Should Donald Trump Bow to Deep State Intel?

Deep state intel is claiming that Russia “meddled” in the 2016 election, and Republicans are piling on Trump to agree.

Below is a typical story aimed at pressuring the President to affirm deep state intel that blames Russia… for what? According to the Republicans, they “interfered” but didn’t accomplish anything. But to many Democrats, Trump needs to affirm deep state intel that blames Russia for his presidency. Why would any president want to do that?

And why should any of us, who see the way the Department of Justice and the FBI are still fighting against the President despite having heads that he appointed, be surprised that Trump doubts what the CIA, NSA, and others say. So what if Dan Coats and Mike Pompeo are loyal to him (we hope). They didn’t go collect evidence themselves. No, they relied on others who have been in the bureaucracy longer. Meaning, they got promoted working for Obama under the supervision of people like James Clapper and John Brennan.Yeah, THAT John Brennan:

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Eagle Rising updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Those are the people that someone like Dan Coats must trust in, unless he wants to fight a huge political battle.

It would be insane for Donald Trump to trust deep state intel even though he doesn’t trust Vladimir Putin either! Even pressure from Fox News or Newt Gingrich doesn’t change those facts.

AFP reports, “Back in Washington, Trump under pressure to reverse course on Russia.

President Donald Trump found himself isolated and under pressure to reverse course Tuesday after publicly challenging the US intelligence conclusion that Russia meddled in the 2016 election during his face-to-face with Vladimir Putin.

At his inaugural summit with the Russian president in Finland, Trump appeared to accept at face value the strongman’s denial that Moscow interfered in a bid to undermine the Democrat Hillary Clinton — a stance that triggered bipartisan outrage at home.

Back in Washington, Trump sounded a defensive note, insisting his meeting with Putin had been “even better” than his one last week with traditional allies NATO — a testy gathering seen as having badly strained trans-Atlantic ties.

But the US president […] has found precious little support for his decision not to confront Putin, and faced calls even from allies to change tack.

“He has to reverse course immediately and he’s gotta get out there as soon as possible before the concrete starts to set on this,” former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci said on CNN.

“Loyalty right now requires you to tell the truth and sit with him and explain to him the optics of the situation, why the optics are bad, the strategy in terms of trying to get along with Vladimir Putin and deploying a strategy of going against the intelligence agency is very bad,” Scaramucci said.

[…]

Trump’s performance at the summit has even come under fire from the hosts at Fox News, usually a reliable defender of the president.

Read the full story.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com


About the author

Joe Scudder

Joe Scudder

Joe Scudder is the "nom de plume" (or "nom de guerre") of a fifty-ish-year-old writer and stroke survivor. He lives in St Louis with his wife and still-at-home children. He has been a freelance writer and occasional political activist since the early nineties. He describes his politics as Tolkienesque.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to a friend