@hanselthecaretaker2, let's not forget MAGA and Trump is screwing you and his supporters over with glee. Losing healthcare and all of that.
Last edited:
It's ok to be angry about capitalism
- Thread starter XsjadoBlaydette
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm having plenty of glee about it too. If the US and Russia collude to deprive Europe of its prosperity, protections and independence, then the least Trump can do is drag down the ingrates that forced this on us down along with us. And its not like they weren't warned about the negative effects to their own lives that Trump would bring.
I did not say mainstream media is particularly trustworthy. It very often isn't.
Yet the shite you turn to is even worse; random liars and grifters without a shred of expertise or authority.
So, we have some circumstantial evidence that Pelosi played the markets. Circumstantial, because it relies just on returns-- and almost anyone can get an impressive return over a short timeframe once or twice with a bit of luck.
Probably, yes she is.
But perhaps a more interesting question to ask is... who else is doing this?
Not to mention, as well as Trump misusing US power, he's also decreasing the relative amount of power the US has to be misused.
Might be faster to ask who isn’t doing this. Arguably a much shorter list.
But it's fine for *our* side to do it. When it's THEM doing it, it's immoral.
Indeed. The biggest question is... how do we stop them?
Instead, popular politics seems to revolve around this bizarre fucking show of accusation and counter-accusation of individual politicians being on the take, as if the problem is merely that we're just not voting for people with the right moral calibre. And let's be clear here, that huge amounts of the public also have a massive fucking blind spot that they think it's only the other guys who have a corruption problem. Like Hanselthecaretaker is here picking on Nancy Pelosi for special attention whilst the president (he supports) is the god emperor of US corruption.
The point is never to rely on luck, fingers crossed the next one is clean. It's to install thorough levels of scrutiny and oversight to make them be clean, or else they are dragged through the courts and slung in prison.
Donald Trump has sprung up about two dozen major property deals in the last year, in all the sorts of countries you'd expect - you know, the ones where paying lots of money for access and favours is the way they do things and the police usually know when to keep quiet. The Serbian president (yes, that ally of Russia) is fuming mad that the Belgrade Trump plan has been scuppered because the minister overseeing it got caught being too obviously bent. And of course Trump son-in-law Kushner's showing his pasty face again now there's a ton of rich Arabs flinging money around to buy favour, because that means a few extra billion to grab and he's not missing out. Pelosi should well go to jail with the rest of them, but let's also acknowledge she's a little-league amateur.
Of course she is, and she's very obviously both insider trading and both better and more shameless at doing so than other members of Congress who do the same thing.
That doesn't change things like her not in any sense being in charge of the National Guard, or that both the Guard and the FBI were under Trump's authority on J6 which makes for example hypothetical FBI in the crowd to rile them up something very hard to blame on Democrats.
Again, from former Capitol Ploice Chief Sten Sund,
"On January 3, I requested National Guard assistance, but your Sergeant at Arms denied it. Under federal law (2 U.S.C. 1970), I was prohibited from calling them in without specific approval. That same day, Carol Corbin at the Pentagon offered National Guard support, but I was forced to decline because I lacked the legal authority.”
thenationaldesk.com
Pelosi knew it when she let her daughter record her admitting they shared responsibility.
Regardless that’s not how it was spun publicly of course.
cha.house.gov
Funny Rogan even said this back when he wanted nothing to do with Trump
nypost.com
People can believe what they want. Point is, similar to JFK and Nixon before him, Trump has a proven history of rocking the establishment’s apple cart, and as history has also proven they have ways of dealing with that. The only differences besides the obvious is by now most people, whether or not they care to admit it are able to see through the bs.
"On January 3, I requested National Guard assistance, but your Sergeant at Arms denied it. Under federal law (2 U.S.C. 1970), I was prohibited from calling them in without specific approval. That same day, Carol Corbin at the Pentagon offered National Guard support, but I was forced to decline because I lacked the legal authority.”
- Superiors: The Sergeant at Arms is under the direction and authority of the Speaker of the House or other presiding officer when maintaining order and decorum in the House chamber.
'Shut up!' Pelosi lashes out at reporter, denies January 6 blame
Pelosi told a reporter to "shut up" after being asked if she had concerns that the newly form Jan. 6 Committee may rule her responsible for the Capitol riots.
thenationaldesk.com
Pelosi knew it when she let her daughter record her admitting they shared responsibility.
Regardless that’s not how it was spun publicly of course.
Transcripts Show President Trump's Directives to Pentagon Leadership to "Keep January 6 Safe" Were Deliberately Ignored
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House Administration
cha.house.gov
Funny Rogan even said this back when he wanted nothing to do with Trump
Joe Rogan suggests Jan. 6 Capitol riot was a set-up to bring down Donald Trump
During Friday’s podcast episode, Joe Rogan suggested the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was a set-up by the US government’s intelligence agencies to take down former President Donald Trump.
nypost.com
People can believe what they want. Point is, similar to JFK and Nixon before him, Trump has a proven history of rocking the establishment’s apple cart, and as history has also proven they have ways of dealing with that. The only differences besides the obvious is by now most people, whether or not they care to admit it are able to see through the bs.
Last edited:
That rat Rogan shouldn't say anything for a while. He maliciously endorsed Trump and now we're all stuck with the damage. Not like Rogan was a one man voting machine, but he's representive of the podcast crowd being a bunch of oppertunistic, greedy rats who aren't wholesome everymen, but instead want to inflict harm on everyone as long as they can get their tax cuts. Because they too are rich. They're not our buddies.
To get this straight: you believe Nixon was brought down not for his enormous crimes, but for "rocking the establishment apple cart"? Though he was as establishment as it's possible to be?
That is not entirely true though. Part of what might have doomed Nixon is that he’s a relative self made man rather that an aristocrat. With Trump all the powers that be close rank because despite hating him he’s one of their own punishing and aristocrats sets a bad precedent. Nixon never had this luxury. Had he done a coup he’d have been jailed.
Eh-- his early life was relatively poor. His education was prestigious and his early working life was as a corporate lawyer. By the time he was President he had been a Representative, a Senator, and Vice-President, as well as a member of the House Un-American Activities Committee.
That's a long history of politics, and a long history of working on behalf of monied elites to protect corporate wealth and stamp out dissent. He was not a legacy aristocrat, sure, but he was an establishment shill.
His "enormous crimes" were doing things Lyndon Johnson did first, but a fraction of the amount. An effect can have multiple causes, and surely committing the crimes is a cause of Nixon's downfall, but if we want to look for the distinction that made Nixon unique, the cause that applied to him more than others, it is not the crimes that got him in trouble where others didn't.
I'm aware of various scandals LBJ was involved in.
I cannot recall him being credibly connected to the use of campaign funds to hire burglars, plant listening devices on opponents, and then destroy the evidence.
No, LBJ weaponized all of the existing intelligence agencies to spy on Goldwater's campaign, which is waaaay worse. Unlawful entry and wiretapping by private citizens are situationally misdemeanor crimes. Sending the FBI to spy on your political opponents is pure corruption.
They're both pure corruption, let's be honest. Watergate was not just private citizens; members of both the CIA and FBI were tapped by Nixon to install the wiretaps.
This is manufactured tu quoque bullshit. Your double standards again, where you're happy to fling accusations against Democrats based on a standard of evidence even lower than those where you'd defend Republicans to the hilt.
Former members of the CIA and FBI acting as private citizens...
But even if a distinction without a difference, that's the point: why was Nixon crucified and Johnson venerated? It's not that Nixon was more criminal or more corrupt, so what separates those outcomes that way?
Nixon was a successful politician, but Johnson had the government, the intelligence community, the judiciary, the news media, and parts of the Mafia at his disposal. If Nixon had those things for himself, the world would have only heard of Watergate as a funny anecdote 50 years later.