Maybe he's playing it light now, but I was not impressed by his demeanor or words.
It seems to me, at least from this interview, that he is taking the Sean Hannity angle that 99%, the rank and file, of the FBI, the DOD, the DOJ are good people, and it's only the leadership that is rotten.
When he said there are many four/three star generals and some of them are doing a great job, he's blowing smoke up someones ass. Everyone above the rank of two star need to be summarily fired at pentagon, and need to ferret out which people below that need to go.
I don't think Kash is hungry enough to play with the big boys in IC. He does not come across as a killer to me.
Have to disagree with you there bud. I do understand your angle on some of the rhetoric he gave in this interview, and while I do agree that it mimics the Sean Hannity, old fashioned conservative type standard message - it's JUST the 7th floor that's rotten, the rank and file men and women of [Intel Agency] and [Woke Pentagon] are good folks and not idealogues - I believe you can trust that Kash has a reason for saying it like this.
There is more beneath the surface as opposed to when rah-rah Hannity or Karl Rove (::shudders::) hands that line out like a warm blanket to the old money neocon donors and the old dudes at home drinking a Budweiser in a couzy. (Nothing wrong with either btw)
Kash along with Devon Nunes authored the comprehensive Russiagate report - which has still not been FULLY unredacted and shown to the American people yet. (One of the important documents we are waiting for the full DECLAS on, considered vital as Epstein and the like according to some)
They were part of a brave few who were actually willing to go after the RINOs in the Bill Barr DOJ - the Rod Rosensteins, the John Yoo's of the world in Trump 1.0. (Yoo was the guy who more recently exonerated Biden from all document related criminality by declaring him too mentally crippled to stand trial - how is that assessment looking now, one must wonder 😑)
Kash had roles working directly with Pentagon brass of different status as well as field agents & bureaucracy of the FBI so when he makes a statement generalizing one of those groups I would take him at his word OR recognize that there is more in between the lines.
You could say that gives him a complete out but I think he has significant street cred - certainly MUCH more than Flynn.
For example: Ka$h is a frequent contributor on Bannon's show, and Bannon financed the movie (docu? Have not yet seen it) version of his book Government Gangsters. I do own the book and its a TREMENDOUS wealth of knowledge especially on the impeachment hoaxes. Names are named very intentionally.
He actually calls them out specifically and bullet points their crimes right below, pretty much. It's an excellent resource and he had significant trouble getting it published if that says anything. Also,
Trump called it the roadmap to his second administration, how's that for praise?
So I would just give Kash the benefit - either he knows a lot of the non-TV generals and standard Feds really are good guys with awful leadership, or he is throwing a wink out when he says it.
For example, Vivek just put forward the idea of disbanding the FBI entirely and mentioned 56% of them are lifetime bureaucrats, desk jockeys. That's a lot of Chiefs and no Indians... and if Kash is calling Chiefs... see what I mean?
Flynn has had a complicated relationship with Trump since he received his pardon, and is not really comparable with Kash who has ALWAYS been 100% loyal to Trump and never very far from the man.
In terms of political jobs, however... Kash is a bit of a T shirt and blue jeans kind of dude in his private life and for interviews, and also no band on the finger. Fairly young mid 40s I believe. Seems like he will hang out for another round or two even after its late, and he doesn't care to sugar coat his statements. He comes across unique and authentic.
And he gets a wee bit cross-eyed sometimes when he's got to stare at the camera. Might only be noticeable to me because I do it too.
I know none of the random facts I just listed should have anything to do with his appointment to a certain job, but I feel as though Trump will give him a deputy type job or sometging where he will really dig into the work, which is where he tends to shine.
My ultimate verdict on Kash would be VERY LOYAL to Trump, VERY STRONG against his enemies, more of a worker drone than leadership. More behind the scenes, more rebel than conformist.
I mean NONE of that as criticism in fact most are qualities I have myself. We all have a part to play in the grand game and it will be interesting to see where Trump thinks he belongs.
"I believe you can trust that Kash has a reason for saying it like this."
That was what I meant by, maybe he is playing it light. To be all lion and no fox is not a good thing at most levels of an operation.
I fully agree that Kash is 1000% loyal to Trump, as we both know that Trump places a very high value on loyalty, and rightfully so. This brings us to Flynn.
Disloyalty is not only outright betrayal of a trust, but one can be disloyal by either intentionally, or through carelessness, putting one employer into a weakened and compromising position.
As Sundance put it:
Former Nat Sec Advisor Michael Flynn disqualified himself from further consideration by poor judgement. Don’t forget, Flynn was an agent for a foreign government (Turkey 2016) and never told candidate Trump, thereby setting the Trump administration up for compromise. Flynn then claims he didn’t see the risk of an FBI interview in his office and never told the White House Counsel of his intent to be interviewed by the FBI. You cannot claim Flynn is smart and reconcile that with his stupidity.
"My ultimate verdict on Kash would be VERY LOYAL to Trump, VERY STRONG against his enemies, more of a worker drone than leadership. More behind the scenes, more rebel than conformist."
I also believe Kash would be better in a behind the scenes role. I think he should serve on the line of combat most suited to his skills.
No no, thank you! First for taking my response not as disagreement or a critique, which I didn't intend, but rather just laying out some information and personal thoughts that spoke to the positives of Kash and maybe ran contrary to the * totally valid* criticisms you had toward some of his statements in this appearance.
It sort of goes without saying but you'd be surprised how often people jump and think it's a criticism or an attack on them. So I want to say I am thankful you took a moment to read and proper understand how I meant it.
Secondly thank you for clarifying a little more to give me perspective where you were coming from and how you meant it. It's funny, the deep divers like us probably listen to these guys so much that we can practically build a story arc for them.
For example, I can remember watching Kash doing media appearances years ago, on small YT channels and big networks both, and I think he came off a little heated or abrasive at times. It seems like he has been working on that come across a bit more even tempered, without pulling the punch in his overall message or policy prescription.
I think you will know what I mean since you seem to have been following as closely and you definitely know about him.
Excellent points about Flynn all the way around. I had definitely forgotten about the FARA situation when it came to him but it's a really vital part of the whole when you consider Flynn in totality.
We always chalk up the FBI moving on him as Flynn being cordial and perhaps naive, but with the context you added, I wonder if we are giving him a pass...
Flynn was familiar with Washington despite working in a more active role on the ground. He certainly has a connected family background. You would think his time the Obama admin would help clue him in on their tactics, I mean... wasn't he going to be the DNI?
I have the utmost sympathy for him being put through such an ordeal if it was legit. But if you turn the picture frame a bit, it might look odd that he made kind of a novice mistake by entering a room with agents ALONE especially amid all the tension.
A last point, we always hear Trump recall Obama warning him about two specific things: North Korea and Flynn. From there, Trump always pivots to NK and touts how he easily disarmed Dear Leader (after a brief but rocky start) and had him purring like a cat harmlessly in no time at all.
You could potentially read the subtext there as Trump telling us, "Obama attempted to distract me by warning me about NK and Flynn, but I easily saw through the ruse and quickly neutralized any dangers." Is he hinting that he saw through Flynn as well, if he were part of the plot designed by Obama (the way a hostile NK was also engineered by them?) Not sure but it is perhaps worth a little consideration.
Flynn's lawyer Sydney Powell also had a now-famous moment where she over promised and under delivered which did unintended harm to Trump at the time. I am not suggesting at all that it was intentional, just odd.
Lastly I remember that around this time Pence took some kind of action, for some reason now I think it might have been related to the Flynn issue, and it set wheels in motion which had huge consequences with respect to one or BOTH impeachments. I'm sure you will know off the top of your head what it was.
Where it fits in with today however is more what I am driving at. Ironically, The Apprentice was about recognition and promotion of human capital (i.e. talent) and yet Trump was dragged through so much during his first term as a consequence of some of his unfortunate choices in people.
You can see he has more than learned from that nightmare by how extensively he has been planning this series of appointments in his second term. He wants to leave nothing to chance and have laserlike focus, getting them as close to perfection as humanly possible.
Maybe he is going past human possibility and using Elon's AI to assist his final choices - I know he will stop at nothing to prevent even a single repeat of what occurred last time, it was his greatest shame and error and he admits it.
Thanks for your thoughtful replay once more, even though I went into left field a bit feel free to respond with any thoughts. Godspeed.
I think that Trump's one weakness, as least from what I've read, is that he has/had a tendency to fall victim to the praise of others. I don't think Trump, and this is backed up by his own words, understood the evil nature of D.C. politics. But he has been cured of that naivety. Who knows, maybe everything played out exactly as planned in at a game level we cannot see or understand.
I would appreciate it you would comment on a comment that I made to another post. I can never do a very good job of getting to the heart of what I want to say, but hopefully with your keen discernment skills, you will be able to pick out what I am getting at.
See below:
Look, Trump is not merely picking people that are qualified, that he thinks will be loyal, and do a great job, there is 5D chess strategy involved in his choices.
After this Q centered group drilled down on every word that Q put out to extract every drop of juice from his drops, I am a little disappointed that the same group of very cleaver people, this sites members as a whole, is not working more diligently to map out the strategy that is being played out day to day by Trump team in near realtime, right before our eyes. A historic battle is taking place, and it's like no one is recording the events.
We have no look ahead efforts to map out the unbelievable tactics that are being employed to defeat a still powerful entrenched enemy. It's like all the brain power, and research talent when up to the point of election night victory, and everyone just said, "we won", and closed up shop.
What Trump did by announcing Deputy AG Todd Blanche and Interim Acting DAG Emil Bove is a lesson in 6th generation political warfare, in my view, and we should make a effort to create a strategic map of the battle to chart the tactics that are playing out.
Unless I am wrong, a Deputy AG, prior to confirmation of AG, can act with all the powers of an AG. This means that if you put a bulldog in that position who is an equal threat to what the AG would be, you put massive pressure on the Senate to confirm your AG choice.
Remember when John Ratcliffe was up for confirmation as DNI during Trumps first term, and Senate was dragging it's feet. Trump named Rick Grenell as acting Director of National Intelligence, and shortly after Ratcliffe was confirmed by Senate. Trump put someone in acting spot that scared them worse than the person they were afraid to confirm. Grenell had all the powers as acting DNI that Ratcliffe had, and it scared the shit out of them.
I think this is the same play being run here. And if it is, it deserves being recognized for the genius game play that it is. Deserves to be plugged into that map that needs to exist.
By mapping this out we will more clearly see the war being fought, what the moves on the board are. This will more enable us to anticipate what the next move might be, help us fully appreciate the clever way the battle was fought when the battle is won, and stand as lessons to use in the next challenge.
I am not smart enough to map this out, but there are autist, an anons who could create a chess game layout of the game being played that would show all the moves being played.
Maybe he's playing it light now, but I was not impressed by his demeanor or words.
It seems to me, at least from this interview, that he is taking the Sean Hannity angle that 99%, the rank and file, of the FBI, the DOD, the DOJ are good people, and it's only the leadership that is rotten.
When he said there are many four/three star generals and some of them are doing a great job, he's blowing smoke up someones ass. Everyone above the rank of two star need to be summarily fired at pentagon, and need to ferret out which people below that need to go.
I don't think Kash is hungry enough to play with the big boys in IC. He does not come across as a killer to me.
Have to disagree with you there bud. I do understand your angle on some of the rhetoric he gave in this interview, and while I do agree that it mimics the Sean Hannity, old fashioned conservative type standard message - it's JUST the 7th floor that's rotten, the rank and file men and women of [Intel Agency] and [Woke Pentagon] are good folks and not idealogues - I believe you can trust that Kash has a reason for saying it like this.
There is more beneath the surface as opposed to when rah-rah Hannity or Karl Rove (::shudders::) hands that line out like a warm blanket to the old money neocon donors and the old dudes at home drinking a Budweiser in a couzy. (Nothing wrong with either btw)
Kash along with Devon Nunes authored the comprehensive Russiagate report - which has still not been FULLY unredacted and shown to the American people yet. (One of the important documents we are waiting for the full DECLAS on, considered vital as Epstein and the like according to some)
They were part of a brave few who were actually willing to go after the RINOs in the Bill Barr DOJ - the Rod Rosensteins, the John Yoo's of the world in Trump 1.0. (Yoo was the guy who more recently exonerated Biden from all document related criminality by declaring him too mentally crippled to stand trial - how is that assessment looking now, one must wonder 😑)
Kash had roles working directly with Pentagon brass of different status as well as field agents & bureaucracy of the FBI so when he makes a statement generalizing one of those groups I would take him at his word OR recognize that there is more in between the lines.
You could say that gives him a complete out but I think he has significant street cred - certainly MUCH more than Flynn.
For example: Ka$h is a frequent contributor on Bannon's show, and Bannon financed the movie (docu? Have not yet seen it) version of his book Government Gangsters. I do own the book and its a TREMENDOUS wealth of knowledge especially on the impeachment hoaxes. Names are named very intentionally.
He actually calls them out specifically and bullet points their crimes right below, pretty much. It's an excellent resource and he had significant trouble getting it published if that says anything. Also,
Trump called it the roadmap to his second administration, how's that for praise?
So I would just give Kash the benefit - either he knows a lot of the non-TV generals and standard Feds really are good guys with awful leadership, or he is throwing a wink out when he says it.
For example, Vivek just put forward the idea of disbanding the FBI entirely and mentioned 56% of them are lifetime bureaucrats, desk jockeys. That's a lot of Chiefs and no Indians... and if Kash is calling Chiefs... see what I mean?
Flynn has had a complicated relationship with Trump since he received his pardon, and is not really comparable with Kash who has ALWAYS been 100% loyal to Trump and never very far from the man.
In terms of political jobs, however... Kash is a bit of a T shirt and blue jeans kind of dude in his private life and for interviews, and also no band on the finger. Fairly young mid 40s I believe. Seems like he will hang out for another round or two even after its late, and he doesn't care to sugar coat his statements. He comes across unique and authentic.
And he gets a wee bit cross-eyed sometimes when he's got to stare at the camera. Might only be noticeable to me because I do it too.
I know none of the random facts I just listed should have anything to do with his appointment to a certain job, but I feel as though Trump will give him a deputy type job or sometging where he will really dig into the work, which is where he tends to shine.
My ultimate verdict on Kash would be VERY LOYAL to Trump, VERY STRONG against his enemies, more of a worker drone than leadership. More behind the scenes, more rebel than conformist.
I mean NONE of that as criticism in fact most are qualities I have myself. We all have a part to play in the grand game and it will be interesting to see where Trump thinks he belongs.
Sorry I ran long. Godspeed.
"I believe you can trust that Kash has a reason for saying it like this."
That was what I meant by, maybe he is playing it light. To be all lion and no fox is not a good thing at most levels of an operation.
I fully agree that Kash is 1000% loyal to Trump, as we both know that Trump places a very high value on loyalty, and rightfully so. This brings us to Flynn.
Disloyalty is not only outright betrayal of a trust, but one can be disloyal by either intentionally, or through carelessness, putting one employer into a weakened and compromising position.
As Sundance put it:
Former Nat Sec Advisor Michael Flynn disqualified himself from further consideration by poor judgement. Don’t forget, Flynn was an agent for a foreign government (Turkey 2016) and never told candidate Trump, thereby setting the Trump administration up for compromise. Flynn then claims he didn’t see the risk of an FBI interview in his office and never told the White House Counsel of his intent to be interviewed by the FBI. You cannot claim Flynn is smart and reconcile that with his stupidity.
"My ultimate verdict on Kash would be VERY LOYAL to Trump, VERY STRONG against his enemies, more of a worker drone than leadership. More behind the scenes, more rebel than conformist."
I also believe Kash would be better in a behind the scenes role. I think he should serve on the line of combat most suited to his skills.
Thank you for you thoughtful, reply fren.
No no, thank you! First for taking my response not as disagreement or a critique, which I didn't intend, but rather just laying out some information and personal thoughts that spoke to the positives of Kash and maybe ran contrary to the * totally valid* criticisms you had toward some of his statements in this appearance.
It sort of goes without saying but you'd be surprised how often people jump and think it's a criticism or an attack on them. So I want to say I am thankful you took a moment to read and proper understand how I meant it.
Secondly thank you for clarifying a little more to give me perspective where you were coming from and how you meant it. It's funny, the deep divers like us probably listen to these guys so much that we can practically build a story arc for them.
For example, I can remember watching Kash doing media appearances years ago, on small YT channels and big networks both, and I think he came off a little heated or abrasive at times. It seems like he has been working on that come across a bit more even tempered, without pulling the punch in his overall message or policy prescription.
I think you will know what I mean since you seem to have been following as closely and you definitely know about him.
Excellent points about Flynn all the way around. I had definitely forgotten about the FARA situation when it came to him but it's a really vital part of the whole when you consider Flynn in totality.
We always chalk up the FBI moving on him as Flynn being cordial and perhaps naive, but with the context you added, I wonder if we are giving him a pass...
Flynn was familiar with Washington despite working in a more active role on the ground. He certainly has a connected family background. You would think his time the Obama admin would help clue him in on their tactics, I mean... wasn't he going to be the DNI?
I have the utmost sympathy for him being put through such an ordeal if it was legit. But if you turn the picture frame a bit, it might look odd that he made kind of a novice mistake by entering a room with agents ALONE especially amid all the tension.
A last point, we always hear Trump recall Obama warning him about two specific things: North Korea and Flynn. From there, Trump always pivots to NK and touts how he easily disarmed Dear Leader (after a brief but rocky start) and had him purring like a cat harmlessly in no time at all.
You could potentially read the subtext there as Trump telling us, "Obama attempted to distract me by warning me about NK and Flynn, but I easily saw through the ruse and quickly neutralized any dangers." Is he hinting that he saw through Flynn as well, if he were part of the plot designed by Obama (the way a hostile NK was also engineered by them?) Not sure but it is perhaps worth a little consideration.
Flynn's lawyer Sydney Powell also had a now-famous moment where she over promised and under delivered which did unintended harm to Trump at the time. I am not suggesting at all that it was intentional, just odd.
Lastly I remember that around this time Pence took some kind of action, for some reason now I think it might have been related to the Flynn issue, and it set wheels in motion which had huge consequences with respect to one or BOTH impeachments. I'm sure you will know off the top of your head what it was.
Where it fits in with today however is more what I am driving at. Ironically, The Apprentice was about recognition and promotion of human capital (i.e. talent) and yet Trump was dragged through so much during his first term as a consequence of some of his unfortunate choices in people.
You can see he has more than learned from that nightmare by how extensively he has been planning this series of appointments in his second term. He wants to leave nothing to chance and have laserlike focus, getting them as close to perfection as humanly possible.
Maybe he is going past human possibility and using Elon's AI to assist his final choices - I know he will stop at nothing to prevent even a single repeat of what occurred last time, it was his greatest shame and error and he admits it.
Thanks for your thoughtful replay once more, even though I went into left field a bit feel free to respond with any thoughts. Godspeed.
I think that Trump's one weakness, as least from what I've read, is that he has/had a tendency to fall victim to the praise of others. I don't think Trump, and this is backed up by his own words, understood the evil nature of D.C. politics. But he has been cured of that naivety. Who knows, maybe everything played out exactly as planned in at a game level we cannot see or understand.
I would appreciate it you would comment on a comment that I made to another post. I can never do a very good job of getting to the heart of what I want to say, but hopefully with your keen discernment skills, you will be able to pick out what I am getting at.
See below:
Look, Trump is not merely picking people that are qualified, that he thinks will be loyal, and do a great job, there is 5D chess strategy involved in his choices.
After this Q centered group drilled down on every word that Q put out to extract every drop of juice from his drops, I am a little disappointed that the same group of very cleaver people, this sites members as a whole, is not working more diligently to map out the strategy that is being played out day to day by Trump team in near realtime, right before our eyes. A historic battle is taking place, and it's like no one is recording the events.
We have no look ahead efforts to map out the unbelievable tactics that are being employed to defeat a still powerful entrenched enemy. It's like all the brain power, and research talent when up to the point of election night victory, and everyone just said, "we won", and closed up shop.
What Trump did by announcing Deputy AG Todd Blanche and Interim Acting DAG Emil Bove is a lesson in 6th generation political warfare, in my view, and we should make a effort to create a strategic map of the battle to chart the tactics that are playing out.
Unless I am wrong, a Deputy AG, prior to confirmation of AG, can act with all the powers of an AG. This means that if you put a bulldog in that position who is an equal threat to what the AG would be, you put massive pressure on the Senate to confirm your AG choice.
Remember when John Ratcliffe was up for confirmation as DNI during Trumps first term, and Senate was dragging it's feet. Trump named Rick Grenell as acting Director of National Intelligence, and shortly after Ratcliffe was confirmed by Senate. Trump put someone in acting spot that scared them worse than the person they were afraid to confirm. Grenell had all the powers as acting DNI that Ratcliffe had, and it scared the shit out of them.
I think this is the same play being run here. And if it is, it deserves being recognized for the genius game play that it is. Deserves to be plugged into that map that needs to exist.
By mapping this out we will more clearly see the war being fought, what the moves on the board are. This will more enable us to anticipate what the next move might be, help us fully appreciate the clever way the battle was fought when the battle is won, and stand as lessons to use in the next challenge.
I am not smart enough to map this out, but there are autist, an anons who could create a chess game layout of the game being played that would show all the moves being played.