TIME today be like...

submitted by christnmusicreleasesIndependent from i.imgur.com

all 34 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (18 children)

Political opinions - at TIME or NYT - aren't proof of the kind of deep state you're thinking of, and aren't themselves mentioning anything remarkably deep or secretive about the 'state'. In fact, using these opinion pieces for your point works against you, by showing that you wouldn't know about the deep state if if was buggering you (which it is, but not for the reasons noted here).

If you want to know about the "deep state", follow the money:

Financial contributions to politicians

Panama Papers

Koch Brothers

Lobbyist groups and PACs

Military Industrial Complex

BigCorp (pharma, oil, health care, news media, entertainment, &c)

Davos

Bilderberg

etc.

What have I missed?

My point is: these aren't hidden conspiracies. They're at your fingertips. Look at those, not the folks who claim they have a secret to tell you.

[–]insta 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

You're all over the place here. The deep state doesn't exist, it does but not the way you think it does, then finishes off with the empty "money in politics" talking points.

Really makes me laugh when people who dismiss everything as a conspiracy theory will turn on a dime and blame most (if not all) corruption on this vague "money in politics" shtick. It's such a gross oversimplification.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Very good that you can enjoy the comments.

Not so good that you think of 'money in politics' as an oversimplification. Rather naive to refer to it as such. The main point here is that one can see the obvious problems with money in politics.

One can see, for example, corporate donations at the time a bill is in the House or Senate that might have a major impact on certain corporations. But there is much more to consider.

By the way: what are the "empty 'money in politics' talking points"? I provided examples.

By contrast, you've not explained your points, which are thus relatively unfounded judgements. If you have an explanation or evidence for your points, let's hear them. If you merely want to suggest that I am an idiot, leave it at that, though this is not much of an argument.

[–]insta 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

If it's all about money why isn't Bloomberg president?

If it's all about money, why didn't Clinton win in 2016?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I didn't say it's all about money. I said, follow the money. It's the one constant motivation in the complicated arrangements of what might be called a "deep state" (though I am sure there are also various arguments on what that is).

[–]insta 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Again, nice pivot.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You are difficult

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It is because you are duplicitous and dishonest.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

About what? And what would be the motivation?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not interested in your motivations.

[–]wristaction 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Koch Brothers

Oof. I think the Koch Brothers are an antisemitic conspiracy theory there bud. Rethink this.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[removed]

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Again - you've got nothing. Perhaps return when you have something to contribute.

    [–]Entropick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Where's Skull and Bones, Freemasonry, the Vatican fit into this?

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    How's this?:

    To finance Lenin, Stalin’s gangster outfit of hitmen and bank robbers used protection rackets, piracy, blackmail and kidnapping. The Rothschilds were hugely powerful in Baku, yet the Tsar’s secret police and Bolshevik memoirists recorded how the Rothschilds contributed to Stalin’s funds, even paying him off to stop a strike. The Rothschilds never knew that they had employed the future supreme pontiff of Marxism-Leninism — nor that he burnt down their refinery. The family shrewdly sold their Russian interests in 1912. Only now have they returned to Russia.

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/diary---19-may-2007

    [–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    The Panama papers were discovered by a right wing journalist investigating a left wing politician in Malta. She didn't expect to find what she did, that's the opposite of it being obvious or at your fingertips. Someone died so you could have that info, don't insult her by pretending it's easy.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Have you lost your mind? Is there anything in my notes that indicates this is a problem for only one political party, or right or left wing groups? And before the discovery of the Panama papers, there were other ways of viewing abuses by the 1%. My referens is obviously to what's available now, thanks to investigations and whistleblowers. It doesn't diminish the memory of their work. If anything, continuing to reference these sources values their work. Thanks to them, you now have access. There is of course much more. Don't tell me I've insulted anyone.

    [–]Soloninja 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I do love how they admitted Trump was right though. Scary they controlled information like that. Guess people are really sheep

    [–]Poofter 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

    Republicans are so fucking stupid and think an opinion piece is evidence Jesus christ 🤧

    [–]TheEvilNick 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

    Democrats and liberals are so fucking stupid and think opinion pieces are fact when it fits their agenda. They're are only 2 genders.

    [–]Poofter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

    Oh no, a Republican that doesn’t understand science or grammar 😂

    [–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    oh no a liberal who makes up science to suit their whims...... the left live in fairy tales

    [–]Poofter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

    Hun, understanding science is not the same thing as “making it up” 🙄

    [–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    making it up like multiple genders and saying boys are girls so they get to decimate REAL female sports?

    [–]Poofter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    You want to get your genitals checked every time you play a sport? 🙄

    [–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    I don't need to, I don't pretend to be a sex I'm not

    [–]Poofter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    How do we know you’re not pretending if we don’t check to see if you have a dick or vag or something else? How do we really know you’re not “pretending”?

    [–]TheEvilNick 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    guess you dont. Luckily for us most of these men trying to play in women sports DEF LOOK LIKE MEN!

    [–]SilenceThem_Consume 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    op, you forgot 2019-2020, 'trump is building his OWN deeeerp state!!'

    [–]TheEvilNick 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Failing NY times