MAXWELL was previously found guilty on December 29, 2021, following a one-month jury trial, of conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.
I am unaware of anyone claiming lack of proof of a deep state is proof of a deep state. Link an example, that would be an interesting read.
OTOH, I think there are many examples of the handiwork of the deep state. USAID funding crazy stuff in countries that don’t matter is one example of deep bureaucracy’s AKA deep state baloney.
@co-hoosier finding USAID isn't proof of anything and is conspiracy thinking. "I do not understand it so conspiracy" is conspiracy thinking.
@arthur-dent tell the truth. you couldn't quit coh. like peas and carrots
The UK?@dbmhoosier I imagine the Trump admin got something from the UK & collateral with several sitting pols to keep it under wraps…
University of Kentucky...the center of all evil...
You really can’t see the deep state, all you can see is what it has done and is doing. USAID nonsense is a perfect one of many examples.
So I obviously don't think your definition exists. But I don't think you give enough credence to how powerful the entrenched bureaucracy is. It's much more than just making sure the i's are dotted and t's crossed. And its been reported on a lot.I consider it the professional bureaucracy that slows down or challenges elected officials’ policy decisions or desires. You wouldn’t deny that exists, would you?
So bureaucracy and deep state are the same? Every nation then has a deep state and the phrase has no meaning.
Deep state to me are powerful shadow figures, many not even in government, carrying out their own shadow government working with other nations or other elite. Think Illuminati, Rothschild, Bilderberg. People stuck in, "we have always required those I's crossed and T's dotted, so we will continue" is simple inertia and a fundamental law of physics.
As to whether every nation has the same size, depth, and power in their own bureaucracies, I'm not aware of that and don't think you're correct. But I'd guess a lot do-- that doesn't mean the phrase has no meaning, though, just that it can be applied in a lot of places, which shouldn't be surprising in the era of bigger and bigger governments.
@bradstevens Do you accept inertia exists? Not just in government, talk to people in large corporations. Following "this is how it has always been done" is real.
Here is a JSTOR article on German bureaucracy faced by Hitler. I like this definition:
The bureaucrat was more concerned with procedure than with
enthusiasm, more concerned with cool precedent than with warm
emotion. By nature conservative, a highly trained member of the
middle class, on "the inside," with an ingrained respect for law
and order, he was more the scribbler than the fighter. The Beam-
ter, that is, the man with an office, was a Jurist, with the training
of a lawyer. Suspicious of the party politics in the Weimar Republic
and of the violence of radical ruffians, the man in the office, the
bureaucrat, had little rapport with the man in the street, the m
The US bureaucrat is similar. Precedent and how it is done matter greatly. It doesn't matter if the move is to the left or right. I know from my brief time at the IRS, we used the actual IRS code. A president could issue forth EOs, but if it wasn't in the actual code, it wouldn't matter. He might be able to tweak the interpretation around the edges, but wholesale change? never. And therin is the modern problem. A Trump isn't trying to tweak. Inertia says "hell no".
Seriously, do you accept inertia is a real force? If so, why discount it? Bureaucrats tend not to be out in the fever swamps of politics. They largely aren't going to dive into radicalism.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Of course I do. But it's not an either/or situation. There can be both a normal inertia and dislike of change one the one hand, and an actual concerted effort to advance one policy position over another, even if the President wants to enact the one you disfavor.Seriously, do you accept inertia is a real force? If so, why discount it? Bureaucrats tend not to be out in the fever swamps of politics. They largely aren't going to dive into radicalism.
Dan Carlin discussed this issue for years before Trump. It certainly ratcheted up during Trump I, though. Heck, some people bragged about it.
Notice, I'm not making any value judgments here, just trying to reach agreement on the facts.
@bradstevens but to be a deep state there has to be a concerted effort. I don't think thousands of Social Security workers are texting each other ways of thwarting Trump.
years ago I asked my German MD friend why he came to the USA to practice medicine. He gave a couple of reasons, one of which how bureaucratic the German system was compared to the U.S. This was in the 70’s and he said heavy bureaucracy was a product of Nazism .
Another point about inertia is the comfort it provides. When an employee can rely on policy, tradition, or “the way it has always been” such employee doesn’t need to think, create anything, or take a risk. Unfortunately, I think our public education system represses individualism and pushes students towards group think, conformance, and acceptance, all building blocks of organizational inertia.