THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2025
...Blue stars barely said a word: "And so it did happen like it could have been foreseen / The timeless explosion of fantasy's dream..."
The star of the program was back this morning, with a weak aside from his wife, the program's co-host.
Where had he been for the past four days? "Glad you're feeling better," the spousal co-host weakly said.
The longer ad breaks remain in place, an apparent artefact of the new corporate structure. Not that any of this actually matters, but the longer discussions which were engineered under the MSNBC regime are apparently a thing of the past under MS NOW.
They were the smartest discussions in all of cable news. Now they'll be tightened and corporatized.
As noted, those discussions were never going to save the failing discourse of our flailing nation(s). But at this site, the idealistic young analysts have wept and stared off into air as they've seen the imposition of these new restrictions on discourse.
By 7:05 a.m. today, the Morning Joe gang was involved in a bit of a dodge. They were talking about what the president said when he shlepped to the Poconos for an endless rally-style event this past Tuesday night.
Thanks to the invaluable Rev, a full transcript now exists of the president's endless remarks on Tuesday night. Full disclosure:
As we suggested yesterday, it seems the New York Times made a mistake when it said the president had described Rep. Omar as "garbage" once again.
There seems to be no record of President Trump referring to Rep. Omar (and "her friends") as "garbage" this past Tuesday night. He did insult her in every other possible way, engaging in the dangerous conduct of an extremely unusual person.
Rep. Omar (and "her friends") are "garbage," the president said on two occasions last week. As far as we know, those astounding insults from two (2) successive Oval Office pressers were never reported or discussed on Morning Joe.
This morning, the Morning Joe panel chose to discuss a different part of the president's Tuesday evening tirade. This is the part of his breakdown the panel briefly discussed:
PRESIDENT TRUMP (12/9/25): I've also announced a permanent pause on third world migration, including from hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Shithole.
PRESIDENT TRUMP: I didn't say "shithole," you did.
Remember I said that to the senators, they came in, the Democrats, they wanted to be bipartisan. So they came in and they said, "This is totally off the record. Nothing mentioned here. We want to be honest." Because our country was going to hell.
And we had a meeting. And I said, "Why is it we only take people from shithole countries," right? Why can't we have some people from Norway, Sweden—just a few. Let us have a few.
From Denmark, do you mind sending us a few people? Send us some nice people. Do you mind? But we always take people from Somalia, places that are a disaster, right? Filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime.
In real time, back in 2018, the president swore that he'd said no such thing. This Tuesday, in an apparent bungle, he boasted that he actually had.
Those remarks are the obvious fruit of an American tragedy. A few weeks ago, the Ken Burns PBS film, The American Revolution, reminded us of where this tragedy started, though also perhaps of how far we have slowly managed to come:
NARRATOR: The Second Continental Congress had been meeting since May, and it was obvious from the first that 43-year-old George Washington would command its new army. He had led troops during the French and Indian War, and he was from Virginia, the wealthiest and most populated colony.
New England delegates, eager to ensure that colony's support for the war, favored naming a Virginian.
Washington was also one of America's richest men, the beneficiary of the work of scores of indentured servants and more than 100 enslaved people at his plantation on the Potomac River, Mount Vernon.
[...]
JANE KAMENSKY, HISTORIAN: I think we have to understand Washington as the figurehead without whom American liberty would not have survived. At the same time, he's an enslaver of 317 men, women, and children. He acted as an enslaver in the ways that enslavers did.
He bought and sold people. He broke up families. Do not look for gilded statues of marble men. They were not that, and neither are we and neither is anybody at all.
"Do not look for gilded statues," not even of us ourselves! Kamensky was giving good advice. We always tell the analysts this:
Just thank the gods that you weren't alive at that earlier time. Thank the gods that you weren't forced to see how you would have reacted to the moral norms, understandings and frameworks of that earlier age.
On Tuesday, the current president spoke about "shithole countries" when he went to the Poconos. On two successive days last week, he ranted about Rep. Omar, right there in the Oval Office.
On each occasion, he referred to her as "garbage." According to the sitting president, "her friends" are "garbage" too.
As the New York Times reported, he also said this:
Somalia “stinks and we don’t want them in our country...We could go one way or the other, and we’re going to go the wrong way if we keep taking in garbage into our country."
So the sitting president said, right there in the Oval Office and right there on videotape..
Now for the rest of the story:
Viewers of the Fox News Channel haven't seen those comments discussed on its "cable news" TV shows. Comments like those are disappeared by that channel, as part of the sanitization which has helped create the America(s) in which we all currently live.
That said, viewers of the Fox News Channel have seen a certain topic discussed. In our view, the New York Times was doing its journalistic duty when it brought that topic to the front page of its print editions on Sunday, November 30:
How Fraud Swamped Minnesota’s Social Services System on Tim Walz’s Watch
Prosecutors say members of the Somali diaspora, a group with growing political power, were largely responsible. President Trump has drawn national attention to the scandal amid his crackdown on immigration.
Rightly or wrongly, Governor Walz appeared in the headlines of that front-page Sunday report. Within the precincts of Red America, viewers keep hearing about that massive fraud.
Viewers hear that topic cited on the Fox News Channel. Over here in Blue America, that topic has largely been disappeared.
We Blues aren't going to hear much about it. Nor are we hearing much about the way the president ranted about Ilhan Omar. right there in the Oval Office.
Yesterday, former senator Claire McCaskill said this about our sitting president:
"That speech. He's not well. He's not well."
What did she mean by that remark? On yesterday's Deadline: White House, she elaborated a bit. This afternoon, we'll show you what she said. But with respect to Minnesota's giant fraud, the overpaid stars of MS NOW are taking a pass on that topic.
As a general matter, they serve us the product which makes us feel glad. Inside Silo Red, on the Fox News Channel, their counterparts play the same game,
When we continue—it might not be until Saturday—we'll show you what Rep. Omar said about that giant fraud when she appeared on Face the Nation. We'll show you what that front-page New York Times report actually said.
We'll also show you what Jesse Watters said about this same topic, right there on The Five.
The Blue American stars of Morning Joe don't discuss what happens on those Fox News Channel programs. In that way, they keep refusing to serve.
They and their predecessors have been playing the game in similar ways for three or four decades now. It's easy to be pleased by the things they say, harder to be aware of the topics they chose to disappear.
Concerning our Blue American stars, know this:
They don't know how to talk about "mental illness." They don't know how to talk about so-called race in a way that's likely to help.
They don't want to tell you about the massive amount of fraud which did take shape with Governor Walz in the State House. They're taking a total pass on that topic as the Fox News Channel—and the president himself—rant and rail about it.
The president ranted about that fraud when he went to the Poconos. In Silo Red, it's widely cited. In Silo Blue, it's disappeared.
More than anything else on earth, Blue America cable's corporate owners don't seem to want a tussle with Fox. Joe and Mika and the rest of the toys are willing to let them rave on.
Tomorrow or Saturday: It emerged from Silo Red
ReplyDelete"They don't know how to talk about "mental illness.""
That's because they, all of them, are mental. Advanced case of TDS, in each of them.
Mentals don't want to talk about mental illness, no surprise there. It's exactly the same phenomenon as in "they don't want to tell you about the massive amount of fraud which did take shape with Governor Walz in the State House". Because they, the Democrats, they are fraudsters.
Cogent. Informative. Keep 'em coming, trumptard.
DeleteTrump's Deranged Cult has thoughts. Idiotic, but still thoughts.
Delete"Olds", not news. Yes, the NYTimes finally printed a good article about about the enormous fraud in Minnesota. But, this story is months old. Somalian scammers in MN have been prosecuted and convicted for quite a while. And, no doubt there's plenty of information in addition to the specific convictions if some reporter took the trouble to look for it.
ReplyDeleteDickhead is pissed off at those corrupt Somalian scammers. On the other hand Dickhead crawled naked thru a Paris sewer to vote for a convicted felon who stole children's charities.
DeleteThe ringleader, Aimee Bock, is not Somali.
DeleteCorrect, the NYT got it wrong, the fraud was perpetrated by a White Christian, who conned a community of immigrant Somalis - roping a few of them in, some unwittingly, and who was caught by the Walz admin and prosecuted by the Biden admin.
DeleteShe is not Christian.
DeleteShe is a Christian.
Delete"the fraud was perpetrated by a White Christian"
DeleteAnd her 52 (and counting) convicted Somali accomplices.
Convicted of bribery, money laundering and wire fraud. Not of being duped' by a White Christian woman.
Squeal louder, 4:07.
DeleteIt's hilarious to the rest of us.
The NYTimes has a practice of not only telling us what happened, but telling us how to think about it. They reported the fraud with a headline, "How Fraud Swamped Minnesota’s Social Services System."
ReplyDeleteWas the swamping of MN Social Service System the most important aspect of the fraud? Some of us might think that stealing billions of dollars from the American people was the most important aspect. BTW I remember when commenters on this site criticized DOGE and disputing the claim that was massive fraud. Turns out Musk and Trump were right, and they were wrong.
DeleteNah. Swamping is definitely the most important aspect. Draining the swamp is absolutely vital, critical.
Has there ever been a murkier and more corrupt deep state then President stuff a couple billion cyber coins in my back pockets deep state? Why do u trust these idiots with $200 billion gifted them to militarily fuck with all of us?
DeleteFunny how you don't give a shit about the President and his cronies stealing billions. Chump.
DeleteCall the cops, Soros-bot. 9-1-1. If you don't, you're an accomplice.
DeleteDavid -- have you considered showing a modicum of honesty or accuracy in your comments? DOGE, as a statement of plain fact, did not find this fraud or any other for that matter. DOGE only eliminated lawfully appropriated funding. For crying out loud, David, are ever embarrassed by the nonsense that you post?
DeleteIlya, no David will never be honest, he is a troll, stuck in a bunker in some far off land - nothing he communicates is genuine.
DeleteBest to just ignore him, since no one here takes him seriously. I understand your inclination is to help those in need and David appears to be someone in need of help, but responding to him here is merely enabling traits that keep David trapped in a dreary abyss.
Anon@1:17: You're right. Still, it makes me sad to see someone who is so thoroughly deluded, even though the facts and information are right there, on his fingertips.
DeleteI take David seriously.
DeleteJk!
Delete"commenters on this site criticized DOGE and disputing the claim that was massive fraud. Turns out Musk and Trump were right, and they were wrong."
DeleteEchoing Ilya, DOGE didn't uncover any fraud. They went in and cut programs they didn't like, often on the childish basis of a key word being in the title of the program. And they way overstated their accomplishments.
Less than a year later and DiC is trying to rewrite history.
Elon Musk selling the personal and financial information of American citizens to China, is a small price to pay for Trump being a bigot.
DeleteSo is a $75 apple.
I think Mika and Joe are finally feeling the blowback of deserving each other.
ReplyDeleteWhy would you begrudge any married couple the happiness they experience in their marriage? You have to be the most mean-spirited grinch I've ever encountered anywhere. I'll bet you wish little kids would choke on their lollipops and puppies would strangle on their leashes.
DeletePerhaps you are unmarried yourself and it makes you sad to see a married couple on a TV show? If so, get help.
A hard heart seems to automatically accompany Cecelia's small mind.
DeleteAnonymouse 1:27pm, you’ve said worse things about dead Charlie Kirk than I’ve said about anyone here AND Joe and Mika.
DeleteI said nothing about Kirk you liar.
DeleteCharlie Kirk the closet case who was shot to death by a kid raised by a Republican family, or a different Charlie Kirk?
DeleteThere’s a measles outbreak in South Carolina. Cecelia and David, please explain how this is Biden’s fault, and that Trump and RFK Jr couldn’t have done anything to prevent it.
ReplyDeleteToo many sick illegals imported by the Autopen administration?
DeleteReading folks like them you realize the stupid don't stop. That is all.
DeleteAnonymouse 12:10pm, you tell me. Explain your own theory.
DeleteToo many idiotic people are convinced they know more than the top scientists in the world. Fucking idiots are taking down their neighbors for no reason other than their conviction to idiocracy. Fuck these disgusting assholes.
DeleteTriggered, Hillary?
DeleteTriggered Boris?
DeleteWe already know you're an idiot, Hillary. No need to keep confirming it.
DeleteThe problem seems to be that Kennedy (and everyone) must endorse every vaccine and speak NO evil of ANY vaccine, or be responsible for every outbreak. It’s like a religious dogma. Imagine trying to hang all unintended consequences (side-effects or dangerous reactions) on everyone who supported a particular medication.
DeleteAI: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in his capacity as Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, has expressed support for the measles vaccine, particularly in the context of ongoing outbreaks.[1] [2] [3] However, his messaging has been inconsistent and often accompanied by claims that contradict established scientific consensus, leading to confusion among the public and criticism from public health experts.[1] [2] [4]
Initially, Kennedy's stance on vaccines, including the measles vaccine, was characterized by skepticism and the promotion of debunked theories.[4] [6] He previously chaired an anti-vaccine non-profit and, in 2019, was accused of contributing to a deadly measles outbreak in Samoa by discouraging vaccination.[6] [7] During a 2023 interview, he denied the measles vaccine's role in reducing deaths, attributing it instead to improved nutrition.[6]
Despite this history, Kennedy has, at times, acknowledged the efficacy of the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. In an op-ed on Fox News in March 2025, he stated that "Vaccines not only protect individual children from measles, but also contribute to community immunity, protecting those who are unable to be vaccinated due to medical reasons."[6] Following meetings with families affected by a measles outbreak in Gaines County, Texas, in April 2025, Kennedy explicitly posted on X that "The most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine."[1] [6] He also instructed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to supply MMR vaccines to pharmacies and clinics in Texas.[1] In an April 2025 CBS interview, he reiterated, "We encourage people to get the measles vaccine."[2] [5]
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made numerous false claims regarding the measles vaccine. Here’s a summary of some notable misinformation:
DeleteClaim
The vaccine has not been safety tested
Reality
The measles vaccine has undergone extensive safety evaluations; it has been used safely for decades.
Claim
Vaccine protection wanes quickly
Reality
Immunity from two doses of the MMR vaccine is generally long-lasting and has led to the elimination of measles in the U.S. since 2000.
Claim
The vaccine contains “aborted fetus debris”
Reality
This claim is misleading. The rubella component was developed from a cell line derived from fetal tissue decades ago, but no fetal tissue is present in the vaccine.
Claim
Measles vaccines cause deaths every year Reality
Vaccines have been proven to prevent deaths caused by measles; measles has a high fatality rate if contracted, especially in unvaccinated individuals.
Claim
Promotes unapproved treatments (e.g., vitamin A, steroids) for measles
Reality
Medical experts warn these claims are unfounded and could be harmful; there’s no effective treatment for measles once contracted.
Claim
Unvaccinated populations are inevitable and Measles will persist
Reality
Higher vaccination rates prevent outbreaks; unvaccinated communities have been the sources of recent outbreaks, not the vaccine itself.
RFK jr had to soften his tone on the measles vaccine in the aftermath of the Texas outbreak earlier this year, but that does not erase his lunatic rhetoric and the disastrous impact he has had. His misguided takes on other public health issues are equally loony and harmful.
Democrat scientism is the best scientism.
DeleteDemocratic science is better than any kind of scientism.
DeleteDemocrat science is Fauci.
DeleteFauci is vindicated by facts. Republicans have been telling a lot of lies about him and his work. RFK Jr. is a fraud and con artist and creepy moron.
DeleteTourettes?
DeleteActually, you sound quite a bit like a creepy moron, 3:30.
DeleteNo, I'm gonna go with RFK as aggressively stupid and cruel (in the sense of causing deaths).
DeleteHe'd been Democrat all his life, so, I'm reluctant to dispute 4:04's characterization.
DeleteBut then he finally stopped being Democrat, so, he got smarter eventually.
The problem seems to be that Kennedy (and everyone) must endorse every vaccine and speak NO evil of ANY vaccine
DeleteNope, Cecelia. What we are asking is for Kennedy not set public policy based on his utter scientific ignorance. I guess it's too much to ask of a heroin addict with half his brain chewed up a worm.
Funny how a heroin addict with half his brain chewed up a worm is acting smarter than any Democrat.
DeleteCecelia,
DeleteIn your opinion, why does the Right-wing corporate-owned media (AKA the media) call Kennedy a "vaccine skeptic", when he is really anti-vaccine, not a skeptic?
Bob seems to have an unhealthy interest in prominent men in corporate media.
ReplyDeleteWe are learning more an more about how many Republican men are living life on the DL - Mike Johnson, Benny Johnson, Charlie Kirk, etc.
Is Bob on the DL?
More power to him, but I hope he finds the courage to come out, so he can live a more authentic life, although captured as he is by the Right, it would appear he has little choice but to stifle his innate nature.
What if his innate nature pulls him toward beautiful 12 year old children? Seems to me some aspects of men's nature need to be stifled.
DeletePedophilic behavior has been linked to things like tumors and other external disruptions to the brain, some of these arising from perpetrators suffering from similar trauma themselves; furthermore, children are unable to consent whereas adult gay relationships are just as healthy as straight relationships. While you have to always consider the context that everything is on a spectrum, you are off in two ways: 1) pedo behavior does not appear to be innate and 2) being gay is innate and no less healthy than being straight, whereas pedo behavior is harmful and destructive.
DeleteThe issue is not that Bob may have gay inclinations - there is nothing wrong with that, it is the repression of those feelings, and how that repression can lead to unhealthy obsessions.
What is the DL?
Deletedown low
DeleteI see. Now Somerby is a gay pedophile, along with being a sexist, racist, treasonous Nazi. You people!
DeleteDG,
DeleteObviously, Anons are exaggerating in service to a greater truth, which is that Somerby is a standard-issue Right-wing rat-fucker.
Could Bob Somerby be a gay pedophile, along with being a sexist, racist, treasonous Nazi?
DeleteIf you've read TDH fore a while, you know anything is possible.
According to Heather Cox Richardson, yesterday day was International Human Rights Day:
ReplyDelete"Today [Dec 10] is Human Rights Day, celebrated internationally in honor of the day seventy-seven years ago, December 10, 1948, when the United Nations General Assembly announced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)...
Drafted over the next two years, the final document began with a preamble explaining that a UDHR was necessary because “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,” and because “disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind.” Because “the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,” the preamble said, “human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”
The thirty articles that followed established that “[a]ll human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights…without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status” and regardless “of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs.”
Those rights included freedom from slavery, torture, degrading punishment, arbitrary arrest, exile, and “arbitrary interference with…privacy, family, home or correspondence, [and] attacks upon…honour and reputation.”
They included the right to equality before the law and to a fair trial, the right to travel both within a country and outside of it, the right to marry and to establish a family, and the right to own property.
They included the “right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” “freedom of opinion and expression,” peaceful assembly, the right to participate in government either “directly or through freely chosen representatives,” the right of equal access to public service. After all, the UDHR noted, the authority of government rests on the will of the people, “expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage.”
They included the right to choose how and where to work, the right to equal pay for equal work, the right to unionize, and the right to fair pay that ensures “an existence worthy of human dignity.”
They included “the right to a standard of living adequate for…health and well-being…, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond [one’s] control.”
They included the right to free education that develops students fully and strengthens “respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Education “shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.”
They included the right to participate in art and science.
They included the right to live in the sort of society in which the rights and freedoms outlined in the UDHR could be realized. And, the document concluded, “Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.”
Although eight countries abstained from the UDHR—South Africa, Saudi Arabia, and six countries from the Soviet bloc—no country voted against it, making the vote unanimous. The declaration was not a treaty and was not legally binding; it was a declaration of principles.
Cont.
Delete"Since then, though, the UDHR has become the foundation of international human rights law. More than eighty international treaties and declarations, along with regional human rights conventions, domestic human rights bills, and constitutional provisions, make up a legally binding system to protect human rights. All of the members of the United Nations have ratified at least one of the major international human rights treaties, and four out of five have ratified four or more.
Indeed, today is the forty-first anniversary of the U.N.’s adoption of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, more commonly known as the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), which follows the structure of the UDHR.
The UDHR remains aspirational, but it is a vital part of the rules-based order that restrains leaders from human rights abuses, giving victims a language and a set of principles to condemn mistreatment. Before 1948 that language and those principles were unimaginable."
Crickets from Somerby on this important day.
If we Americans, as a people, believed in and supported these principles, we wouldn't have elected Trump, a man who is a walking violation of everything we hold important in our own Constitution and the rights its guarantees to American citizens.
I grew up with these human rights as values strongly held by my family and American culture. That they are now swept away by Trump and his billionaires is even more unthinkable to me because I have known no previous values, none of the evil that enabled fascism to thrive and that caused WWII and the rise of the Soviet Union.
Our country needs to re-center itself on the fundamental rights that our country was formed to ensure to our people. That will guide my vote in 2026 and the signs I write and carry in the protests before we take back our nation from the heathens now in office.
It’s a national tragedy the way Bob consistently disappoints his anonymouse readers. They have geniuses such Digby and Heather Cox Richardson, but still, each day, they come to TDH in girlish hope of having all their views completely affirmed by the Heathcliffesque Mr. Somerby, and he fails them every time. It is to laugh…
DeleteI don't believe Digby has ever visited this website. There are some of us who read both Digby and Somerby and report in comments here about the plain differences in effectiveness and content.
DeleteIt is a tragedy that someone who is pretending to be liberal couldn't also pretend to care about human rights.
Anonymouse 1:46pm, it’s a human right for bloggers to focus upon a particular interest, such as the U.S. media and their coverage of important events and themes. It’s worth nothing that anonymices not only wish to dictate Somerby’s particular focus, but they actually troll and insult him for it. It would be interesting to know how Heather Cox Richardson and Digby view such conduct toward a fellow liberal blogger.
DeleteSomerby used to pal around with Digby, but when Somerby's content swung right, Heather (Digby) saw the light. She has actually talked about this on the Majority Report, both her and Sam lamenting Somerby's strange transformation.
DeleteAs far as we can tell, Somerby welcomes the criticism to his blog; the comment section is not moderated, making his blind defenders seem even more weird, although to be fair, when you consider his defenders' warped psychological makeup, it makes sense.
They are paid operatives funded by Russia and China to mess with American discourse.
DeleteSorry to be unclear. I doubt Digby has ever commented here. Of course she may have read the webpage itself.
DeleteCorrect, many right wing/Republican influencers have been outed as being funded by Russia and other foreign entities. A notable one is currently in the midst of having a mental breakdown, Tim Pool has falsely claimed his house was attacked and that he may go bankrupt (so addled, Pool is now attacking other Republican women influencers, calling them the c word, etc); however, the police say there was no reports of an attack, and Pool did the same thing a couple years ago when his viewership dropped in a similar manner.
DeleteSoros fired me, so I’m now looking to Russia and China for funding. Neither has come through yet.
Delete
DeleteWhite Christian Women are funded by Russia.
When oh when is it gonna stop? Sorry, I need to go to my safe space now, and cry.
Dude, you become such a crybaby when you lose the argument.
Delete
DeleteYou have no empathy, Boris. Please, please, have empathy, Boris.
I'm just trying to help you out, you become so transparently distraught when you lose the argument.
DeleteI'm not laughing at you. I would never do such a thing.
DeleteHelp me, Boris. Help me, please. I'm upset, so upset that White Christian Women are funded by Russia.
Why would Russia fund a bunch of racists who want to take away children's healthcare?
Delete"The Caribbean Killings Were Unnecessary. Trump Just Proved It.
ReplyDeleteIf we can seize an oil tanker, why did eighty people have to die?"
William Kristol, Andrew Egger, and Jim Swift
Dec 11
This strikes me as a good question that demands an answer.
AI: These operations have been described as targeting "narcoterrorists" [1]. The primary objective in these cases is to prevent the drugs from reaching their destination and to disrupt drug trafficking networks, which may involve destroying the vessels to achieve this aim, especially if boarding is deemed too risky or impractical[1] [4] [5]. The US has significantly increased its military presence in the region, including the deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, and has conducted numerous deadly strikes on these boats, resulting in casualties[1] [2] [4].
DeleteThe distinction in approach can be attributed to several factors:
Nature of the Cargo and Threat: Oil, while sanctioned, is a commodity that can be seized and repurposed. Drugs, particularly highly potent ones like fentanyl, are often destroyed to prevent their distribution and impact on public health and safety[1] [5].
Legal Frameworks: Seizing an oil tanker involves a legal process of asset forfeiture, requiring a warrant and the ability to secure the vessel and its cargo[1] [4]. Interdicting drug shipments at sea, especially when facing resistance or when the vessels are designed for speed and evasion, might necessitate more immediate and forceful action to prevent the escape or destruction of evidence by the traffickers themselves[1] [5].
Operational Risks: Boarding a large oil tanker, while still a high-risk operation as demonstrated by the use of elite forces, might be deemed feasible for seizure. Smaller, faster drug boats, often operated by individuals willing to evade capture at all costs, could present different and potentially higher risks for boarding teams, making disabling or destroying the vessel a more viable option to prevent the escape of traffickers and their illicit cargo[1] [4] [5].
Strategic Messaging: The dramatic seizure of a large oil tanker sends a clear message about the US's intent to disrupt economic lifelines of sanctioned regimes and to enforce sanctions, potentially deterring other vessels from engaging in similar activities by increasing the cost and risk of such operations[1] [2]. The destruction of drug ships, on the other hand, sends a message about the US's commitment to combating drug trafficking and its willingness to use force to achieve that objective[1] [4].
Political Objectives: While both actions aim to pressure the Venezuelan government, the oil tanker seizure directly targets a revenue stream, aligning with broader efforts for regime change by economic means[1] [2]. The drug interdictions are often framed as counter-narcotics operations, though critics argue they also serve as a pretext for increased military presence and pressure on the Maduro regime[1] [2].
In essence, the choice between seizure and destruction is a tactical decision influenced by the specific circumstances of the illicit activity, the legal tools available, and the overarching strategic goals of the US government
The answer is Trump and his cronies are bloodthirsty, many of them fueled by a bloodthirsty god, even though that is just pure imagination coming from ignorant people living thousands of years ago.
DeleteCecelia, can you please answer the simple question posed. If we can seize tankers why can't we seize fishing boats? Why was it necessary to kill 80 people?
DeleteStop flooding the zone with AI statements that are irrelevant to that question.
Anonymouse 1:48pm, the sentiment of we citizens being endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights is a bit less ancient than thousands of years ago, but it is formulation based upon a higher power, and so are military interdictions that send a very clear and serious message.
DeleteAnonymouse 2:08pm, no, they address the matter as much or more than your opinions, however, you have my permission to ignore them.
DeleteThis AI generated statement is incorrect:
Delete"In essence, the choice between seizure and destruction is a tactical decision influenced by the specific circumstances of the illicit activity, the legal tools available, and the overarching strategic goals of the US government"
The answer to the question has nothing to do with tools or strategy. It is simply that they killed 80 people because they could. The cruelty is the point. Hegseth enjoys playing with lethal toys. Trump feels powerful killing people for no reason. They feel powerful and strong and believe they are projecting those qualities, when they are targeting sitting ducks and killing people for no reason. There weren't even drugs found on the boats (which were destroyed).
You on the right are embracing monsters who will not stop at killing Americans too. What do you imagine would stop Trump if he decided YOU were inconvenient and confrontational? Nothing at all.
Remember back in Trump's first term when he tried to order the military to fire on protesters? We do.
DeleteExactly. Why do you think MTG quickly dropped out of Congress after becoming critical of Trump? Nobody wants to get Khashoggi-ed. Trump excels at bullying people, including threatening violence, including ordering others to commit violence. Republicans cosplay tough guys, but they are really snowflakes constantly shaking in their boots, so it feels so good for them to order our military to beat up others.
DeleteAnonymouse 2:10pm, they did kill 80 people because could. There’s no one contesting that. AI did contest your formulation in comparing what happened with a large shipping vessel to interdiction with drug boats.
DeleteAnonymouse 2:16pm, MTG became critical of Trump policy as to deporting undocumented migrants.
DeleteNo, AI assumed that Trump and Hegseth were acting according to normal military considerations when that is far from the truth. First, Hegseth has no military training or competence, second, Trump is demented and fixated on personal obsessions (at best) and Putin's foreign domination goals (at worst) and has been gleeful about blowing stuff up. Look at the bombs he wasted on Iran, to no military purpose. AI has no intentions beyond its own programming. It wasn't contesting me or anyone else. It was producing a set of words based on whatever command you used to generate them. Reporting an answer without also providing the wording of the search question is corrupt on your part, Cecelia. AI works on a GIGO principle (garbage in, garbage out). It is easy to word an input question that will produce whatever result a person wants. That is bad faith, but you are a bad person.
DeleteMTG split with Trump over the Epstein files. She is leaving because she, above anyone else, knows that Trump's criminal enterprise plays for keeps. Plus Trump probably told her, "Quiet, piggy" and she realized she has no power without him supporting her, so she is going to retire on her stock purchases.
DeleteNo, you do not understand how AI works. AI follows your lead, so if you feed it misinformation it will try to justify that misinformation.
DeleteIn reality, many people in LE have spoken up and said that it is routine and not a problem to stop a small boat and inspect it for illegal activity.
To be clear I at 2:53 was responding to 2:43.
DeleteAnonhmouse 2:47pm, don’t forget her construction company.
DeleteAccording to AI, the seizing of the tanker in fact does raise the question "why bomb those 80+ civilians".
DeleteThe decision by the Trump administration to intercept a tanker rather than bomb it paints a stark picture of strategic inconsistency, particularly when examining the operational feasibility of intercepting small boats. This juxtaposition can significantly influence perceptions of military actions.
Logistical Considerations
Operational Feasibility:
Easier Interception: Intercepting a small boat typically involves less logistical complexity than a large tanker. Smaller vessels can be pursued by fast-moving naval units equipped for rapid engagement. The ability to adapt and intercept smaller targets should have been more straightforward.
Resource Allocation: Given that the Navy can successfully intercept large tankers, the assumption that they could have applied similar efforts to intercepting small boats is reasonable. The existence of the necessary naval resources raises questions about the choice to escalate to bombing.
Lack of Justification for Bombing:
If the U.S. military had the capability to intercept large tankers, the choice to bomb smaller vessels appears to lack operational justification. This inconsistency signals a broader failure in strategic planning and execution.
Moral and Ethical Implications
Civilian Risks:
Escalation of Violence: Resorting to bombing smaller boats increases the likelihood of collateral damage and civilian casualties. In contrast, intercepting these boats could have preserved life and demonstrated a more measured approach to military response.
Humanitarian Concerns: Interceptions could allow for the assessment of the crew’s intentions and the potential for humanitarian actions, which bombing precludes entirely.
AI continues:
DeletePublic Perception:
The choice to bomb small boats, especially when interception was an option, could evoke public outrage and criticism. It implies a willingness to escalate conflict unnecessarily, leading to unnecessary casualties and further alienation of both domestic and international audiences.
Strategic Messaging and Consistency
Double Standards in Military Engagement:
The approach of intercepting a tanker while bombing small boats presents a double standard. It raises questions about the criteria used to engage different types of threats and portrays a lack of a cohesive military strategy.
This inconsistency can undermine credibility with both allies and adversaries. If the U.S. can intercept a large tanker, it should rationally follow that smaller threats could also have been dealt with similarly.
Loss of Potential Strategic Benefits:
By bombing small boats, the administration missed opportunities for intelligence gathering and potential cooperation with entities operating those vessels. Intercepting smaller boats could have provided insights into Venezuelan maritime operations and the true nature of the threats involved.
Broader Implications on Military Strategy
Future Military Doctrine:
The contrasting tactics in the interceptions of the tanker versus the bombings of small boats could lead to a reevaluation of military doctrines regarding asymmetrical threats. The decision-making process should prioritize adaptable and versatile responses over escalating violence.
Impact on International Relations:
Actions perceived as excessively aggressive can strain international relationships and impede diplomatic efforts. If the U.S. can choose non-lethal means with larger vessels, the expectation is that similar restraint should apply to smaller engagements.
Conclusion
Trump’s decision to intercept a large Venezuelan tanker rather than bomb it further highlights the significant shortcomings of bombing smaller vessels. Logistical considerations favor interception, making the choice to bomb appear not only inconsistent but also unnecessarily violent and ethically questionable. This approach may have hampered U.S. credibility and effectiveness in dealing with maritime threats, suggesting a need for a more consistent and strategic military response moving forward.
Anonymouse 2:57pm, bombing drug boats is necessarily violent. It’s the threat that makes a difference in the way that Gen. Pershing did with pig heads.
DeleteCecelia, there is no evidence that any of the destroyed boats were "drug boats." I have no doubt that Hegseth and Trump enjoy retelling that false and debunked story about Pershing, but it is not true about Pershing.
DeleteKilling people is not a threat. It is an execution. In this case, it is an extra-legal one because Trump has no right to summarily execute non-combatant citizens of other countries engaging in no proven crime, all without due process of any kind. Trump has committed murder.
Calling the boats "drug boats" changes nothing about the situation, not even if there were evidence of smuggling (any evidence was destroyed with the boats). As with ICE agents who make up assaults to justify their "arrests" of protesters and citizens, Trump and his people have made up fiction to justify their own criminal acts.
No one has suggested that Trump should bomb the tanker. We have suggested that he might have seized the fishing boats, as he did the tanker, a much larger ship.
The idea that any military considerations were applied to this situation is a farce. As noted, neither Hegseth nor Trump can think in military or strategic terms, they fired any advisors that might have disagreed with them and are thus surrounded by Yes-men who will do whatever they say, and there was no policy or goal achieved by attacking those boats and killing innocent people.
Flooding the zone with AI crap is not helping your case because you still refuse to address the question itself.
It won't make a difference because that is not how most drugs enter the country, and going to war with drug producers/distributors (or in this case, an oil rich country that has little to do with drugs) has proven to be a failure over many decades. If Republicans actually cared about drug use, they would target the root cause of drug use, things like poverty, healthcare, mental health, and precariousness - things Republicans pointedly ignore.
DeleteAnyway, AI says that seizing the tanker does legitimately raise the question of why Trump had to bomb those 80+ civilians/fishermen, since logistically it is easy to intercept small boats, as law enforcement routinely has been doing for years.
More AI that directly contradicts our sad little troll:
DeleteOperational Ease of Interception
Effectiveness of Interception:
Proven Strategies: Law enforcement agencies have long employed interception methods for small boats engaged in illegal activities, demonstrating that established protocols exist for effectively stopping and inspecting these vessels. In fact, intercepting small boats is a routine procedure, further emphasizing the operational capability.
Resource Efficiency: Intercepting small boats generally requires fewer resources and less time than bombing operations. This makes interception a more economical and pragmatic choice, especially when considering the use of military assets.
Comparative Challenges:
Tanker Operations: As previously mentioned, intercepting a large tanker is a complex undertaking involving significant planning and coordination. In contrast, the same logistical burdens do not apply to small boats. Thus, claiming that these small vessels pose a more significant challenge than tankers contradicts common operational experiences.
Economic Considerations
Cost of Bombing vs. Interception:
Resource Allocation: Bombing small boats entails not only the direct costs of munitions but also potential collateral damage, legal liabilities, and the diplomatic fallout of such an aggressive action. Interception, on the other hand, primarily involves operational time and manpower.
Avoiding Wasteful Spending: The economic rationale for focusing on interception over bombing is clear; bombing small boats not only demonstrates ineffective use of military resources but also risks incurring future costs related to humanitarian or legal consequences.
Long-term Impacts:
Utilizing bombings wastes financial resources that could otherwise be strategically invested in improved interception technologies or intelligence-gathering operations to enhance future maritime security.
Ethical and Legal Considerations
Civilian Safety:
Bombing small boats significantly escalates the risk of civilian casualties, and given that many small vessels are operated by fishermen or others without malicious intent, this raises profound ethical concerns. Interception methods provide opportunities to assess intent and ensure compliance without violent escalation.
Legal Framework:
Intercepting vessels usually aligns more closely with international laws regarding maritime operations, as nations are expected to exhaust non-lethal methods before resorting to force. The use of bombings could be perceived as excessive and unlawful under various international agreements.
Strategic Implications
Lack of Justification for Bombing:
Given the routine success of law enforcement agencies in intercepting small boats, resorting to bombing runs appears unjustifiable, particularly when juxtaposed with the decision to intercept a more complex target like a tanker.
This inconsistency can weaken trust in military strategies and undermine the justification for using force in situations where less aggressive tactics would suffice.
Policy Reevaluation:
The ongoing conversation about the feasibility and ethicality of bombing small boats necessitates a reevaluation of military policies concerning maritime law enforcement, encouraging the adoption of standardized interception practices across the board.
Conclusion
Intercepting small boats is not only operationally easier but also more cost-effective and ethically sound than resorting to bombings. The juxtaposition of this strategy against the successful interception of a large tanker calls into question the rationale for military bombings, highlighting a need for more consistent and strategic approaches to maritime threats.
Cecelia, you got most of the timestamps right, so I congratulate you. But you did mess up when you called 2:07 “2:08”. So keep improving!
DeleteAnonymouse 3:32 pm, I got better reading glasses all for you.
Delete2:16 l: a majority of Americans feel like the Democratic party is out of touch with their lives.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:15pm, it’s fine and dandy to “flood the zone with AI crap”. Post it. It’s far more on point than anonymices and we can and are able to separate the dross from the sauce.
DeleteAI ain’t natural.
DeleteThe key to not getting sued by Trump, is to accuse him of child rape.
Delete4:35 laying some proof that Trump is not cognitively impaired, and knows exactly what he is doing when he ignores inflation and instead flexes his bigotry muscles.
DeleteTrump's sociopathic behavior has not changed qualitatively. We can start at any point: his lies about Obama's birth certificate; him leading the crowds and chanting, "lock her up"; his many other lies. Quantitatively, however, given his quickly advancing dementia, his behavior has become more outrageous and bizarre. There's no hiding that he's "unwell". But his pathology has been so ubiquitous and overwhelming that we've become inured to it. We cannot easily see how amped up his disfunction has become.
ReplyDeleteThe right wing may be "inured" to it, but not the left. We are increasingly in panic mode over Trump's obvious deterioration and the damage he continues to do to our nation. We see the obvious here, so when you say "we" you are not referring to Democrats, especially not those of us involved in active resistance and protest against Trump.
DeleteAgree with 1:44 and further, Republicans are not inured to it either, they embrace it because it feeds their undying urge for dominance.
DeleteIIya, how did it go with the many efforts to lock Trump up?
DeleteCecelia, the failure of the left (under Biden) to prosecute Trump vigorously enough does not imply any innocence on Trump's part. We all saw those stacks of classified docs at Mar a Lago. We know what he did to try to overturn the 2020 election results. And we can all see his current corruption and illegal behavior as president. Merrick Garland was an unfortunate choice, but Democrats erred on the side of proceeding carefully and with respect for Trump's rights, even if he has not returned that behavior in his own aborted prosecutions of his enemies. Trump is a criminal with 34 felony counts, other uncharged crimes, and a trail of lost civil lawsuits.
DeleteProsecuting Trump has worked well for Dems, it did not prevent him from becoming president, although it certainly did not help him, but it has kneecapped him, as he is now the least popular president in modern history, a lame duck already in his first year.
DeleteRepublicans have a long and often successful history of weaponizing lawfare to attack their political enemies; it is an effective tool.
Trump' case was a bit different than when Republicans attack, in that Trump is truly corrupt and criminal. Notably Trump has been using lawfare plenty this year, but his attempts are generally failing; Trump thought ginning up false charges would work, but they have not.
Almost certainly, those in the Trump admin that are doing his bidding, will face legal consequences in the aftermath of this wayward admin. We are already seeing people flee the admin, others being removed by court cases, or disbarred from practicing their profession.
Anonymouse 2:34pm, there is no doubt that Trump will be the political focus for decades to come, dead or alive. Until the next generation says enough and they will.
DeleteThere is no basis for your claim.
DeleteIt is highly unlikely Trump will be a focus after he passes; you are completely out of touch with the American people.
As you would expect a foreign troll to be.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:00pm, you’re so disingenuous. We both know that long after Trump is dead every Democratic operative will be likening every Republican presidential or congressional candidate to Trump. You will wear it out.
Delete2:40,
DeleteAgreed.
Republicans will be nominating Trump's fat, bloated carcass for President decades after Trump takes his last breath.
They just can't quit his bigotry, for some reason the mainstream media refuses to discuss.
Trump's alliance with Putin makes the USA an accomplice to other nefarious deeds. Most serious is the threat of a terrorist attack against the USA, funded by Russia. Why is our government part of this evil?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/12/9/2357708/-BOMBSHELL-Russia-Was-Planning-a-Massive-Terrorist-Attack-on-Europe-and-the-U-S-in-2024
Thom Hartmann also has an article today about Trump's sellout to Russia:
https://hartmannreport.com/p/is-trumps-embrace-of-russia-the-greatest-cbb
Is Trump's Embrace of Russia the greatest betrayal in American History? Hartmann asks. It is time we all started asking that question. The recently released National Security Strategy 2025 lays it all out plainly. This must be unacceptable to all who believe that America should not be furthering evil in the world,, especially if it is aimed toward America too, as appears evident from the Financial Times and BBC stories quoted.
Trump needs to be removed via Article 25, so that the USA can return to its senses and stop this sellout to Putin and the forces of international evil.
Republicans are people that only care about themselves, they actually despise most of America and what America stands for.
DeleteAnonymouse 1:51pm, bro, you can’t tolerate a fellow Democratic blogger who doesn’t eternally sing your tune, let alone someone in an opposing party.
DeleteThere is a difference between tolerating a person and tolerating lies told by someone. Somerby's right to maintain his blog has been upheld by most here as a form of free speech. But his lies and his motives have been questioned, as they should be. You defend truth by attacking lies.
DeleteMost of the Democrats here do not consider Somerby to be a "Democratic blogger" in the sense of stating, defending, reflecting or discussing anything Democratic (referring to political parties). He doesn't even support small-d democracy, instead calling it dead and the American people incapable of exercising our rights. We in Blue America do not consider Somerby's effluvial waste Democratic and most of us don't think he is one of us.
Note Cecelia's weasel-word "eternally". Somerby almost never sings a left-wing tune. He occasional veers into Nazi bro territory and reliably repeats Gutfeld's "jokes" and advances right wing talking points, ending with yet another attack the left, mistaken referring to "us Blues" as if he were a lefty, when he quite obviously is not. That is his deception, his BIG LIE. His blog these days is full of shout-outs to admirers of Sacred Homer, readers of My Antonia, the wink-wink nod-nod of Nazi occultism in Eyes Wide Shut, odd remarks about Anne Frank's beauty, and a whole heap of misogyny and defense of traditiona white womanhood. All Nazi shit.
That is so far from singing a Democratic [Party] tune that it reeks of right wing trolling. When the right began to pay operatives to engage in that stuff, Somerby was apparently first in line.
Bob is not a "fellow Democratic", and Dems routinely tolerate those that oppose them, and tolerate them much more than Republicans do.
DeleteRepublicans do not stop at criticism (notably their criticisms are typically incoherent - look in the mirror), they actively want to eliminate their perceived enemies.
Mere criticism does not mean intolerance. Duh. Get a grip, dude.
Anonymouse 3:05pm, in other words, Bob acts like a regular American citizen. A liberal guy, rather than militant ideologue who is attached to an activist political organization.
DeleteBob acts like a run of the mill right winger.
DeleteBig whoop.
Donald Trump — worse than Benedict Arnold?
DeleteSomerby is not any kind of liberal guy. And most of us here are not "militant" ideologues attached to any activist political organization (unless you count the Democratic Party, which is a mainstream organization for getting political candidates elected). Is it now militant to vote?
DeleteCecelia, you are devolving into name-calling. Go have a beer or watch TV. You are making a fool of yourself here.
I don't think we have ever had as big a traitor as Trump. Although the Nazi Americans who were working to help Hitler during WWII come close.
DeletePrescott Bush and Fred Trump come to mind. Interesting how both their descendants became president.
DeleteThat's why I immigrated to Somalia. I am free and happy now, and economy here is great. No traitors here. No evil White Christian women.
DeleteCome to me, Corby, come to me!
"When the right began to pay operatives to engage in that stuff, Somerby was apparently first in line."
DeleteThat's a fairly stupid thing to say.
Anonymouse 3:25pm, what name did I call you?
DeleteAnonymouse 3:59pm, read upwards…, Somerby was compared to a “Nazi bro”, likely by the same anonymouse who accused me of calling people names,
Deletemilitant ideologue is a name
DeleteCecelia, you called me anonymouse, and it hurt.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:31pm, it’s the result of your decision to be anonymous, I know that’s an alien concept to you and that you’ve never put these sorts of factors together.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:31pm, you are a militant ideologue who called Bob a Nazi. . However, you are not a Nazi. See the difference there.
DeleteMy name is Militant Ideologue. I am an anonymouse, but I am not a Nazi.
DeleteBob Somerby is too infirm and addled to be the very first person in line to accept Russian funding to rat-fuck the USA.
DeleteHartmann asks: "Where is our media? Where is the GOP? Democratic politicians are speaking out, as are some commentators, but elected Republicans and the majority of the corporate media are “business as usual.”
ReplyDeleteThis is a five-alarm fire for democracy, both here and around the world."
Yes, this is the same question that Somerby keeps asking. Where IS the media? But Somerby is focused on Gutfeld and Morning Joe and he seems oblivious to the threats posed by Trump's actions. He has never called for anything to be done about any real activities by Trump and the right, not ICE abuses, not Trump's obvious alliance with Putin and his abandonment of Ukraine (and our nation's priorities), not his increasing implementation of an authoritarian police state based on invasive technology, not even Trump's huge theft and corruption. Somerby never mentions Epstein's files, in which Trump is mentioned on every page. It appears that Somerby cares about nothing but embarrassing members of the press who he targets for personal gratification, including his obsession with Gutfeld (previously Maddow).
Read the writers that matter. Start with Thom Hartmann's important call to action. Stop wasting time arguing with trolls like Cecelia and David in Cal and Dogface George, all part of the funded social media invasion meant to subvert our democracy. Somerby is at best, a sad old man. At worst, he is another traitor paid by forces of evil to destroy our country. Either way, don't become his accomplice. We have better things to do.
End of "Disparate impact." It's about time!
ReplyDeleteThe Department of Justice struck a mighty blow for the primal constitutional principle of equality under the law when it implemented an executive order by Donald Trump, signed last April, that ordered the attorney general to rescind regulations that encouraged racial preferences.
Even the Washington Post (!) agreed with the action by Attorney General Pam Bondi to end the routine practice of using "disparate impact" metrics to "prove" discrimination...
“For decades, the Justice Department has used disparate-impact liability to undermine the constitutional principle that all Americans must be treated equally under the law,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “No longer. This Department of Justice is eliminating its regulations that for far too long required recipients of federal funding to make decisions based on race.”
https://pjmedia.com/rick-moran/2025/12/11/doj-ends-disparate-impact-liability-in-a-huge-win-for-equality-under-the-law-n4946936
David today cheers another victory for bigotry against equal opportunity. DOJ may have changed how disparity is measured but there is no indication in this quote that courts have yet decided whether Trump's executive order is legal. So many of them are being overturned by lawsuits. There is a lot of legal precedent for using disparate impact to demonstrate discrimination. It doesn't get set aside just because Trump used his autopen to sign an executive order that he didn't read or understand. But I'm sure Stephen Miller is celebrating a win.
DeleteTrump's tariffs appear to be working.
ReplyDelete"The United States trade deficit shrank dramatically in September, falling 10.9 percent to $52.8 billion as President Trump’s sweeping tariff policies began to reshape trade flows in line with the administration’s goals, according to data released Thursday by the Commerce Department.The deficit reduction reflected gains on both sides of the ledger. U.S. exports jumped 3.0 percent to $289.3 billion, the highest level in months, while imports rose just 0.6 percent to $342.1 billion. "
https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2025/12/11/trumps-trade-policies-drive-sharp-narrowing-of-u-s-trade-deficit/
The Fed yesterday stated that Trump's tariffs have definitely increased inflation contributing to the higher prices consumers are paying everywhere in the US.
DeleteYeah, anonymices love them some free-market capitalism.
DeleteWha? We aren't the ones buying shoddy Trump merch. But the economy is going down the tubes because of Trump's tariffs, which David in Cal tries to pretend are "working" but we anonymi are at fault? Nice try (NOT)!
Delete
DeleteThat's why I immigrated to Somalia. I am free and happy now, and economy here is great.
Come to me, to my beautiful Somalian house, Corby. I love you, Corby! Are you coming, Corby?
J6ers, all Republicans, literally took a dump on our country. Trump pardoned them along with other criminals, like one of the worst drug traffickers.
DeleteRepublicans are hell bent on turning our country into a shithole, because it makes it easier to loot.
Anonymices don’t like tariffs and they don’t free markets.
DeleteThe US trade deficit is a somewhat meaningless statistic compared to inflation, unemployment, GDP.
DeleteAnonomices don't understand Trumptarded economics. Neither do Magats. Because it is stupid. Prove me wrong.
DeleteThis will lead to a drop in homelessness.
ReplyDelete2.5M Illegal Aliens Out of U.S. Since January
More than half a million illegal aliens have been deported and more than two million altogether have left the country since Donald Trump took office.
Actually, deportations are unlikely to free up much housing. Immigrants tend to live together with relatives in overcrowded, inexpensive housing in ethnic neighborhoods. Do you imagine that any citizens looking for homes will want to move into those spaces?
Delete"Immigration plays a significant role in both the demand and supply sides of the U.S. housing market, contributing to economic growth and revitalizing neighborhoods across the country. However, the relationship between immigration and housing costs is often oversimplified and has become increasingly politicized. While immigrants do contribute to rising housing demand, they are not the primary drivers of increasing housing costs. Instead, factors such as housing shortages, restrictive zoning laws, and shifts in housing preferences in the wake of the pandemic are the more dominant forces behind rising prices. Furthermore, immigrant workers are essential to the housing supply, making up a crucial segment of the construction workforce that can address shortages and improving housing stock."
https://forumtogether.org/article/explainer-immigrants-and-housing/
Immigration or migration? We actually have a legal process of coming into the country legally and becoming a citizen.
DeleteNot any more. We used to have such a process but Trump is deleting it. Most recently, Trump cancelled the swearing in ceremony for a group of immigrants who had completed the entire process except for taking the oath. Now Trump is requiring tourists to supply their social media history so that they can be vetted to make sure they don't say mean things about Trump. The cost of clearance is paid by the tourist ($40). Yet another blow to the American tourist industry and all of the attractions that survive off the travel business in the USA.
DeleteBut, hey, this would be a great time to visit Disneyland, amirite?
Anonymouse 2:54pm, you mean people who don’t actually denounce the country and its liberal traditions while in the process of citizenship, Fanatical Muslims come to mind.
DeleteMost Republicans denounce the principles of our country.
DeleteA person who completes all of the steps toward citizenship up to the very last one, the swearing in ceremony, is not going around spouting radical Muslim denunciations. Get real! This is the most ridiculous thing you've said in the last 5 minutes!
DeleteNote that it wasn't just one person who was denied the swearing in, but all of the people scheduled to participate in that ceremony.
Anonymouse 3:07pm, they’re born here. The best leftists can do is to try to get them fired and cancelled from their banks, internet providers, etc.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:21pm, so you’re equating more rigorous screening of applicants with cancelling all immigration in general?
DeleteWhy would it not be significant if immigration applicants in the last throes of the process of becoming Americans, were then denouncing the current president and anything else? How loud a signal do we need to be sure that this person, who is not yet a citizen, has issues that we don’t need to address or accommodate.
You seem confused. America does not have a king, no one has to show loyalty to our current president, or any president, that is not how our society works. You are so out of touch, it is laughable.
DeleteNow Trump is requiring tourists to supply their social media history so that they can be vetted to make sure they don't say mean things about Trump.
DeleteEvery day King Orange Chickenshit finds a new way to ask the question, "why can't we be more like North Korea?" Because he knows his Dickhead cult will grovel and bow.
Anonymouse 3:45pm, yes, you do. You do have to show that you love and care about the traditions of our country. If you’re in that process and you’re knocking any current president or potential president, Democrat or Republican, we don’t need you. If you can’t keep your mouth shut that long, then you are making it clear that you have issues and you need to move on.
Delete"You do have to show that you love and care about the traditions of our country."
DeleteWouldn't the best way of doing that mean withholding loyalty from this president, who so radically departs from the country's traditions?
DeleteMass deportations will release some housing stock, but also I'm sure it'll dramatically improve some neighborhoods; make them livable.
Depends who you deport. I vote to send Cecelia back.
DeleteCecelia, he is vetting tourists, not immigrants. Do you think you should have to love and cherish the UK in order to simply visit London?
DeleteThis spring our city is getting direct flights to London. Yea!! We have so much fun in countries with universal healthcare. Everyone is happy their. America can't have universal healthcare. The blahs need to be worse off than me. Everyone is a hateful sad-sack in the US of A. It ain't very MAHA. MAHA is healthcare for stupid people. Prove me wrong.
DeleteCC at 3:51 is a fighter for the 1st Ammendment. Haha. What a mean jerk telling us how to act. We say if you care about democracy it is your constitutional duty to tell these grifting clowns to fuck all the way off. Prove me wrong.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:41pm, I wasn’t telling anonymices how they should act. It’s not in our country’s interest to do that. Everyone should see anonymices in their natural asinine and inexplicably self- regarding state. I addressed immigrants applying for citizenship. If they can’t get thru the process of gaining citizenship without doing protests and/or blasting the current president (Republican or Democrat) they are proving themselves to be the sort of fools we unfortunately must tolerate via homegrown anonymices.
DeleteTrump has done nothing to inflation except exacerbate it.
DeleteIt makes Right-wingers who said they supported Trump due to grocery prices look like economic morons, instead of the bigots they are.
Someone is trying really hard to trigger the libs.
ReplyDeleteLibs: keep your eyes on the prize and ignore this fool.
Anonymouse 2:36pm, it’s just a blogboard, not your strategy sessions with Antifa.
DeleteHey, look, a troll got triggered!
Deletewomp womp
How is that drumpphh deep state working? Oh, Abrego Garcia ordered released based on deep state lies. What a clown car. Hahahahaha. Prove me wrong.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:32pm, yes, we’re delighted to have one more wife-beater around who couldn’t get himself thru the process of applying for citizenship because he was too busy chauffeuring other illegals around.
DeleteWife-beating is essential to social stability.
DeleteDemocrats believe in free speech. Trump believes in suppressing critics:
ReplyDelete"The Trump administration has considered revoking visas of two prominent critics of billionaire Elon Musk — a once close ally of President Donald Trump — and his X social platform, according to a new Zeteo report on Thursday.
New documentation viewed by Zeteo indicated that high-level talks were underway among top government officials to decide whether to make the decision.
"Per a draft for an action memo outlining options for Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the administration is weighing a move to revoke the visas of former European Union Commissioner Thierry Breton and Imran Ahmed, CEO and founder of the Center for Countering Digital Hate," according to the outlet."
The immigrant, and a former illegal immigrant to boot, that lives off the most government cheese...is Elon Musk.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:25pm, I’m sure you’d rather have someone like Mahmoud Khalil.
DeleteWhat are you talking about?
DeleteCC's just an asshole, hater of everyone not like him.
DeleteYou’d rather have Mahmoud Khalil as a US citizen than Elon Musk.
DeleteI don’t want either of them.
DeleteMahmoud Khalil is a loser, like everyone else that hasn't stolen from a children's cancer charity.
DeleteI don’t want either of them.
ReplyDeleteAnonymouse 6:38pm, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsRjQDrDnY8
DeleteMAGA is politics for stupid. Prove me wrong.
ReplyDeleteAnonymouse 7:02pm, nature has already done that.
DeleteFact free responses is all the big faker had. Prove me wrong.
DeleteMAGA isn't politics. It's bigotry.
Delete36% bitches!
ReplyDelete