Mr. Trump Goes to Washington

[dpareja]

Ron Johnson, my representative, by the way, is a fucking partisan hack who is just as fucking fascist as Trump. He has not gone against what Trump has wanted ONCE. I fucking hate this guy almost as much as I hate Trump.

And since Wisconsin is ALEC's playground (that's why they've passed so many voter suppression laws), Feingold lost to this jackass twice.

[Askold]

Remember when presidential campaigns like this were just a joke:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rjiplsMDz0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rjiplsMDz0</a>

Although the jokes are about Obama's campaign I think that Trump fans might have a comment or two about his position on illegal immigration as well.

EDIT:

Putting 2 and 2 together seems to give me: USA attacking Korea very likely.

Trump's earlier "calm before storm" comment together with his recent tweets about how diplomacy with "rocket man" and that "only one thing will work" implies that he wants a military solution.

So much for not giving away your plans...

Then again, he could just be a goddamn idiot who is fumbling about without a plan.

[Id82]

Trumps the kind of idiot that would tweet the military's plan of attack before doing it.

[Askold]

Trumps the kind of idiot that would tweet the military's plan of attack before doing it.

Especially because he already complained about USA announcing an attack plan in advance.

And really, there can be a strategic advantage from announcing attack plans in advance. Aside from the obvious announcement of a fake plan, you could for example say that you are going to attack city X and give time for the civilians to evacuate which will make it easier for you to fight there.

Or you could lie about the correct time of attack. Or you could announce a real plan but fail to mention that you are doing something else at the same time.

And so on.

[dpareja]

It's what the Western Allies did for Overlord: they faked a whole operation in which they hit Norway and Calais (Operation Fortitude).

The idea was both to draw the Germans away from Normandy for D-Day itself and to keep them away by convincing them that strikes on the other two areas were imminent.

[Askold]

USA had a massive amount of fake evidence for a supposed invasion direction for both wars with Iraq. I think it worked both times as well with US forces coming from a direction the Iraqis didn't expect. (Granted that particularly for the latter time USA just went with such overwhelming force that it wouldn't have mattered much what the defenders did.)

[ironbite]

While Trump wants a war with Kim so bad he'll do anything to have it, he will not throw the first punch.  Why?  Cause he's an internet tough guy.  He does not, oh lord does he not, want anyone to see him as the "bad guy" in that situation and is perfectly comfortable making everyone else sweat in order to goad Kim into doing something stupid.  On the other side of the coin, Kim's handlers are smart enough to see that ploy for what it is and will keep a tight leash on him to prevent such a cataclysm from happening.

Ironbite-until Trump gets bored and decides a war with Yemen would be nice.

[dpareja]

The US is already effectively at war with Yemen.

[Askold]

Why would Trump think that attacking North-Korea makes him look like a bad guy? Everything so far has demonstrated that he thinks it would be a great choice that would make him look like the tough leader he wants to look like.

[dpareja]

Why would Trump think that attacking North-Korea makes him look like a bad guy? Everything so far has demonstrated that he thinks it would be a great choice that would make him look like the tough leader he wants to look like.

Because he (or at least Mattis) has to know that ordinary North Koreans are actually political prisoners, and it doesn't look good to bomb your enemy's hostage camp unprovoked.

[Askold]

Why would Trump think that attacking North-Korea makes him look like a bad guy? Everything so far has demonstrated that he thinks it would be a great choice that would make him look like the tough leader he wants to look like.

Because he (or at least Mattis) has to know that ordinary North Koreans are actually political prisoners, and it doesn't look good to bomb your enemy's hostage camp unprovoked.

But do you really think that someone can explain that to him? Consider how many people must have helped him come up with a way to denounce the violence in Charlottesville and he still ended up going with the "many sides" comment in the middle of the scripted speech.

[dpareja]

Why would Trump think that attacking North-Korea makes him look like a bad guy? Everything so far has demonstrated that he thinks it would be a great choice that would make him look like the tough leader he wants to look like.

Because he (or at least Mattis) has to know that ordinary North Koreans are actually political prisoners, and it doesn't look good to bomb your enemy's hostage camp unprovoked.

But do you really think that someone can explain that to him? Consider how many people must have helped him come up with a way to denounce the violence in Charlottesville and he still ended up going with the "many sides" comment in the middle of the scripted speech.

Trump? Maybe not. But Mattis and Tillerson at least seem to have three brain cells between them.

EDIT: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/white-house-adult-day-care-republican-senator-trump-twitter-1.4346107

Republicans: Disagree with them, hate them, think they're awful and promote horrible policies, but every once in a while they make you laugh for the right reasons...

It's a shame the White House has become an adult day care center. Someone obviously missed their shift this morning.

[Askold]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-recruited-youtubers-to-bash-racist-btch-hillary-clinton-over-rap-beats?source=twitter&via=desktop

...But sure, let's keep calling Russia investigation a "nothingburger."

[dpareja]

Rep. Marsha Blackburn is running for the Tennessee Senate seat which Sen. Corker will not be contesting in 2018. So what does she do in her announcement video?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/twitter-shuts-down-rep-marsha-blackburn-campaign-announcement-video/

Marsha Blackburn claims that she "stopped the sale of baby parts."

For fuck's sake PLANNED PARENTHOOD DOES NOT SELL BABY PARTS. They donate them for medical research and only charge for storage and transportation costs--not to make any profit.

Those videos were essentially sting operations. No charges have ever been brought against Planned Parenthood over them, and, in fact, the people who made the videos have been charged over them.

Fuck you Rep. Blackburn, you lying sack of shit.

EDIT: Seen in response:

[T]here is very strong evidence that Planned Parenthood's sale of baby parts violated relevant federal law. Planned Parenthood repeatedly claimed that they earned no profit from the sale of baby parts, but also failed to produce one single lickspittle of evidence to refute the words captured on tape from its own representatives. Instead, it relied on its media and political defenders to make it go away, and, just like the accusations against Mr. Weinstein (also a major Democratic donor), it did. The media had to lie and suppress the plain videotaped evidence of anyone with eyes to see, calling the videos "doctored" for no reason at all -- but they succeeded, because the media is very good at spreading lies when it puts its collective mind to it.

But the evidence was still there. Rep. Blackburn's committee took note of it in its report and filed the appropriate criminal referrals with the California Attorney General, among others. Of course, the CA A.G., the real sack of shit in this story, is a big ol' Democrat, and was far more interested in putting away David Daleiden for exposing the truth than he was in even pretending to investigate Planned Parenthood's very possible crimes. Shades of the Weinstein-Cyrus Vance Jr. relationship there.

So, before you go on a ragemode again, open your "fucking" eyes and look at the "fucking" statute and the things those Planned Parenthood "fuckers" said on tape, and see if you can explain what legally-allowed expenses StemExpress was paying Planned Parenthood for, since StemExpress was already (by mutual admission) directly handling both the storage costs and the transportation costs, not to mention every single other valid expense permitted by statute.

Planned Parenthood sells baby parts.*

And Twitter, in an act of unmitigated political evil, has decided to censor that basic truth.

There's a lot of people in this story who deserve full ragemode -- a genuinely stunning number of lying sacks of shit -- but a Congresswoman who helped expose them is not one. She deserves our donations, not our ire.

*On a relatively minor linguistic note, even if Planned Parenthood were able to show that its sale of baby parts did not incur them a profit and was within the law, it would still be accurate to call the transfer of harvested fetal organs to a for-profit corporation in exchange for money a "sale." And I think that's an overlooked element of this case: Planned Parenthood's whole defense has been, "Oh, the literal blood money we received was technically legal," but there's a large portion of the American people who believe that, even if it is legal, it should go the way of the slave trade and be banned. Either way, it is a sale, and Blackburn is saying a truth that makes a lot of people very angry, but it is nevertheless indisputably true for any regular user of the English language.

[Art Vandelay]

Even if they do sell aborted carcasses. So what? Is that so much worse than simply throwing them into an incinerator?