356
One of them will likely go down in history, hundreds of years from now, recognized as a notable military commander.
The other will be "that guy who wanted to be 'Rich Hitler'"
The Covid response was far worse than anything Bin Laden ever dreamed of.
I learnt today that in 1940 there was a series of terrorist attacks around New York. It was a group calling themselves the Christian Front, and was led by a catholic priest called Father Coughlin. They blew up the biggest dynamite factory in the US and three other armament factories. They were part financed by the Nazis.
The FBI amassed a ton of evidence and plans of mass murder of jews and serving troops. Dispite this, the jgovernment fucked up the prosecution and all were acquitted.
I learned about this recently from Rachel Maddow’s Ultra podcast. It’s a crazy story and really puts current events into a better perspective. Highly recommended.
Me too. Fascinating!
Pretty upsetting that it isn’t part of US history classes.
I’m sure Texas would ban those school books, so Houghton Mifflin doesn’t even bother.
It really is equal measures sad and frightening the amount of leeway mainstream media gives Trump. If they can't actively call him out, live fact-check him and ask follow-up questions then is it too much to ask for them to at least accurately describine his words and deeds? This normalization of absurdity is doing him a significant favour.
Just look at who owns the media.
Then things got even weirder.
Trump claimed that former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown said bad things about Harris while he and Trump were on a helicopter together. Oh—and the helicopter was in trouble:
We thought maybe this was the end. We were in a helicopter, going to a certain location together, and there was an emergency landing. This was not a pleasant landing. And Willie was—he was a little concerned.
So I know him, but I know him pretty well. I mean, I haven’t seen him in years. But he told me terrible things about her. But this is what you’re telling me, anyway, I guess. But he had a big part in what happened with Kamala. But he—he, I don’t know, maybe he’s changed his tune. But he—he was not a fan of hers very much, at that point.
Brown has not had to change his tune, because none of this ever happened. Trump may have confused *Willie *Brown with former California Governor JerryBrown, with whom Trump once shared an uneventful helicopter ride. (One might think they’re hard to mix up: Willie Brown is Black; Jerry Brown is white.) In any case, trying to untangle the half-cooked pasta of a Trump story isn’t really worth the effort. The issue is that a former president is frighteningly delusional, and if any other candidate had done this—Biden was roasted over stories that were obscure but turned out to be true—it would dominate the news with understandable alarm about the well-being of the candidate.
We’re getting a hair closer to where we need to be wrt speaking plainly and honestly about trump, but we’re still a long way off.
Where are the 80 articles saying he has dementia and that the republicans don’t know what to do about it?
Rupert Murdoch owns the Wall Street Journal
Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post
David Zaslav runs CNN
These guys are all Trump stans.
It’s almost like it’s planned, because you could speculate that he meant Jerry brown. And then you could go ask Jerry brown what he said about Kamala. And he probably won’t say anything because he’ll just say the story wasn’t about him. So again Trump gets away with unchecked lies.
Instead, The *New York Times *ran this headline: “Trump Tries to Wrestle Back Attention at Mar-a-Lago News Conference.” The *Washington Post *said: “Trump Holds Meandering News Conference, Where He Agrees to Debate Harris.” The British paper *The Independent *got closer with: “Trump Holds Seemingly Pointless Press Conference Filled With False Claims,” but CNNwent with “Trump Attacks Harris and Walz During First News Conference Since Democratic Ticket Was Announced.”
All of these headlines are technically true, but they miss the point: The Republican nominee, the man who could return to office and regain the sole authority to use American nuclear weapons, is a serial liar and can’t tell the difference between reality and fantasy.
Donald Trump is not well. He is not stable. There’s something deeply wrong with him.
Any of those would have been important—and accurate—headlines.
Devil's advocate: being serious for years and nothing really stuck. Trivializing him by calling them weird seems to be working. Maybe taking the piss out of them is the better messaging to get the broad electorate to think less of him. 🤷♂️
None of those outlets are doing that either
I find him melting down a real feel good story. Fuck this guy. I look forward to watching him melt down and become America's biggest loser ever, if he hasn't hit that mark yet.
Man say what you want about the Atlantic, sometimes they drop absolute banger pieces like this
It will become funny the moment he loses and goes away and a decade of hindsight finally sets in on all his supporters.
It will also be kind of funny if he continues to hold the GOP hostage for another 4 years.
It's a gift link. No paywall for a couple weeks
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
356 points (98.9% liked)
politics
19135 readers
1180 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS