Jon Sopel has written a piece for the Mail on Sunday that may surprise you. In it, the BBC's North America editor slates the writer of the anonymous New York Times attack on President Trump:
So what legitimacy does the writer have in declaring that he or she is the guardian of US democracy? For better or worse, the ballot box is where elections are decided and in November 2016 the American people spoke.
If you are that unhappy about the administration’s direction of travel, you have the choice of resigning and fighting the Trump agenda at the next election.
Or you stay and argue your corner. But if you lose the battle while fighting from within, your duty as a public servant is to enact the policy that has been agreed.
And he seems to concede that he might have been wrong in earlier dismissing Donald Trump's claims about the 'deep state' being out to get him:
There are two other things Trump said repeatedly during the campaign, which were designed to appeal to those who always love to smell conspiracy: there was a ‘deep state’ – powerful, but secret forces at the heart of the establishment – and that Washington was a swamp that needed to be drained.
Lurking around every neo-classical column were bad actors whose allegiance was to the status quo, who would thwart the newly elected President and scupper him as if their lives depended on it.
At the time, I thought it was tendentious in the extreme, designed to show that Trump was the non-politician in the race, the change-maker and people’s tribune taking on the deeply entrenched elites.
Yet the New York Times article can be seen as the very definition of the deep state.
Wonder what Anthony Zurcher and Katty Kay will make of this? Will they be re-tweeting links to it?
A chink of light? (If that is still legal to say).ReplyDelete
Maybe he’s realised how dangerous it would be to overturn what people voted for. The likely consequence of showing voters in Middle America, many of whom are armed, that their votes mean nothing.ReplyDelete
However it will take more than one article to convince me.
"At the time, I thought it was tendentious in theReplyDelete
extreme..." ? Really? You, Jon Sopel, are a journalist based full time in the USA! What do you do? Put a paper bag over your head and keep the TV turned off? Do you not read history? After all, it was Eisenhower who first raised concerns about an over-mighty military-industrial complex and that was 60 years ago! Do you not raise any questions about Obama's meteoric rise? Or about how the Clinton Foundation operates? Or look into John Brennan's past? Or ask yourself why the top of the FBI is so chock full of active Democrat supporters? Do you really believe Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch were discussing their grandchildren at the infamous tarmac meeting?
I don't know what's brought this on...perhaps it's just simple professional jealousy on his part - "It's our job to bring down this presidency, not moles in the White House!".
It seems clear to me and has from before the election - when the opinion polls were being rigged against Trump - that there is an operational Deep State. It is basically an alliance of the leadership of the CIA, FBI, DoJ, Democratic Party, nearly all the MSM, and the leaders of the big tech companies. It also included a fair number of senior Republicans.
Indeed ... and Oswald acted alone!Delete