I meant interesting. Also, canadian politicians including trudeau and obviously the left wing government in Alberta are running in circles right now trying to understand what effects trump's policies will have on Canada.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT1| From Russia with Love
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
I meant interesting. Also, canadian politicians including trudeau and obviously the left wing government in Alberta are running in circles right now trying to understand what effects trump's policies will have on Canada.
The New York Observer? The one until recently run by a member of Trumps cabinet?
That's the one. But mind you, this is decidedly Anti-Trump.
Can Republicans just rebrand themselves as the Confederacy already?. They'd all fucking traitors and are hellbent on destroying the union.
It looks like Ivanka is playing a part in trudeau and trump's meeting tommorrow.
https://apnews.com/37dab25b8da74902b3fa4076030febe0
https://apnews.com/37dab25b8da74902b3fa4076030febe0
I think I saw this. I don't know what the status of the editorial since Kushner left. Maybe they're having a mutiny.
Good Job Bob
Member
Paid family leave time?
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Will go over as good as Ivanka's bold, totally fresh and new carbon tax...
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
But they have nothing!
Paul Ryan spent five months on a tax bill that no Republicans in the Senate liked.
They aren't discussing health care bills at all and nothing is going on.
They have nothing to shove through, they have nothing on the agenda, they have nothing.
ugaboga232
Member
Schindler (the observer guy) seems to have been doing this before Kushner even left so he is probably vaguely trustable or at least not as instantly suspicious as the rest of the site. He has his own blog as well and he's a huge nevertrumper
http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-mike-flynn-russian-embassy/
So, here's the article. Particularly, these two quotes.
So, here's the article. Particularly, these two quotes.
LostMyNarbles
Member
At this point I feel like it'd be hard to shift the blame onto Trump. The longer the GOP waits to impeach him the more it looks like they willingly sacrificed the security of the country to play politics.
NullPointer
Member
Looks like Politico thinks Trump may not have the right tool for the job:
Full article: DONALD THE WEAK
Matthew Miller said:
Full article: DONALD THE WEAK
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Good. Keep thinking this, GOP.
It's strange that they run so much anti-Trump stuff since Kushner is the publisher. No idea about their credibility though.
Edit: he left? Didn't know.
This sounds like something that will result in nice PR for Trump and absolutely nothing for American women.
If Ivanka's going to keep trying to unofficially be involved in policy, I demand she submit to further Cosmo interviews.
Busy making peace in the Middle East.
whyamihere
Banned
This is verbatim something Democrats said in 2009, minus the cities/states.
The sheer volume of material that he will get to work with. He could make the show run for an entire hour and still have stuff to spare.
This is terrible.
And personally, I think the intelligence community withholding information from the executive branch is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more dangerous than the Russian having ears in the oval office. Neither is good of course, but the KGB pretty much punked all western intelligence agencies all through the cold war, and they didn't get them a whole lot. American spooks running around with little oversight got the US involved in stupid wars and undermine American interests all around the world, repeatedly.
And to be clear, this is not great, this is likely to get spies killed, and I even understand why they might be doing it, but long term this is really bad.
This writer apparently has a sketchy-as-fuck article history that would call this one into question.
I agree with you, but I also think the article is bullshit. I'll believe it when I see it outside of the opinion section
Even if low level analysts don't trust the President, their bosses are Presidential appointees for good reason. Nobody should be rooting for intelligence agencies going rogue. I'm opposed to Mattis for the same reason -- all branches of government need to be under civilian control
You have to question whether the administration actually would have the competency to handle this stuff, or would pay attention to it. This way their betters can emphasize when something is really important.
Like grabbing the attention of a baby with a shiny new toy versus the same old toys it has played with before.
It's a shit sandwich. Question is whether you trust faceless CIA bureaucrats or Trump more, and honestly i'd have to go for the spies.
umm... the political apointees only sit at the very top. Low, mid and high levels of the IC is filled with career officers.
they're at the deputy level too. they make the hiring decisions. In fact, you don't have to read beyond that article to know how deeply politics infiltrate the career ranks. It details the issue within the NSC
I don't know about you, but in my life in corporate America people care deeply about what the people above them want
AntraxSuicide
Banned
But that's a long term worry. Sure, Trump sucks so I'm glad he's hands off, but if the IC gets too used to running their own show, how do you stop them under a future administration? I mean, even if the next President is another Republican but still kinda sane, I'd still want the IC to go back to full briefings and shit.
The only real lesson from Hillary's email server is that people get used to their routines. If the IC starts thinking "handling shit internally before notifying the FOIA parts of gov't" is the way to go forever, then I'll be worried in the 2020's.
Yeah, that's probably true. It's just that the CIA has long and terrible history of keeping the executive branch and congress out of the loop and it pretty much always ended up horribly for the US.
It's not who I trust more, is what's worse, the KGB knowing everything the CIA tells the president or the CIA running around without proper oversight.
Again, the KGB pretty much knew everything the CIA did throughout the cold war, the US never had a spy in the USSR that wasn't killed or turned double agent. Fuck, Stalin knew about the nuclear bomb before Truman. It didn't really help them all that much in grand scheme of things nor did it hurt American interest terribly.
If American spooks get into the habit of running true black ops with no government oversight, well, they used to have that habit before and it will most likely won't end well and it will almost certainly last beyond the Trump administration. Those things are very hard to unfuck and it took a clusterfuck as big as Vietnam for congress to really get serious about it.
This is not corporate America. In my life in the military, I have seen ineffective commander's orders get circumvented, intentionally taken down paths of failure or in other ways have their agendas defeated.
The military is not the same as the IC, it is very much more hierarchical with clear lines of command, and even in our strictly defined community, the "bureaucracy" can successfully undermine command authority. The most successful commander understood that and always got input and buyin from his entrenched staff.
The IC is much more opaque. It is not corporate America, you can't do mass layoff and rehire new staff to enforce your will. Govt service has many layers of legal protections from political appointees and if your entire workforce doesn't believe in you, it's not hard to undermine whatever authority you have.
It is never direct, in your face insubordination that will defeat your agenda. The guys dumb enough to do that are easily replace. It is the guys who spent their lifetimes in the organization, understand where the true levers of power lie, and have mastered the political side of the job that can subvert what you are trying to do. And if what your are trying to do is batshit crazy, its extremely easy to manipulate situations to where your agenda keeps failing.
Have you seen a more punchable face?
https://mobile.twitter.com/Enrique_Acevedo/status/830991092728336384/photo/1
"I'm doing something way worse than Hillary right now and I'm president suckers."
https://mobile.twitter.com/Enrique_Acevedo/status/830991092728336384/photo/1
"I'm doing something way worse than Hillary right now and I'm president suckers."
TheWasTheJoke
Member
CIA has a history of grossly inappropriate and incompetent conduct. At least if decisions are relegated to the executive branch their is the possibility of electoral redress, if not, then things will remain stuck in a classified folder till it's too late. Plus I do think civilians can act as some sort of moderating influence on the IC's excesses
More than anything, being called WEAK (and also being ridiculed) are the best ways to fight against Trump and his form of fascism. That, and it's being laughed at and called weak are what worries him the most.
hipsterpants
Member
tbh I'm just looking forward to when they finally attempt to pass something and the Dems block it. Then we can all laugh at them when they start whining about it to the press.
BobTheFork
Member
I don't think there are any words I would call the best way to fight him. Making him mad isn't going stop anything he tries to do. It might send him further off the rails.
I think there is a little to much focus on ridicule and satire right now. I don't want citizens to see him as funny and ineffective. He's a threat.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
16k people listened to the introductory "Swing Left" call.
Seems to be a surprising amount of people in Alabama?
Seems to be a surprising amount of people in Alabama?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Typical liberals, running up the score in New York and California.16k people listened to the introductory "Swing Left" call.
Seems to be a surprising amount of people in Alabama?
JesseEwiak
Member
16k people listened to the introductory "Swing Left" call.
Seems to be a surprising amount of people in Alabama?
Alabama's a state that has a high floor/low ceiling because of the African-American population, but unfortunately, white people in Alabama vote like African Americans in the rest of the country.
Retromelon
Member
If you said white peole in alabama vote like white people in alabama we'd know what you mean jesse!
I think there's a defensible argument that the best way to erode the social narrative he's established among his followers is to build a strong counter-narrative around his buffoonery. It doesn't mitigate his juridical power, but maybe his power to inspire followers to organize around him.
I think people have shown a willingness to follow awful people, as long as they're the right brand of awful. But who wants to follow a buffoon? Of course, making a counter-narrative isn't the only thing you want to be working on, but there can be a role for it.
No one in South Dakota.16k people listened to the introductory "Swing Left" call.
Seems to be a surprising amount of people in Alabama?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Is this in response to the map or just a general statement?
Well, there are no red dots in South Dakota on the map.
There's one red dot on south dakota and zero on north dakota.
The dot is below the South Dakota border in Nebraska. I count two dots in North Dakota - one in Fargo and one in Grand Forks.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I think it's important to understand why they are wrong. Identity politics aside, they're spouting bullshit and people should know why it's bullshit.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked