Tuesday, December 5, 2017

FBI and DOJ: Idiocy or Conspiracy?

Now that the Trump Russia Collusion Narrative is crashing and burning, we are confronted with the Curious Case of the FBI Bonker, Peter Strzok.

Really, it would take a Tom Wolfe to come up with a chap like that. Because in real life you don't get a consummate villain that has done all the evil things in the movie or the novel: the chap that gets Hillary off the hook, uses the Fusion GPS Dossier to spy on the Trump campaign, and traps Gen. Flynn and Uncle Tom Cobbley and all. All in one twisted cartoon villain suitable for appearance in a Batman or Superman movie.

And all, it seems, because the guy is an over-the-top Democrat partisan. What a fool, it looks like he has spoiled the Dems' whole game to catch President Trump in some sort of trap and then consign him and his deplorables to Outer Slobbovia.

No really! If you are going to be the Democratic hero of the ages, and trap the whole Trump phenomenon in Pooh's foolproof Trap for Heffalumps, you really need to keep your nose clean and not be tweeting to the girl on the team that you are bonking outside the holy bonds of matrimony.

When you look at the pattern the whole Trump Collusion game it looks like a monstrous conspiracy. It looks as though the Dems all got in a room together and the Democratic Mr. Big handed out assignments.

But I prefer the Idiocy Theory. I prefer to think that these people are swamp creatures that haven't yet advanced to consciousness and rational thought. So they are reacting to the election of Trump on pure instinct, not on rational strategic thought. They are all running around chaotically like Keystone Kops.

And by the way I think that also applies to Hillary Clinton and her operatives. The word seems to be that the Hillary campaign thought up the Russia Collusion narrative on the day after the election. And you can see why.

Want to know why they did it? Because they were ashamed, embarrassed that the smartest guys in the room had lost the election to an amateur with a combover. The Idiots.

So these small men came up with a way to deny that they had been well and truly beaten by Trump and his merry band of Trumpsters. The Idiots.

Hey, We woz robbed! they said. The Idiots.

Hey geniuses. When you are in a game in which, as St. Augustine wrote, the only difference between you golden boys of politics and a criminal gang is that you have "impunity," then you shouldn't be shocked, shocked, that the other guys came up and picked your pockets. You are all in the same game. You Idiots.

But, of course the real story is Hillary Clinton. The job of the defeated candidate, like the job of a defeated general, is to sue for peace. After an election, the job of a defeated candidate is to make a concession speech, that very night, to say that the election is well and truly over, that the other guys won, but we are all Americans before we are political partisans. But Hillary Clinton did not do that. The Idiot.

She is such a weak and foolish person that she let her campaign people cook up the Trump Collusion Narrative.

Just like that other weak and foolish person in 2000, Al Gore, that did not concede the election and riled his supporters up into the Hanging Chads narrative. How did that work out, sports fans?

This all echoes to me with the disaster of World War I. In The Sources of Social Power, Volume III, my lefty pal Michael Mann talks about "militarism," the culture of European leaders of the time that assumed that all international disputes were settled by war. So they imagined that the disputes of the early 20th century could be settled on the battlefield. And then lost their thrones and empires.

Of course, the use of the term "militarism" is problematic, right off. That's because it's a left-wing pejorative, a verbal battering ram that the left uses to devalue and marginalize any narrative except the One and True Lefty Narrative about class and race and gender and liberation and emancipation.

There is a better narrative for World War I. Let's just say that most European rulers in 1914 were dull idiots, playing the only game they knew, utterly oblivious to the fact that the world had changed, and that industrial nation states really did not need to settle their quarrels with military force. Forget that the policy of war was evil or monstrous. It just didn't make any sense.

Fast forward to 2016. Your Al Gores and your Hillary Clintons are playing the left-wing game of "activism." It's the only thing they know. They imagine that the way of the world is to offer their supporters "rights" and "entitlements" using government power to extract moneys from productive individuals and businesses. They are utterly oblivious to the fact that their politics is a creaking anachronism, just as "militarism" was a creaking anachronism a century ago.

Now I don't know if President Trump and his people are greater or lesser Idiots than their Democratic counterparts.

But I do think that the folks in the Democratic Party, from Nancy Pelosi -- who really seems to be exhibiting mild dementia -- to Chuck Schumer to mini-Idiots down in the Deep State like Peter Strzok are Idiots.

I keep getting back to my old pal Charles Dickens, who characterized the government bureaucrats of the mid-19th century as Barnacles and Stiltstockings working at the Circumlocution Office, with the motto "How Not to Do It."

I ask you: has anything changed?

1 comment:

  1. What you write is utter nonsensical and full of irony- you spin tales from your ivory tower that only an ultra conservative or a pure idiot voter would follow. Perhaps some conservative rag will pick up your commentary but I - no doubt countless others - see through your half-truths. The Marjorie Masel that I once knew would have never stooped so low to this.