thebigp

-87gH.,b69

The articles describe multiple deep state issues and types. In my opinion and experience the Federal Bureaucracy is one huge deep state. Having worked for the US Treasury Department as an Assistant and National Bank Examiner, including 90 days in DC in 1976, the deep state Bureaucracy certainly existed in that department at that time and that department goes back to 1863. The head of the department, the Comptroller of the Currency, is subject to appointment by the President every five years. The rest of the thousands of employees are career employees for the most part and each of them have their own set of biased political opinions which they can use in their work. As I was often told in DC "we will be here when the then current President and future Presidents come and go". Their are similar appointments with the Fed, FDIC, FSLIC, NASB, FBI, CIA, IRS, Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Justice, etc. and all of these departments influence what goes on in this country. The recent disclosure at FBI, IRS and Justice bring to light the built in political bias of many career government employees, Unfortunately those that work long term in the National offices of these various government agencies in DC soon take the attitude that they know what is best for the country, that they basically cannot be fired for malfeasance, that they are in control of the laws that get put on the books, interpretation of those laws and the President and Congress be damned unless they agree with their particular political views. While our government was set up with a system of checks and balances, in todays world the Courts have increasingly ignored Congress and made interpretations of our laws that were never intended. As the lower courts hand down decisions the final determination of the outcome of those decisions takes years in most cases and often involves multiple administrations so they get away with legislating from the bench while Congress has become a joke for the most part. Unless the President takes on the deep state big time when they disagree with the President, nothing really changes. Obama admitted DACA was not something he could do legally but he did it, it was supported by the high level bureaucracy and it has yet to be dealt with by the Supreme Court. Had the deep state opposed DACA it would have never been implemented during the term of Obama. The reason the deep state is so upset and doing all they can to undermine Trump is because the holdovers employed during the Clinton terms and the Obama terms are adamant liberals who want to see this country turned into a socialist country or worse including subjected to the One World Order international control scenario I believe.

I could go on for hours on this topic and it is indeed in place and a major danger to all of us. Not only is it in place in this country but it is the New World Order group that is an even bigger concern to me. The Rothschild banking family along with the Rockefellers, Carnegies, Mellon's, Kennedys, Soros and other centers of individual wealth have been cited as being in control of the worldwide economy and proponents of the One World Order for at least the last 150 years. In my opinion Obama was elected with the goal of furthering their mission to install the One World Order with the naïve idea that he would be their chosen leader of the World. Obama was and is a pawn of the Soros types of individuals and he is still trying to get himself into that position by his day to day international and US activities.

Hope this helps a little in your quest to better understand the deep state in the US and the World. Google Deep State and One World Order and you will find endless articles and books on this topic I believe that you will find interesting and informative.

Don't know if I fully understand this????
In the United States the term "deep state" is used within political science to describe influential decision making bodies within government that are relatively permanent and whose policies and long-term plans are unaffected by changing administrations. The term is often used in a critical sense vis-à-vis the general electorate to refer to the lack of influence popular democracy has on these institutions and the decisions they make.[1][2] The term was originally coined in a somewhat pejorative sense to refer to similar relatively invisible state apparatus in Turkey and post-Soviet Russia.[3] With respect to the United States, the concept has been discussed in numerous published works by Marc Ambinder, David W. Brown, Peter Dale Scott, Mike Lofgren, Kevin Shipp and Michael Wolff.
While definitions vary, the term gained popularity among various groups, primarily supporters of Donald Trump and conspiracy theorists, during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, in opposition to establishment Republican and Democratic candidates. Since Trump's inauguration, the term has been used by conspiracy theorists who argue that a 'deep state', involving the FBI, CIA, NSA, former President Barack Obama, and/or Hillary Clinton, is aiming to delegitimize the Trump presidency and thwart its policy goals.[4]
Definition
The term 'deep state' was defined in 2014 by Mike Lofgren, a former Republican U.S. congressional aide, as "a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process."[5][6]
In The Concealment of the State, Professor Jason Royce Lindsey argues that even without a conspiratorial agenda, the term deep state is useful for understanding aspects of the national security establishment in developed countries, with emphasis on the United States. Lindsey writes that the deep state draws power from the national security and intelligence communities, a realm where secrecy is a source of power.[7] Alfred W. McCoy states that the increase in the power of the U.S. intelligence community since the September 11 attacks "has built a fourth branch of the U.S. government" that is "in many ways autonomous from the executive, and increasingly so."[8]
According to whistleblower Edward Snowden, "the deep state is not just the intelligence agencies, it is really a way of referring to the career bureaucracy of government. These are officials who sit in powerful positions, who don't leave when presidents do, who watch presidents come and go...they influence policy, they influence presidents."[13]
US politics
The term "deep state" has been associated with the "military–industrial complex" by several of the authors on the subject. Potential risks from the military-industrial complex were raised in President Dwight D. Eisenhower's 1961 farewell address: "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."[14] Mike Lofgren has claimed the military-industrial complex is the private part of the deep state.[15] However, Marc Ambinder has suggested that a myth about the "deep state" is that it functions as one entity; rather, that parts of the "deep state" are "often at odds with one another."[16]
President Barack Obama's alleged lack of success of his campaign promises relating to the Afghanistan war and civil liberties has been attributed by Tufts University professor Michael J. Glennon to what he calls the "double government"; the defense and national security network.[17][18] Mike Lofgren felt Obama was pushed into the Afghanistan "surge" in 2009.[19] Another major campaign promise Obama made was the closure of Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp, which he was unable to accomplish. This has been attributed indirectly to the influence of a deep state. [2]
Donald Trump supporters use the term to refer to their allegations that intelligence officers and executive branch officials guide policy through leaking or other internal means.[20][4] According to a July 2017 report by the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, "the Trump administration was being hit by national security leaks 'on a nearly daily basis' and at a far higher rate than its predecessors encountered".[21]
Donald Trump and Steve Bannon, his former chief strategist, have both made allegations about a deep state which they believe is interfering with the president's agenda.[23][24][25] In 2018, describing the deep state as an "entrenched bureaucracy," Trump accused the United States Department of Justice "of being part of the 'deep state'" in a statement advocating the prosecution of Huma Abedin.[26] Some Trump allies and right-wing media outlets have alleged that former President Barack Obama is coordinating a deep state resistance to Trump.[23][27] While the belief in a deep state is popular among Trump supporters, critics maintain that it has no basis in reality[28], arguing that the sources of the leaks frustrating the Trump administration lack the organizational depth of deep states in other countries, and that use of the term in the U.S. could undermine confidence in vital institutions and be used to justify suppressing dissent.[29][23]
According to a poll of Americans in April 2017, about half (48%) thought there was a "deep state", "meaning military, intelligence and government officials who try to secretly manipulate government." Of those who thought that, more than half (58%) said it was a major problem (net of 28% surveyed).[30][31] A March 2018 poll found most respondents (63%) were unfamiliar with the term "deep state", but a majority believe that a deep state likely exists in the United States when described as "a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy". Three-fourths (74%) of the respondents say that they believe this type of group definitely or probably exists in the federal government.[32][33][34]

source-wikipedia-lindsey, prof jason royce-foreign affairs-michaels, jon d-breitbart-nyt-tufts univ-glennon, michael-elliot, c august-DAVE

usewillow

I think a simple meaning is very easy. It is any government employee who advocates the destruction of our Republic as it was intended. That others with either money or influence that support the employees agenda should be included. My question is ...why has no one tried to use any of the Sedition Acts passed by Congress?

Radiance3

================
I believe this has been going on for years. But under the administration of Obama, it got worst. Audits in 2010 and 2012 reported that there were many high level officials enforcing policies that have been duplicated on various agencies and departments. These were the people Obama hired as rewards to getting him elected. These numerous appointed officials holding enormous powers stay in their office lifetime. Their jobs, ensuring that they have the powers to control and run the government, ensuring that funding to their powerful positions are safe and solid.