I’m still processing the part of the day where Donald Trump stood in front of—what, hundreds?—of reporters, presented an absolute morphine fantasia of a lie about a globally televised speech, and not a single one stood up and said “this is bullshit, you’re just lying right now.”
Trump literally presented a fictionalized account of his speech to the UN. A speech that happened a day ago. That everyone in that room had seen. Not one of them had the guts to say to his face: “What you are saying happened did not happen. You are lying.”
We need to be clear here. He didn’t just present an alternate view of the intention of the room full of world leaders who laughed at him. He flat-out lies—gave a 100% untrue version—of what he said and how the audience reacted. He just made it up out of whole cloth.
This antisemitic/Islamophobic ad was paid for by Stars and Stripes PAC, a now-pro-Trump PAC which was (seriously) started by John Philip Sousa’s great-grandson to draft Ben Carson to run for president.
Here I am, finally able do a @KevinMKruse-style Dinesh takedown thread and yet I’m exhausted and all I feel like saying is, “Quite a lot, dude, and also no that is not how colonies work especially after 120 years you strange and broken little man.”
My response to this will be a podcast of me just slamming my head on the desk for thirty minutes
(Brought to you by The Casper Mattress.)
I have no idea what Butler would make of anything happening today, but he’d probably regard QAnon much like he did Father Coughlin, whom he reported to the Senate for what Butler believed was sedition.
Because it sure SEEMS like what’s going on is that the political establishment—media, pols, etc—just assumes that the super-white party that white people narrowly tend to vote for is always primed to win, whether they support it or not.
And I mean if you’ve grown up in this country and are passably familiar with its history, betting that a majority of white people will pick the leaders—regardless of whether they actually consistite a majority of the population—is not a bad guess! But we should say that out loud.
That time when McCain confronted the woman who said she couldn't trust Obama because he's an "Arab" may be the most tellingly fucked up moment in American politics in the last 20 years.
If you look back, McCain was in a town hall that apparently had a number of racist white people who kept saying that they were scared of Obama taking power. He clearly was struggling to convince them to vote for him by choice, not out of fear of a black president.
A lot of people have focused in on the fact that McCain responded to the woman's statement that Obama was "an Arab" by saying "No ma'am, he's a decent family man, citizen" as evidence of McCain's racism or Islamophobia. But I think it's actually both better and worse than that.
I'm so confused. @DineshDSouza told me the Democrats are the party of the Confederacy but this tweet praising the military leader of the Confederacy appears to be from a Republican. Can someone pls help.
Lee supported conservative Democrats after he was done committing treason but 150 years later it appears that conservative Republicans now support Lee. Did the racist conservatives who would have been Democrats many years ago move to the GOP at some point, @DineshDSouza?
It feels *almost* like some conservatives want it both ways: Supporting the Confederacy and its racist legacy while exploiting confusion around a subtle historical fact bid in order to confuse a key margin of voters. But that's not it, is it @DineshDSouza?
If you can get past the insane bs that Trump is responsible for every job created in America during his presidency, you have to marvel at the reality that @PressSec thinks putting black people to work is proof that a white man isn't racist.
I mean what's the counterfactual here? That a racist president would somehow make sure that African Americans and Latinos were all unemployed? That they would nationalize every job in America and give every one of them to a white person?
I can think off-hand of a few American presidents who personally gave a lot of jobs to black people while being pretty explicitly white supremacist, let me check my notes here ...
A fun thing about U.S. politics in 2018 is that everyone seems to have decided they’re the only true antiwar voice out there and yet there seem to be as many wars and threats of war as ever.
GOPers think Dems are warmongerers. Dems think Trump is a warmongerer. If you oppose Russian interference, you’re a warmongerer; if you’re ok with it you’re maybe also against war in Syria except maybe Assad’s war and Putin’s and generally Trump’s.
Everyone can agree that Israel’s wars are bad (except the Zionists and most of Trump’s base and some centrist Dems who also think wars are bad but necessary because the Palestinians are the real warmongers).
A little while ago we got some books from John Hope Franklin’s estate. Just cracked open his copy of Sontag and this fell out: an original 1980 @macfound brochure announcing their brand-new prize fellows program—now better known as the “genius grants.”
Shortly after he got this brochure, Franklin recommended @HenryLouisGates for the @macfound prize, which he received in 1981. Sontag got hers in 1990.
(That’s it. There’s no punch line. Hope you enjoyed.)
The way Dinesh keeps getting dismantled by @KevinMKruse and other #twitterstorians on here, yet just keeps on promoting his fraudulent documentaries by pretending like he's won, says a lot about politics in 2018.
I notice it all the time on this site: Someone piles on someone else, racking up favs and RTs, and little assists. Then the person who's getting piled on does a quote tweet back to their home turf, and the whole thing seems to reverse. Facts and logic be damned.
Dinesh has an interesting twist on that, getting beaten to a rhetorical pulp over and over on certain threads, then just heading over to a new one and pretending like it never happened. Like, actually asserting that something that happened didn't. And his fans cheer.
That awkward moment in November 2015 when WikiLeaks DMers literally thought Trump was using Nazi tactics but were more worried about Hillary Clinton going after Assange.
They're going through what was a pretty common series of thoughts at the time: Trump is insane. Trump is a Nazi. But it doesn't matter anyway, he'll never be president. Let's worry more about the realistic threats that Clinton poses.
Honestly, these seem like a bunch of kids who know jack shit about American politics and are big Assange fanboys/girls, who JA occasionally checks in with for an ego boost. Nothing on this thread seems like operational stuff that gets at the heart of what Wikileaks did/does.
If you scroll the @FoxNews page just right, you can get Hannity and Bolton seething over Obama's willingness to negotiate with Iran (and North Korea) without preconditions in 2010 right next to the big news of today.
Hannity on Iran and North Korea in 2010: "They're tiny countries; they're not a serious threat."
Bolton, same interview: "Iran is not going to be negotiated out of its nuclear weapons program."
Bolton, 2010: "The administration's policy shows weakness, shows an inability to stand up for an American — American interests. And I think countries and terrorists all over the world see America weakening, and that is a very dangerous proposition for us going forward."
I’m trying to unravel it and I don’t even know where to begin. @jaketapper looks at the Obamas dancing and thinks “Dems in disarray!” @jaketapper’s understanding of the causes of the GOP takeover of the US govt is “Obama at a rap concert.”
Hell @jaketapper looks at a Democratic Party who, should a free and fair vote take place would take over Congress in six months, and thinks, “Ah a weaker iteration of the party of Cotton Ed Smith.”
The funny thing about the people screaming about “Russia mania” is that the mania seems to be almost entirely on their side.
As you might imagine I get a lot of Google Alerts for Smedley Butler’s War is a Racket and the Business Plot. Almost every day there are new blogs and nuclear takes referencing him on how the Dems/MSM/deep state have been taken over by some Russophobic Clinton cult conspiracy.
(It’s notable by the way that they never seem to actually quote anything but the one famous line of “Racket.” Smedley was not on board with the America Firsters of his day and I doubt he’d be now.)
I know, I know ... but I just spent a minute imagining what Hannity would look like if Obama was caught on tape discussing a payoff to cover up having fucked a Playboy Playmate while Michelle was at home with their baby a few weeks before the election.
Just close your eyes for a second and imagine Tucker Carlson having just heard that. Jeanine Pirro texts him to say it might be an illegal campaign contribution. Within the hour, every conservative blog from Maine to Mars has cleared the decks and filed 30 versions of the story.
Pelosi and Schumer have an emergency meeting with their staffs. "We can't defend this shit," they decide, and immediately put out press releases endorsing national calls for a full investigation, in which they hedge just barely enough to say they hope will find no wrongdoing.
Has anyone asked the White House to explain why they call it a witch hunt?
"Witch hunt" generally means that there's some kind of mass hysteria, and that members of some persecuted group are being targeted and rounded up. So what evidence do they have that this is going on, since it now seems to be an official executive designation?
Or if they have a different definition of "witch hunt," perhaps they can share that with the class.