Shutdowns, military pullouts, and resignations: it’s Christmas and Trump thread 89

[TheClaws]

It’s chaos in Trump’s world, more so than usual, with #TrumpResign trending in Twitter after a number of key debacles: the pull-out of US troops from Syria, the resignation of General Jim Mattis, and the shutdown of the government over Christmas due to bipartisan disagreement over wall funding. (Those are just 3 issues.) The next few weeks will be rocky.

Previous thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3442038-But-When-the-president-does-it-that-means-it-is-not-illegal-Trump-thread-LXXXVIII

Interesting take from Justanotherlurker. Perhaps she needs to read this...
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2017.1399806
Two University professors discussing our threads
'Abstract
In an era of fake news and concerns about “social-media bubbles”, we consider how participants in online discussions on the UK parenting website Mumsnet assess the validity and potential subjectivity of news information sources.'

I have the full article if anyone wants it. Can only be sent by email or you have to pay!

We were commended for our measured discussions.

I echo your final para Gump. I'm in awe of how the US is coping with such awfulness from Trump on a daily basis!

Did anyone watch his situation room ramble yesterday? I honestly think he has sunk far lower, if that were possible. Whether it's down to being on his own in the WH for a week, drug use, feeling he is up against the wall, who knows, but he was far far worse yesterday than in the last two years. Absolute lies and rambling (see below) but how his aides can just sit there po-faced god alone knows.

He could have been a good military General
He could get any job in European politics
He talked of Kanye West
He talked of Tom Cruise in the context of how handsome Military officers were and he went into a big beautiful room, better than any room you will ever see, and there were lots of handsome Military and more 'computer boards' than the world has seen
He said Russia was right to invade Afghanistant because it used to be the Soviet Union
He made up a figure of £275billion that immigrants cost the US
He had a massive poster of himself on the table in front of him

💙Koko ✊🏻 ✊🏾 ✊🏿 💙
‏

@Kokomothegreat
Follow Follow @Kokomothegreat
More
This is fucked up.

The Trump administration has located funding to reopen the historic clock tower that tops the president's luxury hotel despite the government shutdown.

I understood the words (except 'hug box') but not the sense.

But absolutely what Gump says.

I think there are valid concerns about identity politics and how the left is not immune to authoritarian measures eg compelled speech and no debate. I’m not really clear about what the specific accusations being levelled at these threads are (but thanks to posters who have explained the terms!)

As an aside, “hug box” conjures up delightful images! Wouldn’t want these threads to be one though - I’ve changed my mind on lots of things because of reasoned debate so would hate for those opportunities to be missed.

Checking in with Rudy. He seems to lost the few sandwiches he had in his lunchbox.

Rudy Giuliani
‏
Verified account

@RudyGiuliani
7h7 hours ago
More
According to CNN witches favor Democrats and they are offended that the Meuller investigation is described as a Witch Hunt. There is no reason for the witches to be offended because Witch Hunt derives from,for example,the Salem Witch Hunts where people were executed unjustly.

.

justanotherlurker I really doubt your claim of having lurked here for two years. If you had, you would know what these threads are about, IDPOL-wise. We have no issues it being a hug-box here - in fact, if we had a Mission Statement, that would form part of it. As for the rest of your post - ? Gibberish.

Clarification on hug-box - we support each other when needed. However, we do also explore other sides of the political spectrum of key issues so we’re not always listening to the same voice.

Think you've picked up a strawman, Pain.

I've never seen any serious suggestion in my lifetime that "the left" is immune to authoritarianism.

The very opposite, in fact: the authoritarianism of far left Communist states has been a sine qua non my whole life. The USSR collapsed decades ago but Communism and Marxism are still frequently referred to as exemplars of all that's bad and tyrannical (although interestingly I see many fewer refs these days to Russia and the USSR as homes of that tyranny). "Cultural Marxism" has been one of those much-parroted pieces of political slang recently. "Evil Commie bastards" are the theme of a huge swathe of still-watched American action movies.

What I have seen recently is a presenting of this truism as a showstopping revelation (not by you Pain, but elsewhere on MN): "Look over there! Just goes to prove the left aren't immune to authoritarianism. "

Erm, yeah, we know, ta.

It's not going to stop us discussing the authoritarian who is a current head of state and is using his position to make pronouncements and give orders which demonise and persecute people. And whose funders and advisers are assisting similar leaders and wannabes across the world.

The use of identity politics to create tribalism and set tribes against each other – that I'll condemn wholeheartedly.

But I understand Justanotherlurker's post even less this morning.

He informs us that "IDPOL" is over... and that "people" (who dat?) are turning to class. But class – as opposed to income – is IDPOL. It's just a different identity from the gender/race social groupings he wants to tell us are so last year.

The Trump campaign overtly used both race and class as categories when it segmented the electorate for microtargetting. I'm pretty sure it used sex too, although I can't think of overt examples.

Oh, wait, I can think of more recent ones: adverts for Republican candidates which used images and quotes of Trump for some male voters; but images of families but no mention of Trump for female voters.

Anyway. Divvying people up and creating/reinforcing tribal identities is what Trump and his backers do as a core activity: one message for this lot; a different message for that lot. It's what the Russian trolls do too: divisiveness is what they're there for.

I wasn’t quite sure what justalurker was getting at perking so made general statements, which probably was creating strawmen!

I wasn’t specifically meaning communism when I meant the left wasn’t immune to authoritarian impulses - people who are left leaning and liberal can fall pray to going along with ideas or ideologies because it’s opposed by people on the right, and not because there’s any merit in it. Again, not saying that it happens on this thread but it’s the closest guess of what I took justanotherlurker to mean.

It probably is a bit futile trying to discuss it when I’m not certain what exactly it is we’re discussing though!

I always find references to 'class' regarding the US interesting. I will not even attempt to say that I understand the UK class 'system', although I think I have a rough idea of how it 'works'. I think it's one of those things where you have to be a native to really get the nuances.

I think 'class', which is pretty much defined here by your bank account so membership can be rather 'fluid', has played less of a part in US politics since the late 19th Century (the age of the 'robber barons'). But I think Scrotus is making many of us re-think how much it's playing now AND wonder perhaps how invisible it's been in our politics all along, at least since the Reagan Era. Certainly we understood that many of our politicians either came from old money or 'got some on their own', but they still seemed to have the traditional core 'American Values' of hard work, family, love of Country, and at least the appearance of 'lifting our lamp beside the open door'. We expected our rich folk to be philanthropic. If they entered politics, we expected them to represent ALL of us, regardless of 'IDPOL'.

Now with Trump & the GOP as it is, we have rich means you're good (and 'raceless' because all that's seen is the 'green'), poor means you're bad (and 'other'). And those of us in-between are having to choose which side we're going to support.

I agree with every word of that, Pain.

Thanks for that, Across. Philanthropy used to be purely altruistic but in this day and age, is used for political gain, would you say, or is that too simplistic?

Natasha Bertrand
@NatashaBertrand
Breaking from Russian news agency Interfax: Russia has indicted American Paul Whelan for spying, which Whelan denies (link: www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?id=879303 )

Can't answer for Across, but in the history of the world many, many things have been presented as "purely altruistic" which are nothing of the kind.

Much has been written about the concept of the "selfish altruist", eg by Tony Vaux of Oxfam, whose book of that name explores the emotions and dilemmas with which relief workers contend – but without merely venally poohpoohing the whole concept of altruism.
www.amazon.co.uk/Selfish-Altruist-Relief-Work-Famine/dp/1853838799?tag=mumsnetforum-21

But there's a lot presented as altruism which those making the claim are aware is nothing of the sort. Slavery, for example.

No really. Some slavers claimed they were enslaving people to save the enslaveds' immortal souls. Well, the souls of those who survived long enough, obviously.

And there's no shortage of less egregious examples, unto the present day.

www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/american-paul-whelan-charged-with-espionage-in-russia-news-agency-reports/2019/01/03/51dab55a-0f6a-11e9-8f0c-6f878a26288a_story.html?utm_term=.87d9fd6dc6e6

Hard to say Merde. But I think we've always felt that we don't care if someone gives freely or with an ulterior motive, as long as good is achieved for those in need and no harm is done to anyone.

Case in point is Warren Buffet and his famous pledge to give away the vast majority of his billions. Bill Gates and a few others have 'signed on'. Is it purely altruistic? Of course not. It's tonnes of good publicity, for their businesses, helps them enormously in the tax department, and they (and their descendants) are still richer beyond most of our comprehension so it's no skin off their noses. But those billions are doing one HELL of a lot of good. So do I care that there might have been ulterior motives? Nope, not at all.

Hey!! Congress is convening. We'll soon begin the swearing in. CSpan covering LIVE now!

Live stream from HoRep

houselive.gov

I am sooo enjoying watching the vote to elect the Speaker.

And I bet the big Orange is looking more like a tomato with every vote cast.

I'll just pop this here while the new Congress is taking shape.

And (as expected) Pelosi is (again) elected Speaker of the House.

Final Tally:
Pelosi-D 219
McCarthy-R 192
'Others' 19
Abstain 3
Absent 1

How on earth can anyone justify abstaining?

Did I see 10 Democrats didn't vote for Pelosi? Were they "others" or "abstainers", I wonder?

I'd say probably 'others'. There were quite a few Dems who felt it was time for 'new blood'. Symbolic gesture IMO. They would have known that Pelosi would win without them.

I was off by one. The official final tally was 220 votes for Pelosi.