What has been made clear in the initial impeachment hearings is that the real concern by the career bureaucrats is that President Trump was not following the DC consensus policy or procedures on Ukraine. The reason Trump may have gone around the normal channels was revealed when the ambassador to Ukraine said she knew of the Biden-Burisma issues but did nothing. This all highlights the problem of DC being a giant blob that any president wishing to do anything different must route around for effective change.
In the Daily Caller, Michael Anton brainstormed a way to make the NSC align with a president. Spend a little money and quickly get individuals aligned with the president’s views into important NSC positions. That is nice, but why would the inner party (Democrats) ever allow this for an appropriation? Why would the outer party leadership that is part of the bipartisan consensus ever allow this? This is the problem. There are just too few foreign policy realpolitik or isolationist leaning individuals staffed to different politicians or being churned our of foreign policy programs. The donors and foundations do not exist for these views to find sunshine.
This is a small example of the problem facing every single department with the federal government leviathan. How do you route around it all? Why do we have to route around it? Why should the blob operate for its benefit rather than ours? The two man team of Nixon-Kissinger ended Vietnam, opened China and got detente going while also engaging in shuttle diplomacy between the Arabs and Jews. Did not really need the massive State Department did we?
In 2017, Erik Prince offered a new solution to our horrible engagement in Afghanistan. It was just a re-branding of his Frontier Services Group work for China in Africa, but it caused freak outs and universal condemnation. No one knew the pros or cons of the idea but even economic policy figures of yore like Robert Reich were screeching about an unaccountable private army for the president!!! We cannot deviate from the horrible courses we are set on because they like their sandbox and only they get to play in it. Because the federal government cannot be skinnied down all that ever happens is presidents use personal channels to route around the beast as the beast adds layers of useless management. Outsourcing and contract work is meaningless because federal regulations and mandates in requests for proposals makes sure the outside companies comply with progressive doctrine and are often advised or owned by old leviathan workers.
We should have articles coming on FBI bloat and CIA shenanigans. The embarrassing thing is the municipal bureaucrat mindset dominating our agencies involved in security. Our military is not immune to this, but at least we discharge incompetent individuals. Did anyone at CIA lose their job over the 9/11 failure? Jamie Gorelick was the deputy attorney general in the Clinton admin, and she famously set up the Chinese Wall between CIA and FBI that contributed to 9/11. Did she face consequences? No. She was a member of the 9/11 Commission and then collected paychecks as Fannie Mae blew up.
The impeachment hearings have been a joke, but the worse joke is a parade of individuals explaining how valiant and grand our Ukrainian policy has been. America lied about respecting Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for its nukes. America and Soros aided an Orange Revolution in 2004 nearly leading to civil war or dissolution. When the Ukes decided on an economic deal with Russia, the US, led by Victoria Nuland, funded and aided the Maidan Revolution to plunge Ukraine into chaos, massive inflation, impoverishment and a civil war. It also allowed our regime’s elite children to pilfer money via Ukraine’s natural resources. What is valiant there? Why should these failures be considered a glorious consensus? These bureaucrats are just administrators for looting and criminality.