Here's why the 'deep state' is hardly just a conspiracy theory. Plus: Experts, illegal aliens, and insulting voters.
By Gary Abernathy
No, the Pentagon does not have a mind of its own
For those who don’t share the concerns of many about the power of an entrenched bureaucracy, terms like “the swamp” and the “deep state” can invoke images of tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists. But in many cases, the pushback to President Trump’s efforts to reform government perfectly exemplify what the “deep state” mindset really means — and it’s not imaginary nonsense.
Examining new Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s goals for reforming the U.S. Armed Forces, the New York Times reported this:
Headline: “Hegseth’s Views May Clash With Reality at the Pentagon.”
From the story: “His view that the military has diminished its standards in welcoming women and racial minorities might run into resistance as he takes the reins at the Pentagon, which sees its diversity as an asset and has tried to build a force that mirrors America.”
First, neither Trump nor Hegseth have said that “the military has diminished its standards in welcoming women and racial minorities.” Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt, the reporters whose bylines are on this NYT “analysis,” are presumably intelligent enough to know this, but they still chose to mislead their readers. What Trump and Hegseth have said is that military effectiveness is compromised when a focus on diversity or inclusion is prioritized over capability and skill. It’s that simple.
But it’s the Times’ treatment of “the Pentagon” as a living, breathing entity with a mind of its own that sums up what many see as “deep state” thinking: “…as he takes the reins at the Pentagon, which sees its diversity as an asset and has tried to build a force that mirrors America.”
The Pentagon “sees its diversity as an asset?” The Pentagon sees nothing. The Pentagon — and any other agency, organization or, in the private sector, company — is, or should be, merely a reflection of the philosophy of the people in charge. For the next four years, the Pentagon will “see” its mission as whatever the president of the United States and the secretary of defense say that its mission is — as long as it’s in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.
The notion that our institutions have standards or philosophies that are so entrenched that they might run counter to the people elected or appointed to run them is exactly the kind of “deep state” thinking that millions of Americans see as the problem. The fear that the “deep state” is real, and that it is unaccountable to anyone, is a big reason for Trump’s support and a primary factor in Americans returning him to the White House.
If Hegseth’s views “clash with reality at the Pentagon,” as the headline suggested, it should hopefully be Hegseth — or any other defense secretary — who prevails. Otherwise, the “deep state” is real, and truly unaccountable.
‘Experts’ are the most suspect sources to be found
Whenever the media wants to belittle ideas from conservatives in general, Republicans in particular, or Donald Trump and his supporters specifically, they love to turn to “experts.”
“Experts” are not rarified creatures. They can be defined as anyone with a college degree in any walk of life, or anyone at a “think tank,” or people who have worked in certain industries for a respectable length of time. They are numerous enough that they cross the ideological spectrum, meaning they can represent just about any point of view in need of bolstering or defending. That’s why criminal court cases often feature experts for the prosecution, and experts for the defense, endlessly contradicting each other.
The far left (formerly mainstream) media loves to trot out “experts” to debunk those who do not subscribe to far-left philosophies or theories. The New York Times did it again this week.
Reporting on President Trump’s announcement of the pursuit of a missile defense system similar to Israel’s, the New York Times produced this headline: “Trump Orders an ‘Iron Dome’-Style Defense System. Experts Are Skeptical.”
The story features a handful of Times-chosen “experts” who, predictably, pour cold water on Trump’s plans. Had they the inclination, of course, the Times could have identified and interviewed just as many “experts” to say it could work. That wasn’t what they wanted.
Anytime you see a headline criticizing an idea from the right that cites “experts,” you can know the pool of “experts” singled out from among all the available experts is quite small.
Keep the insults coming, we enjoy the winning
We all know that many columnists and journalists in general can be insultingly dismissive of Trump voters, but after Trump won two of the last three elections — due in part to backlash against elitist attitudes — you would think they’d learn to be less offensive. They haven’t.
Writing for the New York Times (sorry, the Times again), columnist Thomas B. Edsall quotes from a November story from the British newspaper The Guardian which, in turn, reminded everyone what H.L. Mencken wrote about Warren G. Harding supporters — which, Edsall clearly implies, applies to Trump voters, too.
Edsall writes, “The core of Harding’s support, according to Mencken, was ‘small town yokels, or low political serfs, or morons scarcely able to understand a word of more than two syllables, and wholly unable to pursue a logical idea for more than two centimeters.’”
Please, continue such comparisons. It only helps to motivate.
Correct: Illegal immigrants are by default criminals
Karoline Leavitt did a great job Tuesday handling her first briefing in front of the mostly far-left (formerly mainstream) media.
Part of the back-and-forth dealt with the Trump administration’s deportation of illegal immigrants. Questions centered on how many of those being deported have criminal charges pending or criminal records. Leavitt correctly pointed out that to have entered the U.S. illegally is in itself a criminal act.
The fact that so many in the media don’t seem to understand that point is always confusing. But the Washington Post — in what was presented as a straight news story by Samantha Schmidt and Maria Sacchetti — made its biases clear in how it reported this week on the deportations.
Here’s the Post headline: “Trump deported 200 Colombians. None were criminals, Colombian officials say.”
First, in fact, they were all criminals since they entered the U.S. illegally. Second, the bulk of the story indicates that the Post accepted Colombian officials’ word that “none were criminals.” It’s common practice these days — and another reason for traditional media’s decline in trust — for journalists to take the word of foreign countries over the position of the U.S., especially if a Republican is president.
Following, in bold, is an excerpt from the Post’s “reporting:”
Without offering any evidence, officials declared that they had “fulfilled President Trump’s promise to the American people to arrest and deport violent criminals illegally in the country.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said at a briefing Tuesday that the administration considers “all” immigrants who are in the United States illegally to be criminals.
“They illegally broke our nation’s laws and, therefore, they are criminals as far as this administration goes,” she said, calling the declaration a “big culture shift in our nation.”
Deportation is a civil, not criminal, proceeding.
“Without offering any evidence” was a rich line from a story so full of holes. And where was that line when describing what Colombian officials said? Nowhere to be found.
But read that last line: “Deportation is a civil, not criminal, proceeding.”
In fact, “Illegal entry into the U.S. is a federal crime that often comes with civil penalties. Illegally crossing the border into the United States has many consequences, such as deportation and bans on re-entry into the U.S.,” according to a law firm specializing in legal assistance for immigrants.
Illegally entering the United States is a felony under federal code 8 U.S.C. §§ 1325 and 1326. Hence, illegally entering the U.S. is a criminal act.
So, the Post is being intentionally misleading in trying to claim Leavitt was lying. “Deportation is a civil, not criminal, proceeding,” the Post pompously reported in “correcting” what Leavitt said.
But Leavitt was entirely right. Illegally entering the U.S. is a felony. Committing a felony makes one a criminal, regardless of what the penalty might be. Deportation may well be a “civil proceeding,” but the clear intent of the Post story was to mislead readers into thinking Leavitt was wrong, that being here illegally did not make someone a criminal, that it was a “civil” offense, not a felony. Wrong.
Just sad.
Then, the story added this: “In the United States, people are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.”
No kidding. Thanks for the sermon, and for being so condescending.
How utterly biased and, worse, intentionally misleading.
‘MAGA Republicans Are Already Normal’ — for yourself or for that friend or loved one confused about the election
“MAGA Republicans Are Already Normal — And Other Shocking Notions” is a great addition to the library of MAGA Trump supporters, or the perfect gift for non-MAGA friends and loved ones to help them make sense of the 2024 election results. It’s available on Amazon. Buy it here.
The book (actually much thicker than the illustrations above indicate — the hardcover and paperback are each 453 pages) is a compilation of many of the nearly 200 columns I wrote for the Washington Post from 2017 to 2023 (and a handful of columns I wrote about Trump for The (Hillsboro) Times-Gazette from 2015 to 2017). The columns cover a variety of topics, but they particularly focus on Trump’s rise to political prominence and help explain his appeal.
Here’s a link to a website dedicated to the book.
Sign up or share this newsletter
Please sign up to receive this newsletter directly into your inbox or, if you are already a subscriber and reading this by email, share with a friend using the convenient button below. Thank you!