Everything in this article is spot on. While I don't have any proof, I can't help but think that part of the reason Trump snatched the UN ambassadorship from Stefanik and sent her back to Congress, besides the obvious fact that they can't afford to lose the seat, is to have her there to serve as a snitch against Republican members who might be expressing their displeasure in private or demonstrating signs of a weakened resolve in the face of this scandal that even much of the Republican caucus recognizes to be a big fucking deal.
I agree with the other commenters that this was exactly what we needed, pulled together neatly into a single piece. I honestly had no idea the degree to which Democrats had soft pedaled issues they could have pressed in earlier years. I just find that inexcusable. Everybody should have seen the danger Trump posed early on, even before he first got elected, and how they needed to press him like hell.
I feel like I'm clear on the actions I need to take going forward to pressure my senators and rep, all of whom are Democrats. I also want to use the points you made in some social media posts, crediting you of course, to keep this in the public eye. I hope it also drives subscribers your way. Everyone I know is incredibly frustrated with the Democratic response so far. And even though I know there are people in the trenches doing the work of documenting these things in Congress and the Senate in terms of letters demanding accountability (which I understand from Jay Kuo can then be used as evidence in court), we definitely need a strong public response as well. The public needs that, to witness the fighting spirit.
I'm wondering what you think about the following: one of the problems with Democratic messaging in the current environment--optimized for bad faith attacks--is that Democrats always start with qualifications acknowledging that reality is complex and that under x circumstance y might be necessary. Bad faith tariffs and antisemitism accusations are a great example, as is Covid. It works like this. Trump does something obviously horrific and in terrible bad faith (e.g. unilateral tariffs, bad faith accusations of antisemitism, symphonies on the subject of 'the horrible lockdown' the US never had). Democrats respond by being scrupulous about the facts. "While in some situations tariffs may be important..." "Admittedly, we all need to strengthen our awareness of antisemitism, but..." "We can all admit that next time we'd do better with school lockdowns, but..." And at that point the audience has already clicked off and decided that, actually, Trump has a point there -- when invariably Trump has no ambition to realistically grapple with any of these subtleties and isn't actually articulating policy so much as revenge. We get caught up in the shoelaces of technical debate when no one is actually trying to have the debate. We're the only ones having that debate! The other side doesn't care about nuances and is happy for us to live in that realm, where they can respond to our "We could improve educational outcomes by being more targeted with remote learning" with "You shut down America for nothing!," etc. Engaging in a debate validates the seriousness of completely malevolent and unserious policies, while doing nothing to achieve political momentum. It's all CYA without benefit.
I expect that several foreign governments are monitoring the cell phones of these clowns. That would include the signal chats. Maybe one of them, with some sort of axe to grind against Trump and Trumpies, will let us all in on what's happening.
What did Trump know and when did he know it? Sound familiar? Democrats should be able to find reporters to get this in front of viewers. Seems the Main Stream Media smells blood and they are carrying the story without fear at the moment. Take advantage of that opening.
Riveting, as always, Brian! This should be on all social media feeds across all platforms- it’s time to fight these corrupt scoundrels on our terms, now
I am glad to see you point out how much of what Trump does is meant for show. That’s not to say there aren’t real, horrible consequences from things he does and says, but it does sometimes feel like we’re living in a sick made for TV reality show starring nine other than DJT himself.
Brian, this is IT, You pulled everything together, beautifully written. Everyone should read this piece. Bravo!
Everything in this article is spot on. While I don't have any proof, I can't help but think that part of the reason Trump snatched the UN ambassadorship from Stefanik and sent her back to Congress, besides the obvious fact that they can't afford to lose the seat, is to have her there to serve as a snitch against Republican members who might be expressing their displeasure in private or demonstrating signs of a weakened resolve in the face of this scandal that even much of the Republican caucus recognizes to be a big fucking deal.
I agree with the other commenters that this was exactly what we needed, pulled together neatly into a single piece. I honestly had no idea the degree to which Democrats had soft pedaled issues they could have pressed in earlier years. I just find that inexcusable. Everybody should have seen the danger Trump posed early on, even before he first got elected, and how they needed to press him like hell.
I feel like I'm clear on the actions I need to take going forward to pressure my senators and rep, all of whom are Democrats. I also want to use the points you made in some social media posts, crediting you of course, to keep this in the public eye. I hope it also drives subscribers your way. Everyone I know is incredibly frustrated with the Democratic response so far. And even though I know there are people in the trenches doing the work of documenting these things in Congress and the Senate in terms of letters demanding accountability (which I understand from Jay Kuo can then be used as evidence in court), we definitely need a strong public response as well. The public needs that, to witness the fighting spirit.
I'm wondering what you think about the following: one of the problems with Democratic messaging in the current environment--optimized for bad faith attacks--is that Democrats always start with qualifications acknowledging that reality is complex and that under x circumstance y might be necessary. Bad faith tariffs and antisemitism accusations are a great example, as is Covid. It works like this. Trump does something obviously horrific and in terrible bad faith (e.g. unilateral tariffs, bad faith accusations of antisemitism, symphonies on the subject of 'the horrible lockdown' the US never had). Democrats respond by being scrupulous about the facts. "While in some situations tariffs may be important..." "Admittedly, we all need to strengthen our awareness of antisemitism, but..." "We can all admit that next time we'd do better with school lockdowns, but..." And at that point the audience has already clicked off and decided that, actually, Trump has a point there -- when invariably Trump has no ambition to realistically grapple with any of these subtleties and isn't actually articulating policy so much as revenge. We get caught up in the shoelaces of technical debate when no one is actually trying to have the debate. We're the only ones having that debate! The other side doesn't care about nuances and is happy for us to live in that realm, where they can respond to our "We could improve educational outcomes by being more targeted with remote learning" with "You shut down America for nothing!," etc. Engaging in a debate validates the seriousness of completely malevolent and unserious policies, while doing nothing to achieve political momentum. It's all CYA without benefit.
Yes! We desperately need strong politicians who will do what is needed to save our nation from Trump, Musk and their minions.
Thank you for this information for clarification of what is happening and has happened.
I expect that several foreign governments are monitoring the cell phones of these clowns. That would include the signal chats. Maybe one of them, with some sort of axe to grind against Trump and Trumpies, will let us all in on what's happening.
What did Trump know and when did he know it? Sound familiar? Democrats should be able to find reporters to get this in front of viewers. Seems the Main Stream Media smells blood and they are carrying the story without fear at the moment. Take advantage of that opening.
BB: To your list of "rotten things" add:
Illegality - attempting to evade Federal record-keeping laws by using a 3rd party system
Untrustworthy - they revealed they had real-time information about the results of the strike, and the Israeli's complained that jeopardized a source.
Hi from Canada; you US - Americans type too many words, and don't squash enough Tyrants. Work harder, for the sake of the planet. #sorry
It’s like the entire country is suddenly a Dollar General. Even the generals.
Let’s not forget what the Signal chat was about — blowing up an apartment building with 9 civilians and 1 target. Who do we see about that?
So who is in the large Houthi chat group?
Hillary Clinton in The NY Times shows what can be done.
Riveting, as always, Brian! This should be on all social media feeds across all platforms- it’s time to fight these corrupt scoundrels on our terms, now
I am glad to see you point out how much of what Trump does is meant for show. That’s not to say there aren’t real, horrible consequences from things he does and says, but it does sometimes feel like we’re living in a sick made for TV reality show starring nine other than DJT himself.
That shift had precedent in how Republicans seeking to impeach Bill Clinton went from Whitewater to Monika Lewinsky.