Giiiiirl

Ugh.

Witnesses: Man Cut the Throats of Two MAX Passengers Who Tried to Stop Anti-Muslim Bullying of Women on Northeast Portland Train

Disgusting

This is really sad news. Specially because good valiant people doing the right thing where hurt. The next person that want to something like this will remember this news and think “this can end with me dead if I speak against injustice”.

And those sorts of people are why I carry when I go to the gas station.

So long free world, best of luck to you.

Why we can’t have nice things, part one million. Right now The Detroit Free Press is running yet another one of those Trump-Supporters-Still-Support-Trump articles with the headline “In Michigan, Trump Voters Still Have President’s Back.” (No link 'cause it did the constantly-open-copies-of-my-browser thing.) It goes on to interview old white guys in diners for several paragraphs before noting that Trump’s support in Michigan is now 35% in a state he won.

So in other words, the part of the article that’s actually news would be truthfully entitled “Six Months After Election, Trump Has Lost One Out of Four Supporters.”

If you’re wondering how the Trump trainwreck manages to have any supporters at all it’s because the media fluffs him as much as they can by publishing these dog-bites-man stories that try to make it look like nothing’s changed since the election … except, wait, “In Michigan, Trump Voters Still Have President’s Back” isn’t even a dog-bites-man story. It’s a “Many Dogs Do Not Bite Men At All” piece of nothing.

Do we have a Stupid Shit That Happens In Florida thread?

My guess:
Trump supporter who doesn’t like that family because they are hispanic.

The New York Times continues to act as the Trump Administration’s court stenographer. Recall that on Friday they had the hot steaming scoop, spoon-fed into their mouths by Kushner’s people, that the only reason public-spirited private citizen Kushner wanted a top secret line to Moscow was to bring about world peace. The poor misunderstood lad. (The Post and other papers refused to pass this on to their readers unless they could identify the source as Kushner flaks.)

Today, to prove they are tough but fair, they have a long article that’s hard on Jared about Kushner’s allegedly strained relationship with Trump. But once again it’s the Trump Administration vomiting its spin directly onto the Times with little if any editing. … it’s just that this time, the spin is coming from a different faction.

It’s all pretty catty stuff, like listening to the Gray Lady describe a spat between two alpha mean girls in high school.

The most serious point of contention between the president and his son-in-law, two people familiar with the interactions said, was a video clip this month of Mr. Kushner’s sister, Nicole Meyer, pitching potential investors in Beijing on a Kushner Companies condominium project in Jersey City. At one point, Ms. Meyer — who remains close to her brother — dangled the availability of EB-5 visas to the United States as an enticement for Chinese financiers willing to shell out $500,000 or more.

For Mr. Trump, Ms. Meyer’s performance violated two major rules. Politically, it undercut his immigration crackdown, and in a personal sense, it smacked of profiteering off Mr. Trump — one of the sins that warrants expulsion from his orbit.

In the following days, the president made several snarky, disparaging comments about Mr. Kushner’s family and the visas during routine West Wing meetings that were clearly intended to express his annoyance, two aides said.

Mr. Kushner did not respond, at least not in earshot.

And who could possibly be leaking this bonanza of bitchiness? Well, who cares deeply about Trump’s immigration plan and has the sheer audacity to put in the claim that Trump is bothered by profiteering? Let’s look further:

His West Wing civil war with Mr. Bannon has been a damaging distraction … Mr. Kushner remains infuriated by what he believes to be a series of leaks about his team by Mr. Bannon, who has privately cautioned Mr. Trump against being “captured” by liberal, New York “globalists” associated with his son-in-law, according to three people close to the president.

Mr. Trump, however, has had enough. He recently chided Mr. Kushner for continuing to call for Mr. Bannon’s ouster, saying he wouldn’t fire his conservative populist adviser — who has deep connections with Mr. Trump’s white working-class base — simply because Mr. Kushner wanted him out, according an administration official.

I guess Steve Bannon didn’t think to mention that “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” was playing on the soundtrack when Trump gave this stirring speech defending his loyal aide, since clearly the Times wouldn’t have had any qualms about including that detail verbatim.

The real giveaway that this is all comes from Bannon, though, is this:

Mr. Bannon, a onetime Kushner ally turned adversary known for working himself into ill health

So that’s what you’re calling it, Steve? Well, the country owes you a debt of gratitude, Mr. Bannon. Without your hard work, we’d never find out what was at the bottom of that bottle.

^^^ Like.

Rightwing headlines:
WSJ’s Strassel Destroys Stacked Anti-Trump Panel on 'Meet the Press …'
Her claim (and repeated by MSM reporters,thanks NYT), Kushner was trying to establish a ‘back channel.’ Further, she (Strassel) claims this isn’t any different than Obama in 08 sending a diplomat to Iran.

Here, let’s look at a left wing site and their take:

KIMBERLEY STRASSEL (WALL STREET JOURNAL): Back-channels are completely normal, they happen all the time. Reagan did them, Obama did them, everyone did. So I am not quite sure why supposedly having – at least the president is now elected, setting up a back-channel with the Russians, is somehow out of balance.

JOEY REID (HOST, AM JOY): Here is one key difference. In October, months before this latest meeting, and it was one of 18 separate contacts that we now know of between the Trump campaign and Russia, our primary adversary in the world. In October, the collective judgment of the 17 intelligence agencies had been that Russia had been taking active measures to interfere in our elections – quite a difference; we don’t think Iran was doing that. We know that that was happening in October. So in December, the now-president-elect decides that he’s going to name Jim Mattis to be his secretary of defense. But he doesn’t open a back-channel, he sends his real-estate developer son-in-law, supposedly, or the real-estate developer son-in-law decides to open this back-channel, not just – and it isn’t a back-channel, by the way, because this is not how it works. You don’t go to the adversary country and say, “Let’s set something up inside your secure facility, in your embassy, so that we evade our intelligence services” – sorry – “we set it up inside of your security facility,” which even takes them aback, because that’s bizarre, the idea that we’re going to do this on your facility, and you send them to do that without Jim Mattis, the real estate developer who has no foreign policy experience whatsoever, and then if it’s a channel about opening up negotiations in terms of something realistic – in terms something about foreign policy, why are they also back-channeling with a bank? A Kremlin connected Russian bank? And why is the Reuters report saying that part of the discussion was the possibility of opening up opportunities for financing for Trump related –

STRASSEL: We don’t know the answers to any of those questions because what we are getting here are –

REID: That’s not a back-channel. By definition.

Of course Reid is correct, (if confirmed) Kushner’s proposal to the Russian ambassador is nothing like a “back channel” but yet again what RWM is doing (and some MSM reporters,wittingly or otherwise) is the good ol false equivalence. If anyone has a counter argument to that I’d love to hear it.

Although this is history in the making as the post war alliance crumbles and America begins its decline … thought I’d instead share some funnies from twitter:


Not to be outdone:

It’s going to take generations for our alliances and relationships to recover from this.

And the sad thing is that most of what tipped the balance comes right back to the US’s original sin, which is racism and the policies/resentments which sprang from it. Especially east of the Mississippi, if you look at the frequency of Google search data for racial slurs against black people you find the highest incidence (both in the North and South) in precincts/counties that went for Trump.

I don’t think it will. Contrast Trump with GWB, who was trusted by foreign leaders and got them involved in a disastrous war. That was an actual long term problem that they were stuck sorting out, but America mostly repaired its relationships under Obama.

With Trump, there is no chance of being suckered into such a disaster because he is not remotely trusted. So the US will be ignored for four years or so, and then things will go back to normal when the next administration shrugs and says, “Wow, that guy. What an idiot! Glad that’s over.”

When he’s done embarrassing us, Trump will go down in history as our national Armin Tamzarian. Now let us never speak of this again.

Except that other leaders can’t trust us to not elected the dumbest fucker alive again, so not really.

What Trump taught them is that one election can negate literally everything. Even NATO. That is something that was never in jeopardy before. Now they know it’s entirely possible we will randomly shirk any and all obligations and side with hostile powers every four years.

We went from “trusted at all times, through thick and thin” to “depends who they elected, they could bail at any time.”

Time might heal that, but they wont forget it.

Seconded. America the Temporary, and the Land of the Maybe Free Today but who knows what fascist will be in charge tomorrow.

I had to look that up. I assumed I was going to learn something cool about history. No such thing happened.

-Tom

[quote=“ShivaX, post:3696, topic:126885, full:true”]
Except that other leaders can’t trust us to not elected the dumbest fucker alive again, so not really.[/quote]

This.

The damage is not anything specific Trump will do. As other have noted, specific leaders have messed up things here and there and relationships recover. But Trump represents a breach of confidence in the US political system. The design for stability and subsequent two party system has become obsolete and easier to manipulate.

The US is (sadly) no longer a reliable partner in international relations. There will be moments when it will become a partner and work with the rest of us, of course, and most likely it will be more often than not. But we can’t rely on it anymore.

NATO and the Paris deal are pretty big things. That he refused to acknowledge the importance of Article 5 when the US has been the only country to trigger it is quite a betrayal.