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
As if that’s not exactly how they planned it to go: look like they are willing to sign a deal, make it blow up with outrageous last minute amendments, and then pretend Zelenskyy is uncooperative.
Straight out of Putins playbook. It’s obvious he’s calling the shots in DC for the next 4 years.
for the next 4 years.
If we're lucky.
Was Putin also calling the shots when Europe's deal required Ukraine sell off its ports and power grid?
Ukraine was always going to get stripped for parts, that's why the west invested billions in making it happen.
What scenario doesn't Ukraine get stripped for parts by some "empire" in your worldview? Because you obviously think that russia's invasion was the west's decision too. And Ukraine's decision not to roll over is also US imperialism or whatever.
They've been on this trajectory since 2014.
If that's how you see it, it's been in this trajectory since 1993, 2004, 2007, 2014, 2022. Russia would always come back to reclaim Ukraine, like they did Georgia, what do you suggest they should have done? What should Canada do if trump tries to annex it, rollover?
Putin wouldn't have been able to occupy the Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine if he invaded out of the blue, there would be a massive insurgency, let alone justify the necessity of the invasion to the people he depends on to remain in power if there hadn't been a coup.
But yes, Putin would never have come to power and former USSR countries wouldn't have a problem with right-wing nationalists if we hadn't supported Yeltsin's coup and then intentionally immiserated the population during the 90s.
That's why Russia rolled for Kyiv?
Because they wanted to somehow protect the people in Eastern Ukraine, while they now bombard them non stop?
Protecting the people in eastern Ukraine was a justification they used, which they wouldn't have been able to use if the right-wing government the US propped up in kyiv hadn't passed discriminatory laws and failed to stop azov and friends from shelling them.
This has been debunked. The Donbas "rebellion" would have fizzled out without military support from the Kremlin (Igor Girkin himself admitted to this), Boris Nemtsov was assassinated for publishing a report on putin's proxy war in the Donbas. But after an surprise invasion and 3 years of debating with people like you, if you can't get the facts right, there is no point in debating anymore.
Man they are in force today. Reminds me of all the anti Biden Gaza bots. I am sure they are happy about Trump's casino going up soon. So much better than arranging a cease fire.
There is something I've been meaning to ask someone who lived it: was watching Yeltsin on TV as bad as watching trump? Was it the same brand of buffooning chaos and mindless dismantlement of institutions?
I never thought of that, next time I talk to a Russian I'll ask. I suspect was probably more like watching Newsmax given the role Russian media plays in maintaining power. There's probably an editorial explaining why Yeltsin getting drunk and falling in a river in DC was actually a diplomatic masterstroke.
In the 90s media were completely uncut though, especially their coverage of the first Chechen war. Some openly satyrized Yeltsin and he was kinda ok with it. Toying the line started with overtaking НТВ under Putin, the major divide between pro and anti-state stances and publications then happened around demonstrations in early 2010s, and in the end of the decade the latter started to be pushed out until ouright bans and suppression in 2022-.
There were, like, some guidelines, but when coffins of young boys started to arrive in droves and people protested against the war, print media was there to cover it, and this better-to-be-forgotten page of our history is now set in stone and I occasionally see publications from that period, no way to purge them all. Compare it to today, when mothers' union not against war, but for better treatment of their sons got quietly put down, and the existing media are just a surrogate tightly governed by statesmen.
On the initial question about Yeltsin vs Trump, it's hard for me to compare them for their context is inescapably different. Boris was, like, the first real elected pres, and a populist at that, and while Trump is tasked with just not fucking things too much, Yeltsin took a wheel in a harsh transitional period. And as two populists they share a lot of what makes their public image. But, call it naive and biased, Yeltsin sounded humble and honest when he talked about what he does, like he believed in it. It felt like he cared, but was a wrong person to be there from the very start, and drunk himself to death some eight years after passing the wheel to Putin being still influenced by that. With Don getting prezzed in after neolibs Obama then Biden and actually doing worse than if he did nothing at all, with empty waving like with the wall on the Mexican border, I perceive him significantly worse, more dishonest than Boris. Even knowing now that two were deeply pocketed by oligarchs (first time, eh?), I'm still find some sympathy towards our drunkie and find some personality and struggle within him, that I can't say I see in Trump.
Thank you for that perspective.was very insightful.
Imagine Roosevelt or Churchill accusing Poland of starting the WWII for defending itself from Nazi German.
Trump is a russian assent "just wants peace"
Nazi Germany AND the Soviet Union (aka Russia).
Edit; wrong comment to reply to sorry.
Guy who has only ever seen Boss Baby
Not just shameful. Outright disgusting and imbecilic.
Treasonous?
The only way Trump could be more treasonous at this point is if somebody could prove that he was taking cash from Putin to fuck over Ukraine.
I hope somebody steps in in 25th amendments this guy‘s ass …
The Kremlin dictates U.S. policy.
Trump is Putin’s bitch.
Just when you thought you couldn't get any more embarrassed being an American.
This is a great window into how Trump, Vance and MAGA do business.
Bully. Yell. Lie. Threaten.
The idea that Trump is a Russian agent, or that Putin has kompromat on him and so he's dancing to Putin's strings is just ridiculous. It's not impossible, but it's so incredibly unlikely.
Having said that, this is exactly how Putin would want Trump to act if he were a Russian agent. It's also hard to believe that any US president would be this pro-Russia if the Russians didn't have blackmail material on him.
If Trump pushed any harder for pro-Russian / anti-American policies there's a chance the GOP might actually grow a spine and stop him. He has a slim majority in the senate, and he's already doing things that are causing GOP senators to vote against him. If he were a Russian agent his handlers wouldn't want him to lose control over the GOP, because then he'd no longer be useful to them.
So, here we are in a situation where either the US president is a Russian asset, or he's not but might as well be.
All the spy thrillers of the cold war prepared me for a world where politicians were brainwashed and blackmailed. What they didn't prepare me for was a world where these politicians were enthusiastically supported by their parties despite there clearly being something wrong with their decisions.
Why is it unlikely that he’s a Russian agent?
This started in the 90s when Trump lost all of his inherited money, had half a billion dollars in debt and stayed afloat with Russian money.
Russia has, demonstrably, influenced the 2016 elections in his favor. If he wasn’t indebted until 2016, he sure was after.
His „business“ ties to Russia are so numerous, there’s a separate Wikipedia page just on that topic.
Why is it unlikely that he’s a Russian agent?
It's possible he would have been recruited. It's possible that in 2016 he was elected as president as a Russian asset because maybe the agencies didn't have time to fully investigate him.
While Trump was president, Robert Mueller did a fairly thorough investigation. I'm sure there was a lot of interference by Trump. But, while his investigation found a lot of contact between Russians and Trump, and a lot of money flowing from Russia to Trump, it didn't find any evidence that he was an asset, or that he was being blackmailed. IMO that's a key difference. The amount of cooperation you can expect from a bribe is vastly different from what you can expect from blackmail.
Biden had 4 years with the CIA and FBI under him. Surely, finding out for sure whether or not Trump was actually a Russian asset was one of the most important things for him and those agencies. Even ignoring the political advantage it would gain Biden's party to expose Trump, even the most GOP-friendly conservative people in the CIA and FBI wouldn't want to have their boss be a Russian asset. Just in pure professional pride, I don't think they'd have let that slide. How embarrassing would it be if you were a counter-intelligence officer and your boss was the agent of a foreign government?
I have to believe that getting to the bottom of it was a critical thing that the FBI and CIA were working on during Biden's presidency. It would obviously be kept quiet because they didn't want it to seem like they were just digging for dirt on a political opponent. But, is it believable that they just completely dropped the investigation?
So, the fact that after 4 years there were no revelations, no leaks, nothing to indicate anything more than was in the Mueller report suggests that the Mueller report was pretty thorough. Sure, he'd broken the law countless times. Sure, they were funnelling relatively small amounts of money to him, but he wasn't an out-and-out asset being kept in line via blackmail.
So he's just an outright Traitor then?
I agree. Trump is stupid and easily manipulated. He doesn’t need to be compromised in the way people think. He’s a rich kid with a chip on his shoulder trying to impress Daddy types while stuck in the mindset he’s the most (insert some positive trumpism here) - aka Narcissist.
Very easily manipulated when you know what makes him tick.
There’s a line from the Lioness tv series (S01E06) that rings so true about Trump (but also many modern presidents):
Do you know who's in this meeting?
Don't you?
I knew who was in the debrief was at Langley.
Well, it won't be the President.
Wouldn't be the President anyway. You don't plan bus routes with the bus driver. You just tell him where to drive.
Great point about manipulation. Vance triggered him, and while narcissistic and idiotic, Trump was still normal Trump before that. After the whole "thank you" bit, he went off and all he wanted was for Zelenskyy to take his beating and kiss the ring.
Oh man "Dummies"!
They SLAMMED them, guys. That's a Democrat SLAM! Trump will never recover.
Thanks for saving America, you fucking useless, dickless Democrats.
He still has to recover from "peace in 24h" and all those minerals he won't be getting...
His followers don't care.
I don't know how to describe what's going on to people who aren't here in America, because I don't get it either. But they don't care. They aren't just stupid, they're also mean spirited and heartless.
I’ve got an idea. Let’s all stand around and bitch about it, doing nothing else, and hope that turns out for the best.
Did they do it before or after they received the polls?