The term “deep state” has been brought up this week repeatedly in regards to the alleged criminal activities of Michael Flynn during the presidential transition. Deep state has nothing to do with the actions of Flynn but rather with the subterfuge that appears to be occurring within the White House.
Deep State was originally a term for “An alleged group of influential antidemocratic coalitions within the Turkish political system and military.” The term has now shifted to being used outside Turkey and refers to a group in America’s political system.
A bureaucratic term used in Washington for the partially obscured group of officials, retired or current, legislators, contractors, and media people. They claim to defend “established government policies.”
Supporting the policies means the possibility, and in the case of President Trump, the reality, of being in opposition of the current administration.
The recent scandal of Michael Flynn highlights a probable team of officials, including those left over from the Obama administration, that are the source of the continuous leaks about White House activities. They gather intelligence which is then passed along to anti-Trump media.
The result is that President Trump and his administration face an unknown number of staff who are hostile to them. Actions, statements, communications, all assumed secret until released to the press through proper channels, are now being illegally leaked.
One of those staffers is former acting Attorney General Sally Yates. She was fired by President Trump for refusing to defend his immigration ban. If Yates was not part of the deep state before her termination, that certainly sealed the deal.
Since she informed White House staff in January that Flynn was being deceptive about his conversations with Russia, it is not difficult to assume she was the source of the leak to the press about Flynn. If it was not her directly then it is certain to be other administrators sympathetic to her.
The press has descended on the Flynn story with desperation. With Democrat urging, the headlines are comparing Flynn’s resignation to Watergate. In their opinion, Flynn is presumed guilty and, with liberal logic, so is the entire Trump administration.
Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.
— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) February 14, 2017
Not surprising after his strong opposition of Trump during the election, the support for the treasonous and probably illegal actions of secret officials, is still a direct betrayal of the party he formerly pledged to.
This most recent slap to conservatives comes soon after Kristol was caught on tape saying things such as, “Look, to be totally honest, if things are so bad as you say with the white working class, don’t you want to get new Americans in?”
His suggestion that Americans probably should be replaced with immigrants was largely ignored. That kind of anti-American rhetoric is too easily accepted by mainstream media. The best case scenario is, those comments weren’t illegal; his newest ones are.
He is not the only one praising the existence of the deep state. Evan McMullin, a former CIA operative and third-party Presidential candidate in 2016, also spoke out in favor of the “secret” group.
McMullin very liberally twisted new reports to suit his agenda. He referred to a New York Times report that indicated Trump’s campaign aides “had contact with Russian intelligence.” He neglected to mention that the very same report stated there was “no evidence the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.”
President Trump, despite being accused of dodging the questions, focused on what he sees as the bigger problem.
The real scandal here is that classified information is illegally given out by "intelligence" like candy. Very un-American!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 15, 2017
The conservative publication, the Washington Free Beacon, has also been quite anti-Trump. A reporter there, Adam Kredo, wrote about what he calls, “a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump’s national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran,” including Ben Rhodes, a former top aide to Barack Obama.
The theory is supported by the contention between the intelligence community and then candidate Trump’s comments during the election season. Trump scoffed the consensus that Russia had hacked the DNC and Clinton campaign.
He attempted to mend fences in January, telling the CIA, “I am so behind you. There is nobody that feels stronger about the intelligence community and the CIA than Donald Trump.”
Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer made a realistic and now somewhat chilling point in early January about the feud. “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” he said. “So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this.”
It appears that Schumer knew what the majority of America didn’t, the deep state is alive and well among President Trump’s administration. It is far too early to know exactly who might be involved or what other leaks will begin to surface.
President Trump has cause for concern. The unstable state of the world, pressure from both Democrats and Republicans, and a mess of problems left from Obama, means his White House is vulnerable to attacks.
The seemingly confirmed presence of a deep state further complicates the situation, leaving Trump not knowing who he can trust. We can expect him to begin investigations of his own to try and root out the sources of the leaks and other mutinous interlopers.
In today’s world, full of the dangers from foreign enemies, it is distressing to be forced to so closely scrutinize your own country. However, internal attacks can cause just as much if not more damage than the external ones, justifying the diligence as a necessary evil.