"The Modelers, and the Media have given the Administrative Bureaucrats power over the entire economy and our lives that we have never seen; they are planning to fundamentally change the USA."

In the comments section of the Conservative Treehouse, Bob Guzzardi wrote in part,

The State’s Administrative Bureaucrats, so ably represented by the skilled communicators Doctors Fauci and Birx, the Modelers and ChiCom Flu have closed the USA and European economies.

Had they, the ChiComs, actually, planned it, it could not have worked any better for them.
The Models have transferred nearly unrestricted power to hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats who are, unlikely, to give up their power easily. The bureaucrats have a self-interest in the pandemic- “if you don’t do what we say, you will die and so will your whole family.” Consensus is the antithesis of empirical science and when Experts assert consensus as science we know there is an ideological agenda.

Only a Pathologically Paranoid Cynical Conspiracist would attribute self-interested motives to the network of Bureaucrats, Modelers, Academics and the Media who propose plans and policies that are best for the rest of us.

The Modelers, and the Media have given the Administrative Bureaucrats power over the entire economy and our lives that we have never seen; they are planning to fundamentally change the USA.

It does appear that, coincidentally, the Bureaucrats, the Modelers, the Academics and anti-Trump Media and the ChiComs are ideologically aligned.

Isn’t it a happy coincidence that the Greater Good aligns with the interests and values of the network Academic Modelers, Administrative Bureaucrats and Media Intellectuals.

And who,except a rude child of nature who knows no fine words for falsehood, would say that the unfortunate and unintentional coincidence that the policies and plans of the best of the brightest and the brightest of the best, the Great and the Good, align with the interests and values of the ChiComs?

Does this make sense or am I having Right Wing Trumpian Hallucinations?

Read more here.

Continuing to undermine the president!

In the Free Beacon, Adam Kredo reports,

Multiple lawmakers and former administration officials, including one recently departed National Security Council member who worked on Iran issues, told the Washington Free Beacon that senior officials in the administration continue to undermine President Donald Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign on Iran.

At issue are sanctions exceptions that the State Department has now issued several times in recent years to the consternation of Iran hawks. The waivers permit foreign nations and businesses to partner with Iran on its nuclear work, including efforts to enrich uranium, the key component in a weapon. They also allow Iran to continue sensitive civil nuclear research at contested sites, including a covert military bunker that once housed the country's atomic weapons program.

Multiple lawmakers and former administration officials, including one recently departed National Security Council member who worked on Iran issues, told the Washington Free Beacon that senior officials in the administration continue to undermine President Donald Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign on Iran.

Read more here.

"Who rules the United States? The simple and terrible answer is we do not know. But we are about to find out."

Matthew Continetti writes at The Free Beacon,

By any historical and constitutional standard, "the people" elected Donald Trump and endorsed his program of nation-state populist reform. Yet over the last few weeks America has been in the throes of an unprecedented revolt. Not of the people against the government—that happened last year—but of the government against the people. What this says about the state of American democracy, and what it portends for the future, is incredibly disturbing.

There is, of course, the case of Michael Flynn. He made a lot of enemies inside the government during his career, suffice it to say. And when he exposed himself as vulnerable those enemies pounced. But consider the means: anonymous and possibly illegal leaks of private conversations. Yes, the conversation in question was with a foreign national. And no one doubts we spy on ambassadors. But we aren't supposed to spy on Americans without probable cause. And we most certainly are not supposed to disclose the results of our spying in the pages of the Washington Post because it suits a partisan or personal agenda.

...The last few weeks have confirmed that there are two systems of government in the United States. The first is the system of government outlined in the U.S. Constitution—its checks, its balances, its dispersion of power, its protection of individual rights. Donald Trump was elected to serve four years as the chief executive of this system. Whether you like it or not.

The second system is comprised of those elements not expressly addressed by the Founders. This is the permanent government, the so-called administrative state of bureaucracies, agencies, quasi-public organizations, and regulatory bodies and commissions, of rule-writers and the byzantine network of administrative law courts. This is the government of unelected judges with lifetime appointments who, far from comprising the "least dangerous branch," now presume to think they know more about America's national security interests than the man elected as commander in chief.

Donald Trump did not cause the divergence between government of, by, and for the people and government, of, by, and for the residents of Cleveland Park and Arlington and Montgomery and Fairfax counties. But he did exacerbate it. He forced the winners of the global economy and the members of the D.C. establishment to reckon with the fact that they are resented, envied, opposed, and despised by about half the country. But this recognition did not humble the entrenched incumbents of the administrative state. It radicalized them to the point where they are readily accepting, even cheering on, the existence of a "deep state" beyond the control of the people and elected officials.

Who rules the United States? The simple and terrible answer is we do not know. But we are about to find out.

Read more here.

"Drain the swamp? Well, it’s a start."

Glenn Reynolds writes in USA Today,

for president on the slogan “Make America Great Again!” And he’s also promised to “drain the swamp” in Washington. But maybe the way to do that is to make Washington a little less great. Because as Washington has prospered over the last several decades — to the point where people are making Hunger Games comparisons — the rest of the country hasn’t done as well.

So perhaps it’s time for a role-reversal. I propose that over the next several years, we transfer a lot of federal employees out of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, to parts of the country that aren’t doing so well economically. This would provide a boost to places like Buffalo, New York, or Quincy, Illinois, or Fresno, California, while getting federal bureaucrats out of the D.C. bubble.

...So here’s my plan: During the next four years, the Trump Administration — and Congress — should plan to move at least 25% of the federal workforce located in the Washington, D.C. metro area to other locations around the country: Places that are economically suffering (which will have the advantage of making federal workers’ salaries go farther) and that need the business. Should Trump get another four years, he should do it all over again.

That would mean that in 8 years, the population of bureaucrats in the Washington, D.C. metro area would be roughly halved. That would make Washington less vibrant, but more affordable — and those bureaucrats working out of offices in the hinterland would be brought closer to the American people.

Drain the swamp? Well, it’s a start.

Read more here.

Who writes our "laws?"

Scott Rasmussen writes at Town Hall,

In the United States these days, about 95 percent of all new "laws" are written by bureaucrats rather than approved by Congress. A pair of recent news stories documents the dangers of bureaucrats gone wild.

Last week, the U.S. officially defined 70,000 ways we can get sick or die. These classifications must be used by health care providers and insurance companies.

...Unfortunately, this new system is widely expected to create problems for doctors and patients seeking reimbursement from insurance companies. It will also force doctors to spend more time with paperwork and less time with patients. Undoubtedly, costs will go up as customer service goes down, all in the name of bureaucratic excess.

The other story, reported by the Washington Post, described how the federal government spent decades steering Americans away from whole milk. In fact, whole milk was banned in school lunch programs. Across the nation, sales of low-fat milk soared. All this was done in the belief that it would reduce heart disease.

But despite the massive propaganda effort, the Post article says scientists aren't clear "whether this massive shift in eating habits has made anyone healthier." Even worse, "millions might have been better off had they stuck with whole milk." Contrary to what the government bureaucrats expected, "people who consumed more milk fat had lower incidences of heart disease."

A rational response to this news would be to refrain from making blanket recommendations. It would seem reasonable to conduct additional research while spreading the word that the results of existing research are contradictory. That would let individual Americans decide for themselves.

But that's not the way things work in government. As the official dietary guidelines are being written, believers in the original war on whole milk are going to battle with the skeptics. The fight is entirely over what the guidelines should say -- and don't be fooled by the word "guidelines." Those who believe in the evils of whole milk will fight to ensure that the guidelines remain mandatory for school lunches and any other programs they can impact.

Read more here.

He won't stay quiet

The security guard who blasted the Arapahoe High School Administrators Thursday gave an interview to the press yesterday, and it is today's front page headline in the Denver Post. Cameron Rust revealed that the day before the shooting the killer, Karl Pierson, was out of control banging on a teacher's door, and Rust escorted him to the principal's office. Rust believes Pierson did not get the help he needed that day.

Rust, who also coaches the defense on the school's football team, said that on more than one occasion school administrators told him not to put his concerns about Pierson in writing.