Ted Cruz: John Bolton ouster may signal 'deep state forces' winning fight to salvage Obama Iran deal

[mystery-ak]

Ted Cruz: John Bolton ouster may signal 'deep state forces' winning fight to salvage Obama Iran deal
by Daniel Chaitin
 | September 10, 2019 06:57 PM



Sen. Ted Cruz openly speculated that "deep state forces" may have influenced President Trump's decision to force out national security adviser John Bolton.

Bolton, a foreign policy hawk, was a key figure behind Trump's decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal. In a flurry of tweets Tuesday, Cruz wondered if Bolton's exit signals Trump has been convinced to go "soft" on Iran.

"I sincerely hope his leaving the White House does not mean that the deep-state forces at State and Treasury—who have been fighting tooth and nail to preserve the Obama Iran nuclear deal—have finally convinced the president to go soft on Iran," the Texas Republican said.

"Relaxing the maximum pressure strategy, which is succeeding in dramatically weakening the world’s leading state sponsor of terror, would be an enormous mistake," he added.

more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ted-cruz-john-bolton-ouster-may-signal-deep-state-forces-winning-fight-to-salvage-obama-iran-deal

[libertybele]

Ted Cruz: John Bolton ouster may signal 'deep state forces' winning fight to salvage Obama Iran deal
by Daniel Chaitin
 | September 10, 2019 06:57 PM



Sen. Ted Cruz openly speculated that "deep state forces" may have influenced President Trump's decision to force out national security adviser John Bolton.

Bolton, a foreign policy hawk, was a key figure behind Trump's decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal. In a flurry of tweets Tuesday, Cruz wondered if Bolton's exit signals Trump has been convinced to go "soft" on Iran.

"I sincerely hope his leaving the White House does not mean that the deep-state forces at State and Treasury—who have been fighting tooth and nail to preserve the Obama Iran nuclear deal—have finally convinced the president to go soft on Iran," the Texas Republican said.

"Relaxing the maximum pressure strategy, which is succeeding in dramatically weakening the world’s leading state sponsor of terror, would be an enormous mistake," he added.

more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ted-cruz-john-bolton-ouster-may-signal-deep-state-forces-winning-fight-to-salvage-obama-iran-deal

Cruz has a point and he is once again probably correct.

[roamer_1]

OK. I am done. No more Cruz for me.
Anyone who utters 'Deep State' is utterly off my list.

[Bigun]

Ted Cruz is 100% correct here but I hope the deep state does not win in the end.  Not looking good for my side at present.

[Bigun]

OK. I am done. No more Cruz for me.
Anyone who utters 'Deep State' is utterly off my list.

I just uttered that @roamer_1! What would you prefer us to call the unelected and completely unaccountable beauracy in Washington?

[corbe]

                   I smell a rat

[roamer_1]

I just uttered that @roamer_1! What would you prefer us to call the unelected and completely unaccountable beauracy in Washington?

You mean the bureaucracy that is 100% controlled by Tump? Who runs the Foreign Policy office? The Administration. Who runs the LEO offices like HLS and FBI? The Administration.

Next.

[FeelNoPain]

I just uttered that @roamer_1! What would you prefer us to call the unelected and completely unaccountable beauracy in Washington?

Was there a deep state before Trump took office?

[corbe]

Was there a deep state before Trump took office?

   Yes, @FeelNoPain except we called it Government.

[libertybele]

                   I smell a rat

Absolutely.  Trump needs to show his Princess and her Creepy Herman the door.

(Btw love your new avatar)

[Bigun]

You mean the bureaucracy that is 100% controlled by Tump? Who runs the Foreign Policy office? The Administration. Who runs the LEO offices like HLS and FBI? The Administration.

Next.

No!  Decidedly NOT controlled by Trump or any other president for that matter and that has been the case for far too long.   Since Woodrow  Wilson at least!  Presidents get to appoint a few people at the top of agencies and those people ultimately have little to no control over the people with GS numbers who allegedly work for them.  "I'll still be here when you are long gone Mr. Secretary" is a mantra too often heard in Washington these days.

[TomSea]

This potentially could become a linchpin event that sees someone entering the race against Trump, a big name.

And, I thought for a moment, I saw something about Carly Fiorina entering the race That was posted here, wasn't it??

I just did a search and found 2 articles on her today, NRO and National Interest:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/failed-2016-candidate-carly-fiorina-never-trumper-79366

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/should-we-read-anything-into-carly-fiorinas-tweets/

Someone did post something on her today? Didn't they? About her possibly running so I'll probably hold off on these for now.

[corbe]

   I posted a poll earlier today @TomSea

Will Carly Fiorina run for President 2020?

http://216.224.171.220/index.php?topic=375041.0

[HoustonSam]

"I sincerely hope his leaving the White House does not mean that the deep-state forces at State and Treasury—who have been fighting tooth and nail to preserve the Obama Iran nuclear deal—have finally convinced the president to go soft on Iran," the Texas Republican said.

I think this is a genius tactical move by Cruz.  He associates Trump himself with the very swamp he's supposed to be draining, while blaming that swamp, rather than Trump's mercurial narcissism, for yet another revolving-door exit of "only the best people."

[Chosen Daughter]

OK. I am done. No more Cruz for me.
Anyone who utters 'Deep State' is utterly off my list.

I am confused.  I don't think Cruz wants that.  I think he is worried that the President is heading in that direction.

[Chosen Daughter]

This potentially could become a linchpin event that sees someone entering the race against Trump, a big name.

And, I thought for a moment, I saw something about Carly Fiorina entering the race That was posted here, wasn't it??

I just did a search and found 2 articles on her today, NRO and National Interest:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/failed-2016-candidate-carly-fiorina-never-trumper-79366


https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/should-we-read-anything-into-carly-fiorinas-tweets/

Someone did post something on her today? Didn't they? About her possibly running so I'll probably hold off on these for now.

Fiorina against that witch Warren.

[Right_in_Virginia]

This speculation from Cruz surprises me.  If there's one thing President Trump is not going to do is reenter the Iran "deal".

If anything, what the President has done is broken the unholy alliance building between Bolton --- acting above his pay grade --- and Netanyahu who lately have teamed up supporting action against Iran.  The actions taken by POTUS may well have prevented us from getting sucked into another vortex costing American blood and treasure in the Middle East.

With his decision, POTUS has also shut off a foghorn coming from his administration insisting we must stay in Afghanistan for another 18 years because ... well, it's what we do.

What surprises me is Cruz seems to be out of the loop.   

[Right_in_Virginia]

This potentially could become a linchpin event that sees someone entering the race against Trump, a big name. 

What would he or she run on .... war with Iran and war in Afghanistan into perpetuity?

[corbe]

   Just cause the West Wing gave Cruz his balls back 6 months ago doesn't necessarily mean he's in the 'proverbial' loop. 

[Bigun]

This speculation from Cruz surprises me.  If there's one thing President Trump is not going to do is reenter the Iran "deal".

If anything, what the President has done is broken the unholy alliance building between Bolton --- acting above his pay grade --- and Netanyahu who lately have teamed up supporting action against Iran.  The actions taken by POTUS may well have prevented us from getting sucked into another vortex costing American blood and treasure in the Middle East.

With his decision, POTUS has also shut off a foghorn coming from his administration insisting we must stay in Afghanistan for another 18 years because ... well, it's what we do.

What surprises me is Cruz seems to be out of the loop.   

I'm sure you don't understand what Cruz is talking about here.   He is not talking about anything the president might do and is talking about what the deep state is actively doing.

[Sanguine]

No!  Decidedly NOT controlled by Trump or any other president for that matter and that has been the case for far too long.   Since Woodrow  Wilson at least!  Presidents get to appoint a few people at the top of agencies and those people ultimately have little to no control over the people with GS numbers who allegedly work for them.  "I'll still be here when you are long gone Mr. Secretary" is a mantra too often heard in Washington these days.

Agreed, @Bigun, and it's shocking naiveté to not recognize the existence of the deep state.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I'm sure you don't understand what Cruz is talking about here.   He is not talking about anything the president might do and is talking about what the deep state is actively doing.

I do get that @Bigun   But this is one of the areas where the deep state needs the POTUS..... and it doesn't have him.

[Bigun]

I do get that @Bigun   But this is one of the areas where the deep state needs the POTUS..... and it doesn't have him.

I think it's the exact opposite @Right_in_Virginia.

[Bigun]

Agreed, @Bigun, and it's shocking naiveté to not recognize the existence of the deep state.

Absolutely!   They are a much bigger problem than those who hold elective office IMHO.

[truth_seeker]

Agreed, @Bigun, and it's shocking naiveté to not recognize the existence of the deep state.

Not surprising here, where the driving force is whatever ideas can be construed to have an anti-Trump angle.

I remember my father, talking about career, non-political appointees, in government.

One his personal friends was Howard Jarvis, of Prop 13 note.

A group of them had been with Reagan, since his Governor days.

The point was, when a President took office, his power was limited to a relatively small number of "Political" appointees.