russia.”

      Few here will recognize “this country has been found wanting and its days are numbered” are the 1st 2 parts of the 3 part WRITING ON THE WALL recorded by Daniel during the captivity of BABYLON some 600 years BC.
      The king put on a State Dinner/Feast for 1000 of the ELITE of his kingdom and they praised the gods of gold, silver, brass, iron, wood and stone.
      In other words, from THEN to NOW, as the adage goes, It’s the Economy, Stupid!

      The September 13, 1976 Historical Newspaper record is even more specific about that Future,
      ¨There are 30 months before the fate of the world will be sealed with EITHER Destruction OR the Universal Brotherhood of Man,¨ he said. ¨The 30 month figure concerned a Treaty between Israel and Egypt.¨

      NOTE: This does not say Armageddon happens in 30 months from the article.

      Not 29 or 31, but exactly 30 months later, in March 1979, history shows a Treaty between Israel and Egypt was signed. The Camp David Accord.
      History shows talks broke down on the 12th day and no Treaty was to be signed. Begin and Sadat were leaving. It was on the 13th Day, as in the date of the Article and the picture accompanying it, an unexpected window of opportunity appeared and opened the way for the Treaty to be signed.
      This signified the Universal Brotherhood part of the quote.

      As to the destruction part of the statement? The Iranian Revolution happened a month before the signing of the Camp David Accord in 1979, and all these 47 years later the Destruction mentioned in the 1976 report is increasingly possible in our Generations if you believe the Mass Media and the Alternate Media.



      1. To paraphrase Orwell: “Israel is planning a war with Iran, Israel has always been planning a war with Iran.”

        Especially ever since they ~ first as Persians and then as Iranians ~ rejected Yaweh, his Prophets [and profits], and Israelis as some sort of “Chosen” something or other with a Mandate to create a “Greater Israel” throughout the so-called “Holy Land.” Or anybody else who didn’t accept the Israeli version of God and Religion.

        Sort of like the Holy Christian Crusaders and Muhammed’s 7th and 8th century Jihadists.

        Ther whole situation in that “Holy Land” was best explained to me by an Israeli friend of mine who ~ before he left to serve as a Tank Platoon Commander during Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 ~ put it like this:

        “This whole thing could have been avoided if it hadn’t taken Moses 40 years to find the one place in the whole area that did not have oil.”


        1. For some reason God didn’t want this Chosen People to have ready access to fossil fuels.

          Maybe God is Green and not Greed? 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        2. The major Jewish Prophet Isaiah starts the last chapter of his Book in the Book of Books this way:
          So says the Lord, “The heavens are My throne, and the earth is My footstool; which is the house that you will build for Me, and which is the place of My rest?
          And all these My hand made, and all these have become,” says the Lord. “But to this one will I look, to one poor and of crushed spirit, who hastens to do My bidding.

          If the foot that touches the footstool is Holy, then the footstool is Holy making this whole Earth Holy Land, not just that small sliver of blood soaked land the World has been brainwashed to see exclusively as the “Holy Land”

          As for Islam, I think with a turn of a page in History, the Pope of Rome replaced the Emperor of Rome, and the Church became so corrupt, inverting all the teachings of Christ Jesus, God raised up Muhammad to be a thorn in the side of the Church.
          The fact is, all the major figures in Islam are the very same major characters from the Jewish Old Testament, with Jesus having a special place in the Quran.


          1. God may have raised up Muhammad to be a thorn in the side of the Church; but he and his devoted followers from the beginning have also been a sword severing the head ~ and recently, an IED obliterating the body ~ of anybody who didn’t or doesn’t go along with his recipe for salvation thru jihadism.

            But i’m curious Ray: Did God endorse the Holy Crusades to take back the “Holy Land” from Muhammad and his Troops? Or was that strictly the action of that corrupt Church of Rome?

            The hell of it is is that it was Moslem scholars who resurrected the philosophy, mathematics, and science of Ancient Greece that ultimately resulted in the end of those Dark, Middle Ages the Church had dragged Western Europe into, thus planting the seeds for today’s Western Civilization.


            1. JG, I believe the Spirit of these letters,
              You hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
              This people draws close to me with their mouth, and honours me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
              In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

              Not every one that says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven.
              Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name have cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?
              And then will I profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.

              When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
              And before him shall be gathered ALL nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats:
              And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

              Then shall the King say to them on his right hand, Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
              For I was hungry, and you gave me meat: I was thirsty, and you gave me drink: I was a stranger, and you took me in:
              Naked, and you clothed me: I was sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me.

              Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when did we see you hungry, and fed you? or thirsty, and gave you drink?
              When did we see you a stranger, and took you in? or naked, and clothed you?
              Or when did we see you sick, or in prison, and came to you?

              And the King shall answer and say to them, Truly I say to you, Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it to me.

              Obviously, the Spirit of that letter has nothing to do with being Religious, Jew, Christian, Muslim or Atheist.
              It has to do with having Compassion on people you don’t know or recognize.


              1. i agree completely Ray, that Religion and being “Religious” have absolutely nothing to do with Spirituality and being “Spiritual,” and things like Compassion.

                That’s why throughout history, Religion has caused more Human pain and suffering than any other Human institution except Government.

                Especially when the two are combined into a Government controlled or heavily influenced by Jewish Rabbis, Christian Priests or Preachers, Muslim Mullahs or Imams, or Hindu Pujaris.

                But You never answered my question: Did God endorse the Holy Crusades to take back the “Holy Land” from Muhammad and his Troops? Or was that strictly the action of that corrupt Church of Rome and the Kings under its command?


                1. On that score, God endorsing the Crusades would be in conflict with this, “”This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel, saying: ‘Not by military force and not by physical strength, but by My spirit,’ says the Lord of Hosts from the OT.
                  The Christ teaches in the NT, “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.”

                  Their voices are excluded from US/NATO War Propaganda as the Children of War are on the increase.


                2. If, Ray, God’s endorsing the Christian Crusades would have been in conflict with those Voices, what does that make of His command to Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt and to invade, conquer, and occupy the land area that eventually became and now is the modern State of Israel?

                  But far more importantly, is Israeli treatment of Palestinians since 1948 ~ and especially since the Six Day War in 1967 and the Occupation of the West Bank, Golan Heights, and Gaza ~ is That in conflict with those Voices?


                3. Ray, Bill and Jeff, these are not my words, but plagiarized from the writings on a website who does not cite its author(s). (Bill respectively I hope I am not breaking the comment section rules by debating theism and anti-theism.) A lot to think about here:

                  “It is important to note the fact that many of the negative things which people attribute to religions are, at best, features of some forms of some religions (usually Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), but not of other religions (like Taoism or Buddhism). This is perhaps why so much of spirituality remains attached to traditional religions, like attempts to soften their harder edges. Thus, we have Jewish spirituality, Christian spirituality, and Muslim spirituality.

                  Religion is spiritual and spirituality is religious. One tends to be more personal and private while the other tends to incorporate public rituals and organized doctrines. The lines between one and the other are not clear and distinct—they are all points on the spectrum of belief systems known as religion. Neither religion nor spirituality is better or worse than the other; people who try to pretend that such a difference does exist are only fooling themselves.



                4. That reminds me of a joke from the days of VCR recorders: Did you ever notice that most people who claim to know what God is thinking haven’t yet figured out how to program their VCRs?


                5. There was a Secret Society in the Vatican headed by a Cardinal and staffed by the very best Calligraphers and Linguists.
                  It was Secret because what they did, was re-create hand written Bibles so that only the very rich could afford to buy one.
                  One Day a hot shot Linguist saw a mistake in translation and pointed it out to the Cardinal. The Cardinal saw there might be something to what the Lingist pointed out and said he would go down to the Archives and verify it with the original manuscripts.
                  The Cardinal was gone for too long a Time, and the Priest being concerned went down to the Archives to investigate.
                  When he got there he saw the Cardinal in a fetal position sobbing. The Priest said, Your Eminence, what’s wrong?
                  The Cardinal answered, the word is Celebrate!

                  Liked by 1 person

                6. JG, I was away for 2 days, and when I returned there were over 300 emails to read, the majority notifications of comments on this discussion after my last post Sunday morning. I get few personal email and too many notices from various sources to read this or that. Much studying is a weariness of the flesh.

                  I would not presume to know every thought of the Eternal God with my finite mind.
                  I answer to the best of my knowledge up to now.

                  If you want to get into a personal discussion of what I’ve learned since I came alive to the Spirit of God unexpectedly February 1, 1975, my personal Blog is not exactly a Book, but every post is a chapter in my evolving Curriculum Vitae

                  If you want to continue the discussion, go to, make a comment in any post that gets your attention and that will give me your email address and I’ll reply.


                7. Instead of “celibate,” Ray? LOL.

                  Priests should be able to marry, IMHO. That Catholic priests are supposed to remain celibate has truly warped the church. And not in a good way.

                  Liked by 1 person

                8. Bill, all Saints are Sinners and we are born into this Flesh World.
                  It’s totally unrealistic to demand men not have any sexual thoughts or desires fof a loving touch.
                  Even babies get boners.


                9. Do you know the joke about the monk who was examining very very old scriptures when he lets out a yell. “They dropped the R, they dropped the R!!!” It’s “celebrate”!


    2. And the beat goes on – as I said above – to the rest of the World American politics is just like some never-ending big dumb silly sitcom. With screen writers sitting around coming up with the next days preposterous plot! The more outlandish the better! A huge soap opera of unmitigated bovine excrement!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. i can assure You, Dennis, that those people around the world who have suffered, are suffering now, and will continue to suffer because of American politics do not think it’s a “dumb silly sitcom.”

        And what does the rest of the world think about Russian, Chinese, North Korean, or Iranian politics? Who writes those scripts?

        Or the politics of post-Brexit Britain,? Or the rest of the EU becoming increasingly less of a Union? Or the UN, IMF and World Bank, and other machineries for peace and plenty?

        The Bullshit that is Politics is not limited to what goes on in America.


          1. i’m sure there are folks in Moscow, Beijing, London, Paris, Bonn, Brussels, Tokyo, and elsewhere who have their own views on which nation has a PhD program piled higher and deeper.

            Liked by 1 person

        1. I thought it was misplaced Public spending when Prime Minister Harper announced he was building a Memorial to the Victims of Communism.

          I thought if there was a Memorial to be built, it should be for the Victims of White European Christian Colonialism. There are many more Victims to this very Day in this Year of The Lord 2022.


  10. Twenty-nine (29) references to The Deep State … but not a single name associated with it. Before Trump’s election, references to The Deep State were the stuff of conspiracy theorists and given little credence. Somehow though, in the six years since his election, it has become a viable entity, the sinister manipulator of all things. How did that happen?
    The military/industrial complex is in plain sight. Everybody knows who they are. How is it that The Deep State is also something that everyone knows about and can point to or at least attribute subversive and manipulative actions it’s responsible for, but there are no faces, no names, nothing more than a convenient handle? Not even a grainy photograph of a single suspect.
    Oh, that’s right. That’s why they call it The Deep State.
    Do you think The Deep State calls itself The Deep State, or do they have their own secret name? Just wondering.


    1. Victoria Nuland – just one name BUTSUDANBILL.

      …was the former CEO of Center for a New American Security (CNAS)

      (I suppose we should throw in her husband, Robert Kagan, a foreign policy commentator at the Brookings Institution, and co-founder in 1998 of the neoconservative Project for the New American Century. PNAC’s ideology was summarized in a major position paper, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, in 2000. This document advocated a global Pax Americana unrestrained by international law.)


    2. You want names Butsudanbill?

      Name the principal individuals, organizations, and institutions in the following components of the Deep State, and You will have more names than You can keep track of:

      the military-industrial-congressional complex, the banking-finance-printing press web, the techno-infotainment matrix, the petro-food-guns-n-drugs cartels, the pharmo-medico-insurance-legal cabals, and the surveillance-secrecy-security-safety panopticon that owns and operates and commands and controls the elected politicians and career civilian and military bureaucrats at center stage in America’s reality-tv extravaganza; and America’s $ 1 = 1 Vote system of government and governance that gets, puts, and keeps them there.

      That help?


      1. You said it better than me Jeff. Thanks.
        Instead of my words “dumb silly sitcom”………. lets use your words “America’s reality-tv extravaganza”!
        I like it!


  11. Public perception is just about everything in a democracy. But let’s put aside how things appear and what people will believe for a moment. Let me make a case for this application of the Espionage Act.

    For individuals working inside government to be bothered enough by their contents to reveal classified documents to the public is one thing. For a president, who has the authority to reveal just about anything he wants at any time to the public, to take classified documents with him upon leaving office is another.

    What is the reason he made a private possession of what is public property (declassified after a period of time for all to know about) if not to do something with it in his favor, even if only to hold it out of reach, inaccessible? With past defendants, we knew their motivation as they were open about it, with Trump we do not. He gives no reason for what he did, but is defiant, claiming the material is his.

    Trump is and has always been a deal maker in deals that he prides himself made killings for him and left the counterparty stuck. He lives for the next victory lap. The book his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, wrote describes some of these deals. Coming up with a plan was a continual thing, success the only objective. A plan could be dirty and outrageous, no matter. I thought of this hearing of the “Stop the Steal” plan that would allow him to run off with the election. Now he has run off with classified documents.

    It is difficult to imagine Trump having a bothered conscience as were those charged under the Espionage Act before him. They took great personal risk with nothing to gain for themselves except a clear conscience. Trump has never shown interest in doing anything that doesn’t result in his elevation.

    The Act itself is a recipe for abuse by government, proven in its application to the powerless. Now, it is being used in a way that makes sense regarding a person who sees no limit to his personal power. It is possible that Trump had only the good of the public in mind when he took the classified documents. Let him make his case.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. So will the ‘correct’ application of the Espionage Act be decided by the SCOTUS CLIF?
    You know – the court that Trump was complicit in deciding upon its composition?
    If there is one thing that the US Constitution is – it is loaded with clauses that are not precisely spelled out eh?


    1. That’s an interesting choice of term in calling Trump “‘COMPLICIT’ in deciding upon its composition.”

      Is every President whose selection of who sits on SCOTUS also “complicit”? Or just the Presidents whose choices to fill those slots You disagree with?

      In any event, my guess is that if any lawsuits come out of any of all this [think that’s a possibility?], SCOTUS will ultimately be involved in at least one, if not all of them.

      That is unless SCOTUS has already made some kind of decision[s] regarding The Espionage Act that would address the issues being raised by any new lawsuits.

      Wikipedia has an excellent article with a comprehensive overview of judication on The Espionage Act of 1917 at .


      1. The power to appoint Supreme Court justices belongs exclusively to the President of the United States, according to U.S. Constitution. Supreme Court nominees, after being selected by the president must be approved by a simple majority vote (51 votes) of the Senate.


        1. i know all that, Dennis. i was just wondering how that makes Trump “complicit.” Like i said: Interesting choice of term.


          1. ooops – involved with others in an activity that is unlawful or morally wrong – I used the wrong word eh? That’s what you get with a dumb guy with a training as an Engineer! What’s the word I’m looking for! Involved with. Help me.


            1. Trump’s nominating his choices for SCOTUS was “unlawful or morally wrong,” eh? How so?

              And what does that make of the folks in the Senate who approved those choices and voted to confirm them to SCOTUS? Or all those American citizens who approved those choices and their confirmation; and approve of many if not most of the decisions it made this session?

              And don’t misunderstand me: i disagree completely with the recent SCOTUS decisions on abortion, school prayer, environmental laws, gun control, and the separation of church and state.

              But that has nothing to do with whether or not Trump did anything unlawful or morally wrong by nominating the people who made those decisions and judgements possible.

              Why not just call it “Trump’s Court,” and leave it at that?

              Liked by 1 person

                1. Dennis, read my post again. You asked “What’s the word I’m looking for! Involved with. Help me.”

                  And i suggested simply calling it “Trump’s Court.”

                  Liked by 1 person

              1. JG, when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court March 16, 2016, that was 8 months before the Election and 10 months left to his Presidency.
                The Republican majority in the Senate refused to even consider his nomination, establishing a new Principle a President can’t make a nomination to the Supreme Court during an Election year as articulated by Lindsay Graham and other Republicans.
                The Power hungry hypocritical Republicans nominated Amy Barrett and rushed her appointment to the Supreme Court DURING an Election.

                Do you think Garland’s actions re the Trump raid reflects any animus he holds for being denied even a hearing?

                “I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination.”
                Here’s the video:


                1. Ray, i have no idea about the role his animus about being denied a shot at SCOTUS might be playing in Garland’s behavior and actions.

                  However, given the fact that Trump had very little ~ if anything at all ~ to do with that denial back in March 2016, i would hope that what Garland is doing now has nothing to do with what happened back in 2016.

                  i’m sure that the whole January 6 Hearings/Raid on Mara Lago schtick has a lot more to do with the upcoming Midterm election in November and, even more so, the Presidential election in 2024.

                  And was anybody surprised by those “Power hungry hypocritical Republicans” attempting to get Barrett into SCOTUS during an election? i’m sure that if Obama and his gang up on The Hill thought they could have pulled that off with Garland, they would have tried. That’s probably why they didn’t try to pull it off.

                  After all, one of the most important Rules up there is “We can do anything the other guys can’t stop us from doing.”


  13. A WORLD WITHOUT SECRETS; Or, An anti-Secrecy Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

    The “DISPLAY UNTIL DECEMBER 15, 2013” issue (#110) of Adbusters, headlined as “Political Islam vs. The West,” contained an article that every American and every citizen of every other nation on this Planet needs to read and ponder.

    Entitled “Radical Transparency,” its core message is this:

    “So long as elites and powerful forces are able to concoct wars and geopolitics in secret, we, the people, will never see a day of peace on Earth. Not even a single minute in fact … likely not even a second. Aggression, hatred, greed, jealousy and fear may be the ingredients of war, but secrecy is the heat that it needs to rise … the fuel that turns the disapproving into blind followers. So long as secrecy prevails as a fundamental right of states, peace, unity and brotherhood will always remain dreams … increasingly jaded ones.”

    And, it’s conclusion is thus:

    “If we are ever going to escape the 21st century with less bloodshed than the 20th century, we’re going to have to strip our governments of the right to lie to us citizens. In this information age, where gigatons of information zip around the globe each second, and where the geopolitical, financial, and ecological stakes are high, we need a new human right… .”

    In response, the article proposes the following “amendment to the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to every constitution of every country in the world,” including, especially, The United States of America:



    A World without secrets… . Can You imagine? Could You imagine? Dare You imagine?

    Before rejecting it out of hand as naïvely immature, impractical, ignorant, and impossible (if only because inconceivable), consider first exactly Why governments, corporations, financial institutions, and their media value, need, and thus demand and thereby get secrecy.

    To consider just one tiny slice of the Secrecy Spectrum: Why is it that the only News we ever get is always about what our Leaders have been doing and/or are up to, as or after They have concealed Themselves in Their ECHELONS ABOVE TOP SECRET enclaves and meetings, behind ultra-secretly and -secured closed doors?

    Why is it that what we do episodically get, such as it is, is then typically only under the very strictest condition of anonymity and non-attribution, thereby depriving us of the ability to judge, if nothing else, the probability of the truthfulness and usefulness of the information that we are fed? And not just having to take the Media’s word for it?

    Why do our Leaders tell us Nothing about exactly what They are talking about and what they are actually, really doing? About what decisions they are making? And about how and why They are making them?

    Why is Nothing (at least as it affects Us ~ We, them People) ever talked about in the open? Until, that is, the decisions have been made and all that We, them Folk, get (and get to do) is to deal with the attendant results thereof; ie, to suffer the consequences of those decisions?

    Why ~ when it is time for our Leaders to consider and ultimately make a decision, are all the presentations, alternatives, negotiations, consultations, confrontations, accommodations, compromizations, and declared ameliorations (to say nothing of the amortizations)…. ~ why do they always, Always happen in “SECRET” ?

    Why is EVERYTHING done in secret, until it’s released to and then sold by the Media for, and thus, ultimately and only ~ for our consumption, partial digestion, and excretion ~ as a means of perpetuation? And even then, Why are we only told only that which we are intended to know/think/believe and to thus act upon?

    But never Why it is needed, wanted, and thus intended that we know, think, believe, and act upon it?

    Why all the Secrets? Well…; Obviously, if You’ve been paying attention, that is and can only be for one reason. Which is ~ needless to say ~ also a Secret. And thus won’t get us anywhere but, ultimately, at best, into an eternal (as opposed to infinite) regress.



  14. Jeff’s point above about the cult-like prevalence of secrecy is vitally important. It’s amazing how many sins, how much malfeasance, how many lies can be hidden with the phrase “it’s classified.”

    We the people are supposed to have privacy. We are allowed to have secrets. But the government should be transparent and accountable to us. Elected officials are supposed to be public servants who are accountable to us and to the law. Our guiding light is supposed to be the U.S. Constitution and especially its Bill of Rights.

    But of course very little of this remains. We the people have no privacy. The government is shrouded in secrecy and largely unaccountable. Elected officials serve themselves and their paymasters and pass legislation that ensures they are not accountable to the laws to which ordinary people are held accountable.

    As we all know, this is not democracy. It’s an authoritarian plutocracy corrupted thoroughly by the moneyed interests. And thus today’s economic and social culture in America can best be described as Dickensian, where the rich do what they want and the poor suffer as they must. The best of times, the worst of times.

    A burning question is whether a revolution is coming, or whether America will simply slowly collapse under the weight of its own corruption. And of course other possibilities exist …


    1. “As we all know, this is not democracy. It’s an authoritarian plutocracy” Indeed, we’re all on the same page here. It was a novel experiment to put a man who had zero experience in politics or government in the White House, a true Hail Mary pass. This was a measure of true desperation on a large part of the American electorate. That it was this particular man certainly biased the outcome in significant ways. That his backers cannot easily give up their last great hope is readily apparent.

      But like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, we have ALWAYS had the power to click our ruby slippers and make the government whatever we want it to be. It’s called the secret ballot. The fact is that the Wicked Witches have managed to cower, cajole, lull into complacency, discourage, distract, and otherwise get us to VOLUNTARILY NOT EXERCISE OUR POWER. The amount of time that The System spends blowing smoke up our collective @ss means that the game is nowhere near over. The best slaves are those who need no chains.

      Which brings us to the true tragedy of Trumpism: by undermining faith in free and fair elections, the ONE FINAL POWER WE HAVE IS DISAPPEARING BEFORE OUR EYES. Then it really will be game over.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. That American’s have been led to believe they have power with their secret ballot is a bit of a cruel joke eh REED? The whole system of party controlled primaries, some open and some closed, and then the electoral college shenanigans means that the concept that Americans gets a government voted on by the majority of popular votes flies out the window. In contrast to what is the case in most other democratic countries, US citizens are not directly involved in the Presidential election process. Rather, they choose electors, individuals who pledge to vote for individual candidates. This unique (most of the rest of the World say weird) system is used to elect both the President and the Vice President.

        Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump all managed to attain the highest office in the United States of America despite losing the popular vote in the Presidential Elections.

        In the 2,000 election the issue went to the Supreme Court, with the Court controversially awarding Florida’s votes to George W. Bush, which automatically made him the President-Elect.

        And as we all painfully know, in one of the most controversial elections of all time, Donald Trump was granted the 2016 presidency despite democratic candidate Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in the 2016 election by 2.1%.



        1. Nobody said it was perfect. Still, the principle remains intact…until DJT. Due to the FACT that they are a permanent minority party, the Republicans are steadily blasting away at the last best tool of the Common Man. Next stop: neo-Feudalism.

          Under the US Constitution, the State legislatures determine the means for allocating Electoral votes. The authors were focused on the demons of their time.


          1. Here is another way of looking at it REED. The Electoral College is a group of delegates that cast their votes to represent their state’s people in an election. Every state has a different number of delegates, based on population. The total number is 538. This means that only 538 people out of the entire US population, which is around 320-million get a say in who will lead the country. To put that into perspective, that means that 0.00000169% of the population gets an actual say in who will be the President of the United States.

            Even if you don’t live in a geographic area where you have to brave through long lines and increasingly vile methods of voter disenfranchisement, your Presidential vote is irrelevant. Even if you’re one of the 72 million people of 320 million who live in one of the eight possible “swing states” it’s still mostly meaningless. Oh, and of course your choice can always be overturned by our country’s group of nine unelected black-cloaked judges.


            1. Understood, fellow citizen. Those are the rules. The Constitution gave the State legislatures the power to determine the means of allocating electoral votes. Every State legislature has to one degree or another passed State law that the elector distribution will bear some relationship to the popular vote in a State. We know who elects the State legislators. The fact that this has all be gamed, obfuscated, dilly-dallied and shilly-shallied into pretzels obscures but does not negate the fundamental principle. Actually overturning elections does negate it.


        2. Yes, it’s grim. When the choice is Clinton/Trump in 2016 or Biden/Trump in 2020, and perhaps Biden/Trump again in 2024, it’s a Hobson’s choice.

          Any candidate who truly challenges the status quo, e.g. Kucinich, Gabbard, Nader, etc., is isolated, blocked, denounced, and otherwise kept from running with a major party.

          Meanwhile, the AOCs of the world learn very quickly to trim their sails in the direction of conformity with power. Thus AOC votes proudly for “Mama Bear” Pelosi and abandons (or, more charitably, suppresses) her principles so that she can stay in office and extend her own privileges.

          Perhaps one day she’ll be the new Pelosi.


          1. Nobody promised you a rose garden! Have you ever run for public office? Have you ever stood before your fellow citizens with a ballot proposal? It is highly educational, and not always edifying. But THAT is the mountain to be climbed. One can climb it, or stand at the base and curse the peak.


            1. Have you run for public office, Reed? Have you stood with a ballot proposal?

              I’d be happy to hear of your experiences and what you learned.


              1. Yes and yes. I figure my record was 4-5 as both candidate and campaign manager, on a smallish but rather pivotal local playing field (fastest-growing town in a fast-growing Western state). I wish it was an experience that every American could have.


              2. 4-5 is respectable. Kudos to you for running.

                Would be happy to hear what you learned from the process.


    2. Again, very well said, Bill. Another burning question at this stage of the game is: What are those other existing possibilities beyond revolution or collapse?

      Secession and/or Civil War? Our authoritarian, oligarchal plutocracy morphing into some variant of a fully Orwellian dictatorial tyranny?

      Are there still any “positive” possibilities still available? Or is it too late for that?


  15. What I found interesting is that Trump could never be bothered to read intelligence reports for four years he was in office, why on earth would he take them home? He certainly wasn’t sitting peacefully at home by the fireside (or the air conditioner, in FL) catching up on his reading.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. LOL. So true. Trump didn’t read much. I recall that, when the intelligence agencies really wanted him to read something, they took pains to include his name in the report. That’s the way to catch the attention of a narcissist.

      And when the generals wanted him to think they could still win in Afghanistan, they showed him photos of Afghan women in short skirts in the early 1970s. See, Mr President? They’re just like us!


      1. Come on Bill, I find your second paragraph a little hard to believe! What is the source for that piece of tabloid dross? I know you dislike Trump, but that is surely beyond the pale.


        1. OK Bill, but I guess I find this just as tedious as constantly harping away about Trumps narcissistic character flaws. Sure, anybody who observes the man for 15-minutes can tell you he is a narcissist. A person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves. But surely being in the public eye 24/7 as President of the most powerful country on earth, taking the constant abuse and criticism from his political detractors and the press on everything he says, one has to be a bit of a narcissist. Your self esteem would be in the toilet otherwise!

          In New Zealand we have a saying that you should play the ball not the man. In the US as well I think. The “ball” is our personal view and the “man” is someone with the opposing view. You should stick to criticizing his policies, not heaping ad hominem attacks on the fellow. Comments directed against the person rather than the position they are maintaining. I find the ad hominem attacks on Trump to be over the top. And the criticism’s of his character and lack curiosity and intellect blown out of all proportion. And often think the unintended consequence’s are that his supporters are even more rallied to be behind some of the things we find not to admire about him.

          Anyway, that’s my furtive attempt to plea for more civility in addressing the man. And BTW, I feel exactly the same about the crap directed at the current President of the USA. “Comatose Joe”. Its childish and uncalled for.


          1. Sure, it’s tedious. But my point isn’t to attack Trump as a man. My point is to note that his narcissism limits his ability to serve as America’s president and ultimate public servant. A narcissist puts himself first; a president should put his country first.

            An example: Jacinda Ardern. I’m not here to sing her praises. But she’s shown all evidence of being a compassionate and empathetic person and a leader who connects with people by listening to them and bringing them together based on mutual respect. Whatever Trump is, he is not this.

            Jacinda is a public servant. Trump is not. That is not an ad hominem attack. It’s an observation based on my years of observing both of them, including reading books by Jacinda and more books than I want to admit on Trump.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Yes Bill I agree that Jacinda has been a good public servant. But Kiwi’s watching her milk the “Covid” virus thing for all it was worth – have woken up to most of it was no more than just her playing politician! And becoming a one trick pony is playing out poorly – as she watches her ratings and her parties popularity plummet. I don’t think she will be re-elected.

              Make no mistake about it, she is not devoid of narcissistic traits. Just a more skillful politician, and not as “in- your-face” as Donald Trump!

              And sadly the New Zealand liberal left wing Party is just as much a “do-nothing” failing Party as the American Democratic Party. Young Kiwi couples are fleeing New Zealand by the thousands. Finding it impossible to afford a decent living standard in New Zealand with its low wage economy and million dollar houses. The population is declining. The great socialist egalitarian governments of the past just a memory now.


          2. i will address and speak about Corporal Bonespurs as civilly as he deserves; and no more.

            And i will stop referring to Mr Biden as “Comatose Joe” when i see evidence that he is not in a walking coma, a puppet controlled by the strings of the people who put him in Swampland 50 years ago, and kept him there ever since.


            1. Jeff, that you only too willing to give immature, childish and degrading nicknames to every single one of the American politicians, sparing none of them, the American people have voted into higher office tells us more about you than it does about them. For me your comments would be much more palatable if you at least tried to show a smidgeon of respect for your fellow citizens who give their lives doing their best to serve the nation.


              1. i didn’t give Corporal Bonespurs his name, Dennis. He earned that back during Vietnam. And Trump has given and is giving “his life to do his best to serve the nation,” eh? Heh. When did that start?

                As for the rest of them: How many elected politicians are actually “serving the nation” ~ or even their own constituents ~ as opposed to serving the Special Interests who pay their way to Swampland and, if they produce, pay to keep them there?

                i give those who merit respect all that they merit, and more. The rest of them don’t merit even a smidgeon; and that’s what i give them.


  16. When I was in high school I had a “liberal” social studies teacher whose big theory was that the Soviet Union would become more like the United States and the United States would become more like the Soviet Union. I disagreed with her at the time but now I think she may have been right. This raid on Trump’s house is just more proof of that.


  17. Personally I find it a bit bizarre that people who have never met Trump, never had a conversation with him, claim to know who he is and what he is thinking. Just as people who have never met Putin, never had a conversation with him, claim to know who he is and what he is thinking. How bizarre. Where do they get their “knowledge”. From reporters??? Wow. Just wow. But what do they know about these reporters? About as much as they know about Trump or Putin.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. How do we know anyone? Did you ever think you really knew a person, only to be surprised by what they said or did, even though you thought you knew them so very, very well?

      Speaking of Trump, I’m not a Trump expert or Trump whisperer. But I’ve read books about him, watched him during debates, listened to his speeches, etc. He is very much a public figure, very much a scrutable man. I don’t claim to know Trump’s mind, but I can judge him by his words and especially by his actions. I have to, because he’s running for office and I have to decide whether to vote for him, which, in a way, is passing judgment on him, at least for the office he’s running for.

      Back in 2016, I watched Trump during a debate when he boasted that military officers would follow illegal and unconstitutional orders from him simply because he would be the president and commander-in-chief. Instantly, I knew Trump had fundamentally misunderstood his role. So I wrote an article that Trump had disqualified himself for the presidency. I stand by that judgment today.

      Last Night, Donald Trump Disqualified Himself

      Again, I’m not saying I “know” Trump or that he’s “evil.” I’m saying he’s bad for the country; he isn’t a good leader as I define leadership. You may disagree, and that’s fine. We all get to have an opinion, and we all express that in how we vote.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Bill: It seems that your 2016 article contains a standard journalist trick. Baier states he knows what’s illegal and asks if Trump would insist on doing something illegal. Are you still beating your wife, in other words. Trump wasn’t answering his question. He was stating how severe the situation was. The big picture of course is that the CIA etc. (100 foreign policy “experts”) were opposed to Trump in 2016. After all, he might have pulled us out of NATO. They were opposed to Trump in 2020 when they claimed that Hunter Biden’s laptop was a fake. And they will be opposed to Trump if/when he runs again. I wonder if we should just tell the foreign policy state that they should control how we respond to events because opposing them would be too much hassle (i.e. bad for the country). It seems to me we can’t have it both ways.


        1. Well, it didn’t matter what I thought in 2016. Trump won.

          And if the Dems run Biden or Harris or Mayor Pete, Trump will win again in 2024, regardless of how I feel about him.


    2. Where do you get your knowledge of Julius Caesar, Napoleon, or George Washington from? Yet another canard from Alex’s vast collection of them. .


    3. I never met Trump either, but I saw he was pitching Nihilism to his adoring devotees and certainly a victimization complex as well as being a serial Liar I saw coming from his own mouth in too many news video.
      Long before the Election he was preaching if he didn’t win, the election was rigged. How arrogant!


    1. To me it’s the same process. The same message from those in power. Pay no attention to what the FBI did. Instead focus on how bad Trump is. Pay no attention to what Biden does. Instead focus on how bad Putin is. Pay no attention to what the Gestapo/SS does. Instead focus on how bad the Jews are. Pay no attention to what the NKVD does. Instead focus on how bad the kulaks are. It’s the same old story. We are all puppets, I guess. The only question is who do we allow to pull our strings.


  18. This a well written article by a very intelligent young woman ALEX. And should be read by all patriotic Americans. Hopefully this whole disgusting witch hunt gets what it rightfully deserves from the American people – being ignored like the political stunt it is.

    But you can bet your pay check that the hateful liberal mainstream media are going to onto this like flies on stink for weeks. Milking it for every buck they can make off of it! Taking down Trump is just an added bonus to these corrupt people.


  19. Her best paragraph pointing out the corrupt mainstream press – reporting the truth is last on their agenda:

    “After all, within the course of one week, the justification for the search went from “nuclear secrets” ( I read that he had the nuclear red button codes at his house and could set off a nuclear missile at any minut !) to classified documents, to videos suggesting the documents were not secure, to videos suggesting the Trump team was serendipitously moving the documents, to a confidential human source claiming Trump continued to possess presidential records, to a supposed lie by Trump’s attorney that there were no documents present at Mar-a-Lago marked classified.”


    1. If they don’t convict him of something first. Washington D.C. juries are overwhelmingly composed of Democrats, most of whom I think wouldn’t hesitate to convict Trump of anything. It’s already happened with several of his associates. In the vernacular this is known as “the fix is in”.


  20. Can any of You folks convinced that the DEEP STATE has been, is now, and will ever be against and out to “get Trump,” answer the question i asked Alex two days ago:

    “Can You name one part of the Deep State ~

    “the military-industrial-congressional complex, the banking-finance-printing press web, the techno-infotainment matrix, the petro-food-guns-n-drugs cartels, the pharmo-medico-insurance-legal cabals, and the surveillance-secrecy-security-safety panopticon that owns and operates and commands and controls the elected politicians and career civilian and military bureaucrats at center stage in America’s reality-tv extravaganza; and America’s $ 1 = 1 Vote system of government and governance that gets, puts, and keeps them there ~

    “can You name even ONE part of that Deep State that wasn’t better off after the reign of POTUS Maxximmuss XLV than it was after the reign of Obomber?

    “And can You name one part of that Deep State that isn’t doing even better today under the reign of Comatose Joe?”


  21. Chris Hedges speaks of “Collapse”; not just of America, but of Human Civilization… :

    “THE FINAL COLLAPSE: We Are Not the First Civilization to Collapse, but We Will Probably Be the Last” concludes as follows:

    “This time the collapse will be global. It will not be possible, as in ancient societies, to migrate to new ecosystems rich in natural resources. The steady rise in heat will devastate crop yields and make much of the planet uninhabitable. Climate scientists warn that once temperatures rise by 4C, the earth, at best, will be able to sustain a billion people.

    “The more insurmountable the crisis becomes, the more we, like our prehistoric ancestors, will retreat into self-defeating responses, violence, magical thinking and denial.


    “Our civilization’s collapse will be unique in size, magnified by the destructive force of our fossil fuel-driven industrial society. But it will replicate the familiar patterns of collapse that toppled civilizations of the past. The difference will be in scale, and this time there will be no exit.” [EMPHASIS added.]

    Entire article available at


  22. Saw this snippet on CNN:

    “The fact that this investigation implicates highly classified materials further underscores the need to protect the integrity of the investigation.”

    — The Justice Department, stating in a filing Monday that it opposes the release of key details that led to the search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate last week. The DOJ said some continued secrecy is needed to protect the investigation and therefore, it will not unseal the affidavit which outlines why the search was necessary. Several media organizations, including CNN, had asked for the affidavit to be unsealed after the search was conducted.

    So much for transparency. And what a strange phrase: the investigation “implicates” top secret stuff. Do they mean “includes”? Why not just redact the super-secret stuff?

    The affidavit should be a matter of public record and it should be unsealed to protect the integrity of America. Not that I’m a lawyer …


    1. CNN likes the term “implicates” because that word suggests guilt and CNN believes Trump is guilty of pretty much anything. It’s their standard pose and message. Modern journalistic propaganda. It’s why I don’t listen to CNN. They’re always trying to mess with people’s minds.


  23. Not a word so far on Bracing Views about Tulsi Gabbard filling in for Tucker Carlson on Fox. The woman has class. And what in the heck is going on behind the scenes at Faux News?


    1. I like Gabbard as well. She’s a Democrat but she would never fit into the Biden administration because she doesn’t check the right boxes. Not like the new Press Secretary who checks the boxes but doesn’t seem to know anything.


    2. Dennis: I think you know I’m a fan of Tulsi’s. Consult my numerous articles in support of her candidacy in 2020.

      With respect to Tulsi and Fox News, well a woman has to make a living. Since I generally find her views to be refreshingly candid, I’m glad she has a larger platform for them.

      If she ran in 2024 as a 3rd-party candidate against Trump and Biden (or Harris or Mayor Pete), she’d get my vote.


      1. For all its bad press (from the rest of the (Biden) press) Fox News is really the only place someone like Tulsi would fit. When the Jan 6 committee was running its showcase for TV event, Fox News was the only station that didn’t give them slavish attention, as Tucker pointed out. During the 2020 Democrat Presidential candidate debates, Fox was not allowed to submit moderators. During the main Presidential debate Fox was allowed in but only if the leftist Democrat Chris Wallace was to be the moderator. Wallace then left Fox to join CNN where he was thrilled to join his political comrades. His stage, CNN+, was shut down after lousy reviews.


  24. And………..

    The Italian screen legend Gina Lollobrigida has said she is running in general elections next month because she is “fed up with quarrelling politicians”.

    Lollobrigida, who turned 95 in July, is endeavoring to become a senator with the Sovereign and Popular Italy party (ISP), a new Eurosceptic, anti-Mario-Draghi political alliance that opposes sending arms to Ukraine and “warmongering Atlanticism”.

    She told Corriere della Sera she was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi, for his “way of doing things, for his non-violence” and that she was a “great friend” of India’s first female prime minister, Indira Gandhi. “I saw her every time she came to Rome. She was an extraordinary woman.”

    Liked by 1 person

  25. To all commenters: I like to encourage free debate, and I have no problem with disagreements, especially when commenters are informed and cite sources.

    But personal attacks are low and should always be avoided. Vulgar references should also be avoided. References to peeing, defecating, telling people to STFU, etc. do nothing to enhance your argument. Indeed, if I may be blunt, people who resort to vulgarisms and personal attacks just look rude and ignorant.

    There is a comment policy here. Please review it. I don’t want this site going down the toilet, and I will block people who refuse to follow the policy. Thanks.

    COMMENT POLICY: Brevity and civility; clarity and accuracy; passion and largeness of spirit: please aim for these. This site is against pet peeves, score-settling, insults, and other bad behavior that impedes true debate and sound learning.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. As i just commented on the Ukraine Boondoggle blog:

      Thank You, Colonel. i’ve been wondering when the Adult Supervision would kick in.

      The problem i see ~ with virtually all online Comments Sections and exchanges on social media ~ is that, more often than not, “discussions” that start as conversations very frequently and easily degenerate into confrontation and conflict, and dialogues decompose into “I am Right and you are Wrong” diatribes.

      One rule i try to keep in guiding what i say and how i say it online is to ask myself if i would make this statement if the person i was addressing it to was sitting right next to me, and we were talking to each other in person.

      My guess is that there would be a lot less confrontation, conflict, and diatribes if the people exchanging thoughts, ideas, and assertions were face-to-face in conversation, and not who knows how far apart, connected only by the Internet.

      In any event, Thanks for the reminder of the “Rules of Engagement.”


  26. Todays discouraging fact:

    Monica Duffy Toft, Professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Tufts University…. “The US continues to dramatically prioritise funding of its Department of Defense while limiting funding and roles for its Department of State. Currently, the United States has US special forces deployed in more countries than it does ambassadors”.


  27. ‘The Zelensky you don’t know’

    Born to a Jewish family, Zelensky was a comedian actor before he became a politician. In 2019, he ran as an anti-establishment, anti-corruption political outsider for the presidency and won the election with 73.23% of the vote. In 2018, his assets were worth about $1.5 million (₴37 million). (Source: Wikipedia)

    Zelensky is the darling of American and Western media even before the Russian invasion. The videos (h/t Elizabeth) below of Zelensky when he was a “comedian actor” provides some illumination as to why he is their darling.


    1. Not until you provided the link, Dennis. Thanks.
      The last paragraph is so True.
      What about the sense of superiority among those Ukrainians who identify themselves with Westerners rather than with Russians?

      This is true, and, as for me, this is the most tragic part of the whole post-Maidan story, because it is exactly this sense of superiority that prevented the “progressive” pro-Maidan forces from finding common language with their “backward” pro-Russian compatriots. This led to the Donbass uprising, the “anti-terrorist operation” of the Ukrainian army against Donbass, Russia’s intervention, Minsk peace agreements, their non-fulfillment, and, finally, the current war.

      The US planted the seeds for this War with the 2014 US/CIA Coup/regime change of the Elected Russian friendly government, replacing it with a Neo-Nazi anti-Russian government.
      Naturally the majority Russian speaking Ukrainians in the East who voted for that Russian friendly government, rebelled against the US Coup

      Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.