One of the nation’s most prominent Christian leaders said he fears President Trump is facing a grave domestic threat by forces who want to take over the White House.
"I believe we are in a coup d'etat," Franklin Graham said Wednesday on the "Todd Starnes Radio Show." "There are people in this country who are wanting to destroy the president and take over the government by force."
Graham revealed his concerns as congressional Republicans ramp up accusations that deep state actors within the FBI and the Justice Department may have been plotting against the president.
The evangelical leader did not name names, but he suggested the mainstream media was complicit in the silent coup.
Obviously we cannot trust a Democrat to evaluate Mr. Graham's statement. Let's turn to the former head of the Republican National Committee:
Michael Steele wrote:I have a very simple admonition at this point. Just shut the hell up and don’t ever preach to me about anything ever again. I don’t want to hear it. After telling me how to live my life, who to love, what to believe, what not to believe, what to do and what not to do and now you sit back and the prostitutes don’t matter? The grabbing the you-know-what doesn’t matter? The outright behavior and lies don’t matter? Just shut up.
After reading Franklin Graham and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, it just feels like their belief in Christianity is made manifest by pushing a triumph of law in the secular world. But this triumph of law has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus concerning wealth and poverty, helping your neighbor, or helping the traveler or the stranger. Those aspects of Christianity are considered too onerous for the secular state. Instead the state should concern itself about more fundamental teachings of Jesus, like not making a wedding cake for a gay couple.
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization." - Will Durant "We've kept more promises than we've even made" - Donald Trump "Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist." - Edwin Land
Perhaps the proposal by President Trump and the White House staff to disband the FBI and Justice Department and bring in the KGB might have some merit. The President's friends at Fox could come up with some justification for this changeover.
You know what sucks? "The Deep State" used to be a useful term to describe the semi-permanent security bureaucracy acting in its own interests as different administrations come and go. Now it's a term polluted with crazy conspiracy theories meant to protect a corrupt president from accountability. Merely using it flags you as either a nutbar or someone wanting to politicize federal law enforcement like a tinpot dictator.
The same thing occurred with "fake news." That was a useful term to refer to fictional stories presented to look like real journalism in order to get attention and influence people. Now it's a term used by people to dismiss journalism that casts them or their political allies in a bad light.
It's very important, when trying to identify and label what is true and what isn't, to avoid sweeping generalizations.
It's just really difficult to imagine that not all Drumpf voters are brain dead cult zombies. It's not helpful to call them all stupid, but what other descriptor can you use that is as accurate?
Drumpf voters remind me that we aren't all that far removed from our ape cousins, evolution-wise.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
EAllusion wrote:You know what sucks? "The Deep State" used to be a useful term to describe the semi-permanent security bureaucracy acting in its own interests as different administrations come and go. Now it's a term polluted with crazy conspiracy theories meant to protect a corrupt president from accountability. Merely using it flags you as either a nutbar or someone wanting to politicize federal law enforcement like a tinpot dictator.
The same thing occurred with "fake news." That was a useful term to refer to fictional stories presented to look like real journalism in order to get attention and influence people. Now it's a term used by people to dismiss journalism that casts them or their political allies in a bad light.
These people keep ruining our terms.
They're conducting an Orwellian war. It's a smart tactic, I'm afraid.
EAllusion wrote:You know what sucks? "The Deep State" used to be a useful term to describe the semi-permanent security bureaucracy acting in its own interests as different administrations come and go. Now it's a term polluted with crazy conspiracy theories meant to protect a corrupt president from accountability. Merely using it flags you as either a nutbar or someone wanting to politicize federal law enforcement like a tinpot dictator.
The same thing occurred with "fake news." That was a useful term to refer to fictional stories presented to look like real journalism in order to get attention and influence people. Now it's a term used by people to dismiss journalism that casts them or their political allies in a bad light.
These people keep ruining our terms.
They're conducting an Orwellian war. It's a smart tactic, I'm afraid.
I'm inclined to see things like this as stupid, but effective.
Everyone probably knows someone in their life who gets what they desire because they are willing to behave unethically where others are not. And everyone probably knows someone who does this and imagines what sets them apart is they are more clever or more bold. Others would do what they do if only they had their superior traits. We know, we've always known, that it's not that they are smarter or more bold, but that they lack scruples where we do not. This is life with psychopaths in our midst.
I view constant repetition of "fake news" to discredit true criticisms as an instance of this, just on a national scale. This isn't some genius plan they have uncovered. It's an idiotic plan that just so happens to work. "Let's try a fog of deception" isn't innovative. The reason others haven't done it to this extent before is forbearance in pursuit in political goals. People have historically understood that wall to wall disinformation and demonizing of the legitimate press is unethical and has the practical effect of weakening the whole system of government. When people talk about how Trump (and really, the Republican party) are destroying the norms that underlie our democracy, stuff like this is part of it.
EAllusion wrote:I'm inclined to see things like this as stupid, but effective.
Everyone probably knows someone in their life who gets what they desire because they are willing to behave unethically where others are not. And everyone probably knows someone who does this and imagines what sets them apart is they are more clever or more bold. Others would do what they do if only they had their superior traits. We know, we've always known, that it's not that they are smarter or more bold, but that they lack scruples where we do not. This is life with psychopaths in our midst.
I view constant repetition of "fake news" to discredit true criticisms as an instance of this, just on a national scale. This isn't some genius plan they have uncovered. It's an idiotic plan that just so happens to work. "Let's try a fog of deception" isn't innovative. The reason others haven't done it to this extent before is forbearance in pursuit in political goals. People have historically understood that wall to wall disinformation and demonizing of the legitimate press is unethical and has the practical effect of weakening the whole system of government. When people talk about how Trump (and really, the Republican party) are destroying the norms that underlie our democracy, stuff like this is part of it.
Maksutov wrote: They're conducting an Orwellian war. It's a smart tactic, I'm afraid.
I'm inclined to see things like this as stupid, but effective.
Everyone probably knows someone in their life who gets what they desire because they are willing to behave unethically where others are not. And everyone probably knows someone who does this and imagines what sets them apart is they are more clever or more bold. Others would do what they do if only they had their superior traits. We know, we've always known, that it's not that they are smarter or more bold, but that they lack scruples where we do not. This is life with psychopaths in our midst.
I view constant repetition of "fake news" to discredit true criticisms as an instance of this, just on a national scale. This isn't some genius plan they have uncovered. It's an idiotic plan that just so happens to work. "Let's try a fog of deception" isn't innovative. The reason others haven't done it to this extent before is forbearance in pursuit in political goals. People have historically understood that wall to wall disinformation and demonizing of the legitimate press is unethical and has the practical effect of weakening the whole system of government. When people talk about how Trump (and really, the Republican party) are destroying the norms that underlie our democracy, stuff like this is part of it.
Ruining your terms robs you of authority and message. It's a first strike on the enemy's communication systems. It's a sort of aggression, a weapon in culture change. Violence is typically stupid but sometimes effective. This is virtual violence, virtual civil war. It's a brinkmanship that's incredibly dangerous because it's happening in a place and a way that we haven't quite seen before, that we can't predict or control. It's Black Mirror America.
EAllusion wrote:You know what sucks? "The Deep State" used to be a useful term to describe the semi-permanent security bureaucracy acting in its own interests as different administrations come and go. Now it's a term polluted with crazy conspiracy theories meant to protect a corrupt president from accountability. Merely using it flags you as either a nutbar or someone wanting to politicize federal law enforcement like a tinpot dictator.
The same thing occurred with "fake news." That was a useful term to refer to fictional stories presented to look like real journalism in order to get attention and influence people. Now it's a term used by people to dismiss journalism that casts them or their political allies in a bad light.
These people keep ruining our terms.
Your consideration for the romance and nobility of "the deep state" is concerning...and more so that you only consider it as "corrupt" when yielded by those who don't believe like you believe. Ironically for you, and factually for everyone else, deep state=conspiracy. I get it, you only want a government that represents you and not those other people that you swear have to be inferior to you.
But please, continue, you were endorsing a usurping of the American Constitution and of the wisdom of our nation.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
EAllusion wrote:You know what sucks? "The Deep State" used to be a useful term to describe the semi-permanent security bureaucracy acting in its own interests as different administrations come and go. Now it's a term polluted with crazy conspiracy theories meant to protect a corrupt president from accountability. Merely using it flags you as either a nutbar or someone wanting to politicize federal law enforcement like a tinpot dictator.
The same thing occurred with "fake news." That was a useful term to refer to fictional stories presented to look like real journalism in order to get attention and influence people. Now it's a term used by people to dismiss journalism that casts them or their political allies in a bad light.
These people keep ruining our terms.
Your consideration for the romance and nobility of "the deep state" is concerning...and more so that you only consider it as "corrupt" when yielded by those who don't believe like you believe. Ironically for you, and factually for everyone else, deep state=conspiracy. I get it, you only want a government that represents you and not those other people that you swear have to be inferior to you.
But please, continue, you were endorsing a usurping of the American Constitution and of the wisdom of our nation.
Subgeinius, a couple of questions:
1. Do you think there really is a deep state coup? 2. Who are the leaders? 3. How will they obtain their objective? 4. What is the appropriate response?
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization." - Will Durant "We've kept more promises than we've even made" - Donald Trump "Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist." - Edwin Land