This is probably where most administrations would do the fairly evil thing of publicly saying the US is not subject to the jurisdiction while quietly working to kill the investigations and ensure nothing comes of it outside of saying the US did some terrible shit. That way it won't get into any sort of huge fight in the open.
This just seems like a really bad idea if the goal is anything but pissing everybody off.
As always, the biggest problem with Trump's admin is they are too stupid and brainwashed to not say the thing.
No, in this case, the long standing US policy of "yeah warcrimes!" is a bigger issue. The Trump administration being too incompetent to realize that other people don't approve of warcrimes is a much lesser issue.
The US has gotten along just fine ignoring international criminal courts. Pompeo, because he's a right-wing pundit idiot, is trying to burn bridges here because he's too stupid to understand the benefits of saying one thing and doing another.
That seems like a way to get our submissions to whatever international body holds those sanctions lists to be ignored?
The sanctions have always been country-by-country. The thing is that there has always been a gentleman’s agreement among first world nations to basically honor each other’s sanctions. That’s what stunts like these endanger.
Like before if the US put sanctions on, say, Iran, Germany would quietly tell its businesses not to do business with Iran either. Now if the US puts sanctions on Iran, Germany just says fuck it whatever, unless they have a reason to want to do sanctions too. So the US sanctions are either much less effective, or the US sanctions German companies for doing business with Iran which leads to Germany complaining and possibly doing retaliatory sanctions in return leading to a fuckhead cascade.
That seems like a way to get our submissions to whatever international body holds those sanctions lists to be ignored?
The sanctions have always been country-by-country. The thing is that there has always been a gentleman’s agreement among first world nations to basically honor each other’s sanctions. That’s what stunts like these endanger.
Like before if the US put sanctions on, say, Iran, Germany would quietly tell its businesses not to do business with Iran either. Now if the US puts sanctions on Iran, Germany just says fuck it whatever, unless they have a reason to want to do sanctions too. So the US sanctions are either much less effective, or the US sanctions German companies for doing business with Iran which leads to Germany complaining and possibly doing retaliatory sanctions in return leading to a fuckhead cascade.
Fuckhead cascade is our MO though
Like not trying to be pithy
Trump is popular with his voting base for just doing things that have a clear, immediate transactional benefit, i.e. take something with force (or because fuck you), sue into submission, sexual assault, calling names, etc,
The vanguard of his voting base includes people that want good things and are unable to figure out how to get them properly, and worship him for his ability to get them for himself in simple ways they can understand.
“PC”/fringe racism is a good example of this- it’s not a problem because ... I mean it’s not, the issue is people unable to cope with their inability to understand why the shit they say and do is harmful, so they laud him for being able to call Mexicans rapists without consequence.
Trade and ForPol are more clear in terms of actions but his base doesn’t care much beyond their racist or favorable views of other countries.
Further, the actual GOP represents the people that just want this power for themselves because FYGM, and it’s a crab bucket of folks trying to be the last to whisper in Trump’s ear based on whether they individually win or lose due to sanctions on/from Germany
So anyway to pull this back to the hypothetical fuckhead cascade of sanctions, we’re already there- Trump will do shit to gain personal benefit, including just getting cheers from his voting base, and we’re always just a Trump-whisperer away from the next stupid trade deal
Finally to wrap up with Pompeo’s stupidity here- it’s not just a stupidity thing, it’s just a easiest/quickest way to do a thing that makes you feel good and long term strategy is for nerds
The really stupid part of this is that the US was perfectly capable of maintaining a hypocritical stance on the ICC indefinitley; ignoring any actions it takes against them while using it as Casus Belli for whatever stupid shit rolled into the president's head at the time.
Calling for sanctions against an individual on the board though is simply neurotic; most countries will ignore it because even if they did like trump (they don't) the effort to sanction a private citizen who has no signifigant international holdings isn't worth the paperwork to say nothing of the fact that the subject in question has the duty of prosecuting war crimes and the optics of doing so are poor at best.
+18
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
BREAKING: The Trump administration has put Fatou #Bensouda, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (@IntlCrimCourt) and one of her top aids, on the sanctions list historically reserved for war criminals and international terrorists.
That seems like a way to get our submissions to whatever international body holds those sanctions lists to be ignored?
The sanctions have always been country-by-country. The thing is that there has always been a gentleman’s agreement among first world nations to basically honor each other’s sanctions. That’s what stunts like these endanger.
Like before if the US put sanctions on, say, Iran, Germany would quietly tell its businesses not to do business with Iran either. Now if the US puts sanctions on Iran, Germany just says fuck it whatever, unless they have a reason to want to do sanctions too. So the US sanctions are either much less effective, or the US sanctions German companies for doing business with Iran which leads to Germany complaining and possibly doing retaliatory sanctions in return leading to a fuckhead cascade.
Fuckhead cascade is our MO though
Like not trying to be pithy
Trump is popular with his voting base for just doing things that have a clear, immediate transactional benefit, i.e. take something with force (or because fuck you), sue into submission, sexual assault, calling names, etc,
The vanguard of his voting base includes people that want good things and are unable to figure out how to get them properly, and worship him for his ability to get them for himself in simple ways they can understand.
“PC”/fringe racism is a good example of this- it’s not a problem because ... I mean it’s not, the issue is people unable to cope with their inability to understand why the shit they say and do is harmful, so they laud him for being able to call Mexicans rapists without consequence.
Trade and ForPol are more clear in terms of actions but his base doesn’t care much beyond their racist or favorable views of other countries.
Further, the actual GOP represents the people that just want this power for themselves because FYGM, and it’s a crab bucket of folks trying to be the last to whisper in Trump’s ear based on whether they individually win or lose due to sanctions on/from Germany
So anyway to pull this back to the hypothetical fuckhead cascade of sanctions, we’re already there- Trump will do shit to gain personal benefit, including just getting cheers from his voting base, and we’re always just a Trump-whisperer away from the next stupid trade deal
Finally to wrap up with Pompeo’s stupidity here- it’s not just a stupidity thing, it’s just a easiest/quickest way to do a thing that makes you feel good and long term strategy is for nerds
Trump appeals to people who view all interactions as zero-sum. And there's a lot of people who just naturally think like that. If there's a winner, there must be a loser somewhere. This is the bedrock of Trump's entire view on foreign policy (and other things, but especially this). The idea of alliance doesn't really fit into this world view so he can only see it through the lens of subjugation or transaction. They either gotta do what we say or fucking pay us basically. And because they are idiots, they can't even be subtle about it.
God fucking dammit it's going to be so much work reversing all of Trump's stupid bullshit and attempting to convince the rest of the world that we've got it together again. Is anybody even keeping a list?!
And that's assuming we're able to even vote him out in the first place, naturally.
God fucking dammit it's going to be so much work reversing all of Trump's stupid bullshit and attempting to convince the rest of the world that we've got it together again. Is anybody even keeping a list?!
And that's assuming we're able to even vote him out in the first place, naturally.
And convince people that he, or someone like him, won't be re-elected.
That's what a close election is essentially going to tell the rest of the world. If it's not at LEAST a 10pt margin, probably needing closer to 20 (which is all but impossible), why should the rest of the world not just think Biden is a stopgap to more Trump? Why sign up for any deal/treaty/partnership that lasts longer than 2024, if the American public are clearly willing to entertain the idea of someone like Trump (or Trump himself) getting back into power?
That's the biggest concern, IMO. It's one thing for Trump to be an abberation, and for the rest of the world to treat it as such. But if there's a reasonable chance of him, or at least his ideology recurring in the next decade or so, why would you even consider thinking that the US should be a trusted partner again?
I mean, this is the second time.
Bush dragged us all into a war on false pretenses.
This presidency proves that wasn't an aberration.
That's true, and I'm not trying to diminish the criminality and immorality of the Bush Administration, and its direct effects on millions, if not billions of lives.
But a straight comparison to the crass shitstorm clusterfuck that is this one, isn't really fair either.
This is a massive escalation in rampant stupidity and the destruction of norms, that even someone who thought the worst of Trump, had no idea that it would get this bad. I absolutely figured he'd be corrupt, and passively cruel, but four years ago, I couldn't have imagined this.
Yeah, this stunt seems like it'll backfire on the GOP spectacularly. I'm pretty sure a number of people prosecuted by the ICC tried arguing that the ICC had no jurisdiction over them. Seems like the US has mostly gotten away with ignoring the ICC because it had the combo of being powerful enough that people weren't exactly keen to try and playing theater enough that it didn't appear needlessly antagonistic. Problem is the Trump admin doesn't get how to do that and their play is always to be the loudest dick in the room because they think any other play makes them look weak.
Gotta wonder if this might set the stage where some really shitty US business folk can't leave the US because they were profiting off stuff involved with actual war crimes and knew it was happening or pushed for it.
God fucking dammit it's going to be so much work reversing all of Trump's stupid bullshit and attempting to convince the rest of the world that we've got it together again. Is anybody even keeping a list?!
And that's assuming we're able to even vote him out in the first place, naturally.
It's part of the long term problem with trump: he's shown that It's possible for someone as insane as him to not only get into office but for all of the myriad checks and balances that are supposed to curb the worst impulses of a man like him did jack shit due to the sheer cynical power grabbing that his party was able to do by backing him up and as a result he's jeopardized the single best export america has had for it's allies: Stability.
Stability was a thing a lot of countries were perfectly willing to take in return for backing america on so many of it's projects; sure it meant an uneven trade deal here, a sanction there, housing a military base or whatever but overall it was good for everyone.
But post trump, everyone is realizing that the supply of stability can be lost, and going forward a lot of regions are going to be looking for alternative sources and once they have it they may find that they prefer it to the american brand; France and Germany working together could easily form the bedrock of a new EU that isn't reliant on the US for military support or trade and other countries in europe would likely flock to them for protection. India could easily be an emergent power in south east asia for any countries that don't want to be sattelites for china.
And once blocks like that form, the US will have a much harder time getting them back into their sphere of influence due to the fact that it elected a man like trump, and there is nothing to prevent them from doing so again.
Yeah, this stunt seems like it'll backfire on the GOP spectacularly. I'm pretty sure a number of people prosecuted by the ICC tried arguing that the ICC had no jurisdiction over them. Seems like the US has mostly gotten away with ignoring the ICC because it had the combo of being powerful enough that people weren't exactly keen to try and playing theater enough that it didn't appear needlessly antagonistic. Problem is the Trump admin doesn't get how to do that and their play is always to be the loudest dick in the room because they think any other play makes them look weak.
Gotta wonder if this might set the stage where some really shitty US business folk can't leave the US because they were profiting off stuff involved with actual war crimes and knew it was happening or pushed for it.
GOP voters likely range from "I'll still hold my nose and vote for lower taxes," to "yeah tell her who's the boss here," with almost all of them not caring at all.
If someone was already planning on voting Republican, this is not going to sway them.
Doc on
+8
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
He hasn't started a nuclear war. Yet.
Or an actual ground war.
In those regards, at least, he's still ahead of my worst-case.
Before COVID the Iraq War made Bush hands down the worse president but now we're on pace to rival if not exceed Iraq's body count (about 288,000) in less than 1/17th of the time just in the US.
He hasn't started a nuclear war. Yet.
Or an actual ground war.
In those regards, at least, he's still ahead of my worst-case.
Before COVID the Iraq War made Bush hands down the worse president but now we're on pace to rival if not exceed Iraq's body count (about 288,000) in less than 1/17th of the time just in the US.
As bas as Bush was... there were still worse presidents.
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
+38
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
+4
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Hayes basically compromised Jim Crow for the presidency
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
We are potentially weeks away though, I don't think you can overestimate how close to a precipice we are...assuming we're not already falling off the cliff, which we might be.
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
What would be that moment? Like, you have nation wide protests exacerbated by the president's stance and actions, a rapidly collapsing set of checks and balances, naked graft, the worst health crisis in the past century, somewhere around 30 million people potentially becoming homeless, betrayed allies and enemies that are expanding their influence...
What is the crossed rubicon?
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
Trump has killed more Americans than basically any other single thing ever. He has ruined the economy, destroyed the confidence in federal agencies with decades of clout, is attempting to dismantle one of the few agencies mandated by the Constitution, has put people into concentration camps, and has destroyed any international diplomacy that we might attempt for a generation, all while blatantly engaging in cronism and lining his own pockets at the expense of literally everyone.
This isn't counting shit like his casual genocide of the Kurds by withdrawing our troops suddenly. He's done a lot, it's just hard to remember it all, and so, so much of it is heinous.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
What would be that moment? Like, you have nation wide protests exacerbated by the president's stance and actions, a rapidly collapsing set of checks and balances, naked graft, the worst health crisis in the past century, somewhere around 30 million people potentially becoming homeless, betrayed allies and enemies that are expanding their influence...
What is the crossed rubicon?
Technically the electoral process has not failed yet. I would consider that the line in the sand.
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
What would be that moment? Like, you have nation wide protests exacerbated by the president's stance and actions, a rapidly collapsing set of checks and balances, naked graft, the worst health crisis in the past century, somewhere around 30 million people potentially becoming homeless, betrayed allies and enemies that are expanding their influence...
What is the crossed rubicon?
State Air National Guardsmen bombing a US Joint Base.
Because I haven't had enough blinding rage, I read it.
And while most of it is unattributed (the best we get is Kelly refusing to comment, and an unnamed four-star close to Kelly), nothing claimed was said is unsurprising, or even out of character with remarks that have been made by the President himself.
The closing para ends with "In a 2018 White House planning meeting for such an event, Trump asked his staff not to include wounded veterans, on grounds that spectators would feel uncomfortable in the presence of amputees. “Nobody wants to see that,” he said."
One thing I did learn that I wasn't familiar with, was the history of Bush the Elder (who Trump has apparently called a loser for being shot down, in the article) during WWII. I knew he had served, but no details beyond that.
Given what Trump said about McCain, it shouldn't be a surprise.
Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day. In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed.
The idea that a person cannot die without being to blame for it or doing so in service to something besides themselves is completely foreign to Trump.
Edit:
Trump remained fixated on McCain, one of the few prominent Republicans to continue criticizing him after he won the nomination. When McCain died, in August 2018, Trump told his senior staff, according to three sources with direct knowledge of this event, “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral,” and he became furious, according to witnesses, when he saw flags lowered to half-staff. “What the fuck are we doing that for? Guy was a fucking loser,” the president told aides. Trump was not invited to McCain’s funeral. (These sources, and others quoted in this article, spoke on condition of anonymity. White House spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany did not respond to email and telephone requests for comment.)
Trump is unable to even understand why he should pretend to care and respect McCain. That is how narcissistic he is.
Deputy Assistant to Trump, and Deputy Press Sec. Tweet is available, but fuck giving him clicks/views.
"Not a soul brave enough to put their name on any of these accusations. That's because they are false. Just another anonymously sourced story meant to tear down a Commander-in-Chief who loves our military and has delivered on the promises he's made. What a disgrace!"
"A senior Defense Department official I just spoke with confirmed this story by @JeffreyGoldberg in its entirety. Especially the grafs about the late Sen. John McCain and former Marine Gen. John Kelly, President @realDonaldTrump former chief of staff."
- Jim LaPorta is an AP Investigative reporter.
So, we've got two journalists confirming sources, and a Trump flunky going to bat for Trump despite Trump saying a good portion of this shit on the record.
As Jon Favreau said about this, "The sources are fake until they come forward. Then they’ll be liars who just hate Trump. Then Trump will just say everything in the piece during an interview and all the pathetic goons who’ve devoted their lives to this asshole will just move on to the next lie."
He forgot to include "They want to know who it is, not so they can refute it, but so that they can punish them.". After Vindman, even if I think they SHOULD go on the record, I can absolutely understand them not wanting to.
I'd be hard pressed to think of a president that was more actively harmful to the nation he lead then trump.
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
I'd put Trump as worse than Buchanan at this point, as insane as that sounds.
Buchanan didn't stop a societal breakdown that had been becoming increasingly inevitable for years. Trump created most of our current problems from scratch.
Just more proof John Kelly was as complicit as the rest. Man insulted his dead son and he sat there and took it.
“Hey remember that guy that mocked your deceased son on memorial day while standing with you in front of his grave? You want to be his chief of staff?”
Posts
The US has gotten along just fine ignoring international criminal courts. Pompeo, because he's a right-wing pundit idiot, is trying to burn bridges here because he's too stupid to understand the benefits of saying one thing and doing another.
The sanctions have always been country-by-country. The thing is that there has always been a gentleman’s agreement among first world nations to basically honor each other’s sanctions. That’s what stunts like these endanger.
Like before if the US put sanctions on, say, Iran, Germany would quietly tell its businesses not to do business with Iran either. Now if the US puts sanctions on Iran, Germany just says fuck it whatever, unless they have a reason to want to do sanctions too. So the US sanctions are either much less effective, or the US sanctions German companies for doing business with Iran which leads to Germany complaining and possibly doing retaliatory sanctions in return leading to a fuckhead cascade.
Fuckhead cascade is our MO though
Like not trying to be pithy
Trump is popular with his voting base for just doing things that have a clear, immediate transactional benefit, i.e. take something with force (or because fuck you), sue into submission, sexual assault, calling names, etc,
The vanguard of his voting base includes people that want good things and are unable to figure out how to get them properly, and worship him for his ability to get them for himself in simple ways they can understand.
“PC”/fringe racism is a good example of this- it’s not a problem because ... I mean it’s not, the issue is people unable to cope with their inability to understand why the shit they say and do is harmful, so they laud him for being able to call Mexicans rapists without consequence.
Trade and ForPol are more clear in terms of actions but his base doesn’t care much beyond their racist or favorable views of other countries.
Further, the actual GOP represents the people that just want this power for themselves because FYGM, and it’s a crab bucket of folks trying to be the last to whisper in Trump’s ear based on whether they individually win or lose due to sanctions on/from Germany
So anyway to pull this back to the hypothetical fuckhead cascade of sanctions, we’re already there- Trump will do shit to gain personal benefit, including just getting cheers from his voting base, and we’re always just a Trump-whisperer away from the next stupid trade deal
Finally to wrap up with Pompeo’s stupidity here- it’s not just a stupidity thing, it’s just a easiest/quickest way to do a thing that makes you feel good and long term strategy is for nerds
Calling for sanctions against an individual on the board though is simply neurotic; most countries will ignore it because even if they did like trump (they don't) the effort to sanction a private citizen who has no signifigant international holdings isn't worth the paperwork to say nothing of the fact that the subject in question has the duty of prosecuting war crimes and the optics of doing so are poor at best.
Considering we have convicted our own service members for war crimes, it seems like "whether" wouldn't take long, but "how many" would.
Trump appeals to people who view all interactions as zero-sum. And there's a lot of people who just naturally think like that. If there's a winner, there must be a loser somewhere. This is the bedrock of Trump's entire view on foreign policy (and other things, but especially this). The idea of alliance doesn't really fit into this world view so he can only see it through the lens of subjugation or transaction. They either gotta do what we say or fucking pay us basically. And because they are idiots, they can't even be subtle about it.
And that's assuming we're able to even vote him out in the first place, naturally.
The rest of the world kind of did a “uh... what?“ when Republicans threatened to make America default.
Every country is going to have leverage over a Democratic President by just asking “Okay but what if Republicans?”
And convince people that he, or someone like him, won't be re-elected.
That's what a close election is essentially going to tell the rest of the world. If it's not at LEAST a 10pt margin, probably needing closer to 20 (which is all but impossible), why should the rest of the world not just think Biden is a stopgap to more Trump? Why sign up for any deal/treaty/partnership that lasts longer than 2024, if the American public are clearly willing to entertain the idea of someone like Trump (or Trump himself) getting back into power?
That's the biggest concern, IMO. It's one thing for Trump to be an abberation, and for the rest of the world to treat it as such. But if there's a reasonable chance of him, or at least his ideology recurring in the next decade or so, why would you even consider thinking that the US should be a trusted partner again?
Bush dragged us all into a war on false pretenses.
This presidency proves that wasn't an aberration.
Ironic given that maintaining empire has been their whole platform since WWII
That's true, and I'm not trying to diminish the criminality and immorality of the Bush Administration, and its direct effects on millions, if not billions of lives.
But a straight comparison to the crass shitstorm clusterfuck that is this one, isn't really fair either.
This is a massive escalation in rampant stupidity and the destruction of norms, that even someone who thought the worst of Trump, had no idea that it would get this bad. I absolutely figured he'd be corrupt, and passively cruel, but four years ago, I couldn't have imagined this.
Or an actual ground war.
In those regards, at least, he's still ahead of my worst-case.
Gotta wonder if this might set the stage where some really shitty US business folk can't leave the US because they were profiting off stuff involved with actual war crimes and knew it was happening or pushed for it.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
It's part of the long term problem with trump: he's shown that It's possible for someone as insane as him to not only get into office but for all of the myriad checks and balances that are supposed to curb the worst impulses of a man like him did jack shit due to the sheer cynical power grabbing that his party was able to do by backing him up and as a result he's jeopardized the single best export america has had for it's allies: Stability.
Stability was a thing a lot of countries were perfectly willing to take in return for backing america on so many of it's projects; sure it meant an uneven trade deal here, a sanction there, housing a military base or whatever but overall it was good for everyone.
But post trump, everyone is realizing that the supply of stability can be lost, and going forward a lot of regions are going to be looking for alternative sources and once they have it they may find that they prefer it to the american brand; France and Germany working together could easily form the bedrock of a new EU that isn't reliant on the US for military support or trade and other countries in europe would likely flock to them for protection. India could easily be an emergent power in south east asia for any countries that don't want to be sattelites for china.
And once blocks like that form, the US will have a much harder time getting them back into their sphere of influence due to the fact that it elected a man like trump, and there is nothing to prevent them from doing so again.
GOP voters likely range from "I'll still hold my nose and vote for lower taxes," to "yeah tell her who's the boss here," with almost all of them not caring at all.
If someone was already planning on voting Republican, this is not going to sway them.
Before COVID the Iraq War made Bush hands down the worse president but now we're on pace to rival if not exceed Iraq's body count (about 288,000) in less than 1/17th of the time just in the US.
As bas as Bush was... there were still worse presidents.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
James Buchanan just sat back and watched the lead-up to the civil war happen.
We're not there. Yet.
Whereas Trump is cheering it on.
I'd put Trump as worse than Buchanan at this point, as insane as that sounds.
It's so hard to compare what's happening now to historical equivalents. I don't want to minimize the pain and personal impact that this has had to some number of people (and their families), but we haven't crossed the Rubicon yet.
We are potentially weeks away though, I don't think you can overestimate how close to a precipice we are...assuming we're not already falling off the cliff, which we might be.
What would be that moment? Like, you have nation wide protests exacerbated by the president's stance and actions, a rapidly collapsing set of checks and balances, naked graft, the worst health crisis in the past century, somewhere around 30 million people potentially becoming homeless, betrayed allies and enemies that are expanding their influence...
What is the crossed rubicon?
Trump has killed more Americans than basically any other single thing ever. He has ruined the economy, destroyed the confidence in federal agencies with decades of clout, is attempting to dismantle one of the few agencies mandated by the Constitution, has put people into concentration camps, and has destroyed any international diplomacy that we might attempt for a generation, all while blatantly engaging in cronism and lining his own pockets at the expense of literally everyone.
This isn't counting shit like his casual genocide of the Kurds by withdrawing our troops suddenly. He's done a lot, it's just hard to remember it all, and so, so much of it is heinous.
Technically the electoral process has not failed yet. I would consider that the line in the sand.
State Air National Guardsmen bombing a US Joint Base.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/
"Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’"
Because I haven't had enough blinding rage, I read it.
And while most of it is unattributed (the best we get is Kelly refusing to comment, and an unnamed four-star close to Kelly), nothing claimed was said is unsurprising, or even out of character with remarks that have been made by the President himself.
The closing para ends with "In a 2018 White House planning meeting for such an event, Trump asked his staff not to include wounded veterans, on grounds that spectators would feel uncomfortable in the presence of amputees. “Nobody wants to see that,” he said."
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFuck yoooooooooou. Disgusting orange shitgolem.
One thing I did learn that I wasn't familiar with, was the history of Bush the Elder (who Trump has apparently called a loser for being shot down, in the article) during WWII. I knew he had served, but no details beyond that.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2018/12/01/george-hw-bush-pearl-harbor-changed-everything-world-war-ii-made-him-hero/
He may have been a flawed person, and an even more flawed President, but that shouldn't diminish appreciation for his service.
The idea that a person cannot die without being to blame for it or doing so in service to something besides themselves is completely foreign to Trump.
Edit: Trump is unable to even understand why he should pretend to care and respect McCain. That is how narcissistic he is.
"Not a soul brave enough to put their name on any of these accusations. That's because they are false. Just another anonymously sourced story meant to tear down a Commander-in-Chief who loves our military and has delivered on the promises he's made. What a disgrace!"
"A senior Defense Department official I just spoke with confirmed this story by @JeffreyGoldberg in its entirety. Especially the grafs about the late Sen. John McCain and former Marine Gen. John Kelly, President @realDonaldTrump former chief of staff."
- Jim LaPorta is an AP Investigative reporter.
So, we've got two journalists confirming sources, and a Trump flunky going to bat for Trump despite Trump saying a good portion of this shit on the record.
As Jon Favreau said about this, "The sources are fake until they come forward. Then they’ll be liars who just hate Trump. Then Trump will just say everything in the piece during an interview and all the pathetic goons who’ve devoted their lives to this asshole will just move on to the next lie."
He forgot to include "They want to know who it is, not so they can refute it, but so that they can punish them.". After Vindman, even if I think they SHOULD go on the record, I can absolutely understand them not wanting to.
pleasepaypreacher.net
To paraphrase Hunter Thompson, the only people who really know where the edge is are the ones that have already gone over it.
Buchanan didn't stop a societal breakdown that had been becoming increasingly inevitable for years. Trump created most of our current problems from scratch.
Yeah, the racism and xenophobia we are seeing isn't exactly a new vintage.
“Hey remember that guy that mocked your deceased son on memorial day while standing with you in front of his grave? You want to be his chief of staff?”
“Sure.”