stevenkesslar

I'm referring to he two actors in Red White and Royal Blue. Pictured in the GIF in my post above. TZP on the left, Galitzine on the right. Nicholas Galitzine is a British actor who has played I think about half a dozen Gay or Bi characters. So for a decade, probably starting with Handsome Devil, there has been speculation about whether he is Gay. And as much as anyone else, he's an object of all these questions about "queer baiting," or whether Straight guys should be taking so many Gay roles. As I said, he just acknowledged he is Straight, and that this is a sensitive issue that needs to be discussed, in a Variety interview. Taylor Zakhar Perez's biggest role prior to RWRB was The Kissing Booth 2, in which he played the Straight sex symbol, Marco. So in case I was assuming people knew things they don't, part of the catalyst to this post is that the film, which is a Gay fairy tale filmed by an out Gay director, is a global hit. It's not clear to me why this would not have happened a few years ago, when The Kissing Booth, also a global hit, came out. But Taylor has been outed as a Gay married man on social media. Probably one reason is that suddenly he is very hot, as a star, in addition to the fact that he has always been very hot, as a guy. And some of it is probably because of all the views about queers playing queer roles. I was clueless when Mexico's Polo Marin was outed in a similar fashion several years back. But I don't think there's any going back, even though it's all on social media for now. Add Heartstoppers Kit O'Connor, who recently came out as Bi at 18 on Twitter after being bullied on Twitter for allegedly "queer-baiting" his fans. I would not call any of these three the most prominent Gay actors ever. But they are among the most prominent Gay actors of the moment, in the US, Mexico, and the UK. And they all were outed, in one fashion or another. It's a nice problem to have, in that none of this would be happening if queers were not being represented in cinema in new ways, or the movies were just flops. My main point is I think we're just starting to be able to talk about queer actors and coming out - as opposed to the queer characters some actor, queer or not, plays.

First, thanks for recommending Happy Together. I've heard of it, and knew it has great IMDB scores. It's on my list of films to watch. Second, you may have predicted Nicholas Galitzine's next Gay role - LOL. He's doing Mary & (bi) George now. Can a movie where he plays Noel Coward be far behind? I'm joking, of course. Galitzine brought up in the Variety interview that some of his friends in the LGBTQ community feel more of these queer roles should be played by queers. Others friends don't care, he said. The issue isn't going away. More important, the issues around coming out for queer actors aren't going away. I think we're going to be talking about this for a long time. The point about Noel Coward is a good one. Arguably, it was easier when the solution was simple: you just didn't come out. But that was hardly simple, for Gay actors or Gay anyone. I'm not sure any actor wants to be known first and foremost as Gay. But I think Macfarlane is probably right. Whether they've felt "tortured and ruined," which is a bit dramatic, most queer actors probably don't want to have to lie and live in the closet. I think we know that simply from the increasing number of popular and successful actors who are out. But it is very much a work in progress. Matthew Lopez said there are as many queer stories to tell as there are queer people. To use 1995 and The Celluloid Closet as one starting point, the explosion of good LGBTQ cinema since we've started talking about how queers are represented in movies proves Lopez is right. So if we use these recent awkward if not awful coming out dramas for Gay or Bi actors as a starting point, hopefully this leads to an explosion of queer talent in the decades to come. The only thing I disagree with you about is I think the world is an increasingly fair place. At least on these issues. We do have same sex marriage in many nations. We do have more and better queer cinema. Now we can even have fairy tales with happy endings. The Oscars So White pushback appears to be working - slowly. Both at the bottom, in terms of more actors, writers, and directors who are not White men, and the cherry on the cake - who is nominated for and wins Oscars. That itself raises a touchy issue. If queer actors, writers, and directors are not out, how do we know these things? Do we even want to know? Like I said, we'll be talking about this for a long time. Those numbers suggest Latino representation is a big problem. Lopez has said that queer Mexican American representation is what really drew him to RWRB. And, it seems, to TZP. I strongly agree with your point that acting is extremely competitive. They're actors, not activists. So I wouldn't begrudge a queer Hispanic actor for being more worried about what he has to say to get a role than he is about how he represents the queer community.

Actually, he was found to have done something wrong. I agree with the idea that if we're going to judge Spacey, we ought to have a reason. So I spent a few more hours going through this. Some of this refreshed my memory. I was not aware of the trials, and I did not follow them. I remember when this first all came out I followed it closely enough to conclude that Spacey sure sounded like a serial predator. Kevin Spacey must pay over $30 million to "House Of Cards" makers, judge rules So no individual victim who alleged Spacey groped or sexually assaulted him succeeded in court. As far as I can tell, there were two jury verdicts. One in New York on the initial allegation by Rapp. And the London verdict that was described by Spacey's lawyers as people who just wanted to pile on for the money. A third allegation of groping the son of a prominent local newscaster in Nantucket in a bar was dropped. As that quote indicates, the basis of the LA judgement had to do with Spacey being fired for ongoing sexual harassment of the film's crew. So it does sound like they were able to prove there was a "there" there. As far as why the 30 or so allegations did not result in 30 or so convictions, here's something to keep in mind: Why are we so bad at prosecuting sexual assault? Less than 1% of sexual assaults lead a conviction. Here’s what you can do to fix that. I agree that just because 30 or so people accuse you of something, it doesn't make it true. That said, my own standard is that Weinstein, Cosby, Trump, Clinton, and Spacey are also not innocent simply because a jury could not find them guilty. Of the three, Weinstein, Cosby, and Trump actually have been found guilty relating to specific incidents of harassment and/or rape. I'm not a lawyer, but Spacey's $30 million judgment seems to fall in a different, but related, category. The closest Clinton got to a conviction was making an $850,000 settlement with Paula Jones, based on allegations about oral sex and groping similar to the allegations about Spacey. Again, I'm not a lawyer. But it's easy for me to see why these individual allegations would be hard to prove. Mostly because they were a long time ago. And I am pretty sure they were never reported at the time. If I understand correctly, the Nantucket case fell apart because the alleged victim refused to testify about some text messages his mother, a prominent local newscaster, said she deleted from the phone before she gave it to the police. The texts related to her son's "frat boy activities," the mother said. So Spacey sounds like he had good lawyers. Because I think the tried and true method to defend yourself is to discredit the victim. This is why I believe Spacey is doing exactly what Trump, or Clinton, did. Don't give an inch. Deny everything. Blame the victim. I'm not saying that makes Spacey guilty. But it doesn't make him innocent, either. The House of Cards allegations were more recent, and apparently easier to prove I think the legal part is finally over. So now what we're left with is social media or, more broadly, public opinion. I recoil from the idea that we should just forget about all the "toxic" allegations, proven and unproven, and assume 30 or so alleged victims just made up a bunch of shit. That said, that is what "Frank" would like us to do. I looked around to see if, at any point, Spacey offered any explanation for why so many men happened to think there was a consistent pattern over the course of decades of predatory behavior. There is nothing I could find in his voice that addresses the allegations, except this: Kevin Spacey Posts Video as Frank Underwood to Seemingly Confront Sexual Assault Claims "You wouldn't rush to judgement without facts, would you? Did you?" Spacey asks in a video posted to his social media accounts. I scanned some of the comments. The one that by far got the most likes was this one, with almost 9000 likes and 200 comments: Not surprisingly, the 200 comments on that comment were all over the map. This comment which I strongly agree with, was liked by 213 people: I think an example of that is Al Franken, who I mentioned above. He was respectful to the women making allegations, and stated the Ethics Committee needed to look into the facts. He also could have gotten into character and tried to explain it, or lampoon the alleged victims. Mostly, he's just tried to be the nice guy we thought we knew. And it seems to be working better. He hosted The Daily Show for a week before the strike. The audience loved him. Again. It was presumed at the time that Spacey's video above was in part an audition for getting his job as Frank back. If so, it didn't work. I'm not surprised. I understand Spacey's legal strategy boxed him in. If he was being sued by alleged victims, he can't really explain his behavior to us. His lawyers no doubt have been telling him to keep his mouth shut, for years. Even retracting his apology to an alleged victim, which I think looked awful, arguably served a legal purpose. Being sorry suggested he might have done something wrong. I get all that. This is why I want Spacey to go away. What I'm sure he feels he had to do legally precludes anything in the ballpark of understanding, apology, reconciliation, or rehabilitation. To me, it does mean he has to be just like Trump. I was right. I was wronged. These people are liars. Why would you believe them? Believe me. It would be an embarrassment for the LGBTQ community to get behind Spacey in the way MAGA gets behind Trump.

So I'm starting this thread to put a positive spin on where we are in 2023. There are three threads that start with negatives - Spacey's court verdict, an Asian boy band predator, and an overall discussion about "wokeness" in films and plays. Tangentially, we could throw in Bernstein and Bradley Cooper as a ridiculous example of "nose-baiting," which I guess is kinda like "queer-baiting." 🤔 So this will be a long rambling think piece. But I'll summarize my two main points. First, I'm delighted that we have broader, better, and more positive representation of queers in films than ever before. I'll use Red White & Royal Blue, Heartstoppers, and Uncoupled as examples. I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein to make a few points, too. Second, while it's easier to be a Gay character in a film, it seems like we still have a mess on our hands in terms of whether it's actually okay to be a Gay or Bi actor. At one extreme, the concept of "queer-baiting" suggests everyone should come out, even by force, and mostly or only play roles that match their real life sexual orientation. In real life, Kit O'Connor was forced out, with this idea used as an excuse for cruelty. TZP is being outed right now, all over the world. Not for queer-baiting, but for being queer. But what that means is fans are collecting and commenting on things he posted on social media for about a decade. I would not call it cruel. But I would call it a mess. Meanwhile, we have what I'll call the Luke Macfarlane standard. Which is "just be honest about who you are." That seems to work these days. That's one of my favorite clips from one of my favorite LGBTQ films, The Celluloid Closet. So I'll use it to do a compare and contrast between three time periods over a quarter century apart: 1962, 1995, and today. When The Celluloid Closet came out in 1995, it was itself a sign that it was just becoming okay to talk about how queers are portrayed on film. I'm a fan of Lillian Hellman. But I agree with MacLaine. They had no idea what they were doing. They were totally unaware. Had they been lesbians, in real life, they almost certainly would have been more aware. And they almost certainly never would have been cast, or had successful careers. MacLaine is being a bit hard on herself, and her character. What was one supposed to do in 1962, when most people still thought being a lesbian actually was a disease? The spate of new Gay films I named, all rom coms or love stories, suggest that we really have learned a lot about representation of queers in film since 1995. There's a nice thread on Company Of Men of posters' favorite LGBTQ films. Almost all of them were made after The Celluloid Closet. This is why. I love both Heartstoppers and RWRB. I've read the criticisms of RWRB. That it's a mediocre Hallmark movie, based on fan fiction that reads like Marvel dialogue. But I think the book and film are so successful because they summarize and dramatize decades of learned LGBTQ wisdom. I'll single out one line that I've seen criticized repeatedly as Marvelesque: "Starting today I shall no longer be the prince of shame and secrets." That line, and much of the movie, could have been written as a direct response to The Children's Hour. Finally, we have Gay adults, in Uncoupled, and a Gay and Bi teen, in Heartstoppers, and a Gay prince and Bi First Son, in RWRB, who are willing to fight for their queer love. No wonder the world loves it. I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein. One person who posts here commented that it's one of the saddest movies he ever saw. I agree that it is sad. But I also see it as hopeful. I loved it. It is significant that it was the most successful LGBTQ movie ever in Taiwan. And the most successful movie of 2020 in Taiwan, period. I thought both the movie and its success was a recognition of how growing up in a culture like the one portrayed in The Children's Hour makes it challenging, but not impossible, to live a happy queer life with a partner. The other Asian movie I finally saw this year that I'd compare it to is Bishonen, from Hong Kong in 1999. It did prove you could cast gorgeous young Straight ABC actors, who would become friends in real life and have very successful careers. But the film was a flop. And like The Children's Hour it carried the message that these queer romances never end well. These are two examples of good LGBTQ cinema that makes it very easy to understand why audiences, especially young audiences, love the idea that we really can have queer fairy tales now. Where boy meets boy and does live happily ever after. In terms of whether boy actor can meet boy and fall in love in real life, I feel like we are at about 1995. Meaning we are just starting to be able to talk about it. In that TIME article I hyperlinked, Your Name Director Patrick Liu talked about using a trumpet as a symbol of "a sound quality of wanting to say something, but not being able to get it out." That seems to be where we still are. One anecdotal proof of concept is Kevin Spacey himself. He won his first Oscar right around when The Celluloid Closet came out. I don't blame him for prioritizing privacy, and his career. We know how Don't Ask, Don't Tell turned out in that era. So you can take that as an indicator that it was better for him not to tell the world he was Gay at that time. Kit O'Connor, 18, did not want to come out as Bisexual. He did mostly thanks to the cruelty of Twitter, in his own words. But taken to its extreme, "queer-baiting" means any actor, even a teen, should be required to declare his sexuality. Then we know whether it matches the character he plays. It's ridiculous. Polo Marin, Mexico's most popular Gay actor, was outed twice in his mid-20's. What he said in this interview captured some important nuances: Then there is Luke MacFarlane, who along with a lot of other Gay actors - like much of the cast of Uncoupled - is setting what I view as the gold standard. There's also the argument that, essentially, fans should not be fans. Or even human. We have no right to know anything about these people. One really good response I read from some actor to some question once was, "I like to keep my private life private." That's fair. That said, what both Marin and Macfarlane capture is that this does not happen in isolation. And it is a two way street. Marin wanted to be a role model for others. And now he is. Macfarlane made a pragmatic decision that he could afford to be honest to his fans. First, there's absolutely zero evidence that fans are going to stop acting like fans just because you are Gay. Second, he calculated he could be honest because his fans would love him and respect him for who he is. He was right. Plus, being honest is always easier. Out of curiosity, I Googled to see who the most private celebrities in the world are. I came up with this list. I think it is telling. If these are the most private celebrities in the world, we know a hell of a lot about them. Like their spouses, whether they have kids, their divorces. So if the idea is that fans are evil for wanting to know these things, good luck with that. I'll single out Matt Damon. Like MacFarlane, he seems to be a wise guy who figured out how to get ahead of the curve. Several friends have told me the story about how Damon is the kind of down to earth guy who would meet his wife in a hotel bar, where she was bartending. He is not so private that he didn't share with the world that his wife helped him through a period of depression. It makes perfect sense that celebrities who value privacy for their family try to manage it by curating what their fans get to know. I think they are wise. On the other hand, Harry Styles has proved you can do very well by essentially saying, I could care less what people say about me or my sexuality. He said there is going to be a set of narratives, anyway. And he feels no need to control or shape them. Although I suspect Harry can say that because it actually helps shape the Harry Styles mystique. It still means that his fans know he is dating Olivia Wilde, who wisely calls Harry's fans "kind." And now Taylor Zakhar Perez is in the global hot seat. Which is more proof that we're now better at portraying queers in film than we are at knowing how to talk about queer actors in real life. It is easy enough to blame TZP for about a decade's worth of queerish content he posted on social media. It is also easy enough to blame fans (or not fans) for caring about queerish content he posted on social media. I don't feel either are very fair to TZP, or his fans. But it does prove that if you are a nobody who becomes a big somebody on social media, keeping your private life private is next to impossible. So, like Damon or MacFarlane, it probably makes sense to think that through as early as you can. On Company Of Men I have raved repeatedly about how Galitzine finally came out as Straight in an interview with a Gay reporter at Variety when RWRB opened. It's funny that some fans on social media still think it's a ruse, and he didn't really say it or mean it. Fans will always be fans. I'm guessing that Galitzine and RWRB Director Matthew Lopez had to have talked about that interview. Galitzine kind of put Lopez on the hook by saying he wanted to discuss this with the openly Gay director right out of the gate, before he was cast. I view the interview as an honest and wise way to get ahead of any possible queer-baiting or outing adventures regarding Galitzine and RWRB. It is too much to hope that it will permanently end queer-baiting, and more cruel attacks on actors like Kit O'Connor. But it is a big step in the right direction. Even though RWRB was brilliantly scripted as a movie, and there seems to have been a script to undermine any possible queer-baiting backlash in real life, there is no apparent script for dealing with the fact that one of the two lead actors is Gay, or Bi, and married to a man. TZP could have gone to Variety and talked about being a queer actor in a queer movie. If these guys are as smart as I think they are, it suggests maybe there is a script. Like Harry Styles, TZP may have decided he is fine with fans developing any narrative they want. For now, at least. Fans are already deep into speculation about whether he shares his husband's somewhat more conservative political beliefs. That's a good reason to value privacy these days! I do hope this results in a lot more behind the scenes reflection on how Hollywood can do better. We now have lots of examples of queer actors who were outed. So it makes perfect sense that in the future queer actors should factor in that if they get their wish, and are wildly successful, they may not have a choice. The concept that curious fans should stop being curious fans is ridiculous. This is fun for me in part because it so NOT me. When I watched My Policeman with a Gay friend recently, he actually had to explain to me who Harry Styles is. I'd never heard of him. I skipped Kissing Booth 2 because I could care less about TZP, but wanted to know how the cheesy story in Kissing Booth 1 ended. Now I've been following gossip websites I've never heard of, and reading articles in magazines I never read, to see how we got to TZP being outed. So I'll point to one example of an article that is kind of innocuous, but also a perfect example of the problem. Right when Kissing Booth 2 was being released, TZP was interviewed by Glamour. Here's a few snippets: First of all, let's stop pretending that magazines like Glamour, or almost any other magazine or website in the world, are going to stop asking questions like that. So sexuality is on the table. Because they know that's what fans want to know. None of those answers are dishonest. But they are somewhat misleading, and a bit transparent. A few months later, if you Google it, there are all these articles in which TZP says he is not dating Joey King, who is a friend. And he wonders where fans even got that idea. Geez, who knows? 😉 A few people in these 100+ page "outing" discussions on TZP have speculated that Galitzine, having more experience, is more media savvy. That may be true. Glamour is clearly not doing upcoming queer actors any favors by asking these questions. I'm guessing TZP might have been thinking, "I could tell you. But then I'd have to kill my career." I'd be fine if we all just forgot about queer-baiting and instead focused on how the entertainment industry can help the LGBTQ actors who are starting to break through to just be who they are. We know Hollywood could exist for most of its history without outing queer actors. The old solution was they had to lie and be something they were not. I'm fine with the new solution being silence. At least for some people, for some time. If queer actors like Macfarlane want to tell the world they're Gay, and married to a guy, great. My bias is I'd rather they all come out. But if they don't want to, edit the question out of the interview. It's clear that a lot of this is discussed with directors and publicists in private. At least with some actors. So change the script. That said, now that TZP has gotten his wish, after what sounds like a decade or so of endless auditions, I'm guessing 99 % of the world will overlook these trivial things. If it makes anyone look bad, it should be the industry that insists on pigeonholing sex symbols into stereotypes. I have no idea what a better solution is for the awkwardness of being queer but not being ready to come out. The good news to me is that the increasingly viable long term solution is what Macfarlane did in 2008. Be honest. It did not end his career. He actually says it has helped his career. I hope he is right.

I had never heard of that case, @PeterRS. But it took me about 10 seconds on Google to figure out who you were talking about, and what he was accused of. I agree with your characterization. There were a lot of stories at the beginning about an arrest and allegations. Fewer about when and why he was cleared. But there were some stories afterward, including in The Guardian. There is a pattern here, I think. It was one allegation. Nothing I read sounded like he portrayed himself as a victim, or blamed anybody. He did cancel events, gracefully stating that he did not want allegations against his person to cloud anything. The main sense I got is what you communicated. He was intent on clearing his name. And he did. There were statements about how the investigation helped surface a child sex ring. Whether that was true, or simply a way to defend what the cops did, I have no way of knowing. What's interesting about it to me is that it is not particularly difficult to figure out the rules as they apply to the media and the police. Or the laws around prostitution, for that matter. The more I read about Spacey, the more he seems like one of the world's leading poster children for how to do it wrong. Here's another recent example that rubs me completely wrong: Kevin Spacey appears in court and blames publicist for sexual misconduct apology I read that as a big step backward. The problem isn't that I might have done something wrong. The problem is that I apologized, thanks to my stupid publicist. For some strange reason, there are something like 30 men, many with names attached and some of them underaged at the time, who accused him. Yet in his narrative, what comes through is that Spacey is always and only a victim. When he uses words like "privacy," it is like in the context above. Somehow, vaguely, this is just about me being a normal Gay man who wants my privacy. He really has no explanation for why so many Gay men seem to feel that he really did something wrong. I hyperlinked to an article about GLAAD saying Spacey is trying to deflect from his problems by making this about principles of LGBTQ liberation. I agree with GLAAD. We know the most prominent Gay actor in Mexico invoked privacy and discrimination to explain why he only came out by being outed. By all appearances, the world believes him. TZP is in the middle of his worst nightmare right now, for the same reason. But at the same time, it's a nice problem to have. When he made The Kissing Booth, which was quite successful, nobody particularly cared to figure out whether he was Gay. Now that he played a Bisexual man in a global blockbuster, all of a sudden people all over the world care. I feel bad for Taylor. But I also feel very happy for him and his husband. As with Polo Marin, I think it is going to end well. These are two very good examples of where we are at in 2023 regarding positive discussions about privacy. And whether or not it is possible to be honest about being Gay without ruining your career. I'll start a thread on that, because I think it's a very good discussion the world is having, and needs to have. The media does need an update, I think, in terms of how NOT to create an environment where Gay men have to be afraid of coming out. Spacey has nothing to do with that. The only time privacy became important to his public life is after there was a shit storm of allegations regarding predatory behavior. There are some other very clear examples of things that celebrities shouldn't do, that most can figure out. Hugh Grant and George Michaels are two examples, one Gay and one Straight, that demonstrate why celebrities, in particular, probably don't want to be in a position where they are soliciting sex in public. There's a solution. I have or have had several friends who worked for escort agencies decades ago. I was shocked when I heard a few of the names of celebrities they had sex with. There's a lot of typical names that everybody knows, I think. There are other ones that, as far as I can tell, nobody knows. I'm guessing some of these guys, who are big celebrities married to women, are or were Bi-curious. They may have just wanted to experiment when they were young. But somehow they were able to figure out how to climb the heights of Hollywood and become beloved actors, without the stigma of being Kevin Spacey. Good for them. They deserved, and got, their privacy. There are a few countries I traveled to as an escort where I was a little worried about whether I might end up in jail there. Thailand was not one of them. So to answer the question about how social media would deal with an adult man having sex with an 18 year old male prostitute, it happens all the time. If anything, Thailand was easy. Because there are known bars and resorts and spas you can go to, in privacy, to do your thing. Or to hire other local escorts to take home for the evening. The clients I went there with were not celebrities. We could go out to a bar, hire other escorts, and take them home. Once you become a celebrity, the rules change immediately. My impression is most celebrities understand that. The person Kevin Spacey actually reminds me of is Donald Trump. Deny everything. Don't give an inch. Play the victim. Don't apologize to all these people who for some reason feel like victims. And if you do apologize to them, apologize for apologizing. It is not a good look. And, like Trump, it leads us backward. Not forward.

Spacey has never been found guilty. The actor who sued him for molesting him as a child, Anthony Rapp, lost his case. I didn't follow it. But it sounds just from reading that article like almost every other sexual abuse or rape case. Goal # 1 is to discredit the accuser. At least enough to make things cloudy. Which it sounds like Spacey's lawyers were able to do. The nice thing for Democrats is Bill Clinton can now just be part of our past. Unlike Trump for Republicans. Biden deserves a mention here, mostly as someone who is NOT like the others. He was accused, but by one woman. Who was not particularly credible, for lots of reasons. There's no comparison with how many people accused Spacey (or Trump or Clinton) of serially engaging in the same behaviors. My main point is that the LGBTQ community has not, and should not, treat Spacey the way Republicans treat Trump and Democrats treated Clinton at the time. I think this was clear, but when I used "tortured and ruined" it certainly was not an excuse for any of the things Spacey was accused of doing. As has been noted, Spacey himself used a version of "tortured and ruined" - his White supremacist neo Nazi father - as a way to explain why he never came out until he was accused. That's very understandable. My hope is that Spacey, and the whole concept of "tortured and ruined" Gays, is increasingly just a symbol of the way things used to be. Including how we were viewed: as predators. As this article spelled out nicely:

True. Arguably, in this case the man is disgraced enough. He has lost his career, deservedly. Is jail or additional punishment necessary? Perhaps not. Kevin Spacey Has Been Cleared of Sexual-Assault Allegations Once Again I think he should go away forever. I think he has been disgraced because he is a disgrace. When I think of someone who deserves redemption, the immediate name that comes to mind is Al Franken. The accusations against Franken were mostly about things he did in public. Like a pretend grabbing of a fellow performers breasts on camera. Touching a woman the wrong way at the Minnesota State Fair. Seven of his fellow Senators have said they regret throwing him under the bus. In his case I think there's a good case that, while he said and did some gross things, he was a victim of the intense mood of a particular moment. Kevin Spacey was not a victim of the moment. He sounds like Bill Cosby, Donald Trump, and Bill Clinton. A serial abuser who did it again, and again, and again. That article above goes through 30 men who have accused Spacey, some named and some anonymous, going back to the 1980's. As Cosby's case suggests, no matter how many accusers it can be hard to prove. As Trump and Clinton suggest, it gets very complicated when you talk about how to hold prominent serial abusers accountable - if you even can. I had no idea this trial was even happening. But I actually was thinking about Spacey today for a completely different reason. I usually don't follow celebrities at all. I am following the stuff around Taylor Zakhar Perez daily. I watched The Kissing Booth 1, but skipped 2 and watched the last part of 3 just to see how it all ended. In other words, TZP did not catch my interest at all. Now I'm fascinated. Because he is being outed, all over the planet, basically for being Gay and married. The latest spin I learned today, which shows how little I follow this stuff, is that it is very similar to what happened to the Gay Mexican actor Polo Morin, who was also outed. Basically for being Gay. He is described in that article as Mexico's most prominent Gay actor. The good news is his career seems stronger than ever. Perez is not the most prominent Gay actor in the US. But he is certainly the most prominent Gay actor in the moment. So it is interesting that the most prominent Gay actors in the US and Mexico came out because they were outed. Happily, the most prominent Gay actor from Canada, Luke Macfarlane, came out in 2008 because he didn't want to have to tell all the typical lies that he said "tortured and ruined" many Gay actors in the past. He has not suffered for being honest. Meanwhile, Spacey spent his whole career compiling a long list of allegations of predatory behavior, which came out when he did - decades later, simply because he was accused. If this stems from him having a "neo-Nazi" father as he claims, he has my sympathy. But not my support. I want Gay men like TZP, Morin, and McFarlane representing me. If you can now be a successful and beloved Gay actor with a hubby and child, that is fantastic news. But we still have cultural work to do if prominent Gay actors are being outed. This is also a little complicated. Because just a few years ago when TZP was asked questions by Glamour like "Are you single?" it is understandable to me that he had good reason to think, "No, I am married and I have a husband" may have been the wrong answer. If he wanted to have a career. He said he was "not dating," and in the same interview said "I'm a fan of Joey [King] and wish she would date me." If answers like that got us Red, White, and Royal Blue, it kind of makes stretching the truth look sexy. 😉 But there is still work to do. Happily, TZP just went to her wedding, apparently with his husband. They'll all be fine. When I was reading all this today I tried to think of other prominent Gay actors who have been outed. Spacey was the name that immediately came to mind. But I don't put him in the same ballpark, or even the same century, as these other guys. I can see Spacey as one of those men that was "tortured and ruined" by the homophobia of the past. But I don't want him representing me in the future. I hope he just goes away. And lets others be the role models of what it means to be Gay now. I am thrilled that we have a bunch of honest and adorable Gay men who are able to take the lead, if they choose.

What's likely to be the longest jail sentence for Jan. 6th is now done. 22 years for the leader of the Proud Boys. Enrique Tarrio, Proud Boys leader on Jan. 6, sentenced to 22 years for seditious conspiracy Trump's silence is deafening. Although hardly surprising. If Trump feels Tarrio and other Jan. 6th leaders fought the good fight to stop the steal, why hasn't he spoken up for Tarrio? On the other hand, if Trump agrees with Tarrio, that the cops who were jubilantly and patriotically beaten deserve an apology, why isn't Trump apologizing? Same for the 2 in 3 MAGA Republicans who now apparently disagree with Tarrio: that this was a national disgrace that Trump should be apologizing for. Before Trump slithers into a jail cell of his own. My takeaway is that Trump needs to be punished. Had the Trump-appointed judge congratulated Tarrio, he probably would not be apologizing and talking about leading a productive life. More likely he would feel empowered, and might want to try it again. Trump and the MAGAverse are clearly feeling empowered. If MAGA sees any connection between Trump's indictment and Tarrio's remorse for jubilantly and patriotically attacking cops and lawmakers, they are not letting on. They are standing behind Trump's lies and hate and thirst for violence and revenge. If Trump is not punished, like Tarrio, they will continue to do so.

More bad news for Biden. Two articles worth reading. I'll summarize with a key paragraph from each. Biden is selling an economy on the rise. Voters aren’t buying it so far. Democrats beware: These Black voters are fed up, and looking for a political home There's a few things that both stories make clear. The most important one is ............................. it's the inflation, stupid. Had Trump been POTUS, there's no way he would have escaped the global inflation experienced by (name most any large industrialized nation, except China). But since Biden was POTUS, he will be held accountable for it. The other thing that is clearly a factor is all the stuff about age, and being out of touch. There is one reasonably good comparison we can make on that, which I keep bringing up: Ronald Reagan in 1983. At this point he was still net unfavorable. One 1983 poll showed Mondale beating him by 10 points. Inflated prices won't deflate, any more than they did in 1983. Biden won't grow younger, any more than Reagan did in 1983. The gamble is obviously that a year from now, things will be different. What we know now, that I mentioned above, is the misery index was 7.7 in January 2021 and it is now lower - 6.8. So if Trump wants to talk about inflation and unemployment, right now it is lower than when Biden kicked his ass. (New flash: Joe Biden won the 2020 election.) No one in that second article is saying they are itching to vote for Trump. If inflation and unemployment stay low, there's no particular reason to think Black voters who are disappointed in Biden or even Harris will decide MAGA is their political home. As someone said in that article, most Republican efforts to reach out to Blacks are as cringeworthy as what Biden said in 2020 about how Blacks who vote for Trump "ain't Black." As an aside, some poll I read recently seemed to say that Black Republicans actually prefer Vivek Ramaswamy to Tim Scott. I guess you could score one for diversity. But it made me feel sad. Scott, to me, is a good guy who articulates a right-of-center vision for a colorblind Main Street America. Nikki Haley, to me, is a good gal who does the same. I'm glad she is connecting. Vivek is a culture warrior who is telling conservatives what they want to hear. I'm biased. But it says something to me about the true ugliness in the MAGA movement. They just want their red meat. And lots of it! The S & P 500 was at 3850 or so when Biden took office. It's at 4450 now. Who knows where it will be a year from now. But many prognosticators think it will set a new all time high, above the all time high it already set under Joe Biden. If that plays out, which is what my money in the stock market is betting on, it undercuts Trump's argument about the great Trump economic boom and the horrible Biden economic bust. All that said, this scares the shit out of me. Is anyone else scared?

So let's just continue on this riff. Because you really can't make this shit up. Politics is now parody. Trump: 'No Choice' But to Jail Political Opponents That alone gets a laugh. Exactly. Only a genius like Trump could deduce that Biden is both gone, mentally. And the mastermind who engineered four different indictments. Why be such a senile asshole? Just because Trump tells the truth and defends the Constitution. And stuff like that. Thing is, these evil fuckers like Biden have no compassion. Whereas DJT, despite the persecution, is a nice guy. Reasonable people wanted to hang Mike Pence, for him fucking with the Constitution. And other really bad things. But Trump is better that. He understands the problem. Mike Pence is too damn honest. Which is worse than fucking with the Constitution, when you think about it. Hell yeah! Lock Pence up for being too honest! But what really bothers me isn't Pence. It is the whole damn cult of vengeful, irrational wackos who have nothing but hatred for their country. And want to to destroy Trump for being a patriot who defends the Constitution. So we HAVE TO JAIL ALL TRUMP'S POLITICAL OPPONENTS. Throw these America-hating radical whackos in jail! Lock em up! Now! Bill Barr, Republican Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, Republican Acting Attorney General Richard Donoghue, Republican Acting Deputy Attorney General; John Ratcliffe, Republican Director Of National Intelligence Chris Krebs, Republican CISA Director Pat Cipollone, Republican White House Counsel Mike Shirkey, Republican Michigan Senate Majority Leader Lee Chatfield, Republican Michigan House Speaker Rusty Bowers, Republican Arizona House Speaker Brad Raffensperger, Repulican Georgia Sec. of State. Every one of these America hating whacko dick heads told Trump he lost the 2020 election. Just like that disgustingly honest Mike Pence! These people treated the Constitution like toilet paper. Of course we need to LOCK THEM UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think what Kemp and Raffensperger did helps explain why they won handily in 2022. And why Warnock kicked the ass of the Trump Lie Machine alternative. Or maybe they just didn't like Walker's story about cows fucking cows? Who knows? This is a great example of what Clintonista Doug Sosnik said 2022 came down to, and 2024 will likely come down to. Sosnik: "What defined the 2022 campaign is we're voting against crazy. If that's gonna be the driver in defining what this campaign is about in 2024, the Democrats are gonna win. If it's about Trump's ad [about how the economy was better when Trump was POTUS) that's gonna be a difficult election for Democrats." Kristol: "And what do you think is more likely?" Sosnik: "Crazy." My hunch is this is why the GOP is quickly become the party of the Black working class. All Democrats like me do is elect snobs like Obama and Harris. Republicans show their respect to graduates of HBUs like Howard and respected Georgia law schools like Emory by calling them fat bitches. Clearly, the Republicans know better than me. 🤪

Sweetie, you're always at your best when you keep it simple and stupid. I'm impressed with the words. But, then again, why would you feel the need to impress a whore? 🤫 Fact is, she's a fat bitch who should be locked up for even thinking Trump could be criminal. Let alone trying to prove it with so-called "facts" like recorded phone calls and shit. What fucking nonsense! But, what is one to expect from a fat bitch, anyway? Here's the sad part: Sadly, over half of Americans agree with the fat bitch. Including a majority of Independents. And even one in five Republicans. When a fat bitch can trample over our rights and indict someone just for standing up for democracy, we know we have truly moved away from decency and truth. Stand with The Real POTUS! Lock that fat bitch up! It's the only decent thing to do.

Thanks for helping me to understand the rules of the MAGAverse. In all honesty, I always did wonder how Trump could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it. After all, I figured, he'd automatically be labeled a criminal. Now I finally realize how criminal it is for anyone to think Trump could do criminal things. Especially if you're a fat and ignorant Black woman. Do we still have those signs from 2016 around? How about if we just lock her up?

I thought it made sense to start a thread on the biggest reason Biden might lose in 2024. ‘Pathetic': Voters of color slam Biden’s performance on the economy “Our economy is the lowest it’s been.” Yes, it's one focus group. But there's no way to be a Democrat and feel good about the fact that 2020 Biden supporters who are in his must-have target group feel the economy sucks. It's not good news for them and their families. And it is not good news for Biden and Democrats. And poll after poll after poll say that's how most Americans feel. It increasingly feels to me like this is, in part, a race against time. And two key facts that contradict each other will be in conflict. On the one hand, you can't take inflation that has already happened away. And it seems clear the main thing that pisses people off about the economy is inflation. That also registers in Biden's approval ratings. Which happened to be at their worst in 2022 when inflation peaked. So there is now months of data showing inflation is way lower than a year ago. And for most of this year wage growth is outpacing inflation. Especially for people at the lower end of the income stream. But to a large degree, so far, it just doesn't matter. We could also do a whole psycho-social analysis about post-COVID malaise, too, I guess. But let's not. I read a very funny and sad narrative once about how Veep Mondale implored Team Carter/Caddell not to do that whole "America's tummy doesn't feel good" thing. Not only did it not work in 1980. In 1984 Reagan was still able to smear "Vice President Malaise" all over poor Walter. On the other hand, it's clear that Team Biden is now committed to spending over a year pushing the idea of Bidenomics. Good for them. I think it's better for them to be on offense than defense, regardless of what happens. But what is actually happening is that, just for the last few months, the misery index is lower than when Biden took office. It was 7.7 in January 2021, and it's 6.8 right now. The polls are also clear that no one is particularly bothered by high unemployment - since we are riding a 50 year low. So the real question is how low do inflation and the misery index have to go by November 2024 for people to actually feel better? In that regard, it's interesting that when Ronald Reagan won in a landslide in 1984, the misery index was way higher than today: 11.4. The reason that may have worked well for Reagan is it was roughly half the 20.2 misery index when he clobbered Carter in Nov. 1980. So if Biden spends a year saying broken record that Bidenomics is working, which is basically his version of 1984's "Morning In America," it may work. Assuming inflation and unemployment actually continue to drive a historically low misery index. I strongly agree with Alan Lichtman's bias that, in the end, it is important things like the economy that matter most. And they are predictive of who will win. I also agree with his assumption that voters are smart enough to tell when you are just putting lipstick on a pig. Well, most voters. Putting handcuffs on a pig may be a different thing altogether. Which brings us to the other race against time element. IMHO there are two key questions that will drive 2024, both of which are now reflected in threads here: 1) will the economy get better, or worse? and 2) will Trump be convicted of any of his many crimes? I think the good news for Biden is that if it's a binary choice of whether the economy will get better or worse, on the face of it there's a 50 % chance it gets better. If the question is whether Trump will become less criminal, or less indicted, there is a 0 % chance of that. 🤫 So you could argue that the odds are more on Biden's side than Trump's. I guess it could come out that Trump is innocent. Because Hunter Biden was the one who tried to steal the 2020 election. Maybe Hunter also made all those death threats to Republican Raffensperger's wife. Stay tuned. The final trend I've been watching for about a year is Biden's approval rating in comparison to Reagan's. Just about two years in, which was the point in his term when the Reagan Recession was at bottom, Reagan actually had an approval rating in the high 30's. Biden had a similar low earlier in his term, when inflation was peaking in 2022. Right now, at the same point in his Administration, Reagan's approval rating was 43.4 %, compared to Biden's 41.2 %. Not a huge difference. What mattered from here on out is that the Reagan economy did in fact recover. And Michael Deaver was successful in selling it as Morning In America. So Reagan's approval gradually surged to the high 50's by November 1984. Biden clearly has a similar plan. And it may work. Unless we come to find out that "Bidenomics" means "2024 recession." I'm curious what crystal ball Team Biden has that they decided they are willing to take that gamble? Or perhaps they felt they had no choice.

I'm sorry. My memory sucks. But on the topic of weaponization, who is threatening to slowly and sadistically kill Republican Brad Raffensperger's wife and family ? I mean, can we just face facts? What part of being a 1) Black 2) female 3) liberal 4) educated 5) Democratic 6) bitch did we ever expect Trump's election deniers to like? Call me naive, but I would have thought that if you substitute a conservative White Republican Guv and Secretary of State, who tend to pick on Black activists trying to register people to vote, and who both are saying the same thing about a fair ang honest election, and who both won re-election handily ... well, I just thought reason and fact and comity might prevail. Okay, I know. Silly of me to think that way. But the death threats? Why so harsh? And who is talking about "weaponization"? And why?

Nice to know you're making progress, dear. I'd love to see a woke Georgia GOP as well.

Trump indictment forces a GOP reckoning on 2020

And, so far, it looks like he ain't gonna lose it. 😊 As an update on these comments from months ago, this new polling from Kentucky is encouraging. In a red state where Biden is down 34/55 against Trump, Beshear is leading Republican Cameron 49/41. Good for him for pandering to the middle. To make an at least somewhat logical leap to a conclusion, this adds support to my theory of Ron DeSantis. He was polling at like 60 % approval after the competent job he appeared to do (even to Democrats, the polls said) cleaning up after a hurricane. And before his culture war legislative session. Now he is polling at 50 %, with his abortion and gun laws in particular being wildly unpopular. While it's a bit wishful thinking, maybe Ron has taken himself out as a potential POTUS in 2028 and opened the door for a Democratic Guv to replace him and his unpopular right-wing policies. Meanwhile, Beshear seems to be proving that what people want, and will vote for, is competent government. Which, in his case, is left of center. But not woke. I like it that he can so far seemingly get away with calling Kentucky's Republican handling of abortion "draconian."

This is the key point I can't get around. I've ended several close friendships because I just didn't see how Republican friends could rationalize these things away. I listen to very smart Republican consultants I respect, like Whit Ayres, saying correctly that getting your mind around the idea that Trump is a pathological liar is just a bridge too far for most Trump voters. And I get it, at least intellectually For me, the easiest "shoe on the other foot" argument is that Bill Clinton was a a serial predator rapist. And, by the way, what part of rape do you not understand? What part of predator do you not understand? Do you understand that this predatory shit named Bill Clinton, who was YOUR depraved predator rapist POTUS for eight horrible years, is a rapist? And, let me ask again, do you understand what a rapist predator like Bill Clinton is, and does? Because if you understand that, how can you fucking moralize about Trump, you fucking hypocrite? At its best, that's the argument that some Trump supporters have made to me. And they have a point. No Democrat should defend what Bill Clinton did, or want more of it. But that hardly makes "grab her by the pussy" defensible, either. But, to @Lucky's point, that whole "grab her by the pussy" or, to be inclusive, "Suck my cock, Monica" thing is so FIRST indictment. We're now well beyond that. We're now at lying about losing a Presidential election. We're now at a conspiracy to illegaly retain power. Death threats to Republicans leaders, and their families, who tell the truth about who won. Inciting mobs to shit on Nancy Pelosi's floor and break the bones of lots of cops because that's just the kind of shit we MAGA folk do to defend our country. That actually is worse than raping a woman, I think. It's one thing to fuck over a woman. It's another thing to fuck over a nation, and a democracy. So I can't get beyond the fact that these MAGA folk, who believe in this dark vision of America, just need to lose. I could give a flying fuck how old Biden is. He has done a good job, in my view. So I think he deserves to win again, anyway. But even if I were unclear about that, the idea that we're going to reward and elevate a moral worm like Trump is just very very wrong. And calling him a worm is polite. Because worms aren't intentional about being worms. Trump is intentional about everything evil he does.

This thread is just about six months old. It's interesting that the indictments started with the weakest one and have now, in effect, saved the best for last. The Jan. 6th indictment is about a complicated conspiracy centered on Trump. But the picture most Americans have in their mind is MAGA supporters jubilantly and patriotically breaking the skulls and bones of police defending democracy. It's in large part about the ugliness, lies, and divisiveness of many of Trump's MAGA followers. This next one is all about Trump, Trump, and Trump. Donald Trump's lies. Donald Trump's corruption. Donald Trump's loathing of democracy. You can hate a conservative Republican Governor and a conservative Republican Secretary of State for defending democracy. And some MAGA extremists will. Raffensberger and his family will probably get more death threats. But most Americans will hear the clear smoking gun, the clear lies, and the clear contempt for democracy. Play the tape every day between now and Election Day. And, yes, do the Divine Miss Graham's hair up so she looks pretty when she defends her actions. If that's possible. 😯 I know this is a thread on Trump's indictments. But I'm glad Democrats won't be talking about that. They'll be talking about this instead. Democrats’ climate law set off a wave of energy projects in GOP districts. A backlash followed. While Trump is talking about stealing votes in Georgia and how he really, truly, awfully really, definitely, for sure thought he won the 2020 election, let Democrats debate how many jobs they created in red states. Did I mention unemployment is at a 50 year low? Did I mention how the "misery index" is lower than when Biden beat Trump? Let's talk about that while Trump defends his sorry lying corrupt ass. That article is actually a very nice summary of the complex political dynamics. Money flowing into deindustrialized and rural areas. Republicans who hate the law but love the global investment in America and US factory jobs it's creating. Michigan residents arguing that, uh, what's good for Ford Motor and Michigan factory jobs is good for the Communist Party of China. That's at least an honest debate. Democrats crushed it in Michigan last year on a platform of making government work for people and defending our rights. This will help Biden win Michigan in 2024, fair and square.

In addition to hearing about Trump's soon to be four indictments every day between now and next November, I want to hear about Corrupt Clarence every single day, too. Dems revive calls for Clarence Thomas resignation after new report I figure Corrupt Clarence is worth two Special Counsels and one high tech impeachment. One Special Prosecutor for Corrupt Clarence, and one for his democracy loathing wife. Since they share far right extremist views, I'd be okay with them sharing one Special Counsel, I guess. But the impeachment belongs to Corrupt Clarence alone. Meanwhile, the kingpin of the Biden Crime Family, Joe, is known for having dinner at Cafe Milano, shaking hands, writing nice one sentence notes, and even truly evil shit like talking on speakerphone. Still no evidence of a $5 million bribe, though. Or any favors that impacted any actual policy. The Republicans will clearly be focused on Hunter until Election Day. Even though they have no trust for Trump-appointed Weiss. Who we were told in 2018 shared Trump's  "vision for Making America Safe Again." What is it with these Trump Judases like Weiss, Pence, and Christie? Can't we trust anyone anymore? I'm fine with picking on Hunter. He deserves it for being an influence peddling shit. But Corrupt Clarence, who actually can and does influence government policy, deserves it even more. (I'm of course leaving out Billion Dollar Boy Wonder Jared and China Money Whore Ivanka, since their corruption at least can no longer influence US foreign or domestic policy.) Thomas has highest unfavorability on Supreme Court: Poll All three Democrats have net favorable ratings, topped by Sotomayer with +14 net favorable. Thomas comes in last, even behind Kavanaughty, at -11 negative. Only good news in that for Corrupt Clarence is that Trump is even less popular. And even more corrupt. It's time for a high tech impeachment of a corrupt extremist judge who is wildly unpopular because he is a national disgrace.

Judge tosses Trump’s defamation suit against writer who won sexual abuse lawsuit against him Poor Trump. The shit he and denizens of the MAGAverse have to put up with! You can't even grab pussy these days. I have two questions moving forward. One, did Burisma bribe E. Jean Carroll to do it? Two, was this part of the same $5 million bribe to Hunter or Joe Biden? I sure hope not. When you think of Hunter or Joe in bed with Carroll, not literally of course, it's kind of disgusting. But not as disgusting as thinking about Swalwell boning Hunter while he defended him. No wonder the MAGAverse is just pissed off.

Yup. You are wrong again. We're friends here. So I can be blunt, right? Please @EmmetK. Keep being you. Stay gold. Stay true to yourself. Do what you do. Please. When the anger and lies and basic lack of decency ooze out of the MAGAverse, it just turns people off. Like the wine Moms. Hell. My McCain-loving brother ain't even a wine Mom. And he says Trump is a pathological liar and megalomaniac. Please, @EmmetK. Keep doing what you do. Be you. Tell all your friends to do the same. I'm lovin it. From the MAGA-centric New York Post House Ethics Committee concludes probe into Rep. Eric Swalwell’s interaction with suspected Chinese spy And from Swalwell: So I cited the Post because they are one of the best at creating Democratic "wrongdoing" where there is none. Right now there is an enormous amount of futile intellectual masturbation going on at the Post, trying to figure out how to transform "no wrongdoing by Joe Biden" into "Joe Biden took a $5 million bribe." Even the Post is coming up intellectually impotent. So on this one, they didn't even try. You stated Fang Fang is a Chinese spy. That is incorrect. She is a suspected Chinese spy, according to the MAGA-centric Post. You stated Swalwell slept with Fang Fang. Also incorrect. All the Post mentions is that she was a campaign volunteer who raised money for him. For all I know or you know, Swalwell is correct is calling this a "false smear." You certainly haven't proven anything. Other than that in the MAGAverse anger counts for way more than facts. But let's assume you're right, and Swalwell boned her. Because that gets to why Trump will lose in 2024, I think. We then have to assume that every young stud with a libido involved in politics should be particularly careful about every hot Chinese woman (or man) he knows. Because s/he might be a spy. Which I think was the whole "Eek! Chow mein!" thing @alvnv was getting at. Trump simply attacked an Asian Cabinet member of his for being Asian. So let's assume like MTG does that Swalwell was wrong for boning Fang Fang. Even though he stopped boning her when the FBI said, "Um. We suggest you stop boning that spy woman." Or something like that. You can make a case that under the highest of ethical standards, Swalwell should have assumed that Chinese woman was a spy, and not have boned her. Or maybe he should have assumed any woman can be a spy, and not boned anyone until he was married. Poor guy! But that's the rub. If we make such assumptions, here's what follows: Trump should have assumed every hot woman near him did NOT want to be raped. Trump should NOT have assumed every hot woman near him wants her pussy grabbed by some powerful old guy. Trump should NOT have assumed he won the 2020 election when all the evidence says the exact opposite. Trump should NOT have assumed that of course at least 11, 780 more votes in Georgia were cast for him. Trump should NOT have assumed that the MAGAzens he incited to go to The Capitol and beat cops were very fine people just protecting their democratic rights. I could go on endlessly. But you get the point. Please. Raise the standards as high as you can. It makes it that much more obvious to everyone outside the MAGAverse why Trump is such a dismal political and moral failure.

Who started World War II? I don't recall. And now Germany and Japan are both strong US allies. Vlad might want to factor that into his calculations. This has not gone well for Russia. And it ain't gonna end well for Russians. Even China is becoming wobbly. So much for eternal friendship. And don't worry about Americans killing Russians. The Ukrainians you love, respect, and want peace for are very busy killing Russians right now. In a war Russia started. Probably best to focus on that.