The Trump Purges: Retribution or Necessity

1. 85

   GA Andersonposted 2 months ago

   Instead of getting a morning chuckle, this one opened a whole can of confirmation bias. And that's not a good thing.
   
   Amid all of the headlines about Pres. Trump's deep state/retribution 'purges', I stumbled across a new O'keefe 'undercover' film. My perception of O'keefe isn't positive, but sometimes the message is true even when its presentation is suspect.
   
   To set a frame of mind: The Brits had a popular satirical comedy series on the subject: Yes, Prime Minister
   
   
   And the Okeefe video:
   
   
   
   *If the X post link doesn't work here's a youtube link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74UVFZcCXxI&t=12s
   
   There is a danger of a brain sprain when the truth of the need for some degree of departmental continuity (as described in the 'Yes Prime Minister video) is acknowledged. If it were easy, we wouldn't be talking about it.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 85

      tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Interesting up to the point when you click the last video what is revealed is "Hmm...this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else." I use Firefox for my browser. I tried it in Chrome with the same result.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         That's a puzzler. I just checked the link and it worked for me.
         
         Here's a youtube link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74UVFZcCXxI&t=12s
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 85

            tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Thanks for the YouTube link. It worked fine. Maybe it is I am not a member of 'X' with the other one? I'll watch the video later.

            replyreport
         2. 87

            Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Working for me too

            replyreport
   2. 60

      Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Do you see a need or benefit to completely turn over civil servants in government agencies with each administration?    O'Keefe was employed during the first Trump administration. Not sure when he began his employment.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         Your question is the potential "brain sprain I mentioned.
         
         It was too easy to sit through the O'Keefe video because I see that as an illustration of what Pres. Trump talks about. And, the satirical Brit comedy reinforced that perception.
         
         But, the comedy's point about continuity seems a valid one to me. It affirmed and contradicted the O'keefe video at the same time.
         
         The best question might be at what point do the professional efforts that maintain a degree of continuity (career bureaucrats) become 'deep state' efforts?
         
         The guy in the O'keefe video is an example of that point. He is the "deep state" example.
         
         GA

         replyreport
   3. 85

      tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Okay, okay . . . a little wandering . . . I watched the two videos, but I watched the one with Wright first so that I could connect the dots with the parody. I did see the dots and connected them based as an observer, on my personal experience, and observation knowledge from the cinematic universe. So, it is 'my' perspective. I always experience cinematic story telling with awareness as the ideas came from somewhere.
      
      With the Wright video bearing in mind she was undercover my first impression was that Wright was trying to get laid. When is the question in the back of mind. That impression prompted my bullshit olfactory senses to perk up.
      
      Also, in the back of my mind was the Clint Eastwood movie Heartbreak Ridge. I pondered the conflict between Sargent Highway and Lt. Colonel Powers. Along with that is how the information flowed to achieve the objective and as the song says, "My Way". 
      
      I was impressed with the commercial on Gold pondering the audience of OMG. That was confirmed by the last commercial when seeing the survival deal's price.
      
      With the parody I listened carefully to the 'Four Stage Strategy' while remembering the writers came up with that from somewhere. The Four Stage Strategy is:
      
      1) The Standard Foreign Office response in a time of crisis - Nothing is going to Happen
      2) Something may happen, but we aren't going to do anything about it
      3) Maybe there is something that can be done about it, but shouldn't do anything about it
      4) Maybe there was something we could do about it, but it is too late to do anything now
      
      I thought of the Trump response to Covid, though mainly driven by media. So, a grain of salt is applied. Otherwise watching the parody again another impression is the comedic interplay came down to double speak, which in my perspective is the language of politics more than governing. That is an interesting thought, what are we the people governed by?

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         The O'Keefe guy (Wright) is easily discounted with your 'he's trying to get laid' rationale. The question is, does that negate the concept details of his explanations? I don't think it does. I think he is describing a prevailing mindset.
         
         My problem is finding the line between deep-state actors like Wright and career bureaucrats who are necessary and beneficial.
         
         The Yes, Prime Minister satire speaks to both. As you say, the idea has to come from somewhere. Maybe it comes from the reality of the situation. After all, it's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 85

            tsmogposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            "The question is, does that negate the concept details of his explanations? I don't think it does. I think he is describing a prevailing mindset."
            
            Is it any different anywhere else outside of government? I worked for a corporation with 24 US Tire & service stores and 2 warehouses. There were 6 stores in Mexico with 1 warehouse to boot. There were inner circles for the whole of the 24 years I worked for them. There were five major corporate leadership/management changes during those 24 years each with their ideas for how to increase sales and be more efficient. For those leaders to survive they had to gain the inner circles, which there were more than one, confidence. In other words, follow [him]. I can attest that did not happen in all cases. 
            
            [Edit: Coming back . . . Knowing that one could speculate that is why Trump is as they say draining the swamp, but again based on my experience, he never will get rid of all the inner circles. They all will work against him in someway or some manner as that is how you survive. Kissing *ss is a well used technique.]

            replyreport
2. 70

   Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago

   I believe there to be no substance left to the debate... it is clear that it is "necessity"
   
   Before Trump, an argument could still be made...
   
   Then came Trump and all they exposed, of themselves, of the depths of their corruption and the willingness to risk everything, no line at all too far to cross... not assassination, murder, war, holocaust, anything goes...
   
   It has become a necessity... they made that clear over the last 4 years
   
   Risking Nuclear War and being unwilling to negotiate...
   
   25% Inflation... aka printing money and diluting the value of every dollar... in addition to throwing another 10+ Trillion onto the National Debt...
   
   And then the general insanity of 72 different sexes, men are women, kids can be mutilated, etc.
   
   No Trust.
   
   An absolute necessity.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Yep, there really is a 'deep state', but maybe we don't want an all-or-nothing choice. I could see a legitimate need for some level of career bureaucrats. But of the comedy's stripe, not the O'Keefe guy.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         It goes back to many things I have repeated ad-nauseum about the WEF, Agenda 2030, etc. etc.
         
         My concerns as well as their lectures and agendas and policies proved out... as seen in our open borders, flying migrants in, adding over 10 Trillion dollars to the debt, etc. etc.
         
         Our government cannot do what is best for its National interests and its Citizens and at the same time do what is best for powerful corporations, powerful foreign nations and financial institutions like BlackRock.
         
         A wonderful video to watch regarding the recent WEF summit and Trump's impact on it and their agendas:
         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnvVH3SewmI

         replyreport
         1. 85

            GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            What a day . . . First, it was the USAID rabbit hole, then it was tsmog's deepfake, and now it's you and a 25-minute video.
            
            I watched it all, but I'm keeping my focus on USAID for now.
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 70

               Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

               USAID its likely a sacrificial lamb... an offering...
               
               When they trash the more serious Agencies...
               
               Or when they expose how:
               
               BlackRock hits record $6 trillion assets, helped by Trump tax law
               By Trevor Hunnicutt
               January 12, 2018
               https://www.reuters.com/article/markets … KBN1F11WB/
               
               BlackRock went from 6 Trillion to ...
               
               BlackRock Assets Hit Record $11.6 Trillion in Fourth Quarter
               By Reuters
               Jan. 15, 2025
               https://money.usnews.com/investing/news … er-of-2024
               
               Practically doubling their money in under 7 years...
               
               You know what they say... follow the money... follow where all the money from those Pandemic Bailouts and Build Back Better budgets went...
               
               Like the man in the video said... Globalism... our government... aided and insured much wealth landed in the hands of the few while making the average person poorer and more helpless...
               
               And then there are those wonderful wars, and the hundreds of thousands dead, the millions displaced... with the help of the hundreds of billions diverted to Ukraine and Iran... I guess that will be another telling sign, how quickly the spickets to Ukraine and Iran get turned off and the killing stops.

               replyreport
3. 87

   Sharlee01posted 2 months ago

   "The Trump Purges: Retribution or Necessity" 
   
   In his 2024 campaign, former President Donald Trump emphasized that his ultimate form of retribution would be to restore America's greatness. He stated, "The unprecedented success of the USA will be my ultimate retribution."

   replyreport
4. 84

   Readmikenowposted 2 months ago

   This is interesting
   
   CIA offering buyouts to its entire workforce: report
   The move is being made to bring the spy agency in line with President Trump’s agenda
   
   The Central Intelligence Agency, in what officials reportedly claimed was an effort to bring the agency in line with Trump’s agenda, offered buyouts to its entire staff on Tuesday.
   
   The Wall Street Journal reported that the agency is the first to tell its employees they can quit and get eight months of pay and benefits.
   
   Last month, the Trump administration offered about 2 million federal employees buyouts to be paid through September, though the window to accept the offer closes on Thursday.
   
   While the Trump administration made offers to some 2 million federal workers, some categories were exempt from taking advantage of the buyout, including federal workers with national security roles.
   
   CIA Director John Ratcliffe reportedly told the White House to extend the same offer to employees within the CIA, hoping it could pave the way for "a more aggressive" agency, an aide told the Wall Street Journal.
   
   Fox News learned that even though the CIA was exempt, Ratcliffe personally decided he wanted the agency to participate.
   
   On Thursday, he emailed the Office of Personnel Management and asked for a process that would enable the CIA to email its workforce and offer the same opportunity, while also retaining flexibility to work through the timing of employee departures in critical areas.
   
   Ratcliffe also chose to offer the option of early retirement to long-tenured officers, while also halting on bringing on any officer offered a job late during the Biden administration to ensure their position aligns with the Trump administration's priorities.
   
   https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cia-of … -workforce

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Sounds fair to me. Those who know they might be targeted for actions they may not have had control over now have the opportunity to step away without facing termination. It’s actually a thoughtful gesture. Trump is draining the swamp, and maybe those "swamp people" should take note and move on before they get called out and let go.
      
      We can no longer tolerate biased, corrupt workers. The status quo ends here. It’s time to tackle problems head-on, not sweep them under the rug or sit idly by, feeling ill-equipped to address problems and solve them.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         These are civil servants, not political appointees.  This isn't draining the swamp. This is wielding power for purely political purposes.  This is dictator sh*t. Does anyone realize how long the process takes to replace a single FBI or CIA agent?  The recruitment, the vetting,  the training?   It's over a year.... Let that sink in when you plan on reading an agency of thousands of skilled people.

         replyreport
5. 70

   Ken Burgessposted 2 months ago

   Another BIG area they need to target is the courts...
   
   Our justice system has clearly been corrupted, judges no longer follow the law, they bend, break or make illogical leaps to get their desires met out...
   
   This was seen in NY in the cases brought against Trump that would have been laughed out of any courtroom if the political bias did not rule the decision making process.
   
   This is another fine example of a failing system:
   
   Judge McCormick Blocks Elon Musk's Pay Deal Again
   https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2024/12/02/ … n-n3797539
   
   Delaware Judge Went After Elon Musk; Now Delaware Losing Corporations at Alarming Rate
   https://hotair.com/david-strom/2025/02/ … e-n3799446
   
   Judges like that should not be able to sit on such important cases and play god, making decisions based on ideology and feelings rather than law and precedence.
   
   Changes need to be made so that when a Judge does, they can be eviscerated for the damages and harm they cause.  This judge's career should be ruined and she should face permanent disbarment from practicing.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Willowarborposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Are you saying that you want Trump to clear the judicial system of those who do not fall under his ideology? Like actually get rid of the judges?

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         Did you know the FBI was also part of our Justice System...?
         
         
         
         
         
         

         replyreport
   2. 87

      Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

      I completely agree with the sentiment that the justice system seems to be facing increasing challenges when it comes to political biases influencing judicial decisions. It’s troubling when it feels like judges are making decisions based on their own personal beliefs, rather than strictly interpreting the law and abiding by legal precedents. The cases involving Donald Trump in New York serve as a glaring example, as many of the charges brought against him seemed politically motivated rather than rooted in sound legal reasoning. Similarly, the decision by Judge McCormick to block Elon Musk's pay deal yet again, despite the deal being deemed legal, raises concerns about judicial overreach and bias.
      
      These are not isolated incidents; there have been other controversial rulings, such as the case of Delaware judges going after Musk and potentially driving companies to leave the state. Such decisions don't just damage individual cases; they contribute to a broader erosion of trust in the system. It’s clear that reform is necessary to ensure judges are held accountable when their rulings seem more driven by political agendas than by impartial legal reasoning. Making decisions based on ideology rather than law is an unfortunate trend, and it's important to consider systemic changes that ensure more accountability and integrity in the judicial system. This isn’t just about individual cases—it’s about restoring faith in a system that is supposed to be blind to political influence and committed to justice.
      
      Beyond Musk, her bias was evident in her dismissal of a lawsuit challenging Delaware’s mail-in voting changes, where she ignored constitutional concerns in favor of a politically convenient outcome. Likewise, she upheld a corporate diversity mandate that many argued violated equal protection laws, prioritizing progressive social policies over legal precedent. Even in a criminal case involving violent rioters, McCormick handed down a lenient sentence that appeared influenced by her personal views on social justice rather than consistency with other rulings. Her decision to side with a major tech company against privacy plaintiffs further showcased her selective application of the law, seemingly protecting powerful interests that align with her ideological leanings. With this long record of questionable rulings, it’s clear that McCormick is not acting as an impartial judge but as an activist in a robe, shaping outcomes to fit a political agenda rather than upholding the rule of law.
      
      I completely agree. Judges who consistently demonstrate bias should be disbarred. They are nothing more than extensions of the political swamp, using their positions to push an agenda rather than uphold the law.

      replyreport
6. 85

   tsmogposted 2 months ago

   Well Musk certainly has emboldened the Military-Industrial Complex. Is that a good thing?
   
   Elon Musk's DOGE has a new No. 1 fan by Quartz (Feb 5, 2025)
   Defense industry executives at L3Harris, Palantir, Lockheed Martin and more are eyeing regulatory cuts
   https://qz.com/elon-musk-doge-defense-f … 5_breaking
   
   "Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) came into existence with the pledge to slash red tape and dismantle the federal bureaucracy. Although it certainly hasn’t been free of controversy, there’s one group of people that have stars in their eyes: defense industry CEOs.
   
   “We think this is a really good thing,” TransDigm (TDG) CEO Kevin Stein said on a recent earnings call, calling DOGE a “great opportunity” to streamline procurement at the Department of Defense (DOD) and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).
   Advertisement
   
   The DOD is a prime target for DOGE, whose leaders and allies in Congress have already singled out the department. The Defense Department has failed seven consecutive audits, and critics say that overregulation has left the Pentagon slow to act and unable to quickly procure goods and services."

   replyreport
   1. 69

      IslandBitesposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Apparently, most, inc GOP, think is not.
      
      GOP support for Musk influence with Trump falls dramatically: Poll
      
      The share of Republicans who say they want tech billionaire Elon Musk to have significant influence in the Trump administration has fallen substantially in the months since President Trump was elected.
      
      In The Economist/YouGov poll taken in the days after the November 2024 election, 47 percent of surveyed Republicans said they wanted Musk to have “a lot” of influence in the Trump administration, while 29 percent wanted “a little” and 12 percent wanted him to have “none at all.”
      
      Today, however, the share of Republicans who say they want Musk to have “a lot” of influence has fallen substantially to 26 percent. Meanwhile, 43 percent of Republican respondents say they want Musk to have “a little” influence, and 17 percent say they want him to have “none at all,” according to the latest poll from The Economist/YouGov released Wednesday.
      
      Surveyed Democrats and independents are also showing less desire for Musk to have a prominent influence in the Trump administration. Only 6 percent of each group say they want Musk to have “a lot” of influence. In November, 15 percent of Democrats and 26 percent of independents said they wanted Trump to have “a lot” of influence in the administration.
      
      Overall, 13 percent of surveyed Americans want Musk to have “a lot” of influence on the Trump administration, while 25 percent say they want “a little” influence and 46 percent say they want “none at all.”
      
      In November, 34 percent of surveyed Americans wanted Musk to have “a lot” of influence, 22 percent wanted him to have “a little” influence, and 30 percent said “none at all.”
      
      The latest poll also shows Americans have less favorable views of Trump and Vice President Vance than they did in last week’s poll, conducted after their first week in office.

      replyreport
7. 85

   GA Andersonposted 2 months ago

   bump

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Your bump really sticks a pin in the "let's get Elon media blitz". LOL
      
      I agree it's time to return to your thread's subject. Took time to watch the videos...   
      
      Brandon Wright’s remarks in the undercover video came across as boastful, as if he were trying to impress his audience by inflating his own influence within DHS. He seems like an overlooked employee attempting to make his role appear more significant than it is. However, if his claims of deliberately defying directives from Secretary Kristi Noem are true, then his behavior is not only unacceptable but warrants immediate dismissal.
      
      Wright does not fit the role of a career bureaucrat, whose job is to implement policy, not dictate it. His attitude is troubling because it erodes trust in government officials to carry out their duties impartially and in alignment with elected leadership. A strong, functional government requires career bureaucrats who can transition between administrations while respecting the policies of those they serve—without injecting personal bias. Wright’s actions, whether just arrogant posturing or a genuine attempt to undermine the administration’s agenda, highlight the risks of individuals prioritizing their own views over their professional responsibilities.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

         It was a '*spammers' bump to get ahead of all the lost lover and love potion threads. Not to redirect the conversation.
         
         GA ;-)

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Well, if you are going to spam, I can think of worse topics...

            replyreport
         2. 87

            Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

            "bump" in a thread, it's typically used to bring attention to the post and push it back to the top of the conversation.  Felt you were not appreciating the divertions from your thread. That is what generated my comment. I did not respond to your post spammer bump.
            
            https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/362 … ost4356612

            replyreport
            1. 85

               GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

               I can see the confusion.
               
               GA

               replyreport