My reading of what in going on in the US in the broadest perspective out of a lifelong interest in history and a target of the FBI for the past several years for my investigative writing into crime and corruption throughout the Connecticut legal system is that we are now undergoing the third wave of duplicity, underhandedness, and secrecy leaving the country at sea, ever further out with each wave.

The first wave was the Great Iraq War Hoax of the Bush the Younger administration. I look at this astonishingly cynical and malign — and also deadly — Hoax as like one of those marriages you ready about every so often where the husband lies to his fiancee about his occupation and income; and she marries him not solely on this basis, but at least as a factor of his attraction to her. Not long after the marriage, when they are settled and she is perhaps pregnant, she finds out the truth. Now she can’t realistically get divorced, but the marriage, inevitably, is filled with misgivings, recriminations, distrust, fantasies about what might have been, built-in limitations, questions over one’s own intelligence, vulnerabilities, judgment, and values, and sense of drift and decline from the realization that something is rotten at the core. Just like the US’s invasion of Iraq and ensuing developments in the region.

The second wave was the financial calamity of about 2008; which combined with a range of consequences including loss of home ownership by many, lowering of home values reducing the assets of many, and government rescue of leading banks and other financial institutions came to be known as the Great Recession. Yes, many would-be homeowners gave fraudulent information on mortgage applications. But in most cases they were encouraged to do this by the mortgage lenders with the realization that the lenders would not be examining nor investigating the applications; and in many cases too, with the homeowners following explicit or implicit guidance by the mortgage lenders on committing fraud that the would-be homeowners could count on would lead to their aim of getting a home. However, it was the disingenuous, fraudulent mortgage lenders and other banksters who were the (supposed) professionals under the circumstances. The lenders were the professionals, the supposed responsible ones; the supposed ones responsible for not routinely approving suspect mortgages.

The absence of professionalism evident in the complicit mortgage lenders and the banksters underlying the Great Recession was a reflection of the loss of professionalism in many professions depended upon for the orderly, reasonably effective maintenance of society. Among these professions were lawyers, politicians, accountants, journalists and others in the media, and as it might be looked at as a profession, the Catholic clergy in its reaction to the many claims of sexual abuse of children. Many of the professions looked to to provide leadership, acknowledgement of and observance of ethics (as in professional ethics), and models for aspirations regarding status and income became major players in the duplicity, underhandedness, and secrecy, with devastating effects on society as a whole; while in league with government and partners-in-crime, such professionals were not only reaping the rewards of their duplicitously-gained riches, but also having their standings strengthened.

Then comes Trump bringing with him the third wave of duplicity, underhandedness, and secrecy. Trump himself is not the primary agent for the effects of the duplicity, underhandedness, and secrecy ushered in by him. Rather — and more significantly and fatefully for the country — Trump’s unpredictability (not to be seen as instability), flamboyance (in place of conventional political image), and unrooted spoutings (having a resemblance to lies) are openings by which in this third wave of duplicity, etc., the state-security agencies, notably the FBI taking the lead in the investigations and accusations of Russian contacts, are able to advance and strengthen their place in the political world and on the basis of this, throughout society.

With the complexity of what is going on involving several large government agencies with scores and possibly hundreds of employees who could affect how events unfold, the secrecy by which some of these agencies typically operate, and the lack of candor of many employees in these agencies, there is no way of ascertaining an outcome at this time. One thing is for sure however — the imprint of state-security agencies will become greater. While precise and particular effects cannot be denoted, there can be no doubt that how politicians, many government officials and workers, media people, and others involved with government engage in their business and interact are going to change.