Depose the Deep State or a Wall Is Meaningless

By | 2019-01-20T22:37:17-07:00 January 21st, 2019|
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Last week in the Russian collusion saga, we learned that the FBI opened an investigation into the president because it disagreed with him on a matter of foreign policy.

Yes, the agency first formed to catch people who crossed state lines with white women to have sex—and that now keeps secret files on UFOs—surmised in the aftermath of the 2016 election that Donald Trump might be an agent of the Kremlin because he favored diplomatic rapprochement.

Much can be inferred from this, not the least of which is that our chief law enforcement officers are idiots. Maybe not the gumshoe “just the facts ma’am” guys you know from the church picnic, but certainly the ones who ran the place who are now getting big-money book deals as they fend off indictment.

Beyond Andrew McCabe’s monumental stupidity, though, investigating the president for treason confirms that there is a deep state with an agenda separate from the will of the electorate.

It means, at some level, that America is governed by unelected bureaucracies that were originally created to assist the various branches in carrying out their ministerial functions.

These have grown, by mission creep, into a shadow government so cocksure of its impervious reach that it does not even hide its nefarious intentions.

Welcome Bravado in the Face of Deep State Defiance
Do you want to know how cocksure? Well, recall former FBI counterintelligence chief Peter Strzok’s annoying smirk as he testified falsely before the United States Congress, and it’s at least that much.

As Trumpism devolves into a debate over a wall, with “wallriors” like Ann Coulter telling everyone that building a wall was the sine qua non of Trump’s presidency, here’s a little reminder.

The wall is important, sure. But people did not vote for Trump out of heartfelt certainty that he would build a wall. No, people voted for Trump because he said he would build a wall.

That may seem to be a distinction without a difference, but let me explain.

By the time of the last election, people where I am from—Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania—were noticing that everyone in Washington was droning the same monochrome politically correct Bush-Clintonism about everything. There really wasn’t much difference between Bush III and Clinton II.

Elected officials were not so much enacting and enforcing laws—which is the sole expression of their delegated authority—as they were defying laws to “do the right thing” so they would not be accused on CNN of starving children.

Immigration loomed large because it perfectly exemplified the problem: Washington was refusing to enforce immigration laws over ginned up moral qualms.

And, imagine that, the phony moral posing just happened to serve big money donors at the expense of workers who were having their wages driven down by abundant cheap labor.

It was not just immigration, though. The secretary of Health and Human Services was telling nuns to buy condom insurance and federal judges were intruding to order high schools to provide separate bathrooms, for boys, for girls, and for anyone who identified as something else.

People were fed up.

A candidate who said, “I will enforce the law” would not have sufficiently driven a stake into the heart of Washington’s preening conceits.

Voters wanted someone who demonstrated his defiance. “I’m going to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it” was welcome bravado. It showed voters that the speaker did not care a whit about pleasing CNN.

The only way to fix illegal immigration was to elect that guy. Whether or not he ever built a wall was secondary.

Solve the Real Problem
If you’ve been watching you know that even if a wall is built, the establishment will simply get their federal judges to tell bureaucrats to entertain asylum applications at all points of entry, and illegals will enter through the gates.

They will be given accommodations at motels in El Paso while their asylum applications are processed and will disappear into the night from there. Or some unassailable expert will come up with another tortured civil rights pretext to let everyone in.

So long as the wall has gates, it does not solve the problem of Washington insiders refusing to enforce immigration laws. Which is kind of what General Patton meant when he said, “fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man.”

Of course, the wall is where the political battle is now being waged and President Trump cannot capitulate, or they win.

But, as working-class voters who elected Trump know, the real problem is unpunished freelancing by the deep state that regards laws as something for the little people.

Want to stop illegal immigration? Well, then, someone please wipe that smirk off Peter Strzok’s face. Depose the deep state or a wall is meaningless.

There has been a nighttime warrant executed on the president’s personal lawyer to root through his private files to find something, anything, to cause damage. Trump’s one-time campaign manager is in solitary confinement.

This is a coup d’etat.

Trump is under your skin, Swamp Things, I get that. But we’re in charge, not you. That is what elections mean. We want our wall. Or fence. Or wall-and-fence combo with stepped-up border security.

If the president wants to support legislation that gives “dreamers” a three-year stay of deportation in exchange for a wall, that’s how politics works—compromise.

At least it would be an exception adopted into law. Which is preferable to the present regime, where laws are ignored.

And no, wallriors, the wall is not everything. The whatfor of Trumpism is a restoration of constitutional governance even if it defies the preferences of our betters in Washington.

Drain the swamp and the rest will follow.

Photo credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

About the Author:

Thomas Farnan
Thomas J. Farnan is an attorney in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. His writing has appeared in Forbes and he is a regular contributor to Townhall.com and the Observer. Follow him on Twitter @tfarnanlaw.