I Have Read The Following Complete Articles And Extracted From Them The Information I Felt Pertinent To Make My Point Which Is To Help Everyone Understand There Is A “Deep State”.



A Warning From An Outgoing President



Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the Nation on January 17, 1961



A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.


Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.


Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.


This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience.


The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.


In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.


We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.


Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.


In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.


Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.


The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.


Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.


It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.



A Warning From A New President




John F. Kennedy at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel on April 27, 1961 before the American Newspaper Publishers Association.


"The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know."


"For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed."


"No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers-- I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.


Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed-- and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First (emphasized) Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution-- not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news-- for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security and we intend to do it."


"And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of mans deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news-- that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent."




Published: November 22, 2014




It was hard to miss JFK’s veiled reference to the Skull and Bones society at Yale University, a branch of the Bavarian Illuminati, the Bilderbergers, CFR and the other secret societies that rule the world from behind the scenes, The Powers That Be (TPTB).


G. William Domhoff, a Research Professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz first coined the non-conspiracy acronym TPTB. He received his Ph.D. at the University of Miami. He has been teaching at the University of California, Santa Cruz, since 1965. Four of his books are among the top 50 best sellers in sociology for the years 1950 to 1995: Who Rules America? (1967); The Higher Circles (1970); Who Rules America Now? (1983); and the non-"conspiracy" critique and theory of the U.S. power structure, The Powers That Be (TPTB) in 1979.


[Excerpt from "Bones" in the Money Pit]


Our consumer society didn’t just happen; it was planned. Not in 1910, or 1954, but in the year 1832, the year William Huntington Russell and fellow classmate Alphonso Taft founded the Skull and Bones society at Yale University, a branch of the Bavarian Illuminati.


Members, known as “Bonesmen,” include Rockefeller, Kuhn, Loeb and Morgan all connected to the House of Rothschild’s global financial empire. They are founders of the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, France, and Germany or, for that matter, any central bank anywhere in the world. In theory, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, one of the most important domestic acts in the nation’s history, took the power to create money from the people and gave it to the Bonesmen for profit.


Russ Baker's new book, “Family of Secrets: the Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, And What Their Influence Means for America," is about George H. W. Bush’s secret intelligence work with the CIA many years before he became the Agency’s director. Bush Sr. had played a powerful but hidden role in determining the direction of the U.S. government.


It's common knowledge that the Bushes sit at the intersection of America's business and intelligence communities, but it not so common knowledge that the Bush Family, Bush Sr., Jr. and grandfather Prescott Bush, were all Bonesmen. Prescott Bush’s initiation in 1918 is said to have included robbing the grave of the Native American warrior, Geronimo. Prescott Bush helped Henry Ford, Averell Harriman and others finance Adolph Hitler.


Russ Baker suggests the strong possibility that Bush Sr. was connected to the assassination of President Kennedy (assassinated November 22, 1963) because “Lyndon Johnson would be more obedient to Texas oil men.


A more plausible connection is Abraham Lincoln (assassinated April 15, 1865) was killed for the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and Kennedy for Executive Order 11110



Jim Marrs, in his book Crossfire, presented the theory that Kennedy was trying to rein in the power of the Federal Reserve, and that forces opposed to such action might have played at least some part in the assassination. Marrs alleges that the issuance of Executive Order 11110 was an effort by Kennedy to transfer power from the Federal Reserve to the United States Department of the Treasury by replacing Federal Reserve Notes with silver certificates. Actor and author Richard Belzer named the responsible parties in this theory as American "billionaires, power brokers, and bankers ... working in tandem with the CIA and other sympathetic agents of the government." - Wikipedia



Lincoln’s “greenbacks” would have prevented the Federal Reserve from creating $500 trillion of money out of thin air, money that Warren Buffett and Market watch say financed our global consumer society.


And, JFK’s "United States notes" backed by silver, which were withdrawn the day he was shot, would have put the Federal Reserve out of business and returned to the Treasury Department the Constitutional power to create and issue a debt-free currency.


Anyone who spoke against the “Creature from Jekyll Island” (Federal Reserve banking cartel exposed by G. Edward Griffin) was silenced. Presidents Garfield (assassinated July 2, 1881) and McKinley (assassinated September 1, 1901), outspoken champions of “sound” money and a central bank, were silenced permanently.


John Sherman, a Rothschild protégé in a letter sent to New York bankers on June 25, 1863 in support of the then proposed National Banking Act, wrote:


“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favors that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages...will bear its burden without complaint, and perhaps without suspecting that the system is inimical to their best interests.”


Directly and indirectly, the Bonesmen orchestrated the Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, the stagflation of the 1970’s and the dot-com and the housing market bubbles.


One of the more absurd notions that has found its way into the history books and the writings of economic experts is that somehow these men were made wealthier from the Monopoly money they printed, the same money that enabled consumers to buy houses, second houses, cars, RVs, TVs and DVDs, i.e., the cheap “stuff” we use on a daily basis. Let’s not forget the fact that in 1910 these men already controlled one-sixth of the world’s wealth. And that was real wealth—gold, silver and raw materials—not the fiat currency we call money. Don’t forget the world they owned and controlled in 1910 had a mostly balanced ecology.


The Skull and Bones society and the Federal Reserve were critical to the growth of our industrial and consumer society, but responsible for much of the financial and environmental damage done to the planet.


We perceive our Country as a constitutional republic; a government representative of the people and accountable to them; but it now seems that premise is nothing more than an illusionary, sentimental belief.


[End of excerpt]


Consider Another Assassination Conspiracy Theory


Few would deny JFK was talking about TPTB when he used the words, “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy.”


What if, after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, his investigation uncovered the “secret” that TPTB are in a metaphysical struggle with Mother-Earth (Gaea) and the environmental damage and pollution was the goal and not the unintended consequences of the Industrial Revolution and our consumer society?


And it is conceivable when in 1961 JFK spoke about a:


“System which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.


Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, and no secret is revealed."


He was referring to a system that wasn’t about money. Instead he understood that the resources of the planet were about to be consumed – as in “used up” because he understood the metaphysical struggle.


Then when he realized we were about to be “conned,” into shopping for stuff to trash the planet, he signed Executive Order 11110 as a first step to put us on the road to sustainability.


What would a different history look like?






The Technetronic Era



Zbigniew Brezinski, National Security Advisor to President Carter,

CFR member and first Director of the Trilateral Commission, writes of a society controlled by a Power Elite in his 1970 book, Between Two Ages:

America's Role in the Technetronic Era.  You will find much of today’s world in his writings of 46 years ago.



The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.


Today we are again witnessing the emergence of transnational elites...[whose] ties cut across national boundaries... It is likely that before long the social elites of most of the more advanced countries will be highly internationalist or globalist in spirit and outlook....


Within a few years the rebels in the more advanced countries who today have the most visibility will be joined by a new generation making its claim to power in government and business... accepting as routine managerial processes current innovations such as planning-programming-budgeting systems (PPBS) ... A national information grid that will integrate existing electronic data banks is already being developed.... The projected world information grid, for which Japan, Western Europe, and the United States are most suited, could create the basis for a common educational program, for the adoption of common academic standards....


The nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty. ... In the economic-technological field, some international cooperation has already been achieved, but further progress will require greater American sacrifices. More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken, with some consequent risk to the present relatively favorable American position.



MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' Co-host Mika Brzezinski, daughter of Zbigniew Brezinski, National Security Advisor to President Carter, commented Wednesday morning, 2/22/17, that she is upset to see President Trump has moved in on the media's turf when it comes to the area of mind control.


"He is trying to undermine the media and trying to make up his own facts," she said about Trump. "And it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, he could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think."


"And that, that is our job," she noted, referring to the media.






The Deep State



Retired congressional staffer Mike Lofgren illuminates the shadowy influencers behind US politics in his incriminating new book, The Deep State. Explore in detail the involvement of Wall Street, Silicon Valley and the military-industrial complex in the decisions that will shape the future of the United States.


Essay: Anatomy of the Deep State

February 21, 2014

by Mike Lofgren


The Deep State is the big story of our time. It is the red thread that runs through the war on terrorism, the financialization and deindustrialization of the American economy, the rise of a plutocratic social structure and political dysfunction. Washington is the headquarters of the Deep State, and its time in the sun as a rival to Rome, Constantinople or London may be term-limited by its overweening sense of self-importance and its habit, as Winwood Reade said of Rome, to “live upon its principal till ruin stared it in the face.” “Living upon its principal,” in this case, means that the Deep State has been extracting value from the American people in vampire-like fashion.


The Deep State does not consist of the entire government. It is a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies: the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Justice Department. I also include the Department of the Treasury because of its jurisdiction over financial flows, its enforcement of international sanctions and its organic symbiosis with Wall Street. All these agencies are coordinated by the Executive Office of the President via the National Security Council. Certain key areas of the judiciary belong to the Deep State, such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, whose actions are mysterious even to most members of Congress. Also included are a handful of vital federal trial courts, such as the Eastern District of Virginia and the Southern District of Manhattan, where sensitive proceedings in national security cases are conducted. The final government component (and possibly last in precedence among the formal branches of government established by the Constitution) is a kind of rump Congress consisting of the congressional leadership and some (but not all) of the members of the defense and intelligence committees. The rest of Congress, normally so fractious and partisan, is mostly only intermittently aware of the Deep State and when required usually submits to a few well-chosen words from the State’s emissaries.



Lofgren agreed to speak with retired Truthout editor Leslie Thatcher about his new book on January 27, 2016.

The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.


You describe the “deep state” as the iceberg beneath the visible tip of the official US government “that is theoretically controllable via elections.” How does it function and what are its main components?


It’s a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry effectively able to govern the US without reference to the consent of the governed. Its nodes are the national security agencies of government, Treasury, the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] court (whose dealings are so mysterious not even most members of Congress know what the court is doing).


Most congress people just vote according to what their party leadership tells them. Membership in the deep state in Congress boils down to the leadership and a handful of Defense and Intelligence Committee members. The private part of the deep state is the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned about in 1961. There is also Wall Street and its symbiotic relationship with the Treasury and its regulatory agencies, like the SEC [Security and Exchange Commission]. People like Hank Paulson, who worked for [George W.] Bush, or Tim Geithner, who worked for Obama, are essentially interchangeable: Their worldview is much the same despite being of different political parties.


And then, of course, you have Silicon Valley – necessary for the technology which totally enables the NSA [National Security Agency] (which informants have told me couldn’t do its job without that technology). Silicon Valley is also significant as an enormous center of new wealth. You also see their self-glorifying statements about being innovative disruptors. They certainly are disrupting the economy. There is little evidence that technology will do anything in a macroeconomic sense other than concentrating wealth even further so that we’re left with CEOs on top and everyone else in the gig economy, like contractors for Uber.


How did you personally become aware of the deep state and what is the explanatory power of its existence for understanding current affairs?


I became aware that there were forces at work in the period between 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq that were bigger than the government and were operating on their own compass heading. We have a supposedly free press, but when you saw people like Phil Donahue and Ashley Banfield fired or demoted for being critical of invasion, you have to wonder. I’m pretty sure nobody in the White House picked up the phone and asked somebody at NBC to fire those folks, but the NBC executives were sufficiently conditioned to perform a service to the government by firing those folks and creating the propaganda for the war.


You trace the transformation of Washington, DC, and the explosion of the deep state to the 1970s, the Powell Memo and the explosion of tax-exempt foundations and its origins to the secret development of the A-bomb. A recent National Review article uses the term, “Government of, by, and for Special Interests,” and ascribes that to progressive politics and the New Deal. Are these views reconcilable?


Well, their view is certainly not my view. Enough people know that something is wrong, even if they can’t put their finger on exactly what it is or how it works, so the editors at the National Review have had to craft a counter narrative to muddy the waters; that’s all it is. For crying out loud, William Buckley Jr. came out of the CIA; I wouldn’t be surprised if he were part of Operation Mockingbird. Time-Life and other media outlets were on the payroll of the CIA during the 1950s. Their role was to reflect the CIA’s point of view. Buckley, after graduating from Yale, a favorite recruitment center for CIA, went into the CIA, but only for two years. Why? [CIA director Allen] Dulles would have gravitated to him because he was a Yale man and because his father was rich. It seems very possible that Dulles, or some other CIA executive, told Buckley he could do more for the cause by creating a conservative front group to push the CIA’s Cold War line and to denigrate the isolationist posture of conservatives like Sen. Robert Taft.



Operation Mockingbird was allegedly a large-scale program of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that, beginning in the early 1950s, attempted to manipulate news media for propaganda purposes, and funded student and cultural organizations and magazines as front organizations.


The claim that CIA ran an "Operation Mockingbird" first appeared in Katharine the Great, a 1979 biography of Washington Post owner Katharine Graham, written by reporter Deborah Davis. According to Davis, Operation Mockingbird was established by Frank Wisner, director of the Office of Policy Coordination, a covert operations unit created by the U.S. National Security Council. Davis writes that Mockingbird was a response to the creation of a Communist front organization, the International Organization of Journalists, which "received money from Moscow and controlled reporters on every major newspaper in Europe, disseminating stories that promoted the Communist cause."


Wisner recruited Philip Graham from The Washington Post to run the project within the industry. According to Davis, "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of The New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles." Wikipedia



How does the deep state survive and even thrive in spite of its obvious failures from the war on drugs to the “war on terror,” from economic to political and social justice?


Well, although it doesn’t do much to help the republic or the economy as a whole, it does help certain people. This circumstance creates a kind of perverse Darwinism in the short and medium term, so that harmful traits are the ones that are selected for. And most people simply don’t look at the long-term results of their actions, but mirror the typical corporate executive whose timeline is the next quarter’s results and how they will impact the price of the stocks he owns.


What is the position of finance in the deep state? What does it mean to “fight for an open economic system?”


A macro explanation of the trade deals of the last 25 years – NAFTA, CAFTA etc. and now the TPP [Trans-Pacific Partnership] – is to forget about tariff schedules and what textiles cost. These agreements are a bargain between the United States and other countries whereby the US gives privileged access to US markets in exchange for submission on foreign and economic policy. The powers that be are perfectly happy to destroy the economic seed corn in the USA in exchange for temporary dominance abroad. They’re willing to sacrifice Detroit for the UAE [United Arab Emirates].


As a congressional staffer, I presume you interacted regularly with people you would now consider operatives of the deep state. What can you tell us about them as people? What motivates them? What immunizes them so thoroughly from democratic concerns?


mccain.jpgI think it’s hard to improve on Upton Sinclair’s dictum, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” I think they’re all about the logic that if it pays for their kids’ cornflakes and their scholarship fund, they will do it without their conscience bothering them too much.


So you don’t see them as malevolent?


Oh no, it’s much more banal than that.


Like Hannah Arendt on Eichmann?


Exactly, the banality of evil. ["He did his duty...; he not only obeyed orders, he also obeyed the law."]


You mention the outsourcing of congressional staffing to ALEC [American Legislative Exchange  Council] post-Gingrich in the book. Let’s take one concrete instance of US legislation – the 342-page USA Patriot Act of 2001, initially introduced by the Bush administration less than a week after September 11. Can you explain a little how the deep state would have been involved in its drafting and enactment and how it continues to serve the deep state’s – rather than Americans’ – interests? Also, what were your own thoughts at that time?


twin towers-250.jpgWe can assume that all those provisions that didn’t quite get into all the crime and intelligence bills introduced earlier just sat on a shelf somewhere in the Justice Department and were dusted off. The Patriot Act was drafted by the government in an executive agency. Now what we have 15 years later is  pretty much ALEC-template bills in statehouses – and even on Capitol Hill, legislative drafts originate with the tech industry or K Street so congressional staffers don’t have to worry their pretty little heads about drafting legislation.


You have elsewhere described the inequality of the US criminal legal system and the flat-out “corruption” of the Roberts court. Would your proposals to abolish corporate personhood and get money out of politics be adequate to remedy these abuses?


No single nostrum will be a miraculous panacea. But getting money out of politics is the precondition for anything else, including abolishing corporate personhood, enforcing anti-trust law and reforming health care. You have to align politicians’ incentives with the public interest rather than the interests of political donors.


With the deep state in control, have our elected government organs become purely ceremonial or do elections still make a difference?


There is a symbiotic relationship between the deep state and surface democracy. And the type of person who holds office does matter on the margins. Individual decisions do make a difference. The incentive structures for all concerned tend to be shared in a certain fashion because of careerist best interests. I’m not pointing to some massive conspiracy. All of this is going on in the light of day. Everyone knows who the Koch brothers are, General Dynamics etc. It’s just that most people do not see how it all works as a system and how we’ve been conditioned to look at it.


You’ve been very careful to distinguish the deep state from an active, conscious conspiracy, but is it possible or likely in your view that some of its operatives have been involved in, for lack of a better word, plots to dismantle democracy?


They wouldn’t put it that way. They think they’re legitimately working on political issues. But how it impacts the public is another matter. What the governor of Michigan did was a conspiracy against democracy. He needed to appoint emergency managers with autocratic powers because he needed to undo municipal government and carry out his pro-corporate agenda. His emergency manager plan was rejected in a public referendum, so the Republican-controlled legislature attached the proposal as a rider to an appropriations bill. Therefore it was no longer subject to referendum. Rick Snyder and his cronies are hamstringing the ability of local governments to respond to democratic concerns and consciously doing so in order to pay for the tax cuts they gave to corporations. It was a conscious effort to undo democracy in Michigan, and it ended up poisoning children. What happened was nothing more than racketeering, in my judgment.






As a general rule, it’s probably unwise to pick a fight with spies, a point Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer made in early January. “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.”


Yet Schumer’s warning, even if realistic, is chilling: Not only does it raise the possibility of unelected, faceless bureaucrats using classified information to retaliate against a duly elected president, but that comes in the wake of the intelligence scandals of the Obama years. Edward Snowden’s revelations showed the vast powers that the NSA had accrued and could use, even on American citizens, with little or no oversight.


Some commentators have dubbed what’s going on the revenge of the American Deep State, in reference to the existence—real, imagined, or a little bit in between—of a bureaucratic shadow government that constrains the legitimate government in places like Turkey. In Turkey, generals devoted to the secularist ideology of national founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk have repeatedly toppled governments that they worried were threatening that ideology. In January, when a dossier of explosive and unverified claims about Trump was published, Glenn Greenwald, the leftist journalist who helped break the Snowden story, warned that liberals who cheered the dossier were in effect cheering for an intelligence coup. Greenwald specifically labeled these actions the work of a Deep State, writing, “But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind.”


The idea of a “Deep State” constraining Trump was not new. Back in February, when the idea of a President Trump still seemed wildly implausible, Megan McArdle wrote that he wouldn’t be able to do that much damage even if he won, thanks to bureaucrats who could slow-walk or even block his priorities. “This is the reality: Most of what you want to do to Washington won’t get done—and neither will much of what you want to get done outside of it, if you insist on taking Washington on,” she wrote. After the inauguration, some liberals took new heart in that idea.


But the Deep State motif has really gained in popularity over the last few days, as the pace of leaks undermining Trump has accelerated. “The fact the nation’s now-departed senior guardian of national security was unmoored by a scandal linked to a conversation picked up on a wire offers a rare insight into how exactly America’s vaunted Deep State works,” Marc Ambinder writes at Foreign Policy. “It is a story not about rogue intelligence agencies running amok outside the law, but rather about the vast domestic power they have managed to acquire within it.”


It’s not just the leaks. At Slate, Phillip Carter argued that pushback from career officials had helped prevent Trump from instituting a plan to reinstate torture, labeling this the work of a deep state.







The Deep State Bumps Off General Flynn. Who’s the Next Target?

by VIRGIL15 Feb 2017


I. The Main Stream Media’s Victory Lap 

The Deep State has done its dirty work, getting rid of Michael Flynn, the now-former national security adviser to President Trump.  And so the Main Stream Media (MSM), having taken direction—even dictation—from the Deep State, is moving in for the kill.  The ultimate target, of course, is Trump himself.


The Washington Post, which has long hated Republicans, and Trump in particular, is leading the charge.  On February 15, seven of the eight top stories on its online home page were anti-Flynn, anti-Trump—and, of course, pro-MSM.


Meanwhile, others in the MSM are piling on as well.  Politico has whipped up such hot headlines as “Flynn’s ouster leads to more chaos in Trump world: The former national security adviser is only one of the White House’s many problems.”  And then, striving to give the storyline legs by taking it beyond Flynn, the news site added: “Who Told Flynn to Call Russia? Let’s stop focusing on the resignation, and start focusing on the real issue here: The mystery of Trump’s Russia ties.”  


The MSM narrative is two-fold: First, the crazy kook Flynn was finally removed; second, the Trump White House is headed for a shipwreck, and Captain Trump himself can’t manage the wheel. 


And yet there’s a third narrative, lurking, flitting in and out of focus. 


This third narrative is the demonstrable power of the Deep State.  That is, the permanent government, the people who were here in DC when Trump arrived, and who look forward to seeing him leave—as soon as possible. 


So who, exactly, are these Deep State people?  What are their names?  Their precise identities seemed to be perpetually veiled, cloaked in journalistic omerta.  


And yes, that hiddenness opens up the possibility that reporters are exaggerating, or compositing, their sources—or even making them up altogether.   And yet if the stories about Flynn had been completely made up, the retired three-star would still be on the job.  So the Deep State has proven that it can provide the fire, as well as the smoke.  


Still, some clues as to Deep State identities have emerged.  On Tuesday night, the 14th, Fox News’ Bret Baier put it plainly: The anti-Flynn material “came from someone in the Obama administration.”  


In the meantime, though, we can see that some un-elected Beltway Republicans—the right wing of the Deep State, one might say—are cheerleading the anti-Trump effort.  One such is the neoconservative pundit Bill Kristol, who in a February 14 tweet, basically endorsed the idea of a soft coup: “Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics.  But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.”


The rest of us might say that it’s a whacked-out world when un-elected government officials can commit crimes—leaking classified material is always a crime—and then, with the megaphone of the MSM, shift the blame onto a high government official chosen by a newly elected president, and then get that official removed.  Welcome to Washington.  


So we might ask: What’s the motivation of the Deep State?  Is it just hostility to Trump?  Or to Republicans?  Or is there something more?  


“Let’s not kid ourselves” said Virgil of Brietbart:  “These anti-Trump constituencies might have lost the 2016 presidential election at the ballot box, but they don’t intend to lose their power.  And to that end, they have real clout, and they are using it.”


Eli Lake of Bloomberg News, bluntly entitled a piece, “The Political Assassination of Michael Flynn.” Lake observed that what we’re seeing now is what we see in police states, where the government security apparatus is a sword against its own people, not a shield against foreign enemies.   


As for how all this might end if the Deep State domination continues, Lake approvingly quoted Rep. Nunes: “First it’s Flynn, next it will be Kellyanne Conway, then it will be Steve Bannon, then it will be Reince Priebus.” To which Lake added, “Flynn is only the appetizer. Trump is the entree.”



February 23, 2017



PROJECT VERITAS released 119 hours of raw audio in a WikiLeaks style dump, with over 100 more hours still yet to be released. The audio was secretly recorded in 2009 by an anonymous source inside CNN's Atlanta headquarters who we are identifying as Miss X. The tapes contain sound bites from current and previous CNN employees Joe Sterling, Arthur Brice, and Nicky Robertson, as well as numerous others. 


Miss X: "I read a CNN poll that was taken on June 26 and 28th, and I know that the hearing for the case, the fire fighters case was on the 29th, so the poll was done right before it, and those are still the poll results we're reporting, so I asked someone in DC who does the poll results about why we hadn't updated it, and said there were a few newer polls from last week and the week before and there's CBS news polls and a Rasmussen poll, and he said we don't use Rasmussen, and I said does CNN plan to do another poll if we're only using that. He said we're not going to be doing another poll, those are the results we'll be using. So I don't see how that's reporting all sides because that poll said hold for release until Friday the 10th."


Arthur Brice: "Who did you talk with?"


Miss X: "Paul [CNN's Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser]."


Arthur Brice: "Yeah, he's your director. Yeah, he's pretty high up in the food chain. I agree. I think it's dishonest to use outdated information if new information shows something that is in variance with what you're reporting. It's just, it's dishonest."


The same apathy towards reporting accurate poll numbers was seen in the way CNN released inaccurate poll numbers about Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor.


Miss X: "This wasn't released until two weeks after. So can we say a newly released poll?"


Joe Sterling: "No, you can't say that. You can't say that at all. This isn't a newly released."


Miss X: "But it says newly released on Friday."


Joe Sterling: "I know, how did we write about this? Did we write a wire about this? "I don't think we stand to change how people think of her [Sotomayor]. Geez, I mean if someone picked this up it's not going to change - it's not going to change anybody's opinion."



Journalism is supposed to be about reporting the news, not shaping opinion unless, of course, you are part of the Deep State!


Who Are Some Of The Players



Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries.


Founded in 1921, the Council takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.


The Council on Foreign Relations' David Rockefeller Studies Program — CFR's "think tank" — is composed of about fifty adjunct and full-time scholars and practitioners (called "fellows")


The program focuses on the most significant foreign policy issues facing the United States and the international community today, including conflict in the Middle East, rising powers in Asia, and globalization. The fellows' work covers all major geographical regions of the world — Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, and the Polar regions — as well as the following program areas: energy security and climate change, global health, international institutions and global governance, national security and defense, science and technology, and U.S. foreign policy. In addition, the Studies Program hosts two research centers: The Maurice R. Greenberg Center for Geoeconomics and the Center for Preventive Action.


The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is first and foremost a membership organization. With more than 4,300 members, CFR's ranks include top government officials, renowned scholars, business leaders, acclaimed journalists, prominent attorneys, and a host of distinguished nonprofit professionals.




Trilateral Commission 

The Trilateral Commission was formed in 1973 by private citizens of Japan, Europe (European Union countries), and North America (United States and Canada) to foster closer cooperation among these core industrialized areas of the world with shared leadership responsibilities in the wider international system. Originally established for three years, our work has been renewed for successive triennia (three-year periods), most recently for a triennium to be completed in 2012


The “growing interdependence” that so impressed the founders of the Trilateral Commission in the early 1970s has deepened into “globalization.”


Our membership has widened to reflect broader changes in the world. Thus, the Japan Group has become a Pacific Asian Group, including in 2009 both Chinese and Indian members. Mexican members have been added to the North American Group. The European Group continues to widen in line with the enlargement of the EU. We are also continuing in this triennium our practice of inviting a number of participants from other key areas.




Bilderberg Group

Bilderberg takes its name from the hotel in Holland, where the first meeting took place in May 1954. That pioneering meeting grew out of the concern expressed by leading citizens on both sides of the Atlantic that Western Europe and North America were not working together as closely as they should on common problems of critical importance. It was felt that regular, off-the-record discussions would help create a better understanding of the complex forces and major trends affecting Western nations in the difficult post-war period.


In short, Bilderberg is a small, flexible, informal and off-the-record international forum in which different viewpoints can be expressed and mutual understanding enhanced. Bilderberg's only activity is its annual Conference. At the meetings, no resolutions are proposed, no votes taken, and no policy statements issued. Since 1954, fifty-seven conferences have been held. For each meeting, the names of the participants as well as the agenda are made Public and available to the press.


There usually are about 120 participants of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America. About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds from finance, industry, labour, education and         communications. Participants attend Bilderberg in a private and not an official capacity.




The Club Of Rome

The Club of Rome is an independent, not-for-profit organization with an international membership. It draws on the insights and expertise of its members from all regions of the world, from different cultures and histories, from different fields of science and public policy and from academia, civil society and the corporate sector. Since its founding forty years ago, it has been promoting interdisciplinary analysis, dialogue and action on the fundamental, systemic challenges which are determining the future of humanity.


The work of the active, international members is complemented by around 50 honorary members and 40 Associate Members and by the activities of 33 National Associations throughout the world.


It is launching a major international cooperative programme on the broad theme: “A New Path for World Development.” This will engage thinkers, practitioners and activists in key regions and countries to undertake interdisciplinary and multicultural thinking on crucial global issues. Experts, universities and organizations from major emerging economies, such as Brazil, China, India, Nigeria and Russia will be engaged in the programme, as will leading personalities from Europe, Japan and the United States, and from Africa, East Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.


1.Environment and Resources: This cluster relates climate change, peak oil, ecosystems and water. Radical and rapid social and economic transformations will be needed to avert run away climate change and ecological breakdown;


2. Globalization: This cluster relates interdependence, distribution of wealth and income, demographic change, employment, trade and finance. Rising inequalities and imbalances associated with the present path of globalization risk the breakdown of the world economic and financial systems;


3. World Development: This cluster relates sustainable development, demographic growth, poverty, environmental stress, food production, health and employment. The scandal of abiding poverty, deprivation, inequity and exclusion in a wealthy world must be corrected;


4. Social Transformation: This cluster relates social change, gender equity, values and ethics, religion and spirituality, culture, identity and behavior. The values and behavior on which the present path of world development is based must change if peace and progress are to be preserved within the tightening human and environmental limits;


5. Peace and Security: This cluster relates justice, democracy, governance, solidarity, security and peace. The present path of world development risks alienation, polarization, violence and conflict; the preservation of peace is vital in itself but is also a precondition for progress and for the resolution of the issues which threaten the future.








Free counters provided by Andale