@McGentrix,
The rumors and cloak and dagger crap, and their exquisitely well-timed public revelations appear to be mostly the actions of the Pro impeachment forces among Democrats. It is a well established tradition of our governance that Ambassadors serve exclusively at the pleasure of Presidents, who, in our Constitution are charged with the conduct of our foreign relations. Indeed wholesale replacements of Ambassadors by incoming President is a long-established practice. Now we see establishment media reports outlining the long bureaucratic careers of Ambassadors, some directly stating, others merely implying the wrongful denial of career bureaucrats their rightful posts.
This is a new phenomenon in American politics - an extensive Federal bureaucracy that increasingly behaves as though it is an independent branch of our government. The now decades long practice of the Congress to enact legislation on a wide variety of matters addressing only general expressions of intent and desired outcome, and empowering these Executive Branch Bureaucracies to independently issue general policy and detailed regulations for the execution of the legislation, has contributed significantly to this corruption of our democracy. In many cases the Executive Departments enforce them through administrative courts created within the bureaucracy for this purpose. In most cases this has also been accompanied by the creation of judicial-like investigation departments and even uniformed police forces for enforcement. In short federal bureaucracies have, within their, often poorly defined, areas of authority, become mini governments, with their own rules, investigative bodies judicial procedures, courts and police. I believe this has led to the implicit belief among the huge cadre of Federal bureaucrats that they are the government and can act with impunity to oppose the action of elected presidents, who themselves are the constitutionally designated heads of all Executive Branch agencies - including them. Now our elected President, admittedly a disruptive figure who has declared his intent to limit the excess intrusiveness of Agency regulations, and has acted to eliminate reduce and simplify wide areas of such excess regulation (achieving enormous public economic benefits as a result), has directly challenged the erroneously presumed autonomy of these agencies. I believe this has led directly to the so -called "deep state" resistance to the President that we have observed for the past two years.
There is also a political dimension at work here. "Progressive" Democrats persistently seek to achieve their desired ends through the creation and action of such agencies working under fairly loose legislation, and making & enforcing detailed regulations to achieve their ends. In contrast Republicans generally seek to preserve greater degrees of individual freedom of action in both personal and economic activities. Thus this deep state itself is largely the action of Democrat political action. This flies in the face of the Constitutional prescription for governance through three independent branches - Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.
