So, turns out russia is trying to bring down the U.S. from the inside? Isn't this what the intelligence community has been saying for years now, and somehow we keep letting it happen.
Republicans are actively and knowingly working toward russia’s goal. The traitor swine.
It's ok now that Russia is run by oligarchs - oligarchs don't really have nationality in the sense of us peons. It was only that crazy, communist USSR they didn't like. Seriously: name me a significant Russian policy that doesn't 100% align with US conservatives.
Almost like the post-Soviet Russian government was heavily influenced by Ronald Reagan's administration. Of course conservatives love Russia now, it's fully realized Reagan's dream.
Gun control
The NRA was nearly shut down because it was funneling so much money from the Russian right to bear arms group that it didn'tknow what to spend it on - so the leadership spent it on luxury stuff.
Part of me thinks, "Yeah, the American Fascist Party rushed Johnson into the Speaker's office so that the press wouldn't be able to assemble all this information in time for anyone to protest."
Another part of me thinks, "So much of this stuff being reported now happened a long time ago. Why didn't we already know?"
The frontrunner for the republican president is well known to have had ties and been compromised long before 2016 (remember the pee-pee- tape?). And plenty of republicans straight up flew to russia for july 4th a few years back.
Nobody cares. Their base will still vote for them and the rest of us are waiting for the end.
That's because Democrats don't know how to do rhetoric. Remember how we don't actually have a federal budget for the next fiscal year? If this were due to democratic infighting, republicans would be on air every day talking about how "they can't even manage their own party, they shouldn't be trusted with managing our government".
A competent democratic party should be talking about how we went over the cliff on the antarctic ice shelf melting because republicans don't believe in climate change, they should be talking about how republicans are prepared to abandon democracy, they should be talking about the incompetence of the republican party.
Nobody with a modicum of intelligence blames the Democrats for the impending shutdown.
It is just that people have largely made their mind up over that and there is the expectation of "a brief shutdown" because of how dysfunctional the government is.
In the likely event this continues? Then we will probably see that become a strong part of messaging. But even that only directly impacts a comparatively small part of the voting populace. Most people will instead blame "park rangers" for shutting down national parks and "lazy TSA" for the inevitable shitshow of airports. And continue to blame the USPS for everything else. Rather than realize there is one big connection between all those.
Well that's the thing, rhetoric isn't for the people that agree with you, it's for the people that don't. Conservatives aren't completely hopeless, but their fear and anger are being weaponized to ignore fascist movements in their party while actively having their class consciousness suppressed. Deprogramming them will require a constant reminder about the failures of their party to actually improve their life through policy.
I suspect, with zero evidence, that the press was more focused on covering the shit show that was the vacancy. To dive deep into all of the candidates was going to be a challenge, especially given that the candidates kept changing day to day.
So once the speaker was elected, the press could then coalesce around the one person.
The overarching shitshow (Shitshow Influenced Corrupt Organization, or SICO) serves to overwhelm the ability of the press to effectively cover everything. The effect of this is that while, yes, the press does cover some very important sub-shitshows, and those shitshows get blunted by public reaction, many more sub-shitshows go unnoticed and plow forward as shittily as intended.
Hell, they even published a book detailing their plans.
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread geopolitical anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States and Canada to fuel instability and separatism against neoliberal globalist Western hegemony, such as, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists" to create severe backlash against the rotten political state of affairs in the current present day system of the United States and Canada. Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics".[9] Aleksandr Dugin later recorded himself endorsing the presidency of Donald Trump in the 2016 election, expressing agreement with him and his proposed set of policies.
DOJ needs to step it up but Garland's a "centrist."
Because the people they report to are the people on the inside.
I'm thinking we start by torpedoing the oligarchs' yacts in international waters.
FUCK THIS GUY AND FUCK THE GOP
Mike Johnson is...
(not mine, but worth sharing and adding to)
"defending religious freedom,[...]and biblicial values."
I am a Christian [agnostic]. Bruv that shit is not how anything work
Christian agnostic? That sounds like an oxymoron, how does that work? (actual question, not being an asshole)
Basically, the belief that there's a lot you can't be sure of, but you choose to believe in the core of Chrisitianity: God and Jesus as extant and important entities, to put it a bit clinically.
Of course.
Wouldn't have it any other way.
Russia Russia Russia.
Every traito’R’ is funded by the same bunch of bad guys.
Maria Butina. Now there’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time.
A long time.
deleted by creator
Catholic here, during my confirmation we had to stay a weekend at a monastery to learn about God. One day a priest is talking about a priest who saw Jesus appear before him telling him that he should kiss the feet he walked on and pray to him as he was the son of God, when the priest heard this, he responded with "Jesus never asked to be glorified as a God, and instead wanted to be our servant, you are not him", he threw holy water at Jesus who immediately caught on fire and revealed himself as Satan just before disappearing. The lesson is that is someone tells you that to follow the footsteps of God, you must cause pain to others and do evil deeds, then that person does not represent God but instead represents the Devil and you should cast him aside.
Exactly, we should cast the bible aside.
Very based, but according to this the GOP represents the devil, and Christians sure aren't throwing them aside.
The atheists are unironically better Christians than the Christians are.
And the members of the satanic temple
This is what happens when you let money into politics, eventually whole countries can purchase politicians/political parties to do their bidding.
Then it doesn't even matter if the president is born overseas, if he can be bought with overseas funds.
Every headline about him just gets worse and worse. Just when you think the last Republican Speaker was bad, they somehow manage to outdo themselves with another, even worse shitbag.
Who's shocked? Anyone? No?
Cool. Moving on then.
Not even a little surprised.
I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you! Well, not that shocked...
The Russian MAGA coalition must have someone in charge that's accountable to Putin.
MAGA by starting to execute traitors again
Slightly off topic, but I've been wondering: Is the "a single member of the House can call a vote to remove the Speaker" rule still in effect, or did things go back to default after McCarthy's removal?
Since I haven't heard anything to the contrary, I assume the single-member requirement is still in place.
That single member requirement is actually the "default", historically. Pelosi had it changed when she became Speaker (with a similarly slim margin) so that you needed a majority from either party to make the motion. McCarthy simply changed it back.
What could we say about the massive unilateral view of our politics and media about Israel?
Here you come with that shy, fishy donation to a nobody politician while our government give blank checks, weapon and approval to that racist entity in the middle east.
What could we say about the impeding calamity that will be climate change in the next decade?
Here you come with a tiny little conflict that only effects millions of people when there are billions of lives under threat.
Talk about your priorities!
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News