So he has a private elevator to his office. That means that every Sec. State in recent memory before him did - but they point it out only now because it serves the upcoming narrative that he is absent and aloof.
He blocks out reading time - which is in quotes for some reason - likely to indicate editorial disdain like maybe he's just napping or something as opposed to learning - and being in his office is cloistered now. One would think reading memos ahead of meetings would be a good thing - but the author and editor clearly think its just a sign of incompetence.
Yes so he has an insular circle of political aides. Which is to say he has political aides... and the insular is an editorial choice - narrative firmly established. And then comes the rumor mongering about not looking him in the eye. How do I know its a rumor? No leaked memo or other attribution present and the following statement in the article.
So people are talking shit and it is alluded that some people believe this shit because they have cartoonish imaginations about their Sec. State probably thanks to the media. I say that because people don't get ideas from nowhere and these career bureaucrats ought to know better by now.
So onto the modus operandi for this article - as to why talk about any of this at all. The State Dept Budget. It is proposed to be cut by 30-37% by this admin. Well that throws a monkey wrench in a whole lot of interventionist plans by the establishment types (neocon/neoliberal foreign policy hawks).
Interesting - they quote the top Democrat - but don't seek out the Republican Chair. Weird right? So why does Tillerson not fight the cuts? Well for one - this is a part of the strategy of the White house to cut the bureaucracy - that is to drain the swamp.
Ok so what swamp might I be referring to? The Swamp that resulted in chaos in Iraq/ Syria/ Turkey/ Libya/ Georgia/ Ukraine and the spread of that to sub-Saharan Africa in a real way - and the migrant crisis in the EU (especially southern and eastern areas). There isn't a single part of those regions made better in the last 8 years - even Egypt is worse off by far thanks to our meddling. The swamp is murky as fuck.
So why cut the State Dept budget of all places right? It seems counter intuitive and counter productive right? Well what if I told you it makes sense if you wanted to stop, slow, stymie or otherwise inhibit US interventionism and involve ourselves less in other nations' domestic affairs? Consider the large number of spies acting under official cover through the State Dept - like this moron who got himself caught and beat up outside the US Embassy in Moscow
We see in TV, movies and other media how often spies are run out of embassies. Well the logical first step to curtailing this provocation is to cut the funding for it. Often we have seen various bureaucracies go rogue - The State Dept in Ukraine appeared to be running its own little thing with the help of Sen. McCain, the CIA hacked the Sen. Intel Oversight Committee during the torture probe. Back in the 1962 Operation Northwoods nearly went through if JFK hadn't shut that down. Other related operations were Operation Mongoose, Mockingbird, Dirty Trick (using a malfunctioning Mercury Space Launch to provoke hostilities) and Bingo ("create an incident which has the appearance of an attack on U.S. facilities (GMO) in Cuba, thus providing an excuse for use of U.S. military might to overthrow the current government of Cuba.")
The idea that our government is as pure as the driven snow is one of the false pretenses that arguments are based on. The idea that the state department is a force for good or something - or even successful at pursuing US interests is dubious at best. The TPP and TTIPS were both pathetic treaties that would have only made trade less free world wide and neutered sovereignty and our ability to seek recompense through the courts. Why would you fund an agency that would negotiate against you? It is ludicrous.
So what about people having issues working with Tillerson?
Ok well there goes that narrative - but despite this the author continues without attribution - but full of apparent refutation...
Yes *some complain* and *other* unnamed *diplomats* are cited. John Sullivan was rejected - es I wonder why? a Republican Lawyer under...oh yeah GWB - remember that guy? Well anyone who served under him would be suspect - and he has no State Dept XP either - so why double down on that? Seems like a good decision to me.
Oh...really? so *some* unnamed *diplomats* again are meeting (conspiring) to swap notes (plot) on how to decipher (createively interpret to their own benefit) the fledgling *editorial word choice to denigrate Trump* administration's policies? Why I am shocked shocked that there is plotting going on around here. Might I suggest taking the policies at face value you cock stains?
Well that's why you're former...and the rogue bureaucracy is getting benched. It got uppity and was usurping power and being disruptive. Senior acting officials were refusing to do their jobs as ordered and so were relieved. Bye!
Yes and the bureaucracy has shown itself to be untrustworthy especially with all of these leaks, rumors and anonymous shit talking..erm...sourcing. As to whether or not it will lead to success - I will say that the jury is out. The old system wasn't working at all - so maybe, just maybe it is time to try something new and if that means firing a whole bunch of people well then so be it. Control over information is paramount. The idea that there should be or even was a free flow is absurd. No I reject that notion. Info is controlled to control leaks and perception here and abroad.
Ah and back to rumor mongering then a correction to show how full of shiat these sources really are...
Well ok. So he is finding a way to work that helps him.
Well gee a political appointee expecting his underlings to harden the fuck up and adapt? The price of pearls must have shot up with all of the clutching and fainting on victorian era couches that is going on here.
Welp - maybe - but it is a former official - he might not know things or perhaps there is internal sabotage being done through withholding of information - like has been rumored with the CIA, FBI and others with President Trump.
So he course corrected and its all ok - gee. I think we can leave that there then.
Indicated here is that other Sec. States have also not filled the counsellor position - yet the editor and author try to portray this as an oddity. And yes the bureaucrats are an obstacle to change - hence all of the whining in the paragraphs above and below! Do you even read what you are writing for content?
Why the fuck would the Sec. State for Trump work for *both* parties? What in the name of fuck is that about? See this is why they are a problem - they just don't get it. They think they ought to get their way all the time. The author - clearly doesn't read for comprehension very well though he'd make an excellent copywriter. Oh well except for the fact that he forgets Nato is spelled NATO because its an acronym. What a tool - also hello editor do your freaking job - you're an editor not an officer for the soviet politbureau!
Oh no he has a smaller staff and will travel less? Heavens to fucking Mergatroyd! Oh and he had no official note taker - so his aides did that job - so there were still records. So there was a problem that there was no problem. Oh. Fuck right off you cunt.
In other words - feel free to express your differences and we will listen - we just won't take it as gospel and always accommodate you. Ah finally a boss who is taking charge!
Update: Called It - Rumor of Not Making Eye Contact IS FALSE and spread by Jeff Bezos personal blog the Washington Post. #FakeNews
