Sponsor Advertisement
White House Advisor Alleges 'Deep State' Influence in Undercover Video
Screen grab from X. OMG video. Fair Use

White House Advisor Alleges 'Deep State' Influence in Undercover Video

A White House advisor was caught on undercover video discussing the bureaucratic 'deep state' and its ability to undermine potential Health Secretary nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s appointment.

In a candid revelation captured on undercover video, Byron Cohen, an Executive Branch Fellow in the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, has acknowledged the influence of a bureaucratic entity colloquially known as the "deep state." The term, often used to describe an entrenched network within the government capable of wielding significant power, came to the forefront as Cohen discussed the potential nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health Secretary.

The footage, obtained by O'Keefe Media Group (OMG), features Cohen expressing his views on the challenges Kennedy might face if tapped for the position. "People joke about the 'deep state,' but to some degree, it's real," Cohen admitted during the undercover interview. He went on to elaborate on the sophisticated means by which the bureaucracy could thwart political appointees, such as slowing down processes or creating commissions that lead to prolonged inaction.

Cohen specifically targeted Kennedy's potential nomination, asserting, "RFK Jr. is a very bad pick for HHS," and predicting a high likelihood of the bureaucracy overpowering him. He pointed to tactics like initiating prolonged study commissions to stall progress on policy initiatives. Cohen cited historical examples, including drawn-out investigations into fluoride and water quality, to illustrate how such strategies have been effective in the past.

Amidst the discussion of bureaucratic resistance, Cohen offered a nuanced perspective on the democratic process. He proposed that obstructing Kennedy's appointment might reflect the majority's policy preferences, especially concerning vaccine policies, a contentious issue given Kennedy's outspoken views.

The leaked conversation has raised concerns about the integrity of democratic institutions and the transparency of policymaking. Cohen's role as an Executive Branch Fellow focused on Interagency Research and Development Oversight adds weight to his assertions, giving a rare glimpse into the inner workings of government agencies.

These revelations come on the heels of another OMG report involving a high-ranking Pentagon contractor and former FBI agent discussing opposition to then-President-elect Donald Trump. The convergence of these events has stirred debate over the role of the so-called 'deep state' in shaping government policy and personnel decisions.

While the concept of the 'deep state' remains controversial, Cohen's comments have sparked a conversation about the balance between bureaucratic expertise and democratic accountability. The implications of such revelations are far-reaching, potentially influencing public trust in government and the efficacy of political appointments. As the story unfolds, it remains to be seen how these disclosures will impact the perception of the U.S. political system and the future of policymaking within the government's highest offices.

Advertisement

The Flipside: Different Perspectives

Progressive View

Progressives may interpret Byron Cohen's comments as reflective of the complexities inherent in governance. While the term 'deep state' carries negative connotations, it is essential to recognize that the bureaucracy comprises experienced professionals dedicated to public service. Their expertise ensures that policy decisions are informed by knowledge and continuity, crucial for effective governance.

The concern raised by Cohen regarding RFK Jr.'s potential nomination may also resonate with progressives who prioritize evidence-based policy, particularly in areas such as vaccine safety. It is possible to view the bureaucratic resistance not as subversion but as a safeguard against policies that could undermine public health.

Moreover, progressives might argue that the existence of a so-called 'deep state' is an oversimplification of the checks and balances within the government. They may advocate for reforms to enhance democratic oversight of the bureaucracy while preserving its necessary role in policy implementation.

Conservative View

The recent statements made by White House advisor Byron Cohen confirm a long-held conservative contention: the existence of a 'deep state' that operates beyond the reach of elected officials. Conservatives have often argued that an entrenched bureaucracy poses a threat to democracy by subverting the will of the people and the decisions of their duly elected representatives.

Cohen's assertion that the bureaucracy could 'crush' a potential Health Secretary nominee like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. underscores this concern. The tactics described by Cohen—creating commissions to delay action, slow-walking directives—demonstrate how unelected officials can influence policy outcomes. Such methods not only undermine the democratic process but also hinder the implementation of policies supported by the electorate.

Moreover, the conservative viewpoint emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability within the government. The hidden machinations of bureaucratic entities defy these principles, allowing individuals to exert power without public scrutiny or consent. This incident reinforces the conservative belief in the necessity of limited government and the dangers posed by a sprawling, unaccountable bureaucracy.

Common Ground

Both conservatives and progressives can agree that transparency and accountability in government are vital for a healthy democracy. There is a shared interest in ensuring that the public's will is represented and that appointed officials are able to carry out their mandates effectively.

Additionally, there may be consensus on the need for experienced professionals within the bureaucracy to inform decision-making. Finding the balance between respecting professional expertise and safeguarding democratic processes could serve as common ground for bipartisan discussions on government reform.