FBI analyst previously listed on Kash Patel's 'Deep State' actors list suffers harsh fate

[TCC]

FBI analyst listed in Kash Patel's 'Deep State' list suffers grim fate

The FBI declined to comment, citing its longstanding practice on not giving public statements regarding personnel matters.

www.dailymail.co.uk

he FBI suspended an analyst once described by Kash Patel as a 'deep state' actor in a book he wrote in 2023.

The New York Times first reported the move by the agency Patel now leads to place Brian Auten on administrative leave, citing people familiar with the matter.

No official reason has been given for the dismissal of Auten, who worked on investigations related to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and Hunter Biden's infamous laptop.

 

[mattfivefour]

I would question the Daily Mail's sensationalist "harsh" in the headline. Administrative leave is not harsh. And considering what the agent is apparently accused of, dismissal wouldn't be either. It would be deserved.

 

[TCC]

I would question the Daily Mail's sensationalist "harsh" in the headline. Administrative leave is not harsh. And considering what the agent is apparently accused of, dismissal wouldn't be either. It would be deserved.

Agreed. Searching for quick stories online algorithmically (at least for me) is always a challenge to find more or most conservative views on stories. Of the batch, the Daily Mail was the most conservative. For me, just getting the thing that is happening to post is sometimes all I have time for...lol. For me, I am to a degree I guess innoculated from the spin. I almost don't see it any more. Not because I consume it as "what is." Its just so common it is awesome that we all kind of know they do that all over the place. But it is always good to identify that. Because you are right pastor, "harsh" is a spin word there. For sure. So when they end up in jail it will be treason i'm sure...lol. At some point though, what things mean I would imagine fall better into place. Its sad that so much of the uphill climb today is just getting something said without twisting it. I have seen this on both sides. But I believe the left are far better at it.

Although I have an off the beatten path question in relation. An example of perhaps the right with Trump might have quite a leg up on spin. As you know I generally think the Trump admin is helpful to the country. And that conservative values are needed. And the Trump admin will bring a fair share of that and more, I believe. But still, because of my strong views on the Trump camp, I tend to hold myself as accountable to that level in posing my own scrutiny upon myself as it were.

So if anyone can help with this, that would be great. Otherwise i think it is a sober note too. Recently someone posted on our forum about Trump's turning on the water and letting it flow from Norhtern Califionia into Los Angeles fire ridden areas. Some reports I have seen got caught up in the Army Corp of Engineers turning it on as though Trump assigned the military to rule over Calfiornia. Scenes from Idiocracy. But my concern though is how Trump sold that and what he did with it.

It seems the water Trump opened to flow will never make it to Los Angeles. There is no connection. And the water Trump let flow was flowing "out" of reservoirs needed for drought level farming in the summer. And the waters would flow into lakes and everaporate going nowhere and doing nothing except depleting Northern farming summer water levels needed. And then doing that, Trump postures himself as a hero...lol. I think his admin will crush it. I think his admin will surprise the country and the world in fact. But even so, this to me seems rather bafoonish. How does it strike you? Or does anyone have any rebuttle? Because the only voices talking about it are either thinking Trump is trying to militarize Calfornia (which is not even a part of the issue), or stating what I just did. No one is saying Trump did a good thing with the water and explain why. No one. So is there any good in that? Or should we just chalk this up to Trump likes to be pampered by awe? Whatever insight would be appreciated. Blessings.

 

[mattfivefour]

I honestly have not yet been able to make up my mind on this.

 

[Hol]

Environmentalists control water flows in western states and especially CA. They want levels of flow that protect certain fish populations. That requires municipalities to change water storage and diversion policies that were used in the past for the benefit of communities and that affects the state. When there is lots of rain/snow instead of storing the water—the water is released to run into the ocean so that a few lower reaches of the watershed never run dry (theoretically). Letting the water flow from N. CA to LA is an odd way to tell us what Trump is trying to do, but from what I understand the entire watershed could be managed with a focus on irrigation and reservoirs. They would divert water before it freely runs into the ocean and maintain full reservoirs.

 

[TCC]

Environmentalists control water flows in western states and especially CA. They want levels of flow that protect certain fish populations. That requires municipalities to change water storage and diversion policies that were used in the past for the benefit of communities and that affects the state. When there is lots of rain/snow instead of storing the water—the water is released to run into the ocean so that a few lower reaches of the watershed never run dry (theoretically). Letting the water flow from N. CA to LA is an odd way to tell us what Trump is trying to do, but from what I understand the entire watershed could be managed with a focus on irrigation and reservoirs. They would divert water before it freely runs into the ocean and maintain full reservoirs.

It was pretty pubicized that Trump scolded Newsome for not opening the Norhtern water valve to let more water access flow into Southern California. There was back and forth. Then we hear Trump opened up the Norhtern valve. But yeah all the reports seem to be clear that that water ends up in central California and runs off into lakes and evaporates. Its like a different way of letting the water go nowhere. With the liberals having it go into the ocean. And the conservatives running it down to Central California and run off into lakes. It almost seems like a commentary of sorts upon our state. That we have gotten so far removed from our own sense of identity in how politics works in our state, that we just let imagery of what politicians do or don't do be our answers toward the problem.

Interesting statement though about what Trump's interest is in doing what he is doing with the water valve in Northern Calfironia. But it is somewhat concerning that not knowing its just the way it is. We let ideologies answer the issues without reality for those issues. But the farmers up north do seem to be speaking out against it. Blessings.

 

[Hol]

It almost seems like a commentary of sorts upon our state. That we have gotten so far removed from our own sense of identity

If CA would return to water management goals from thirty or forty years ago they could make some practical progress. Unfortunately the bureaucracy of environmentalists has tied policy up with legal decisions and the unstated abandonment of law making when the legislature turned power over to ‘experts’ from the CA environmentalists.

It would take the CA law makers asserting control and showing experts the door. Plus, a few generations of govt. workers in environmental services only implement environmentalists strategies.

Maybe the federal govt could come in and override decades of bad decisions. That possibility will not likely hit media from CA.

 

[1LoverofGod]

Environmentalists control water flows in western states and especially CA. They want levels of flow that protect certain fish populations. That requires municipalities to change water storage and diversion policies that were used in the past for the benefit of communities and that affects the state. When there is lots of rain/snow instead of storing the water—the water is released to run into the ocean so that a few lower reaches of the watershed never run dry (theoretically). Letting the water flow from N. CA to LA is an odd way to tell us what Trump is trying to do, but from what I understand the entire watershed could be managed with a focus on irrigation and reservoirs. They would divert water before it freely runs into the ocean and maintain full reservoirs.

Yes. California has been dumping trillions of good water into the ocean to save the fish for some time.
Over the past couple of years, California has gotten record rains including atmospheric river type rain falls of months worth of rain in days causing major floods. There's also been a lot of snowfall in the mountains.
Yet most of the reservoirs are dry. A major reservoir was deliberately destroyed and it was what contained the water supply that was dependent on to keep fire hydrants full of water.
This was the main reason the Palisades fire went out of control and caused so much fire destruction.
All the water by means of heavy rain and snow that California has had and I see this recent headline and it makes one wonder........

California's drought has returned — and it's already bad​

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/california-drought-problem-20271547.php

 

[Bethlehem57]

Environmentalists control water flows in western states and especially CA. They want levels of flow that protect certain fish populations. That requires municipalities to change water storage and diversion policies that were used in the past for the benefit of communities and that affects the state. When there is lots of rain/snow instead of storing the water—the water is released to run into the ocean so that a few lower reaches of the watershed never run dry (theoretically). Letting the water flow from N. CA to LA is an odd way to tell us what Trump is trying to do, but from what I understand the entire watershed could be managed with a focus on irrigation and reservoirs. They would divert water before it freely runs into the ocean and maintain full reservoirs.

What is really exasperating about this California “water dilemma,” is that when I was still living there back in the 1980’s, Southern CA was pitching an all out liberal fit about a pipeline from Northern CA, because Northern California, if not in a drought, gets much more water (rain, snow melt, etc.) than the Southern part The population there is much higher than the north, thus demand is higher. And they irrigate (no rain in the summer months) state wide, so water is vital to agriculture statewide. California politicians have been adept at greed for generations.

And if I’m not mistaken, this pipeline wasn’t even turned on when the LA fires were happening.

Unbelievable!