USA Politics (redux)

[Karl Henning]

Eugene Robinson:

One of two things has to be true. Trump completely lost touch with reality. Or he decided to lie in an attempt to cling to power.

The committee has already made a powerful case for that second scenario.

[Karl Henning]

Eugene Robinson:

One of two things has to be true. Trump completely lost touch with reality. Or he decided to lie in an attempt to cling to power.

The committee has already made a powerful case for that second scenario.

The House select committee might not be able to reach the Trumpists who appear to regard being grifted by their leader as a mark of honor. But sane Americans will see what bad business this is for the country.

[Karl Henning]

And because, shamefully, in America we do need to state the obvious:

Of Course Trump Is Responsible for His Lies

[BasilValentine]

Great, now let's talk about who funded the now-discredited Steele dossier. There is zero evidence that anything the Russians might have done in 2016 changed one vote. Mueller didn't even know what was in his report. Plus, no one was charged with anything other than process crimes. I'm certainly no big Trump fan, but I've had quite enough of MSM/DNC outright lies.No there wasn't. It was a bunch of unarmed yahoos who thought they were being snookered by a rigged election. The summer before that we had entire city blocks being looted and burned.

You claimed that democrats keep asserting that Russian disinformation turned the 2016 election. Could you please name and quote any prominent democrats who did this? I've always said it's impossible to ascertain with certainty whether or not such disinformation had a critical influence, but given the tiny margin of victory, 70,000 votes over several states, such an assertion is far from implausible. Had you read the Mueller Report and done other minimal research, you would be aware that Russian "influencers" had established false identities as US citizens for more than a year in advance on numerous fora to establish trust and familiarity with other users. One should at least understand what the Russians did before making blanket assertions about its influence.

[Karl Henning]

More bad news for the Trump crime family.

Trump Denied Final Appeal, Must Sit For NY AG's Deposition in Trump Org Investigation

[greg]

What exactly would be the motivation for Russians to vote for Trump? (assuming it's the Russian government)
Especially since Putin didn't try to take Ukraine when Trump was president... seems like Putin/Russian government couldn't get their way with Trump in power, so why would they want him in power?
What is the connection I'm missing here? Were bribes or something part of it?

[JBS]

Trump was openly hostile to Nato, and openly admired Putin. Plus there's the Trump business dealings in Russia which connect to various oligarchs and mafiosos in Russia. We still have no idea of how indebted Trump might be to Russia.

It's also relevant that the "perfect phone call" for which Trump was first impeached was an attempt to extort Ukraine.

Had it not been for Trump's utter mishandling of Covid, he probably would have been re-elected. So through 2019 Putin would have been justified to base his calculations on Trump being in office through 2024, and not feel a rush to finish off Ukraine.

[greg]

Trump was openly hostile to Nato, and openly admired Putin.

Sure, but I don't get how that leads to this:

"I know Vladimir Putin very well and he would have never done what he is doing now during the Trump Administration, no way!"

https://www.dailysabah.com/world/americas/no-way-trump-says-russia-didnt-invade-ukraine-on-his-watch

Wouldn't Russia have gotten the idea of the US letting Russia invade Ukraine be naturally a part of the deal?

Had it not been for Trump's utter mishandling of Covid, he probably would have been re-elected.

Maybe so.

[JBS]

Sure, but I don't get how that leads to this:https://www.dailysabah.com/world/americas/no-way-trump-says-russia-didnt-invade-ukraine-on-his-watch

Wouldn't Russia have gotten the idea of the US letting Russia invade Ukraine be naturally a part of the deal?

You seem to forget that Trump says whatever he thinks his target audience would like to hear, and if that resembles the truth, it's pure accident.

[greg]

You seem to forget that Trump says whatever he thinks his target audience would like to hear, and if that resembles the truth, it's pure accident.

Yeah, but that line of thinking is heading towards such cynical distrust that it's just a pure dead end. Just because he tells people what they want to hear (isn't that quite typical of politicians, it's kind of their job?) doesn't mean that's the only explanation. Of course, he'll always proudly announce the positive things and try to either spin the negatives as positives, or ignore/whataboutism the negatives.

Let's say he had some shady dealings with Russia. It could be that, due to a lifetime as a businessman, he knows how to make and keep a deal. And Russia starting a war was breaking a deal. (Remember how he leaned more anti-war than a typical US president). (it could have been "elect me as president and i'll do this and this for you, but don't attack Ukraine or the deal is off," etc.)

That possibility is an actual positive, amidst the negatives. Just a suspicion, but people should consider this, and I don't think they do because I've never heard anyone mention this as a possibility because they are only interested in the negative aspects and behaviors regarding Trump.

[JBS]

Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

If there was such an arrangement, it would undoubtedly be more on the lines of Trump forcing Ukraine to surrender before any shots were fired. He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

But Trump's statement is merely typical Trumpian bluster.

[LKB]

Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

If there was such an arrangement, it would undoubtedly be more on the lines of Trump forcing Ukraine to surrender before any shots were fired. He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

But Trump's statement is merely typical Trumpian bluster.

Trump was unique among recent US Presidents in that he brought no useful attributes to the office whatsoever. Unfortunately, that little factoid probably won't  keep the profoundly disgraced Republican Party from nominating him anyway, since they  are more interested in securing Trump's idiot base than they are in assuring the continuance of American democracy.

[JBS]

Trump was unique among recent US Presidents in that he brought no useful attributes to the office whatsoever. Unfortunately, that little factoid probably won't  keep the profoundly disgraced Republican Party from nominating him anyway, since they  are more interested in securing Trump's idiot base than they are in assuring the continuance of American democracy.

Trump's base has always been their base. That's why they can't get rid of him.

I am, in the rarified intellectual sense, a socially conservative person bending to libertarianism.

I was prone to mingle online in conservative spaces, and often would see various RW posters denounce the apparent allegiance of minorities to the Democratic party. I would challenge them: our immigration system is screwed up, Blacks do suffer from systemic racism; the GOP needs to offer solutions to those problems.

The response was almost always along the lines of "they're trained to ignore conservative ideas". That is, the racist/xenophobic idea that Blacks and immigrants inherently gravitate to progressive ideas, no matter how bad they are.  They would freely admit that thet opposed immigration because they assumed they would vote Democratic

So they feel their political needs require suppressing blacks and minorities.

[vandermolen]

Trump was unique among recent US Presidents in that he brought no useful attributes to the office whatsoever. Unfortunately, that little factoid probably won't  keep the profoundly disgraced Republican Party from nominating him anyway, since they  are more interested in securing Trump's idiot base than they are in assuring the continuance of American democracy.

Although I'm an outsider I very much agree with what you say - all v depressing and not much better here.

[milk]

Although I'm an outsider I very much agree with what you say - all v depressing and not much better here.

His one unique attribute was giving the impression that it was impossible to feel talked down to by him. It's something I guess. 

[Karl Henning]

Another nail in the coffin of the recent whataboutery: Eastman admitted to Pence team that Gore didn't use argument Trump was pushing

[milk]

https://www.pressherald.com/2022/06/15/daponte-string-quartet-rehired-board-members-replaced/

DaPonte String Quartet rehired, and board members replaced

"The DaPonte String Quartet lives...

A little more than a month after the Midcoast-based classical musicians received letters of termination from the head of its nonprofit friends' group, a new board of directors has been established and has rehired the four members...

Frank would not provide additional details about how the resolution was reached but said the former board members who had pushed to terminate the musicians agreed to step down, as did the executive director, Erica Ball. Frank also declined to share any documentation of the agreement."

[greg]

That is, the racist/xenophobic idea that Blacks and immigrants inherently gravitate to progressive ideas, no matter how bad they are.

Wouldn't it be that they have it backwards? And also incorrect in the fact that blacks an immigrants don't inherently gravitate to progressive ideas, but rather they vote democrat because democrats advertise themselves as friendly towards them.

Blacks and immigrants are both more socially conservative on average than whites, and progressive ideas fall largely in the social realm (although in the economic realm it might be a completely different story, that part might be closer to being correct?).

But specifically, it gets tangled right there. It's another aspect of how two parties can't represent the various cultures/subcultures' values completely.

The question conservatives raise is, have democrats in charge of big cities really pulled the black population out of poverty in the last 50+ years? Are they really the best option?

I don't know the answer to that. But it raises the question, just because that party advertises itself as friendly to that demographic, is it really going to be the best option? Or are both options bad, and it's hopeless?

Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

Is that how businessmen become successful? 

He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

I know he is quite narcissistic, but there is really no possibility he just doesn't like war?

And now that I think of it, you could still frame that as possible narcissism STILL- "if a war breaks out under my presidency, i might not get re-elected and will be only a one-term president."

So yeah, he probably would have had something to gain.

[Fëanor]

Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

If there was such an arrangement, it would undoubtedly be more on the lines of Trump forcing Ukraine to surrender before any shots were fired. He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

But Trump's statement is merely typical Trumpian bluster.

I think Trump and Putin have a similar idea about deals:  deals are like pie crusts ...

If anything, Trump antagonism towards NATO encouraged Putin to believe that it was weak, and that Western response to an invasion would be like 2014, i.e.  Tsk, tsk and a few more ineffectual sanctions.  That plus Putin's believe in the reliance of central and western Europe on Russian oil & gas combined with high fuel prices, occasioned Putin's decision to invade.  Further, apparently Putin also mistakenly believed that the Ukraine government was much weaker and more unpopular than it was -- ignoring the popularity and resolve of President Zelenskyy.

[JBS]

Is that how businessmen become successful? 

Trump, when judged by the usual standards (not declaring multiple bankruptcy, etc), was an astonishingly *un*successful businessman. His achievements more properly lie in being a con artist and grifter.

I know he is quite narcissistic, but there is really no possibility he just doesn't like war?

And now that I think of it, you could still frame that as possible narcissism STILL- "if a war breaks out under my presidency, i might not get re-elected and will be only a one-term president."

So yeah, he probably would have had something to gain.

May I point out that Covid19 broke out, and his narcissism wouldn't let him deal with that.