Progressives Plot Sedition With ‘Deep State’ to Undermine Trump Presidency


American University law professor William Yeomans called the election of Donald Trump “an assault on the federal bureaucracy.” Speaking to a room full of students and civil servants, he whined that Trump does not “believe deeply in the importance of public service.”

Translation: Donald Trump does not believe deeply in an entrenched class of bureaucrats who will not answer to the will of the people and who would impose unrepresentative tyranny on the public.

Jon Michaels, a UCLA law professor, embraced the idea of the “deep state” as a means to fill the federal bureaucracy with people who can “thwart the intentions or political mandate of the president.” Michaels listed his ideas for how to ensure the success of the “deep state.”

Act as a group — a department, across agency lines, as a community — rather than as an individual when pushing back against Trump from the inside, he said. Once such a coalition is formed, he suggested “rogue tweeting” or “leaking to the media” as options for fighting the president.”

In other words, the ends justify the means, even if it means breaking the law.

When the discussion turned to those members of the Trump administration who pose the biggest threat to turning back the progressive tide in government, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Health and Human Service Secretary Tom Price and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt topped the list.

Displaying the type of paranoia that makes progressives outraged at the Trump election look like thumb suckers, former EPA bureaucrat Mustafa Santiago Ali chose to leave government after 24 years because he believes Pruitt’s actions at the EPA will lead to Americans dying across the country.

I also knew because I believe in real talk that the choices that they were making were literally going to be devastating to those communities and they would actually cause more folks to get sick and unfortunately more folks were going to die, and I couldn’t be a part of that.”

A cooler or head of two did surface occasionally. Heather Gerken, a Yale law professor, urged her colleagues to focus less on the federal “deep state” and to get more involved at the state and local levels.

Federalism is for everyone. I have been making that argument for a little while now, I find that progressives are much more attuned to that argument in recent months for reasons that you might imagine,”

For the majority of the crowd with a hard left-wing bent, Gerken’s advice probably went over their heads. But she pressed on anyway, trying to refocus the meeting on more realistic views and rely less on legal avenues to impose their way.

Politics are what matter more. The reason why progressives are in the fix they’re in is because they lost elections. They lost elections at the local and the state and the federal level and this is what happens when you lose elections. It’s a mistake to think … that law is going to save us.”

Other speakers kept lamenting the results of the 2016 election, yearning for the halcyon days of the Obama administration where federal directives by unaccountable bureaucrats were the rule of the day.

Source: The Washington Examiner

 



Share

34 Comments

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest