FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2025
They tried to rig the election: As of yesterday afternoon, the accusation had spread.
A termite on a "cable news" program advanced the claim last Friday night—and others may have believed it. Yesterday afternoon, as Prime Minister Modi looked on, the following Q-and-A occurred right there in the Oval Office.
For the record, the question seems to have come from a member of the Indian press. For Mediaite's report, and for videotape, you can just click here:
Trump Entertains Insane Question About USAID Rigging the 2020 Election
A fawning “reporter” asked President Donald Trump if the U.S. Agency for International Development helped rig the 2020 election against him.
The bizarre question came during a joint appearance by Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the Oval Office on Thursday.
[...]
REPORTER: President Trump, first of all, congratulations for the fantastic 24 days of your presidency. Historic and unprecedented decisions that you’ve made, transformational reforms—
TRUMP: I like her. I like her.
[LAUGHTER]
REPORTER: I’m particularly impressed by the exposé on USAID. And I would like you to share with us if you think USAID had a role in election interference in the U.S. in 2020 and in the elections in 2024.
TRUMP: So, it could’ve had a role. There were a lot of bad things that happened in 2020. I think bad things happened in 2024, but it, was too big. We won by a tremendous margin. And we want every swing state.
We won the popular vote by millions of votes, so it was too big to rig. But yeah, I think they probably tried.
Back in grade school, "Teacher" would always say that there are no insane questions. There are only insane answers, she would always say.
Yesterday, right in the Oval, the commander offered the latest of his many answers—and some of what he said was actually accurate! For example, he did win the election "by millions of votes."
(The "millions" in question were two.)
Did that constitute "a tremendous margin?" Nationwide, he won the popular vote by a bit less than 1.5 points. Nationwide, he won slightly less than half the popular vote.
Did that constitute "a tremendous margin?" Let's set such matters aside. The possible craziness entered the scene when the commander made a new claim—when he seemed to say that he thinks that USAID probably tried to rig last November's election.
Question:
Did anyone ask this thoughtful man to offer evidence in support of this new statement?
Stating the obvious, no one asked for any such evidence, and no one ever will. What's left of our conquered nation's discourse—such as that discourse ever was—no longer even pretends to run on such outmoded fuel.
At this site, we were struck by the way the commander's claim seemed to echo the peculiar claim made last Friday night on an ersatz "cable news" program.
That program has nothing to do with "news" as that term has long been understood.
Instead, the program practices a form of "journalistic madness." It does so every night, in prime time, on this conquered nation's most watched "cable news" channel.
For unstated reasons, everyone gives this program a pass, including the gang at Mediaite. Under apparent rules of the game, you can mess with CNN's (embarrassing) 10 p.m. show, but you have to ignore the bizarre behavior seen on the Fox News Channel.
At any rate, the peculiar fellow who hosts the show had authored a somewhat similar claim about USAID:
As we've noted, he had accused USAID of staging "a color revolution" (whatever that might mean). He had seemed to accuse USAID of trying to topple the MAGA revolution, just as it had allegedly worked to topple foreign governments.
Yesterday, the commander took this one step further. He said he thinks that USAID tried to rig last November's election.
His statement was unsupported by evidence. Such are the new rules of the game.
As for the "cable news" host, let's play it again! Once again, here's the heart of what this possible nutcase said:
GUTFELD (2/7/25): DOGE has exposed a pile of programs funded by USAID to foster gender and trans propaganda in foreign countries—countries where such things don't seem to benefit stability. Because nothing will bring a Muslim country together like drag queens reading the Koran to kids.
But that's the point. You have to destroy the world to build a new one where men can watch girls pee in locker rooms.
[...]
As we learn that USAID was creating instability abroad, we see these same dirty tricks coming home. Because once you find yourself with a populist president who wasn't the elite choice, instability must be created artificially.
[...]
So imagine if we looked at America as a foreign country when Trump won. USAID did! You had a populist president, not an establishment puppet. What followed? Organized and immediate protests—race gender, climate, the three horsemen of funded, organized dissent.
It was a color revolution, funded by people who pay taxes. Suddenly, you had trained agitators in the street with fresh signs and robust crowds and fueling the media that pushes incendiary hoaxes.
Add to that a crusade against so-called misinformation to empower censorship. Sound familiar? Sounds like everything USAID did in other countries.
Now maybe we didn't mind USAID before. Sure, they toppled governments overseas, but that wouldn't happen here. Now, by shining a light on what they and our government is doing, we find that they did try to destroy a populist movement for being a challenge to their power.
In Tuesday's report, we posted the full transcript of this fellow's "monologue." You can watch his full presentation simply by clicking here.
That said, his basic assertion seemed to be fairly clear. He seemed to be saying this:
USAID had already been working to topple governments overseas. But when Donald J. Trump took office in 2017, USAID began working to do the same there here.
"It was a color revolution," the fellow said, without explaining the meaning of the term. Here at home, USAID tried to destroy the "populist [MAGA] movement for being a challenge to their power."
So the gentleman said. And why had USAID done such a thing? Simple:
You have to destroy the world to build a new one where men can watch girls pee in locker rooms.
According to this program's host, that's what USAID was trying to do during Trump's first term. These claims were authored, in prime time, on this defeated nation's most-watched "cable news" channel.
No evidence was offered in support of these claims. Yesterday, right in the Oval, the restored commander took things one step further:
USAID had "probably" tried to rig last November's election! Or so the commander said he currently thinks.
We've decided to focus today on what the commander said. We'll also focus on what won't be said—on the fact that the commander's latest remarkable statement will pass without comment, except within the Red American realms where such claims are repeated and embellished by an assortment of types.
The commander makes so many unsupported claims that Blue America has largely abandoned the task of taking note of his statements. Judged by traditional norms, this is a form of journalistic surrender.
It's akin to a form of insanity. It's journalistic madness.
Yesterday, the termite's unsupported claims seemed to resurface in an exchange between an ascot-kissing journalist and the restored commander.
The termite seemed to have said that USAID had somehow been responsible for the resistance to the commander during his first term in the Oval. Now, the commander was saying that USAID had (probably) tried to rig last year's election.
In fairness, almost everything is possible! On the other hand, most insane claims are untrue.
By journalistic tradition, a powerful fellow like the commander should be required to offer evidence in support of claims of this type. The same expectation once existed for hosts of TV "news" programs.
Such practices are now dead. As you see these unchallenged claims spread, you're seeing the walls of our own sacred Troy being overrun.
Very few members of Blue America's elites seem to be able to see what has already taken place: They're unable to see that the "night assault" is underway—that it has (probably) already succeeded.
The termite and the commander are spreading a new Bible all through a conquered land. Last Friday night, four "bobbleheads"—we'll use Thomas Friedman's term—were sitting on the Fox News Channel set, prepared to offer the world a bit of comic relief
They were expected to create the sense that a "discussion" was taking place. Yesterday, we said their names. Today, we'll say them again:
Gutfeld! panelists—Friday, 2/7/25
Todd Piro: Co-host, Fox & Friends First
Dagen McDowell: Co-host, The Big Money Show
Rob Long: Tinseltown writer and producer
Kat Timpf: Regular panelist, Gutfeld!
These bobbleheads were charged with the task of disguising the night assault.
We're trying to tell you what has occurred within our conquered nation. We'll guess that there may be no turning back, as with the conquest of Troy.
USAID tried to rig the election! So the commander has said!
Tomorrow: Histrionically, McDowell stifles a bomb
Next week: The sociopathy rules
More right wing lies. Is anyone surprised? Meanwhile, DOGE is cutting but federal expenditures are increasing, not decreasing:
ReplyDeleteElon Musk Isn’t Making a Dent in Federal Spending
February 14, 2025 at 8:53 am EST By Taegan Goddard
The Economist: “It all seems to add up to something big. On a daily, sometimes hourly, basis, Elon Musk claims that his team of fiscal commandos has found yet more government fraud, terminated another wasteful contract or even scrapped an entire agency. Mr Musk’s supporters believe that, through tech wizardry and sheer willpower, he is slashing the federal deficit in a way that has eluded politicians for years. But this narrative has a glaring flaw: our review of official data shows that Mr Musk’s efforts have scarcely made a dent in spending.”
“Every working day the Treasury publishes a statement detailing withdrawals of cash from its primary deposit account, providing the best high-frequency indicator of government spending. Since Donald Trump took office a little more than three weeks ago, outlays have averaged $30bn a day. Compare that with the same period last year under Joe Biden: federal spending back then came to about $26bn a day.”
“Outflows from the Treasury have actually risen since January 28th, when Mr Musk first claimed his ‘Department of Government Efficiency’, or DOGE, was saving the federal government $1bn a day.”
Duh, Musk is out to skim a little off every government transaction, of course spending will go up to cover Musk's "cut" of the the taxpayer pie.
Delete"Trump’s Immigration Arrests Appear to Lag Biden’s
ReplyDeleteFebruary 14, 2025 at 6:49 am EST By Taegan Goddard
“U.S. agents arrested more than 21,000 unauthorized immigrants in November as President Biden’s term wound down — a pace the Trump administration doesn’t appear to be matching in its first month despite its crackdown,“ Axios reports."
Axios appears to be goat-fucking.
DeleteWhy is it that Trump is arresting fewer people despite supposedly investing more resources in his deportation efforts? Are they ineffective or are they skimming (or both)?
DeleteCareful, 10:18. You're talking about a statistic, more broadly known as a fact.
DeleteNot your area of competence.
ReplyDelete"Did anyone ask this thoughtful man to offer evidence in support of this new statement?"
What "evidence", Bob? What are you talking about? Are you totally nuts?
He is asked: "do you think USAID had a role?"
And he replies: "it could've had a role".
What kind of "evidence" are you craving? Are you listening to yourself, crazy person?
Also, a unicorn could have been the Game 3 winning pitcher of last years World Series, or there could be a Republican voter who isn't a bigot.
Delete10:16,
DeleteYou left out, "But yeah, I think they probably tried."
You're welcome.
DeleteUSAID funded Politico, AP, NY Times, and who knows what else fake news media.
So, there is no question it was involved in rigging that election.
I bought an allen wrench at Home Depot the other day. I guess that means I'm "funding" them
DeleteIf you paid $8 million for a free wrench, then yes.
DeleteDid USAID pay $8 million for "free" political coverage? No? Then what are you talking about, trumptard?
DeleteUSAID paid $8 million/year for "subscriptions" to Politico, a free, open to the public website.
DeleteNever mind, you're too dumb to understand anyway, Soros-bot.
Hey Trumptard,
Deleteyou don't seem to know that Politico charges for content not available on the free website.
So you have definite opinions on something you know nothing about. You truly are a trumptard!
If I am not mistaken, the $8 million dollar figure is for the total of all subscriptions to Politico from all government sources including the fucking White House, Trumptard. You gotta stop believing your Russian disinfo sources or this country is gonna go down the shitter with you treasonous bastards.
DeleteData from USAspending.gov, a government website that tracks federal spending, shows government agencies collectively spent more than $8 million combined in payments for Politico subscriptions and products in 2024. This includes $24,000 spent by the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, on subscriptions.
The subscriptions, which include Politico Pro or E&E News by Politico, offer paywalled content including policy tracking and exclusive reporting. Data show federal agencies also paid for subscriptions to other news outlets in 2024, including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.
"you don't seem to know that Politico charges for content not available on the free website."
DeleteHa-ha. Yes, Soros-bot, those secret fake news. Fake news that the rubes at USAID have to pay money for reading. Jeez.
11:36 trying to argue with a cold sore.
DeleteCold sores don't care about your facts.
What comes after the fall of democracy?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/path-american-authoritarianism-trump
DeleteIf 2020-2024 reign of the demented was democracy, then now is a great time to try authoritarianism.
From Wiki you weirdo: The page "Major accomplishments during Trump's first term" does not exist.
DeleteAs for Biden: In August 2022, Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, a domestic appropriations bill that included some of the provisions of the Build Back Better Act after the entire bill failed to pass. It included significant federal investment in climate and domestic clean energy production, tax credits for solar panels, electric cars and other home energy programs as well as a three-year extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies, an insulin price cap, and a provision allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. In late 2022, Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, which repealed the Defense of Marriage Act and codified same-sex and interracial marriage in the United States. Other domestic legislation signed during his term included the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the first major federal gun control law in nearly three decades;[8] the CHIPS and Science Act, bolstering the semiconductor and manufacturing industry; the Honoring our PACT Act, expanding health care for US veterans; the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act; and the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act, making Juneteenth a federal holiday in the United States. He appointed Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court—the first Black woman to serve on the court. In response to the debt-ceiling crisis of 2023, Biden negotiated and signed the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which restrains federal spending for fiscal years 2024 and 2025, implements minor changes to SNAP and TANF, includes energy permitting reform, claws back some IRS funding and unspent money for COVID-19, and suspends the debt ceiling to January 1, 2025.[9] He established the American Climate Corps and created the first ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. On September 26, 2023, Biden visited a United Auto Workers picket line during the 2023 United Auto Workers strike, making him the first US president to visit one. Biden also rigorously enforced antitrust laws by appointing Lina Khan to head the FTC.
Haha.
"These bobbleheads were charged with the task of disguising the night assault."
ReplyDeleteAnother conspiracy theory to justify dismantling USAID is not an assault on our govt. The massive layoffs are. The defunding of agencies is. Somerby focuses on Gutfeld, who is nothing more than a media clown spewing disinformation. There is no election coming up, so why is Gutfeld important in even a minor way? He isn't. It is important to notice and resist what Trump's people are doing to our govt.
In that sphere, the resistance involves the lawsuits that are winning restraining orders against Trump's efforts to dismantle govt efforts. The resignations of govt officials, including those Republicans appointed by Trump himself during his first term, and the decisions by long-time Republican-appointed judges show that there is pushback by Republicans along with Democrats over Trump's attempted coup.
This is what Somerby ignores while he focuses on the nonsense on Fox News. Why would Somerby be shouting "look over here, Gutfeld is lying" when there are so many more consequential things to be concerned about? Because that is what Trump wants his helpers to do -- divert and distract the public from his real destructive acts.
It would be nice if Somerby would discuss why so many people on the left are calling this another attempted coup. Does Somerby know why that word is being used?
Maybe he's overwhelmingly repulsed by Gutfeld. That would be a natural human reaction.
DeleteSomerby's lack of concern while Republicans are burning down our republic is way more repulsive than Gutfeld.
DeleteMore damaging. Not more repulsive.
DeleteGutfield is a distraction from Musk stealing our personal information and selling it to China.
ReplyDeleteThis.
DeleteChina could buy our personal information on the open market.
Delete
DeleteRight, Soros-bots. Your Soros-bots' and Soros-trained monkeys' personal information is China's object of desire. China can't fall asleep thinking of y'all and your personal information.
Mao,
DeleteWould you date longtime failed businessman, adjudicated rapist, and self-admitted sexual predator, Donald J. Trump? He told me you remind him of his daughter.
My wife once said that if she were close to death, and if she had the chance, she’d murder Trump. USAID was spending money with inadequate supervision. They had great freedom in how they spent their money. If the head of USAID felt like my wife, then doesn’t it seem pretty likely that some USAID funds were used to oppose Trump’s election?
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. In fact it's likely that USAID-funded monsters are hiding under your bed at night.
DeleteOne of the more ridiculous comments from DiC, and that’s saying a lot.
DeleteDiC,
Deleteyou're a pathetic man-child and you reason like a coffee table.
How do we know USAID was spending money with inadequate supervision? Because Elon Musk said so?
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
I hope you've gotten help for your wife since.
DeleteMy high school mate's cousin has a thing for ugly older women, and he had a brief affair with David's wife, and he says David's wife never talked about Trump, but did talk about murdering David because he resembles Trump in that he emits a horrible stench and has a tiny penis.
DeleteIt is the right wing that uses govt funds to promote Republican candidates, including Trump. There is a law prohibiting the use of federal funds for campaigning or election activities. The left tends to obey it while the right blatantly ignores it. Look at the MAGA hats being worn in the Oval Office by Trump appointees, for a small but consistent example. MAGA is a campaign slogan.
DeleteUSAID is aimed at International Development and humanitarian efforts, not campaigning. Those targets of its work do not vote in the USA. That makes this claim doubly stupid.
Note the use of the term "color revolution" in the accusation. You might think that is a racial term, but it is not. According to Wikipedia:
"The colour revolutions were a series of often non-violent protests and accompanying changes of government and society that took place in post-Soviet states and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the early 21st century. The aim of the colour revolutions was to establish Western-style liberal democracies."
Why would an accusation against USAID use that phrase if written by an American? It wouldn't. It's inclusion makes it seem like that phrase was lifted from a script prepared by Russian propagandists. It makes no sense in the context of American politics, but a lot of sense to Russians. But it also undermines the credibility of the complaint as a legitimate criticism of USAID, which conducted no demonstrations in the USA against Trump or on behalf of Biden.
This seems to be an obviously manufactured excuse, prepared by someone outside American politics, to justify the attack on USAID, which hurts America's enemies (who seem to be the people who "helped" prepare this attack).
This may have been spoken by Gutfeld but it surely didn't come from him. No one here talks like that.
Why didn't Somerby bother to follow up on a statement he himself says he didn't understand? A reporter would. It is easy enough to Google "color revolution" but Somerby merely says "whatever that is..." and lets it go.
I can't believe your wife is still with you.
DeleteWhy would Gutfeld oppose color revolutions, much less consider them to be aimed at MAGA? Is it because MAGA doesn't share the goal of building a Western-style democracy?
DeleteIt is almost as if the right were now trying to rebuild society from the ground up, as a Russia-style autocracy, a totalitarian state like the salad days of the USSR. Are we now openly fighting tyranny at a personal level? That is what it sounds like from Somerby's quote, but oddly Somerby doesn't go there.
@11:39 implicitly acknowledged that Reps are more open-minded and accepting of different kinds of people than Dems. S/he wrote “I can't believe your wife is still with you.” She didn’t express surprise that I am still with her.
Delete12:00 because nobody believes the stupid lies you tell about yourself, you fucking dope.
Delete12:00, horseshit. I don't care about you; I care about your abused liberal wife. What it must be like enduring your limitless bullshit everyday must be a living hell.
DeleteWe Soros-bots care.
DeleteIf the head of USAID felt like my wife, then doesn’t it seem pretty likely that some USAID funds were used to oppose Trump’s election?
DeleteDo you ever re-read the gibberish that you post, David?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2025/02/10/elon-musk-pushes-false-claim-ex-usaid-chief-earned-23-million-the-biggest-doge-hoaxes-spread-on-x/
DeleteRead it and weep, DiC. Pat yourself on the back for being more accepting of others than the Dems. LMFAO.
Meanwhile, Trump has been president for over a month and we have not gotten any closer to settling the battery boat/ shark dilemma.
Thanks for the link, @1:14. Unlike the name of the link, Musk didn't announce that she EARNED tens of millions. He claimed that she was WORTH tens of millions. Forbes correctly said Musk offered no evidence. That's a fair criticism. OTOH Forbes offered no evidence that she was NOT worth tens of millions when she retired.
Deleteand within 30 seconds his army of robots were smearing her all over the media accusing her of stealing from the agency, including the many russian bots on this very blog.
DeleteSorry dude. At the news conference in which a 4 year old seemed more prescient than the clowns in the room, Trump specifically prompted Musk for his lie about Power. Your gibberish about it is a comical swing and a miss. Did you read the entire article? It documents multiple instances in which fElon lied or agreed with lies about USAID.
Delete"Forbes correctly said Musk offered no evidence. That's a fair criticism. OTOH Forbes offered no evidence that she was NOT worth tens of millions when she retired."
DeleteLord God, it's not a fair criticism, it's a devastating criticism.
A blowhard can stand up and say whatever they want without evidence in your Trumpian dystopia, and the burden of proof is on the accused to prove it ISN'T true?
No wonder people call you Dickhead.
Cope, Soros-bot. Watch your blood pressure.
DeleteA blowhard can stand up and say whatever they want without evidence in your Trumpian dystopia, and the burden of proof is on the accused to prove it ISN'T true?
DeleteHave you not read Kafka's The Trial? USAID administration is known to be guilty of something. What that something is, we will not share with you.
Good one, trumptard.
DeleteHector — statements made without evidence are normal. E.g, the very article you linked to implied with evidence that no federal bureaucrat had retired with a net worth of tens of millions.
DeleteThe article did not imply that in any way, shape, or form. Cite the paragraph where the article implied that. The post on X clearly stated: "How does the head of USAID make 23 million dollars in 4 years? ".
DeleteThat's false. Yet, you're piling on with some sophistry, David, which amounts to the following: it's possible (as no one has conclusively shown otherwise) that someone who has worked at USAID has net worth in millions; therefore, USAID is corrupt. Does this make sense to any sentient creature?
D in C - certainly statements are made all the time without evidence, for example by you, and certainly by a large percentage of the posters here. But you're getting into nutcase territory when you condone Musk claiming Power stole the money from the US, and Trump' s saying USAID "probably" tried to tilt the election - with no evidence. How can you think it's excusable for the President to smear people with no evidence - which he constantly does?- weren't you the guy who was bent out of shape by Clinton being such a big liar, you listed 7 lies she told (like she was named after Edmund Hillary). Now you're a sycophantic apologist for the WWE-style President who thinks being honest is for suckers.
DeleteS/he wrote “I can't believe your wife is still with you.” She didn’t express surprise that I am still with her.
DeleteWe haven't met your wife.
"statements made without evidence are normal."
DeleteBut if accusations are made without evidence, they shouldn't be given any credence, no matter how good the feeling they generate in your amygdala.
"E.g, the very article you linked to"
I didn't link to any article.
"implied with evidence that no federal bureaucrat had retired with a net worth of tens of millions."
I have no idea what this means.
Without his love for bigotry, David in Cal would have nothing.
DeleteVeteran Democratic Party strategist James Carville is furious about the direction the party is headed, expressing to colleagues: “I dedicated the best years of my f-cking life to this party, only to see it taken over by a bunch of stupid motherfu-kers. Everything’s gone to sh-t.”
ReplyDeleteCarville is especially livid following the DNC leadership election, reportedly saying, “Who are these people? This David Hogg guy and that other sissy (referring to Malcolm Kenyatta) come out of goddamn left field. Well, there goes the male vote forever. Thanks guys! We’re f-cked and we deserve it.”
DeleteWhat? Dedicated the best years of your fucking life, James?
Cracka please. You're a fucking political consultant, making a good living lying to the public.
Speaking of the male vote, Thom Hartmann today has an essay about how the right is suppressing the women's vote via voter ID laws. Most women do not have an official ID (DL or passport) that matches their maiden name, because they changed their name to their husband's name when they married. The lack of congruent birth certificate and adult ID is the loophole right wingers are using to toss out women's votes in some red states (with more to come, if they succeed in this nationwide vote suppression project). Women tend to vote more democratic than men, especially in the last election, so this matters as much as suppression of black votes.
DeleteBut Carville is worried about the male vote. That shows how far his head is up his own ass.
Thank god for the filibuster.
DeleteAnonymouse 10:10am shows us that anonymices are so thrillingly street and savvy sitting at home in their hoodies and pajama bottoms.
DeleteCarville is mad nobody has a dime to spare him or his misbegotten neoliberalism.
Deletewomp womp
Anonymouse 12:32pm, probably living on a USAID grant.
DeleteAttacks on USAID are in support of China; it is un American.
DeleteNo, you're not getting paid by USAID anymore, 1:04 PM. End of story.
DeleteSure, sure, anti American bot.
DeleteCarville was a weirdo and a jaggoff 40 years ago. He has only gotten worse. Screw him. These dinosaurs have no idea how to handle the march to fascism started by the far right loonies after Goldwater had his ass handed to him by LBJ.
DeleteJames Carville is a moron, who doesn't even think we should shoot all Republicans in the head and let them bleed out in gutters.
DeleteI'm not going to listen to that fool.
Calling Trump "commander" furthers authoritarian dictatorship by implying that he should be giving citizens commands that we must all obey. A democracy doesn't work that way. The president is a leader not a commander (except to the military, which has an authoritarian command structure that civil society does not).
ReplyDeleteWords matter. Why has Somerby been using that kind of language to talk about the buffoon-in-chief? Why would he be enhancing the stature of someone he calls crazy (wink wink, nod nod)? We don't need such puffery, even if Somerby pretends he is being ironic.Trump is a more pathetic old man than Somerby tried to cast Biden as.
Or maybe Somerby just does this to irritate the few remaining liberals who read his blog? Anything is possible (that is the asshole's motto).
You definitely need another booster, Corby.
DeleteVance gave an unusual speech today at the security conference in Munich. Instead of discussing military matters and Ukraine, he said the biggest European problems were internal: reduced freedom of speech, reduced democracy, and too much migration. On YouTube where I watched it, I also got a response from a German public news station. The response was intelligent and well delivered. In a polite way, it disparaged and slammed pretty much everything Vance said. The European audience didn’t care for the speech either.
ReplyDeleteGosh, do you suppose Europeans disagree with Vance about what their biggest problems are?
DeleteThis was a "security conference" being held at a time when Russia has attacked a neighbor, Ukraine, and the US seems to be withdrawing its support for NATO and supporting Russia's invasion (by offering to let it keep parts of Ukraine in exchange for a ceasefire). In that context, Vance suggests the biggest problem is free speech. Of course they disagree. Vance is telling Europe loud and clear not to expect any help from the USA. I am ashamed of our nation.
Tesla sales are down 60% in Europe (including Germany), while EV sales are up overall.
DeleteMusk is tanking.
Lol.
DeleteI've already made $1k today alone by short selling Tesla stock. "Musk tanking" is a good thing.
DeleteYou have got to be kidding me, that little Peter Thiel Pro-Dictator Boy-Toy with eye-liner lecturing Europe on free speech. After ignominiously stabbing an ally in the back and sucking on putin's knob. Holy shit.
DeleteCope, Soros-bot.
DeleteI'm "coping" by short selling, made easy by Trump and Musk's incompetence and corruption.
DeleteSure, sure.
DeleteLeftwing German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, incensed by JD Vance defending democratic values against EU fascism, just got up and said "free speech doesn't mean anyone can say anything." Yes it does, fascist.
Delete
DeleteOver in Deutschland it doesn't, 12:09 PM. In Deutschland, and in the Democrat party, "free speech" means you follow orders.
Ordnung uber alles.
Free speech in the US is limited.
DeleteThe reasoning for this is obvious.
Civics 101 you fucking dope.
Ah, one of the idiot-Democrat "free speech realists" is here.
DeleteWhat? 12:23 you are just embarrassing yourself. Nice self own, lol
DeletePlease, we need a snot-nosed, thirty-something, who has spent his short adult life sucking on the teat of monied degenerates, telling us what 'our biggest problems are'. He's one presumptuous mother-fucker. Has the pompous asshole ever held a job in his useless life?
DeleteCope, Ilya.
DeleteFree speech in America has always had constraints, something American children learn in school.
DeleteConservative thinker Mark Steyn in particular has promoted the view that it's already too late. He says demography is on the side of the Islamic Migrants in Europe. Twenty years ago, he predicted that Europe over time would adopt values, such as restricted speech, restricted democracy, and restricted religious freedom including anti-Semitism. Sadly, Steyn's prediction seems to be coming true.
DeleteSteyn is no thinker. He's just a shouter.
DeleteThe Europeans recognize Trump and by extension, his crew, for what they are: a danger to the EU. Lecturing Europeans about free speech from a pulpit that constantly spews propaganda and misinformation is pathetic.
Delete
DeleteBoris, the German Defense Minister, told JD Vance that criticizing Germany is unacceptable.
True story. I'm getting the impression that every Western European Boris is a moron.
JD Vance nailed it when he said the Republican Party is nothing but a shit pile of bigots.
DeleteFrom Politico
ReplyDeleteTime to Admit It: Trump Is a Great President.
But the second occasion of Trump taking the oath of office also put him in an entirely new light. For the first time, he is holding power under circumstances in which reasonable people cannot deny a basic fact: He is the greatest American figure of his era.
He is someone with an ability to perceive opportunities that most politicians do not and forge powerful, sustained connections with large swaths of people in ways that no contemporary can match. In other words: He is a force of history.
This is something his most ardent supporters — still shy of a national majority — have never doubted but something others, myself included, have been slow to reckon with. The inaugural address and a raft of hundreds of executive orders Trump has promised for his opening days in office make it impossible to avoid.
One more signature shown by the most consequential presidents: Uncommon psychological toughness. Have you ever known someone who was facing legal hurdles? In many cases, even if people ultimately win the case, they end up being consumed and shrunken by the searing nature of the experience. Imagine running for president amid huge civil suits, criminal prosecutions, and even felony convictions — then emerging from this morass as a larger figure than before. No one needs to admire the achievement to recognize that Trump is possessed by some rare traits of denial, combativeness and resilience.
John Harris is founding editor and global editor-in-chief of POLITICO.
Sounds like he’s trying to keep his USAID money flowing.
DeleteTrump is trying to beat his first term record as the worst president ever. This guy's essay applauds Trump for making his criminal prosecutions go away by using the presidency to have them dismissed. That is corrupt, not admirable.
DeleteThe only reason a sane man would write an essay like this about Trump is that he fear reprisals. A person who governs by fear is a tyrant. We aren't becoming a dictatorship, we are already there when opinion pieces like this appear from editors in chief of news sources. I am in mourning for our country.
DeleteJohn Harris, founding editor and global editor-in-chief of POLITICO, will have to get a real job soon. Security guard, perhaps?
11:48 you should read it in its entirety. It suggests you simply can't see the reality before your eyes which is that Trumpism is more democratic, less corrupt, less authoritarian than the Democrat left.
DeletePolitico, Democrat party Pravda, published this, 12:06 PM?
DeleteJeez, something new every day.
John Harris lauds Trump for his 'denial, combativeness and resilience' in the face of criminal charges.
DeleteThe same could be said for Al Capone.
I think Ezra Klein said it best:
Delete"Trump is acting like a king because he's too weak to govern like a president"
Apparently, it takes a great president to destroy the government and any vestiges of integrity it might have had (see Adams case). It's true in the same way as it took a great skill to demolish my deck. It only took a couple of days. Rebuilding it, on the other hand, took a while longer.
Delete
DeleteThe federal government should be dealing with national defense and international diplomacy.
The rest can (and arguably should) be demolished (with perhaps minor exceptions).
You vote for your anarchist and I will vote for my party.
DeleteThe federal government should be dealing with national defense and international diplomacy.
DeleteThe rest can (and arguably should) be demolished (with perhaps minor exceptions).
I am in awe of the cluelessness of this position. This is the insipid shallowness that Libertarians are always eager to demonstrate.
Federal agencies, such as the FDA, EPA, NIH, etc. didn't spring up overnight by an executive fiat. It wasn't Biden or some "left-wing lunatic" -- the most in vogue term in the Musk administration -- that created them. They evolved in response to real life problems. Is there some mission creep in them? Entirely possible. Should one throw out the baby with the bath water? According to the narcissistic fools, who call themselves libertarians -- yes!
The Koch brothers hand an idiotic Ayn Rand book to 13 yo boys and they think they alone created everything good in the world with their Beavis & Butthead awesomeness. This life view lasts for the rest of their lives. Pathetic. My BIL who worked for the State as a Hwy pothole filler and a City Fireman refuses to understand he was part of socialist organizations. Also amusing, telling a libertarian Maga man that the greatest military in the world is a socialist organization. They refuse this basic truth. Silly boys Beavis & Butthead libertarians.
DeleteArty,
DeleteI like to point out to people that if you want to live in a society, you will have to put up with some socialism. How much, is open to a discussion.
From what I learned as a Public School and State University grad - I say NO! to socialism.
DeleteMusk is un American.
ReplyDeleteLiterally and figuratively.
DeleteSomerby seems content on focusing on different ways to phrase the lunacy of Republicans, which is safe since it does not move the needle at all, but Somerby just can not bring himself to consider the trivially obvious concepts of "corruption" and "crime", as Republicans are hell bent on destroying our country in order to benefit a handful of billionaires.
ReplyDeleteThis is a media critique blog. That's what Somerby does.
DeleteAside from the stated purpose of the blog including musings on the American discourse, how is a critique of "crazy" more relevant than critiquing corruption and crime?
DeleteIt isn't necessarily more relevant. It's what he does.
DeleteBob is critiquing the "insane" discourse that is put forth as news, including the question from a very "friendly" reporter, which was not a question at all.
DeleteIn some ways, it's more important than critiquing corruption and crime; the pseudo-press provides the cover for corruption and crime.
Somerby, thumb, scale.
ReplyDeleteRinse, repeat.
Ignorance ain't gonna manufacture itself.
DeleteBack in grade school, "Teacher" would always say that there are no insane questions. There are only insane answers, she would always say.
ReplyDeleteThe question that the "reporter" asked was not a question. It was an answer to a question that no one contemplated. It was predicated on accepting an insane lie -- that Trump wont 2020 election.
This election he won without less than 30% of eligible vote.
"Day 1" is long gone and Ukraine is still going strong, as well as inflation and the genocide of Palestinians.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile Somerby diddles away, excited by Fox News porn.
Be patient, Soros-bot. Cope.
DeleteThanks, trumptard.
DeleteI've been waiting almost 10 years for anyone to find a Republican voter who isn't a bigot. How much more patience do you need, Mao?
DeleteWho uses my name to summon me?
ReplyDeleteMao
DeleteThe headline and article said the reporter asked whether the U.S. Agency for International Development helped RIG the 2020 election. But the actual question and answer concerned whether USAID HAD A ROLE in election interference. Of course, it would be improper for USAID to have any role whatsoever in a US election.
ReplyDeleteevery right-wing accusation is a confession. there are no exceptions
DeleteDavid in Cal,
DeleteIn your opinion, why is it that no one can tell the difference between Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and the fine people on the Right?