http://usdefensewatch.com/2018/09/the-deep-states-active-measures-campaign-against-trump/
By Ray Starmann
Like Caesar, Trump is surrounded by enemies, like JFK the Deep State is determined to destroy him at all costs.
President Trump is under 24-hour siege from Deep State traitors and
their loyal minions in the mainstream media who seek to bring down his
presidency.
Be in no doubt, President Trump’s enemies are your enemies. President
Trump’s enemies are America’s enemies. President Trump’s enemies are
freedom’s enemies.
They seek to open our borders in order to flood the nation with cheap
labor, while creating a new voting bloc for the Democrats, who have
been abandoned by Middle America. They want endless, unwinnable wars in
order to line their pockets and justify their government jobs and think
tank titles. They wish to bring back trade deals that eradicate the
nation’s industrial output, while putting the final nail in the
Forgotten Man’s coffin. They want high taxes, Soviet-style national
health care and the erasure of the Second Amendment.
They don’t believe in American Exceptionalism, in America First, but
in a global government, where America is only a seat at a children’s
table, no more equal in value to third rate nations.
The Deep State, the Establishment, and their obscene acolytes in the
media, in the Antifa, in BLM, in the ‘Resistance’ are anti-American
traitors who wish to destroy Trump because he represents something they
never will, the United States of America, and its founding beliefs of
small government and laissez faire economics.
The President is also a self-made man, who never worked a day in his
life for anyone, nor for the US government before he was elected to
office, and that very fact causes him to be hated by the Beltway
Establishment which has never known a paycheck that was not signed by
the US Treasury.
The Deep State Coup against the President is largely being
orchestrated by the intelligence community. It smells, sounds, feels
like an intelligence operation and has from day one.
The Deep State’s greatest weapon is what the KGB used to refer to as ‘active measures.’
Active measures range “from media manipulations to special actions involving various degrees of violence”. They were used both abroad and domestically. They included disinformation, propaganda, counterfeiting official documents, assassinations, and political repression, such as penetration into churches, and persecution of political dissidents.[1]
Retired KGB Maj. Gen. Oleg Kalugin,
former Director of Foreign Intelligence for the KGB, described active
measures as “the heart and soul of Soviet intelligence”: “Not
intelligence collection, but subversion: active measures to weaken the
West, to drive wedges in the Western community alliances of all sorts,
particularly NATO, to sow discord among allies, to weaken the United
States in the eyes of the people of Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America,
and thus to prepare ground in case the war really occurs.”[2]
Disinformation, propaganda, media manipulation, subversion, creating
discord, political repression (silencing conservatives on social media).
Sounds a lot like what’s going on now, doesn’t it?
The active measures campaign really kicked into gear the first day
the Russian Collusion Fairy Tale was broadcast to the world. The Russian
Fairy Tale serves three purposes: one, to justify why Hillary lost,
two, to depose Mr. Trump, three, to ensure the globalist gravy train
keeps running down the track.
Using the oldest trick in the spy tradecraft bag, every treasonous
act the Clinton’s and the Deep State conducted was now thrown at Trump.
It was the Clinton’s who sold missile technology to China in the 1990’s.
It was Hillary who opened up her server to Russian and Chinese hacking.
It was Hillary who sold the nation’s uranium to the Russians.
Yet, in one fell swoop, Trump was now the Russian agent, who colluded
with Putin and the GRU to throw the 2016 Election. Yes, through some
nefarious Russian operation, Trump became elected when every bleeding
heart knew it would surely be Hillary!
With the assistance of a mealy mouthed Attorney General and a Deputy
Attorney General loyal to James Comey and Hillary, a Special Counsel was
created to investigate something that never happened.
Enter Deep State hack and Uranium One bag man, Robert Mueller, who
along with Obama holdouts in the DOJ, has yet to prove that Trump
colluded with anyone on the planet.
In order to propagate the disinformation, the liberal media has been
totally engaged in the operation. Like Hitler’s Propaganda Minister,
Josef Goebbels, the mainstream media hammered and continues to hammer
the American public with the big lie, that if told often enough, many
will believe.
As time progressed, political opponents had to be silence on Twitter,
on You Tube, on Facebook, on Instagram. The big lie was being
challenged by America’s modern-day Sam Adams, Alec Jones, who is now
public enemy number one to the Deep State.
In the last week, the next phase of the active measures campaign
against President Trump began with the publication of establishment
journalist Bob Woodward’s book, Fear.
The book, a hatchet job, light on facts and heavy on embellishment
has one main purpose, to paint Trump as an erratic, know-nothing,
hot-headed maniac who must be consistently restrained by loyal
subordinates who refer to the Trump White House as ‘crazytown.’
Sounds like a setup for a 25th Amendment coup doesn’t it?
Mr. Woodward would be better served by writing a book on Hillary called Chinatown.
Woodward is the perfect Deep State operative, someone who many
believe is a sainted, impartial journalist, the anti-hero of Watergate, a
man who is supposedly a conservative, but is actually an establishment
liberal.
Yesterday, the NY Times published an OPED titled, I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration.
Like, the Woodward work of fiction, the OPED whether real or not, was
designed to create an image of Trump as a dangerous leader whose
actions must be thwarted to save the nation.
Not only is Trump a Russian agent who stole the election, he is also a
crazy man who must be stopped at all costs by Quislings inside the
White House, by globalist operatives, by Deep State hacks. He must be
overthrown before the midterm elections.
A coup d’etat against Trump is in progress and at the heart of it, is
the active measures campaign being waged at this very minute.
In 1963, a bewildered and shocked nation watched as a coup d’etat took place under the guise of the Deep State.
Are we going to let it happen again?
Pray for Trump…
Thursday, September 6, 2018
Sunday, September 2, 2018
What If....
https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018/09/01/what-if/#more-182499
By Tim “xrugger” Stebbins for The Burning Platform
Part I: The United States “are.”
Most of the time what I read (including my own stuff) is long on descriptions and explanations of the problems besetting the nation, but woefully short on suggestions or thoughts on how to fix it. My views regarding the trajectory of the country have been clearly stated on this website and I stand by them. I do not think the country is salvageable in its present form and the odds of avoiding a national nervous breakdown are minimal at best. Having said that, mechanisms do exist for addressing the problems we face. What follows is a thought experiment in (Admin willing) several parts on what it would take to restore this nation without the massive destruction, bloodshed, and chaos which will inevitably engulf us if we continue our present course. I believe the chances of any of the needed reforms I hope to discuss actually coming to fruition are negligible. The alternative, however, is so horrific that we owe it to ourselves and to those we love to give voice to hope.
The consolidation of the states into one vast empire, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of ruin which has overwhelmed all that preceded it.
Robert E. Lee
The states are the key to any significant amelioration of the national dilemma. I am not talking about the states in terms of the people who live in them. I am talking about the states as sovereign entities separate from and opposed to the federal power. The distinction is crucial to what follows.
Prior to Lincoln’s War, national identity was an afterthought. One’s state commanded primary allegiance. This sense of state sovereignty and identity suffered near extinction in the bludgeoning that followed hard upon the South’s refusal to accept federal ascendancy. Its restoration is essential if the states are to have any hope of standing up to the federal leviathan. If any recognizable version of America is to survive, the United States must once again become an “are” instead of an “is.” As a people, we must do something we have not done in a very long time. We must learn to think of ourselves as Montanans, Virginians, Vermonters, Georgians and Minnesotans first and Americans second. State legislators and executives must think and act like the leaders of sovereign states and not like second-string players on the national team.
If the people of any given state wish to rise above the provincial subservience to which the central government has relegated them, they must be willing to pay all sorts of costs that the federal government will seek to inflict upon them. More importantly, they must instill that willingness in their leadership. State politicians must begin to fear the people of their state more that they fear the power of the federal government.
Usually the first tool in the federal bag is the threat to withhold all sorts of federal payments from recalcitrant states. Depending on the severity and duration of the challenge, everything would potentially be on the table. From highway money to Social Security, every form of federal largesse will be included in the threat and the actual withholding of these resources would undoubtedly cause significant disruptions to state operations and genuine pain to the vast number of individuals and families that have become dependent on federal handouts for their very existence. Sorry about that, but a genuine challenge to federal authority must be backed by the willingness to tell the national government to take their money and shove it.
Of course, many of the actions of a state that truly seeks to wrest authority from Washington D.C. would require the nullification of a host of federal laws and regulations. Even now, we see de facto nullification of federal law in the actions of many states with regard to immigration and drug law. California refuses to enforce federal immigration and drug law and suffers no consequences. If that bastion of leftist moonbattery can thumb its nose at Washington with impunity, why cannot Montana similarly invite the central government to piss up a rope when it comes to enforcing oh, let’s say… federal gun laws? The double standard in such matters is comically blatant.
Naturally, politically incorrect nullification would trigger a slew of court challenges certain to spark a chubby in every lawyer from Nome to North Lauderdale. Invalidation by the courts would surely follow. Ultimately, the Supreme Court would be the final arbiter of any challenge deemed serious enough to find its way to the top of the heap. Leftist lips, perennially chapped from suckling on the government teat, are nothing if not persistent. Rest assured that no state challenge to federal mandates regarding diversity, gender equality, second amendment rights, or any other liberty destroying pet projects of the protected classes would go unnoticed or un-litigated. Liberty to the hive mind is like a game of whack-a-mole; wherever it pops up, it must be hammered down. The trouble for tyrants is that like whack-a-mole, freedom, hammered in one place, has the temerity to pop up again somewhere else. Sovereign states, if they so choose, can provide a place where free men can hold their heads up without fear of the federal mallet.
The essence of nullification is indifference to federal power. Whether that power emanates from the Executive, the Legislative, or the Judicial is of no consequence. If a rebellious…check that…wrong word. If a sovereign state worthy of the name has had enough of federal overreach, the particular source of federal douchebaggery is unimportant. What matters is how willing the state and its people are to go to the wall to reclaim their place in the national discussion.
Indifference to federal mandates requires the national government to initiate some sort of action, though, once again, that appears to depend on the political leanings of the state in question. If no federal action is forthcoming, then nullification has achieved its purpose and has fundamentally altered the federal/state relationship without violence or bloodshed. This appears to be the case in states like California and Colorado. However, if there is direct federal action to compel state obedience the response must be commensurate with the severity of the federal riposte, up to and including armed resistance. I believe that any serious attempt by the states to restore their sovereignty would likely escalate until both the states and the federal government would be faced with essentially the same choices faced by the country in 1860. Here we get to the meat of the matter.
Any state challenge to federal authority must carry with it the explicit threat of secession. Otherwise, the whole exercise is pointless. The possibility always exists that the federals will blink when they once again stand eyeball to eyeball with a state that has rediscovered its backbone. When (or if) the brink is reached, secession must once again be on the table. Most Americans likely think that secession is somehow illegal, or simply unthinkable. It is neither.
The right to withdraw from a voluntary association is implicit in the very concept of such an association. Secession from a voluntary association, which is antithetical to the interests of one or more of the constituent members, is implicit in the original agreement; therefore, unless and until the original agreement is altered in such a way as to make withdrawal illegal, the right of secession still exists. It likely exists as a natural right in any case, but again, that is a discussion for another day.
As much as we might revere the Constitution, in essence it is nothing more than a contractual agreement between sovereign entities. There is in it no explicit prohibition on withdrawal from the agreement; therefore, the conditions noted above still apply. I believe that the South had the absolute right to secede, but was denied exit from the Union by force of arms. The Union victory in Lincoln’s War did not abrogate the right of secession, it only compelled the submission of the unwilling. The right of secession still exists and the several states need to remember that fact, as does the federal government.
The restoration of state sovereignty to its rightful place in the national debate is crucial if this country is to have any chance at a peaceful resolution of the growing conflicts we face. Our own history shows us the perils of such a course of action. I do not believe the federal government has the stomach to initiate a second civil war, but if the people of any given state utterly reject further association in the American Union, the only option left to the federal power is to compel their submission. As things stand now, Washington holds the whip hand and the lickspittle representation of most states would likely fold at the first federal threat to withhold government cheese.
It is clear that restoring state identity and sovereignty is largely a subjective process. The people of any given state must rediscover what it means to chart their own course. The risks inherent in opposing the federal beast we have allowed to run rampant are significant, but so too are the potential rewards. A re-ordering of the Union as something more akin to the original Articles of Confederation would allow states who wish to follow a socialist path to suffer the consequences of their foolishness without encroaching on the rights of those states that choose the freedom road. A vastly diminished federal government would have little power to continue to impose a one-size-fits-all credo on states wishing to go their own way.
The federal government of the United States, as presently
constituted, is a suppurating lesion on the American body politic. It is
orders of magnitude more overbearing and intrusive than anything the
Colonial era opponents of central government could have imagined. If not
brought to heal by the sovereign states, what remains of American
liberty will not survive its depredations. The power to restore the
nation resides primarily with the legislative power of the sovereign
states. Among other things, it is within their power to repeal
Constitutional amendments, or call an Article V convention. The states
are not federal lapdogs. They never were. Neither were they to become
the enforcers of federal edicts, or the collectors of federal taxes. The
government of a genuinely sovereign state exists to guard its people
from the overreaching pomposity of a self-aggrandizing central
government.
If there is to be the slightest chance of avoiding the horrors of internecine strife that are looming on the national horizon, the states absolutely must reclaim their rightful place in the original vision of the Founders.
Next up: Article V Convention, Amendment repeal, demoting the Supreme Court, Abolishing the withholding tax, and other impossible tasks.
Part I: The United States “are.”
Most of the time what I read (including my own stuff) is long on descriptions and explanations of the problems besetting the nation, but woefully short on suggestions or thoughts on how to fix it. My views regarding the trajectory of the country have been clearly stated on this website and I stand by them. I do not think the country is salvageable in its present form and the odds of avoiding a national nervous breakdown are minimal at best. Having said that, mechanisms do exist for addressing the problems we face. What follows is a thought experiment in (Admin willing) several parts on what it would take to restore this nation without the massive destruction, bloodshed, and chaos which will inevitably engulf us if we continue our present course. I believe the chances of any of the needed reforms I hope to discuss actually coming to fruition are negligible. The alternative, however, is so horrific that we owe it to ourselves and to those we love to give voice to hope.
The consolidation of the states into one vast empire, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of ruin which has overwhelmed all that preceded it.
Robert E. Lee
The states are the key to any significant amelioration of the national dilemma. I am not talking about the states in terms of the people who live in them. I am talking about the states as sovereign entities separate from and opposed to the federal power. The distinction is crucial to what follows.
Prior to Lincoln’s War, national identity was an afterthought. One’s state commanded primary allegiance. This sense of state sovereignty and identity suffered near extinction in the bludgeoning that followed hard upon the South’s refusal to accept federal ascendancy. Its restoration is essential if the states are to have any hope of standing up to the federal leviathan. If any recognizable version of America is to survive, the United States must once again become an “are” instead of an “is.” As a people, we must do something we have not done in a very long time. We must learn to think of ourselves as Montanans, Virginians, Vermonters, Georgians and Minnesotans first and Americans second. State legislators and executives must think and act like the leaders of sovereign states and not like second-string players on the national team.
If the people of any given state wish to rise above the provincial subservience to which the central government has relegated them, they must be willing to pay all sorts of costs that the federal government will seek to inflict upon them. More importantly, they must instill that willingness in their leadership. State politicians must begin to fear the people of their state more that they fear the power of the federal government.
Usually the first tool in the federal bag is the threat to withhold all sorts of federal payments from recalcitrant states. Depending on the severity and duration of the challenge, everything would potentially be on the table. From highway money to Social Security, every form of federal largesse will be included in the threat and the actual withholding of these resources would undoubtedly cause significant disruptions to state operations and genuine pain to the vast number of individuals and families that have become dependent on federal handouts for their very existence. Sorry about that, but a genuine challenge to federal authority must be backed by the willingness to tell the national government to take their money and shove it.
Of course, many of the actions of a state that truly seeks to wrest authority from Washington D.C. would require the nullification of a host of federal laws and regulations. Even now, we see de facto nullification of federal law in the actions of many states with regard to immigration and drug law. California refuses to enforce federal immigration and drug law and suffers no consequences. If that bastion of leftist moonbattery can thumb its nose at Washington with impunity, why cannot Montana similarly invite the central government to piss up a rope when it comes to enforcing oh, let’s say… federal gun laws? The double standard in such matters is comically blatant.
Naturally, politically incorrect nullification would trigger a slew of court challenges certain to spark a chubby in every lawyer from Nome to North Lauderdale. Invalidation by the courts would surely follow. Ultimately, the Supreme Court would be the final arbiter of any challenge deemed serious enough to find its way to the top of the heap. Leftist lips, perennially chapped from suckling on the government teat, are nothing if not persistent. Rest assured that no state challenge to federal mandates regarding diversity, gender equality, second amendment rights, or any other liberty destroying pet projects of the protected classes would go unnoticed or un-litigated. Liberty to the hive mind is like a game of whack-a-mole; wherever it pops up, it must be hammered down. The trouble for tyrants is that like whack-a-mole, freedom, hammered in one place, has the temerity to pop up again somewhere else. Sovereign states, if they so choose, can provide a place where free men can hold their heads up without fear of the federal mallet.
The essence of nullification is indifference to federal power. Whether that power emanates from the Executive, the Legislative, or the Judicial is of no consequence. If a rebellious…check that…wrong word. If a sovereign state worthy of the name has had enough of federal overreach, the particular source of federal douchebaggery is unimportant. What matters is how willing the state and its people are to go to the wall to reclaim their place in the national discussion.
Indifference to federal mandates requires the national government to initiate some sort of action, though, once again, that appears to depend on the political leanings of the state in question. If no federal action is forthcoming, then nullification has achieved its purpose and has fundamentally altered the federal/state relationship without violence or bloodshed. This appears to be the case in states like California and Colorado. However, if there is direct federal action to compel state obedience the response must be commensurate with the severity of the federal riposte, up to and including armed resistance. I believe that any serious attempt by the states to restore their sovereignty would likely escalate until both the states and the federal government would be faced with essentially the same choices faced by the country in 1860. Here we get to the meat of the matter.
Any state challenge to federal authority must carry with it the explicit threat of secession. Otherwise, the whole exercise is pointless. The possibility always exists that the federals will blink when they once again stand eyeball to eyeball with a state that has rediscovered its backbone. When (or if) the brink is reached, secession must once again be on the table. Most Americans likely think that secession is somehow illegal, or simply unthinkable. It is neither.
The right to withdraw from a voluntary association is implicit in the very concept of such an association. Secession from a voluntary association, which is antithetical to the interests of one or more of the constituent members, is implicit in the original agreement; therefore, unless and until the original agreement is altered in such a way as to make withdrawal illegal, the right of secession still exists. It likely exists as a natural right in any case, but again, that is a discussion for another day.
As much as we might revere the Constitution, in essence it is nothing more than a contractual agreement between sovereign entities. There is in it no explicit prohibition on withdrawal from the agreement; therefore, the conditions noted above still apply. I believe that the South had the absolute right to secede, but was denied exit from the Union by force of arms. The Union victory in Lincoln’s War did not abrogate the right of secession, it only compelled the submission of the unwilling. The right of secession still exists and the several states need to remember that fact, as does the federal government.
The restoration of state sovereignty to its rightful place in the national debate is crucial if this country is to have any chance at a peaceful resolution of the growing conflicts we face. Our own history shows us the perils of such a course of action. I do not believe the federal government has the stomach to initiate a second civil war, but if the people of any given state utterly reject further association in the American Union, the only option left to the federal power is to compel their submission. As things stand now, Washington holds the whip hand and the lickspittle representation of most states would likely fold at the first federal threat to withhold government cheese.
It is clear that restoring state identity and sovereignty is largely a subjective process. The people of any given state must rediscover what it means to chart their own course. The risks inherent in opposing the federal beast we have allowed to run rampant are significant, but so too are the potential rewards. A re-ordering of the Union as something more akin to the original Articles of Confederation would allow states who wish to follow a socialist path to suffer the consequences of their foolishness without encroaching on the rights of those states that choose the freedom road. A vastly diminished federal government would have little power to continue to impose a one-size-fits-all credo on states wishing to go their own way.
If there is to be the slightest chance of avoiding the horrors of internecine strife that are looming on the national horizon, the states absolutely must reclaim their rightful place in the original vision of the Founders.
Next up: Article V Convention, Amendment repeal, demoting the Supreme Court, Abolishing the withholding tax, and other impossible tasks.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
