Deep State take-out

Vincent J. Curtis

23 Mar 22

We see in the Paul Miller case a classic example of a deep-state take-out.  Damning information mysteriously comes into the possession of someone with power over the victim.  The information is not subject to cross-examination, so its veracity hasn’t been tested.  No matter, it is simply believed because it is too incredible not to be believed.

In Miller’s case, we don’t even know what that information is.  Miller speculated as to what it might be, but that speculation was denied.  And so, what the damning information is remains a complete mystery, but the determination is not: Miller has to go.  And he is gone.  Taken-out without his case being aired.  And that means without the judgement of the power over Miller being subjectable to questioning.  It was offered to be in Mr. Miller’s own interest that the damning information not be released.

If Miller were expelled from the NDP caucus and party on the grounds that he was an irredeemably deplorable, that might turn out badly for the power that expelled him, if, on examination, he wasn’t that irredeemably deplorable. And that the decision of the power was excessive, even vicious.  The power might have vested interests at play, and the expulsion was happily convenient for the power.  That’s probably the real reason for the mystery behind the take-out.

Mystery is how the deep state covers itself.  Protect sources and methods, you know.  And people get crushed mysteriously and without their day in court.

-30-