Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Nowadays, it's mostly Trumpazoid true-believers who don't think that there should be investigation into possible Russian influence in the US election.
The Trump presidency
- Thread starter brogdale
- Start date
- Status
CRI
Registered Chooser
Hysteria? Seriously?
Um, when evidence of unorthodox connections between members of the Trump administration and senior officials in the Russian Government, or wealthy oligarchs, seems to emerge from under every stone lately, is it really "hysterical" to want to know what's up? I think wanting to know what's happening is a pretty normal, sensible response.
I get why the Trump fans don't want an investigation. They are enthralled to their leader and/or the vision he peddles. They don't care how he got the job, how much loot his team makes or where it comes from, or whether another country is calling all the shots. If abortion gets banned, Christianity promoted, Muslims, foreigners and hopefully Jews get banned or leave and more of the black and brown people left get locked up or kept separate, they don't give a shit what the President does. They'll oppose anything that stands in the way of Trump giving them their white supremacist promised land.
But why are many folk on the left so furious about attempts to investigate Russian involvement in US politics? Is it sentimentality about the old USSR? It's not like Russia has been socialist for donkeys. There are no reds left to be under any beds. It has an oppressive, authoritarian kleptocracy where working class people suffer extreme hardship and leaders and a small elite enjoy lavish lifestyles. They've introduced policies that are misogynist, racist and homophobic. Then there are the independent journalists and political dissidents that seem to die in odd circumstances. Why do some people on the left fret so damned much about the prospect of this Russian government getting caught out? FFS, they don't make half the fuss about the shit working class Russians have to deal with under their corrupt system.
If it's the stuff about needing to appease Russia or they'll declare war, well that's pish, and by accident or design, President Trump's quite likely to provoke some kind of armed conflict somewhere in the world soon, so hey.
And, it is possible to fight against Trump's ghastly policies and want to know how the Russian government has been/is involved in influencing the Trump campaign/administration at the same time. Congresswoman Maxine Waters is an excellent example of this. I adore that woman!
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Name the people on this thread who are against this investigation then
CRI
Registered Chooser
To be fair, I haven't seen much evidence of American-context liberals (i.e. in the range between left of centre Democrats to the bulk of Sanders supporters,) trying to quash investigations of the "Russian Links," apart from maybe Jill Stein and some of her pals.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
sp.
Funnily enough, in 2007 Pelosi had the sort of accusation levelled at her that Democrats are levelling at the Trump admin now.
From a 2015 National Review article
Why Pelosi’s Syria Visit Remains Indefensible, by Tom Rogan, National Review
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Levelled at her by some op/ed hack at... the National Review.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Strange days indeed when leftists look to the National Review - a journal founded by William F. Buckley(!) for inspiration and guidance.
CRI
Registered Chooser
Was just pointing out that I meant "liberal" in the American context, which tends to mean anyone with views to the left of centre as opposed to "liberal" in the UK (Blairite as opposed to Corbynite, for example.) Interestingly, "liberal" is used as an insult both places, but by people on opposite ends of the political spectrum, targeting people at different places on that spectrum.
I agree. The only voices I'm hearing in America poo pooing investigations are of the Tea Party contingent on the right. But, there are a couple peeps on here that have said the calls for investigation are "hysterical" or "worse than McCarthyism," and unless I've missed something, I don't think either have views aligned with the right end of the GOP. Genuinely curious why they do align with them on this issue though.
Last edited:
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Levelled at her by some op/ed hack at... the National Review.
If an event is reported by a publication then that is always the sole origin of that story, even when the report is in 2015 about an event that happened in 2007.
Anyone who links to a news website agrees with the full ideological position of that publication both today and from its founding.
If someone links to an article then they agree with it.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
its a common source of confusion this one. Political terminology in the US doesn't map the same as it does in the UK (and thats before we get into the classic and widely accepted use of Liberal in other times and places- a meaning it still holds)
CRI
Registered Chooser
Thanks - you explained that better and way more succinctly than I did
CRI
Registered Chooser
Back to good old-fashioned nepotism in the administration . . .
Trump’s Son-In-Law Is Shaping Health Care Policy, And The Fate Of His Brother’s Obamacare App
Kushner’s brother, Josh, co-founded Oscar, an insurance company that is valued at $2.7 billion. That would be an obvious appearance of a conflict of interest, at the very least, and the potential for a conflict is even greater because Oscar was started for the express purpose of making money on the state exchanges for individual insurance that were created as part of the Affordable Care Act.
Oscar, a website and app, sells insurance directly to individuals who aren’t already eligible for insurance through their employer or a government program. Under the ACA, individuals who aren’t already covered are required to buy insurance or pay a penalty under what is called the individual mandate. And the federal government may partially subsidize the plans that the Oscar app sells and manages. Precisely how big that subsidy is depends on the type of plan and the buyer’s income and, eventually, on the health care law that the Trump administration passes ― or fails to pass.
Trump’s Son-In-Law Is Shaping Health Care Policy, And The Fate Of His Brother’s Obamacare App
Kushner’s brother, Josh, co-founded Oscar, an insurance company that is valued at $2.7 billion. That would be an obvious appearance of a conflict of interest, at the very least, and the potential for a conflict is even greater because Oscar was started for the express purpose of making money on the state exchanges for individual insurance that were created as part of the Affordable Care Act.
Oscar, a website and app, sells insurance directly to individuals who aren’t already eligible for insurance through their employer or a government program. Under the ACA, individuals who aren’t already covered are required to buy insurance or pay a penalty under what is called the individual mandate. And the federal government may partially subsidize the plans that the Oscar app sells and manages. Precisely how big that subsidy is depends on the type of plan and the buyer’s income and, eventually, on the health care law that the Trump administration passes ― or fails to pass.
coley
Well-Known Member
brown shirts and jackboots is this years look, apparently.
coley
Well-Known Member
Aye, concentrate on policies, that's the ticket, never mind the birther and e-mails Shyte eh?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Something I wasn't aware of: the investigation of the connection between Trump's casino failures and the Russian mob:
Did @RealDonaldTrump engage in extended/massive money laundering?
Donald Trump was bailed out of bankruptcy by Russia crime bosses
Did @RealDonaldTrump engage in extended/massive money laundering?
Donald Trump was bailed out of bankruptcy by Russia crime bosses
Last edited:
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Makes calls for him to release his tax returns, that much more pertinent.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
I accept your criticism before of me saying it's worse than the McCarthy era, I usually try to avoid looking into American history as it's so depressing (Zinns fault really), but then whose history isn't. Maybe it's because to top it all off the place is super-powered now, considers itself the bestest society ever but has essentially learnt nothing. Now it has bases everywhere, super-carriers, nukes, carries out invasions, coups, secret wars, funds and trains jihadis and fascists and engages in ruthless conspiracies to exploit and control any and all vulnerable societies, and there's AFRICOM (which I take as a personal affront). And then from its throne of skulls it has the bare-faced cheek to reckon itself some sort of global force for good, and most of the other former empires look up to it and are in its gang. But still yeah, I should probably bite the bullet and read up more on that era of American history rather than going by the general historical impression.
But as far as this current stuff is concerned, I don't really care in principal if the Americans want to investigate members of their current ruling cabal, do what you want, they strike me as all a bunch of cunts anyway. My problem is that it's all based on a kind of pro-Cold War faction in US politics currently pretending to be pro-Left or pro-Human Rights an all that but really they just want to make work for their military-industrial-congressional complex, and are so into what I call Exceptionalist ideology (the latest incarnation of Supremacism an all that) that they seem offended that big chunks of the world seem beyond their capacity to tell what to do. China, Russia, Iran... how dare they sit there being well-armed, populous and large!
These days I spend so much time knocking back pro-NATO war-mongery bullshit in those temrs that by a sort of Newtonian physics alone I've drifted towards the Russian position on what's going on. Fair play though, I don't engage in that old Western tradition of hating the Russians- I don't see them looking to seize shit from the rest of the world, what with living in their MASSIVE country like they do... they seem to me quite content to live their lives over there in Russia, concerning themselves largely with Russian affairs. A bit nerve wracking for the large-Russian-polpulation neighbours but no reason for anything to kick off really... I mean fuck they couldn't even afford to strongly intervene in Ukraine militarily. So they took Crimea back, fair play- considering the circumstances. and I've not seen em funding any coups recently... certainly not since they left the Soviet Union, let them work their various problems out for themselves man, it's not like they're uninformed of history or lack experience with big government and authoritarian regimes. They're basically just a "normal" (as in not considering themselves Exceptional) non-Western country with authoritarian tendencies, profound conservatism, lots of corruption... like many other nations are really, but this time big enough and ugly enough to look out for themselves if certain nations with previous for that sort of thing want to go all Shock and Awe on em.
But get this- in the 90's the Americans crowed about their significant interference in Russian politics to get that drunk Boris into power, the drunk who then ordered tanks to pummel the Russian parliament and centralize power to his presidency. The US wasn't shy about any of that, they boasted about it actually, wasn't there an article in TIME magezine? "How we won it for Yeltsin" or something. Now the US act all outraged and insulted at the idea (in my view a made up far-out conspiracy theory spawned in the campaign of that War Monger that fumbled her otherwise inevitable ascendancy to the Presidential throne) that Russia returned the favour a bit. Exceptionalism see... no real sense of reason or proportion, no capacity to take what it's happy to dish out.
It'd be all just a bit of harmless banter if the bullshit was just aimed at yet another 3rd world country that can't really fight back (well, not really). However I reckon the US is quite capable in all the excitement of talking itself into actually attacking the Russians at this rate, or putting the bear in a corner, the US is already stacking tanks on Russias border. I've taken to calling Vladimir Putin "Emperor PalPutin" now, based on a made-up evil emperor in a story about events that never happened and taken on by a brave rebel alliance that doesn't exist over the course of a number of big budget Hollywood productions. Strikes me as rather apt.
Personally I'd like to have kids, buy a house, see more countries... I got things to do, I don't have time for some looming fucking cold or even nuclear war because of Americas massive great big ego-complex. Underneath, all this latest stuff amounts to the US being affronted because countries it can't order about are standing there on the other side of the planet being themselves. You can get caught up in the details of the latest chapter in this thing but the overall plot is obvious, gots ta gets dem juicy NATO 2 percents right? Gots to sell them F35's n' shit, billion dollar budgets for the greatest most bloated gravy-train military in the world isn't gonna justify itself. I' mean for fucks sake at least leave the other thousands-of-nukes countries out of your internal squabbles, that's all I'm saying. And stop making out like everyone you don't like is Hitler all the time.
\probably incoherent rant, but cathartic, thanks.
Last edited:
CRI
Registered Chooser
To be fair, the 2nd paragraph comes from the guy who wrote The Little Prince, or at least a supposedly bad translation of it. But he did say the first paragraph, and described everything from his hat to the ship as "beautiful.""So true"
So sad, frigging arsehole.
Friggin auto correct
But, he did belt out this load of tripe. Probably supposed to be thankful he got through a whole speech without mentioning the size of his win, or crowds, or something.
This is American craftsmanship at its biggest, at its best, at its finest. American workers are the greatest anywhere in the world. This warship, and all who serve on it, should be a source of shared pride for our nation. We are joined today -- (applause) -- better believe it, right? Better believe it. (Applause.) Better believe it. And, by the way, we're going to soon have more coming. We'll have more coming. (Applause.)
After years of endless budget cuts that have impaired our defenses, I am calling for one of the largest defense-spending increases in history. And by eliminating the sequester and the uncertainty it creates, we will make it easier for the Navy to plan for the future and thus to control costs and get the best deals for the taxpayer, which, of course, is very important, right? Got to get a good deal. If we don’t make a good deal, we’re not doing our job.
The same boat for less money. The same ship for less money. The same airplanes for less money. That’s what we’re doing. That’s what we’re doing. Means we’re going to get more of them, and we can use them.
Our Navy is now the smallest it’s been since, believe it or not, World War I. Don’t worry, it's going to soon be the largest it’s been. Don’t worry. (Applause.) Think of that. Think of that.
(No mention of course how he'll get his cheap war machines with the American labour he insists is so great, but hey . . . )
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Nah, still doesn't work. Single malt in a bar is fucking expensive. At least £3.50 a shot.
So you're being a rich wanker chucking his money around without appreciating what he's buying at all. Without even caring that he's not appreciating the expensive stuff he's buying, just buying it cos it's expensive and you've got the wonga.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Only a rich wanker would spend money on a single malt and then take away everything that makes it expensive to make some stupid inverted snobbery point.
I buy single malt in the pub sometimes, as a treat. You being a twat about it is insulting to those for whom it is bought as an expensive treat.
This stuff really isn't difficult.
I buy single malt in the pub sometimes, as a treat. You being a twat about it is insulting to those for whom it is bought as an expensive treat.
This stuff really isn't difficult.
Have you had some tonight?
I made a point - on Tuesday - about how people being snobbish about the 'correct' way of having a steak / scotch / whatever is pretty irritating to everyone who isn't on board with that (and plenty of people who are). That's all I was doing. I've no interest in whatever you're on about now.
I made a point - on Tuesday - about how people being snobbish about the 'correct' way of having a steak / scotch / whatever is pretty irritating to everyone who isn't on board with that (and plenty of people who are). That's all I was doing. I've no interest in whatever you're on about now.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Now.. as a proper whisky snob, I should point out that you will be wanting to take your cola with a solid bottle like a Laphroaig 10 Cask Strength or maybe a Glenrothes '92. Something with a bit of a liquorice kick and saltiness to balance the sugar.
It'll change the way you think about whisky and coke, mind.
- Status
Similar threads
