stevenkesslar

It's better you just post videos, @Barknaway. Because when you open your mouth, you just spout ignorance and hate and stupidity. Yup, blame everything on immigrants. I'm stupid. I'm a hater. Blame the fucking immigrants! I have no facts. I just post lie after lie after lie after lie every day. But fuck! I'm MAGA now. I can say any ignorant thing I want and it has to be true. One of many reasons I stopped watching your videos is that in a number of them somewhat honest posters admit this is just some shit I read on the internet. I have no idea whether it is true or not. But pass it along. You folks prize ignorance like a badge of honor. There is an obvious common denominator here. It is not immigrant status. It is vaccination status. The dead American child, and most of the children affected, have that in common. Not vaccinated. Texas is not releasing the immigration status of the children, or their names. I think they think the important fact here is that they're not vaccinated. But what do health experts know? The non-ignorant bright idea here is that vaccinated children likely won't catch or spread measles from other kids, whether they are immigrants or not. And they won't die. And by the way, Trump is POTUS now. And measles spreads quickly. So this is on Trump. Since MAGA blamed Biden for the death of anyone an immigrant killed, if you think this may have been because of an immigrant - with no proof - then you should blame Trump for the child's death. If some immigrant child crossed the border with measles and spread it, that had to have happened while Trump was POTUS. More likely, it is a direct result of the lack of vaccination. But that would mean Trump is accountable. We can't have that! Facts and bright ideas just get in the way of your ignorance and hate campaign. So go back to your videos. You have a lot of work to do. Trump is getting less popular by the day. Ever wonder why? IGNORANT LIAR

No one knows for sure. But the most likely explanation for the insolent pig's outburst is that he wanted a political win last Friday. If that is true, he should be pissed at his own Vice President and his own temper for fucking that up. Is it possible the insolent pig and his recklessness is his own worst enemy? That would sure be a shocker, wouldn't it? 🤪 All Trump did is expose that his stupid and vain brain sucks at making deals. I think it is better for the world and Ukraine and Europe if they just make deals around Trump, for a while. The ego and stupidity of the insolent pig can be manipulated to bring him on board later. What a humiliating embarrassment that this vain insolent pig is our leader!

Trump and Zelenskyy’s White House clash a ‘deliberate escalation’ by US, says Germany’s Merz U.S. president’s rage was pre-planned, likely next chancellor says. The insolent pig Trump is a traitor. The insolent pig Trump is stupid and vain. Thanks to his stupidity and vanity and ego and recklessness, he is destroying our alliances with Europe. The insolent pig Trump is breaking America.

Trump’s ‘indecency’ endangers transatlantic alliance: French PM François Bayrou calls U.S. president’s treatment of Zelenskyy “a staggering scene marked by brutality.” The insolent pig Trump is a traitor. The insolent pig Trump is stupid and vain. Thanks to his stupidity and vanity and ego and recklessness, he is destroying our alliances with Europe. The insolent pig Trump is breaking America.

I know I am in full rant mode with long posts. But I am learning a lot of new things. And I assume everyone who is not interested just ignores what I post. Top Republicans say they want Ukraine deal 'back on track' That was completely predictable. Again, Mike Johnson spoke for most Americans when he said we want Putin to be defeated. But most Americans are sober, and realize for now he can't be. Sorry we feel that way. Couldn't happen to a nicer genocide maker. I don't think JD Vance speaks for most Republican Senators. I think most of them want the US to keep arming Ukraine. They probably also want to offer Zelenskyy the security guarantees he wants. But they know they have to blow smoke up Trump's ass constantly. In Trump 1.0, the grown ups in the room were in the White House. One very clear indicator that the insolent pig has the brain of a child seeking retribution is that he made sure all the people he appointed are loyal to him. But I think this proves that he just can't do that with Republicans in the Senate and House. Johnson will blow smoke up Trump's ass, and then make pro-Ukraine deals. Thune seems to not even have to bother blowing smoke up Trump's ass. He just does what the majority of Republican Senators want. Which is his job. This confirms that the majority of Republican Senators want to defend Ukraine. Despite Trump's affection for Genocide Man, his mafia crony. If I had to bet, I'd bet that statement is wishful thinking. Trump runs the administrative branch. And he wants it his way. There is a silver lining on that cloud. In theory, Trump can keep Putin defanged for four years. Meanwhile, the EU can get organized around its own defense against Putin. If a Democrat wins in 2028, the bipartisan consensus is back on track. That is far from perfect. But it is probably good enough. I haven't read much about Zaluzhnyi until you mentioned him. But I can see lots of advantages in him beating Zelenskyy in an election. 1. If there is an election, it means there is at least some kind of fragile truce. 2. As you said, he is wildly popular. Ukrainians love him. 3. He is pro-NATO and effective at killing Russians, by all accounts. Vlad does not like him. NATO and US hawks love him. 4. He dresses better than Zelenskyy. Hopefully, he can tell stories about how Trump, in every war he has fought in, felled thousands of enemies with his erect penis alone. He will tell Trump stories about how Ukrainians read books to their children about how wise and powerful Trump is. And how handsome. If only Trump could be King of Ukraine! The fourth part may be the most important to Ukraine's future, sadly. That is how stupid and narcissistic our insolent pig is. And now we are stuck with him.

You're funny. You are such a lying hypocrite. This is rich coming from you. Getting Zaluzhny, a popular general, is like stepping out of the frying pan into the fire for Putin. He is pro-NATO, as that anecdote above explains. If you are looking for another corrupt Friend Of Vlad's this guy is not who you want. Vlad knows that, which is probably why Vlad put him on a "wanted" list. Too bad he can't kill him, like he does all his domestic political opponents. The main reason Ukraine can't have an election now is also thanks to Vlad. They are in a war. I'm sure Zelenskyy, like any politician, would prefer to win any election he is in. But he did appoint and promote Zaluzhny. What this makes obvious is that Vlad has also made Ukraine a very militarist society. They have to be, because their lives and existence are on the line. I don't know Ukraine at all. But it might be a bit like the US in the 1950s, when we had a very popular General as President. I don't think this is good for Russia. On a similar note, I read this today: I think that is a great summary of the basic conflict, and the motivations. I am pretty certain Zelenskyy is speaking genuinely from the heart. Ukraine hates Putin. Ukraine hates Russia. The only good Russians are dead Russians. And Ukrainians have killed a lot of them. I don't think this is what Putin had in mind when he invaded. I don't think Ukraine was a CIA-designed trap for Putin. It is obvious how Ukrainians feel without any help from the CIA. But if you want to to believe this was a CIA trap, Putin was a fool to walk into it. I will repeat the basic principle of Brzezinski, which played out exactly as he hoped in Afghanistan for the USSR, and then for the US. It played out the same way for Poland, his beloved homeland, as well as the rest of the Warsaw Pact. His point was that even when Poles more or less accepted the USSR as an inevitable reality, and didn't mind it all that actively, it was still only a matter of time. It was easy to pick the threads of the alliance apart, with zero actual weapons. Sending in a beloved Polish Pope really put that on steroids. In Ukraine, you have deep and active and daily hate of Russians. I've been in Europe a lot, and know that many Europeans know more about the US political system than Americans do. So I'm guessing many Ukrainians know that this is a war in the US between two political parties. And even between two factions in the Republican Party. It will not last forever. But what will last forever, or at least a century, is the deep hatred for Russia Genocide Man has now created in Ukraine. Good luck with that.

Top HHS spokesperson quits after clashing with RFK Jr. Thomas Corry resigned over disagreements with the HHS secretary and his approach to the measles outbreak. Donald Trump's 4 Year Plan. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat.

Texas measles outbreak grows to 146 cases, largest in decades The latest update comes two days after the first death was reported in a school-aged child who lived in the outbreak area. Donald Trump's 4 Year Plan. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat. Break shit. Then it won't work. Repeat.

This is just a different dumb ass version of the yapping dog's Canada v. US. A big lose-lose for the US and our allies, that the insolent pig does not seem to realize strengthens China. There’s Only One Winner in a U.S.-EU Trade War: China Here’s how a common U.S.-EU trade strategy on China can help avoid a transatlantic trade war. I think the verdict is in last Friday that, given the choice between America First or America Alone, Trump will take America Alone. If he can't have America First on his terms, he'd rather not have it at all. He'll see America Alone as a victory. MAGA will yappingly agree. The big problem with this article's idea is simple: no tariffs is like saying bad shit about his pal Vlad to Trump. Don't even bother. Ain't gonna fly. The insolent pig's brain thinks like a child seeking retribution. It can't handle the complexity of what this author lays out. As a Democrat my basic instinct would always be to celebrate when the SPD wins in Germany. I remember the days when the SPD's Gerhard Schroeder and Putin were allied in trying to stop the US from invading Iraq. It absolutely infuriated Republican friends that I agreed with Schroeder and Putin. They thought I was un-American. Look how that played out. 😉 So right now I feel like it is a happy coincidence that Germany elected a very pro-NATO and pro-US and hard ass conservative leader instead. If you throw Merz and Donald Tusk and Macron and Starmer in a room, you may have a Europe that can be solid behind Ukraine. Trump won't be. The author of this article is right that Trump now has a natural ally in Germany - if Trump thought like Reagan did. But he doesn't. He is just an insolent pig, traitorous to allies. So now the question is whether the EU, with a strong German leader, can get its shit together while Trump focuses on breaking as much shit as he can.

You posted that in between me making two posts on polls. So that CBS poll answers your question. It is taken from the 26th to the 28th, and the Oval Office shit show was on the 28th. So it will be interesting to see whether that shifts perceptions a little. I think Trump's authoritarian followers have mostly spoken. They are on his side. I suspect some Republican veterans are getting worried about Trump, though. Those guys really don't like Putin. So one way to answer your question is that the glass is 96 % empty. Very few Americans sympathize with Russia. I think 96 % of Americans are right. No American forced Putin to decide to invade Russia. If joining NATO is the pretext, it was always an empty promise. Again, if I could go back to Bucharest in 2008 and show W. what the impact of the empty promise would be, maybe he would have shut the fuck up. Regardless, it was an empty promise. It's just as likely that Putin would have invaded anyway. Either way, that glass is 96 % empty. And I have now shown you several polls that confirm that almost no one in America sympathizes with Putin or Russia. That said, I think there has been a disappointing but not surprising shift. Republicans, not Democrats or Independents, are suddenly a lot more likely to say that we support neither side. It's the same thing as saying we abandoned our allies, but it sounds nicer. I think there is also a shift that more Republicans are willing to say maybe Russia is friendly. It is too early to tell. But one third of Americans, mostly Republicans, saying Russia is friendly is a big increase from a few months ago, I think. And Putin can thank Trump for that. As a Democrat who sympathizes with Ukraine, I have no fundamental problem with any of this. I can make a great argument that this is cleaner than what would have happened if Harris has won. Either way, most people - most importantly Ukrainians - now see the war as a stalemate. The big plus with Trump is that he may be able to get Putin to play nice for at least as long as he is POTUS. I will keep arguing that he is, in effect, the security guarantee Ukraine wants. But only for four years. Your stupid AI model did not understand that "from now on" really has to mean until 2028. Depending on what happens in 2028, things may be very different in 2029. Hold that thought. Either way, Putin's unprovoked invasion was halted at a terrible price to Russia. And almost no price to the US. I wrote it that way intentionally. The job of the US was to support our ally. We did. If people died in Ukraine, that is because Genocide Man killed them. The US did not kill any people. Ukraine asked for help, and the EU and NATO and the US gave them the help they asked for. And while many of Trump's followers know very little about NATO or the EU, and say lots of incredibly ignorant things, those polls above confirm that almost all Americans want Europe as our ally. Not Putin. But Republicans don't want to help Ukraine anymore, because Trump runs their party now. He likes authoritarian leaders like Putin, and aspires to be one himself. So that now all has to play out. Again, Vlad must be laughing his ass off. Enjoy the show. It won't be pretty.

And I'll repeat Republican Senator Lisa Murkowksi's quote, too: When she said that a few days ago, it was meant as an admonition. Not surprisingly, it also kind of worked as a prediction. But it is complicated, and involves a Republican mind fuck to get there. From the same CBS poll I quoted above: So those first two polls mostly show that nothing has changed. Almost nobody supports Russia. Almost all Americans see Europeans as allies, or at least friendly. I'm sure if CBS had polled Mike Johnson's exact language above - "Putin is the aggressor" and "I'd like to see Putin defeated" most Americans would agree. With many politically ignorant MAGA Republicans, you would first have to explain that Mike Johnson is the Republican Speaker of the House, and an ally of Trump. That is how authoritarian followers think. Just tell me what Trump says. He is always right. I obey. Those second two polls are a disappointment, but not a surprise. Trump shit all over Zelenskyy for saying what most Americans think about Putin. Meanwhile, he went on and on about what poor Vlad and him had to go through when Vlad interfered in a US election. I'm pretty sure most Trump supporters who actually watched that felt sorry for the insolent pig, if not his Russian pal. It's not really true that the US walked away from Ukraine and our allies. The Republican Party under Trump walked away from Ukraine and our allies. And that's not really true, either. Because Johnson knows Zelenskyy is telling the truth about Putin. He is saying the same things himself - much more forecefully than Zelenskyy does. And politically uninformed authoritarian followers who like the idea of having allies in Europe probably have no idea that Trump is destroying the very alliances they say they want. So everyone just has to dance around Trump while he breaks shit. It is incredibly fucked up and ignorant. But it is where we are. Trump loves to break shit. The theme of Season Two really is RETRIBUTION. And until it becomes clear to more people that broken shit doesn't work, they will applaud that breaking shit is really cool. Meanwhile, Putin is laughing his ass off.

I posted these Zelenskyy quotes already in another thread. But they are funny, and sad: Zelenskyy said this: First, polls consistently show this is how most Americans feel. A brand new CBS poll after the Oval Office shit show shows one third of Americans see Russia as an enemy, one third as unfriendly, and only one third see Russia as friendly or an ally. Second, this is the exact opposite of what Trump thinks and says. This kind of language is now branded as unhelpful, if not warmonger, for people like Trump who want Peace. Third, these were actually things House Speaker Mike Johnson just said, in an article about why Zelenskyy may have to resign. He is basically saying Trump is wrong, and Zelenskyy is correct, and saying what most Americans think. And Zelenskyy should have to resign for that. WTF?

Putin can, and in fact has, come up with an endless list of grievances about how Ukraine or NATO forced him to invade. But no one forced him to invade. The easy way for me to agree with your basic point is to go back to Bucharest in 2008. Donald Trump was a reaction to many things. But many of those things were George W. Bush. In the film version, I would send the 2025 version of Donald Trump back to Bucharest, I would have him show W. what the bloody current outcome would be for Ukraine. I'd also show him the devastation in Iraq. And the humiliating end in Afghanistan. I might add January 6th, and point out that the reaction against you led to this. George. And add how his Veep's daughter is now persona now grata among the new MAGA Republican Party. I don't think W. planned on any of that. So my hope is he would react in abject horror, and shut the fuck up about Ukraine joining NATO. On an objective level, it is now clear that no good came of it so far. Kissinger at the time said that Ukraine should be a neutral bridge between Russia and the West. Maybe that was a better idea. That said, I think the same holds true for Putin. This is clearly a good moment for Putin. Maybe a bit like W. under his "Mission Accomplished" sign in Iraq. Famous last words. But W. actually thought he had won in Iraq. All Putin has is a bloody stalemate. My argument, which you won't agree with, is that this has already gone badly for Putin. And it's not going to end well in the long run. It is interesting that you focus on 2019 in your journal of grievances. Trump was President then. And he would kick you out of the Oval Office, too, @Moses, for suggesting that he did not have his buddy Vlad's back. So what if Zelenskyy did this or that? Trump wasn't going to let them join NATO. Nor was Biden. Nor did Biden. Nor will Trump now. It's a weak argument to say that Putin had to invade Ukraine because of something that has been talked about for 15 years, but has always been an empty promise. I will repeat again that, for all his horrors, I would take Trump over W. in a heartbeat. At least this version of the Republican Party isn't launching an adventure like Iraq. And if Harris had won I think there would have been pressure to find a way to freeze the stalemate, too. So I'm personally good with a break in the forever wars. And its now clear that both Ukraine and the EU won't make it easy for Trump to throw their interests under the bus to make a deal Putin would love.

Brzezinski Interview 1998 Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski on Afghanistan in Le Nouvel Observateur So this post will be really off the rails. I am long winded, anyway. But this one is a bunch of complicated but fascinating ideas. In summary, my point is that I would be quite worried that Putin just won a huge battle, but will still lose the war. This post is about Afghanistan and Poland, in particular. And the point is that Zbig, as I will call him, was a native Pole who was the hawk in the Carter Administration. His theories about how these national conflicts play out over the long haul have sure proven to be accurate, every time. His belief in the Carter years was that Poland was too culturally different than Russia for the Warsaw Pact to last. And the job of the US was to gradually and slowly engage in positive ways and pick that alliance apart. That strategy obviously worked under Reagan and Bush 41. Putin would argue that if any country is just like Russia, it is Ukraine. I've never been to Ukraine. So what do I know? But I suspect Zbig's theory is right in this case, as well. Whatever peace or truce or stalemate is created, this will never be forgotten or forgiven by Ukrainians. At some point, when Brezhnev Andropov Gorbachev Yeltsin Putin is dead, Ukraine will probably get their chance for what they all now want: to get out of Russia's orbit forever. Trump will just be a sad chapter in history. The way I got to Brzezinski and 1980 is something Jeffrey Sachs said in that interview I posted above. Sachs is the peacenik who I admire. He is sympathetic with Putin's view, that somehow Putin was almost forced to invade because of NATO. Sachs claimed in the article I posted that Zbig admitted before he died that he and Carter started funding the Afghan rebels even before Brezhnev invaded Afghanistan. He said their goal was to lure the USSR into a Vietnam-like trap. I had never heard that before. So Sachs railed against the US, and also indirectly the USSR. Both empires broke this poor nation Afghanistan for 40 years, he argues. No wonder people hate the US, and the USSR or Russia. We treat their countries like toys, break them, and walk away. I agree with his overall rant about US and USSR and Russian imperialism. He is largely right. Exhibit A for me on the US side is always the Iraq War. But part of Sachs' point is that Afghanistan was a disaster for both the USSR and the US. Brezinski's theory was that this kind of subjugation is always easy to gradually pick apart, if you try. So he thought the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, a country that has always repelled outsiders, was a sitting duck. He was right. This is from the 1998 interview of Zbig I hyperlinked above Famous last words. Little did Zbig know that those agitated Muslims would attack America in 2001, and draw the US into the same quagmire. So both the US and USSR are guilty of enormous amounts of stupidity and hubris. Sachs is wrong on his point about Zbig, I think. I found some 104 page essay on this topic from 2012 and read the whole thing. Carter and Zbig did not lure the US into Afghanistan. They of course did not want the invasion. In part because it made Carter look weak. Zbig's point is that if the Soviet Union does invade, we will help the indigenous rebels turn it into the their VietNam. The first installment from the US was only $500,000 in non-lethal aid, given months before the invasion. When it was pretty clear the USSR would invade. So my rejoinder to Sachs is that Afghanistan has done a pretty good job fucking up their country on their own, thank you. When neither the USSR nor US were helping. But it does speak to how even the biggest superpowers in the world can not subject people who don't like them for long. The really fascinating parts of that essay go into great detail about how the beginning of the end of the Warsaw Pact started under Carter. Again, Zbig's theory was that people in Poland and the Iron Curtain wanted to be free. So he pushed the idea that instead of being afraid of provoking Breshnev, we should be doing everything we can to promote Western values and ideals in Poland. Fate intervened, and perhaps God was on Poland's side for once. Zbig met Pope John Paul II when they were both nobodies. They became immediate allies, Poles who hated the USSR domination. In a few years Zbig was in the White House, and we had our first Polish Pope. They talk about when the Iron Curtain really ended was when John Paul II went to his Polish homeland in 1979. We all know the history. It took another very messy decade or so for Poland to become a free market democracy, and for the USSR to collapse. But Zbig's basic theory has proved true, whether in a Muslim nation like Afghanistan or Catholic Poland. When Zbig and Reagan and the Pope set about to turn all these cultural and political and economic cracks into canyons, it really wasn't particularly hard. I think Ukraine falls into exactly the same historical pattern. I'm quite sure the CIA manipulated the hell out of Ukraine. Just like Putin has manipulated US elections. Did the CIA actually set a trap for Putin to invade Ukraine, knowing it would be a quagmire like Afghanistan? First, there is no proof. Second, I doubt it. Much like Carter did not want to be seen as weak when the USSR invaded Afghanistan, I don't think Trump or Biden or anyone wanted Putin to invade Ukraine. Whether it was intended or not, has Ukraine been a trap for Russia? Yes. I think it has. It killed lots of Russians. It screwed up your economy. And so far what you have is a bloody stalemate. And while it seemed objectively true 10 or 20 years ago that Ukrainians were neutral if not friendly to Russia, that world is gone. They hate you. They just spent years killing you. Zelenskyy was undiplomatic in the Oval Office for a reason. His people clearly hate Putin, and don't trust Russia to do anything but kill them, rape them, and steal their children. Trump has put Republicans in the impossible position of having to argue everything Zelenskyy says about Putin is true. But he should resign for saying so. Even though most Americans and Ukrainians agree with him. Putin did not have to invade. I think everything Brzezinski argued correctly would play out in Afghanistan and Poland and the rest of the Warsaw Pact will probably play out in Ukraine as well. You and I agree, I think, that as long as Trump is POTUS there will be some kind of peace or truce or stalemate in Ukraine. Neither Trump not Putin will want to mess with each other. So that is potential good news. I don't think Trump will convince the US, or the EU, that Putin is now our ally. Quite the opposite. But there will be a cold peace, at least. I would be worried that this is much worse than Poland in 1980. The reality is that the USSR could have invaded and crushed Poland in 1980, and almost did. The fact that they were bogged down in Afghanistan actually saved Poland from an invasion, some former Brezhnev associates have argued. But I'm sure the USSR could have crushed Poland's nascent rebellion if they tried. They did try to crush Ukraine. And it failed, badly. So now everyone gets a time out. But there is no reason to think the Ukrainians won't be just like the Poles. I think Putin walked into it a trap of his own making. Check with me in a decade, when Trump is long gone. And Putin is either old, or dead.

Thanks for a clear answer. That is the big one, of course. And I think it is clear that Putin has won that, at a very steep price for both Russia and Ukraine. This may not be entirely fair. But I do blame this on W. His two great horrors were the Iraq War and the Global Financial Crisis. The first was clearly his fault. I blame the second on him as well, since he ran all the regulatory agencies that at the very least tolerated Wall Street building a mortgage time bomb. But W.'s insistence that Ukraine had to join NATO could be seen as a third time bomb, that just took longer to go off. John Mearsheimer is one of my Top 10 academics that I listen to a lot. He is viewed by some as a Putin apologist. But mostly what he talks about is how Ukraine joining NATO was of course always going to be an existential threat to Russia. I think the honest statement that has to be added to that now is that the US turned out to be a paper tiger. If Ukraine wanted to be part of NATO, and the US was absolutely determined to make it so, that is one thing. But the US has basically shown again it is unreliable in the long run. So with 20/20 hindsight I think W was the original sin back in 2008. Congratulations. If Putin's goal was to keep Ukraine out of NATO, I think he won that. At least for a long time to come. That said, no one forced Putin to invade. It's not like Zelenskyy was just about to sign a treaty joining NATO. Quite the opposite. W.'s original sin in 2008 - if we view it as a sin - was that it was an empty promise. Ukraine was divided about NATO until Putin invaded. Now they are unified in hating Putin, and wanting nothing to do with Russia. So the ironic thing is that, now that Ukraine is unified around hating Russia and wanting to be in NATO, suddenly Trump wants to take away the empty promise. History has many strange and sad turns.

Great, Vlad. I cited the source. But you don't believe facts. Third time in a row, thank you. You are good at proving how stupid AI is.

The Gilded Age Is Back — And That Should Worry Conservatives It's a massive conflict of interest. Musk has specifically gone after the government agencies that regulate his businesses, and enforce public safety. But the obstinate pig Trump won't get in President Musk's way.

Again, thanks. You are proving AI is stupid. It actually does cite the You Gov/Economist poll I am referring to. Trump said that Ukraine started the war. In the UN, he amazed the world by having the US (along with Russia, and North Korea) vote against a resolution calling Russia the aggressor. In fact, only 4 % of Americans say Ukraine started the war. So Trump actually disagrees with 96 % of Americans on that. It's not an exaggeration. It's treason, as far as I am concerned. The same poll shows that only 3 % of Americans sympathize with Russia more than Ukraine. Anyone watching that Oval Office slap down could logically conclude that Trump does not sympathize with ungrateful Ukraine. But he talked a lot about what poor Vlad and him had to go through together, when Vlad interfered in US elections. So I think it's fair to say Trump sounds like he disagrees with 97 % of Americans, who do not sympathize with Putin and Russia the way he does. Again, Mike Johnson twisted himself into a pretzel disagreeing with Trump while blaming Zelenskyy for saying my people need security guarantees. I sympathize with poor Mike Johnson, having to cover up and lie for Trump all the time. You did not answer my question, so I will repeat it: And on this subject, I have a question for you, our local Russia expert. Assuming there is some kind of cease fire or "peace" agreement, whatever form it takes, do you think Putin would break it while Trump is POTUS, and try to take all of Ukraine again? Again, I think the answer is no. Trump is Putin's great gift. I think Putin will take the win, and let Trump break US alliances and be the insolent pig he is. I've said several times, and will keep saying, it is a huge win for Russia. Putin and his piglet obviously feel that way. But I at least hope the silver lining for Ukraine is that Trump and Putin both have to appease each other. And MAGA does not support Putin. So hopefully Putin will act like he wants peace while Trump is POTUS. I hope. What do you think?

Again, thanks for educating me about how stupid AI really is. At least whatever model you are using. I'll just focus on the first statement, which is obviously a figure of speech AI didn't get. Trump has revealed in clear terms that he is a traitor who sides with Putin's view of the world, unlike 95 % of Americans. So it's very logical to think "from now on" we'll need a different strategy - through 2028. AI probably did not get that I was referring to our next Presidential election. After 2028, "from now on" may mean something very different. It's early days. But it's a pretty good guess that a lot of Americans will feel, "This is not what I voted for when I voted for Trump. I don't want Genocide Man as an ally." If a Democrat is elected, I'm guessing Ukraine and Europe will will be quite happy, and welcome US leadership back. Just a hunch. Check and see what AI thinks. And here's another job for AI. Ask AI to figure out Mike Johnson's latest set of illogical verbal contortions, to defend the insolent pig Trump. So there you have Mike Johnson clearly contradicting the insolent pig Trump, who called Zelenskyy a dictator and said Ukraine started the war. Johnson is accurately stating what most Americans think, according to polls. And yet the point of the article is that Johnson is saying Zelenskyy may have to resign, for saying things much less negative about Putin. Zelenskyy's main point in the meeting with Trump, and with US Senators beforehand, was that we can't have peace without security guarantees. Which is exactly what doves like Jeffrey Sachs are saying as well: Ukraine and all these countries, like Estonia, need "security guarantees" so hat Genocide Man will not attack them. Again, most Americans agree. See if AI can figure out why Johnson is contradicting Trump's lies, while saying Zelenskyy may have to resign for stating things most Americans agree with? And on this subject, I have a question for you, our local Russia expert. Assuming there is some kind of cease fire or "peace" agreement, whatever form it takes, do you think Putin would break it while Trump is POTUS, and try to take all of Ukraine again? My answer is no. I think Putin understands that the insolent pig Trump is a huge gift for Russia. So he will just sit back and enjoy all the damage Trump does to US interests, and the interests of our allies. No reason for him to pick a fight with Trump. If true, "from now on" until 2028 Trump himself is a sort of security guarantee for Ukraine. Because Putin won't want to get in the way of all the things Trump will break. If true, it is a silver lining in the cloud of his betrayal of Ukraine. That also gives the EU and Ukraine four years to get their shit together on security guarantees, if they can. Because under Trump it is clear that the US is unreliable as shit to our allies.

It's a shame @Barknaway doesn't post fewer videos. And more thoughtful ones like these ones with Jeffrey Sachs. When he first started his mindless and endless yapping, I watched every one of at least 50 videos. Maybe more like 100. I wanted to see what I would learn. Basically what I learned is that there is an awful lot of stupid in MAGAland. Seasoned generously with outrageous lies and extra helpings of hate. Mostly I think the MAGA concept is a torrent of nonsense that will intimidate and suppress, while they bitch about censorship. LOL. What a joke. Personally, I welcome it. The more MAGA spews their venom, the shorter their political lifespan. They barely came back from the dead, thanks to inflation. And Joe Biden being too close to being dead. And now they are racing right back into their coffin. It is an intellectual disservice to Sachs to throw him in with this cauldron of ignorance, lies, and hate. But since you have: Jeffrey Sachs: Bipartisan Support of War, from Iraq to Ukraine, Is Helping Fuel U.S. Debt Crisis That's a nice and relatively recent Sachs 101 interview. I strongly agree with him that warmongering is not good for our budget. How about child tax credits instead? If we put money in the hands of the working class, like AMLO's party in Mexico did, maybe we could win a landslide like his party did, too. I have read and watched lots and lots of Sachs for many years. I agree with most of what he says. So I'll make these comments. 1. It would be helpful if the Republican Party had been on board with Sachs 20 years ago, or more. He is right that there is a bipartisan military industrial complex. Ike said that loudly, even though he helped create it. Obama said it quietly, even though he helped use it - unsuccessfully, as Sachs argues - in Libya. That said, the Republicans are the biggest warmongers most of the time. Exhibit A: W., and weapons of mass destruction. The US was the warmonger and aggressor. Why didn't Republicans listen to Sachs then? 2. My main gripe with Team Trump is that they want to end this war and ally with Russia and Putin, which 95 % of America does not want. Why? So they can prepare for war with China, who they think is the competitor we need to arm up for. I don't disagree that China is a threat. But, again, I mostly agree with Sachs. He is arguing that getting out of the fire with Ukraine to jump into the frying pan, or nuclear Armageddon, with China is really fucking stupid. I agree. 3. I do have a problem with saying Ukraine or the EU are "warmongers" for wanting to defend themselves from an aggressor. I do wish, like Michael Caine suggested, that Trump and Republicans would just calm down. They went from this extremely aggressive pro-war strategy in Iraq, which was doomed to fail and did, to the opposite: an abandonment of our principles and our allies. And that is not a principled Republican doctrine, as lots of Republicans trashing Trump right now are being clear about. My Republican Dad is rolling in his grave. This is just Trump being a horrible diplomat and POTUS. He basically sees Putin as a fellow criminal or mafia thug he knows and can work with. 4. Sachs uses the right two words, which are exactly the two words Zelenskyy got into trouble over: "security guarantees". What are the security guarantees for Ukraine? And, as Sachs asks, for the Baltics? What if Estonia is the next target? Maybe it was undiplomatic for Zelenskyy to "Ukraine-splaine" this on TV. But I am glad he did. As Sachs would argue, we have a right to know! Trump should have an answer. Not an insulting lecture to our allies about how ungrateful they are. Or a stupid Tik Tok video with lies and hate. 5. I completely agree with Sachs that Europe should take the lead, both diplomatically and militarily. These two paragraph I read today were music to my ears: I'm not sure "from now on" actually makes sense. But it clearly makes sense "from now on" until 2028. It's all so up in the air that it's not clear whether Trump is negotiating with Putin, or the EU is, or Ukraine is, or all three. Trump clearly wants to play the honest broker. That's kind of a funny concept in an of itself. But if it keeps Putin from more genocide, I think anything is worth a try. 6. I keep reminding myself that Trump is still a million times better than W. So far, at least. I thought the legacy of W. was two global shit bombs: Iraq and the Global Financial Crisis. Which all the federal agencies W. ran helped set up. Or at least tolerated, while Wall Street planned a global meltdown. I think it is now fair to say that W. left a third ticking time bomb, by insisting in 2008 that Ukraine had to be part of NATO. There are good arguments on both sides of that debate. But I think the verdict is in: it was a key factor in why Putin invaded. But that does not justify an invasion. And Putin has lost the war. Because now everyone in Ukraine would prefer their brothers and sisters in Russia to simply be dead. That is the big humanitarian win of Putin's invasion and genocide. Ukraine wants Russia to just die. The consensus is now that they want to be in the EU. Good luck changing their mind, Vlad. You'll have to invade them and kill them instead. 7. The best model for success is the US/NATO/UN/EU intervention in the Balkans in the 1990's, that did stop a genocide. The lesson I take from that is that someone had to be a leader. And come up with a tough plan to punish anyone who did not agree to peace. Clinton did that. He finally grew the balls to bomb the shit out of whoever would not come to the table and negotiate. A second lesson, which Sachs alludes to, is that the EU at worst can be a paralyzed nightmare of bureaucracy. Clinton ultimately felt that he had to work around the paralysis of the EU and UN. So if Trump wants to play Clinton, and see if he can create a lasting peace, good luck to him. Little Marco was spouting off today about how Trump is the only guy in the world who can even bring Putin to the table. What ridiculous bullshit. But this is not a horrible configuration. Let Ukraine and the EU take the lead on defining what "security guarantees" in Europe means. Starmer is right that the US will ultimately have to get behind it. But if Trump wants to play peacemaker with Putin, go for it. It is better that Trump NOT try to define security architecture. Because he sucks at it. 8. Trump's end game here is still to ally with Putin, a stupid and unpopular idea that won't work, to prepare to go to war with China. The warmongers Sachs does not like are assembling around Trump to plan for that. So anyone who is taking Sachs seriously ought to be afraid of where the Trump Train and its warmonger club car are ultimately headed. By the way, at first I thought this might be some joke. That EU diplomat or parliamentarian or whoever he is in that video sure looks like Sascha Baron Cohen!

Of course Putin has no loyalty to Trump. We agree. The question is, what does "conquer" mean? Do you think Putin would try to conquer Ukraine while Trump is President? No one knows, of course. But I don't think that. I think the insolent pig Trump is far too valuable to Putin, and Putin will not piss Trump off. As you're saying, he knows Trump is a fool. Play his weakness and narcissism now, and rebuild for Round Two later. That's at least what I would do if I were as smart and sexy as Vlad. My guess is the insolent pig knows that himself. Let me do something fucked up and weak, call it peace, and get my Nobel Peace Prize. Let's not talk about security guarantees. I could care less what Putin does after he rearms for a few years. Little Marco, the loyal piglet, is running around saying more dumb shit: "What's wrong with Trump trying to be a peacemaker?" Exactly. What's wrong with seeking peace by calling Zelenskky a dictator? What's wrong with seeking peace by telling the ridiculously insane lie that Ukraine started this war? What's wrong with seeking peace by telling the 95 % of Americans who don't want to be allies with a murderous KGB thug that we are all wrong? What insolent pig would think this is the art of the deal? It seems to be all out of Roy Cohn 101. Maybe this shit worked in the Bronx or somewhere. And dealing with Putin is like dealing with the mafia. But Trump is mostly proving how bad he sucks at diplomacy. And how weak he is. I think even his own party understands he wants peace through weakness. This won't lead to his demise. But I don't think this is helping Trump. It will lead more people to think that, as Harris wanted, Putin will eat him for lunch. I think it is in Putin's interest to just sit back, enjoy his good luck, and taunt everybody he would love to rule, but can't. I think that is enough victory for him for now. Little Marco will come to life and pop a boner when he figures out that Putin really does want peace - on his terms. But I don't think that means Trump can hand over Ukraine to Putin. Even the insolent pig is too smart to believe he can get away with that. I hope, at least. If Vlad does goes for broke and try to take Ukraine, it probably is World War III. And if he is really that reckless - which he has NOT been for the last 20 years - there is a cold logic to doing it while Trump is President.

That's not hysteria. That's hysterical, in what it says about both AI and you. I am one of those people who is scared shitless about AI. For all I know, YOU are AI. Maybe @barknaway is AI. If we think misinformation and lies are bad now, just wait. @Barknaway is proof of concept. But this kind of stuff makes me think I am worrying about AI too much. Or, should I say, being hysterical? 😉 Because AI thinks that confrontational language is "disproportionate" to the situation being discussed. Which is G.E.N.O.C.I.D.E. So tell that to millions of Jews and Gays who Hitler slaughtered. Tell them they were being hysterical. Since you have tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of stolen children in Russia, tell them the Moms and Dads who Putin killed were being hysterical. Or just shut the fuck up, lying hypocrite.

He's a principled conservative. To state the obvious, this is the biggest test of democracy in America for a long time. Thankfully, this is not the Civil War. At least not yet. The best comparison to me is VietNam and Nixon. There had to be a center, and it had to hold. In part that meant there was a Silent Majority that did feel things were out of control, and elected Nixon to stop it. But there was a center that held in the Republican Party, too. When they told Nixon he had to go. People who don't agree on most things can meet in the center and agree on some important things. This is one of those times. And Trump makes Nixon look like child's play. Since I am praising Republicans I mostly disagree with, I will add Dan Crenshaw to my list, for two reasons: Dan Crenshaw appears to threaten Tucker Carlson in hot mic moment How can anyone not like Crenshaw for saying that? Except Tucker, of course. Talk about insolent pigs! But here is another think I like about Crenshaw, that I think meets the moment. I would like to put him in a room with Ukraine's Special Ambassador To Kiss Trump's Ass, as well as some EU elitists. Dan Crenshaw: Europeans can boost defense spending or 'shut up' on Ukraine negotiations In fact, 55 % of Americans oppose Trump leaving the EU out of negotiations. 59 % of Americans oppose Trump leaving Ukraine out of negotiations. And Crenshaw can sound ungrateful. Since Europeans have done a lot of things Americans have not done. Like let swarms of Ukrainian women and children into their countries, homes, and schools. Regardless, I think most Americans would agree that the EU should step up. And the more they do it, the more it calls out Trump's pro-Putin treachery.

I think a few things have become relatively clear. Whether intentional or not, Zelenskyy did the world a huge favor by not kissing Trump's ass. As Keir Starmer apparently told him, Zelenskyy now needs to somehow find some way around the obstacle he created by not politely kissing Trump's ass. He needs to somehow mend fences with Trump. The Divine Miss Graham, always a clever political whore, advanced the idea that if Zelenskyy does not resign, he should change his mind or send somebody else. I think the Ukrainian Parliament should appoint a Special Ambassador To Kiss Trump's Ass. Just play the arrogant fuck. The insolent pig advertised to the whole world, and Putin, that he just wants to be stroked and played. So do it. Miss Graham knows that, of course, since licking Trump's ass is now his reason to exist. He proudly advised Zelenskyy to do the same. Zelenskyy is no doubt speaking to his own base. Unlike Trump, he is doing it accurately. America wants to be on Ukraine's side. Not Putin's. So I do believe what Zelenskyy said above probably does reflect how 90 % of Ukraine feels. They want peace with strength. The polls mostly say the same. As opposed to how 90 % of Putin's loyal piglets feel. This mineral deal offered pretty much nothing in the way of security guarantees. Let alone actual weapons. Saying that if Zelenskyy had just kissed Trump's ass somehow it would change Trump's behavior is a dumb idea. Trump is a dumb insolent pig. And his deeply felt affection and loyalty to Putin has been obvious since Day One of Season One. I think Zelenskyy should keep being Zelenskyy, the tough scrapper who calls out the truth about Putin. But they now need a Special Ukrainian Ambassador To Kiss Trump's Ass. Sniffing and licking Miss Graham's ass a little would probably be a good idea, too. 🙄 Breaking Down the U.S.-Ukraine Minerals Deal That was a very helpful article. The way Fareed Zakaria explained it in a brief piece you can Google if you want is that Zelenskyy got pretty much everything he wanted. Fareed described what I would call a $500 billion extortion ok Ukraine as Trump's "protection racket" money. Apparently all that got stripped out. Which this article also seems to confirm. So now it is more like a joint US/Ukraine venture to develop Ukraine's minerals and rebuild Ukraine. As far as it goes, it seems like a good enough idea for a Special Ukrainian Ambassador To Kiss Trump's Ass to finalize. Miss Graham will love it. Whether it actually leads to security guarantees or weapons is a whole different question. Whether the mineral deal itself will lead to anything real is a whole different question, too. The more I read, the more it seems like a fig leaf designed by whores like Miss Graham and Actually Smart People like Bessent to let Trump feel like his dumb ass actually made a very very smart deal. A perfect deal. But nobody seems to know what minerals Ukraine actually has that are feasible to develop. And even if we did, it would take decades to mine and develop and sell them. And even if that made sense, no mining company will invest in a country that could be part of Russia, or at war, a few years from now. So it all goes back to security guarantees. Zelenskyy is doing the right thing by insisting on security guarantees. As long as he keeps doing that, I think he has both Ukraine and Americans on his side. But not our insolent traitorous pig of a POTUS. Ukraine will somehow have to work around that. The interesting question no one can answer is this: will Putin invade Ukraine while Trump is POTUS? My guess is NO. The insolent pig is far too valuable an asset for Putin to piss off. To me, this is one of the best reasons to think Trump could actually do some good, just by appeasing Putin. Maybe Putin will be Hitler, and just decide to go for broke. But I doubt it. So it is a very fucked up way to build a security infrastructure. But as long as Trump is kissing Putin's ass, that may offer some protection to Ukraine. And it may be the best Ukraine can get until the insolent pig is gone.

Economic agreement with Ukraine off the table for now, Bessent says They must believe that most Americans are really stupid. And we get our information from Tik Tok. What's kind of surprising is that Bessent is smart enough to know that most Americans know Trump is spouting Putin's lies and talking points. And they don't agree. But of course Bessent, like Rubio, has to be a loyal piglet. He has to make stupid ideas and traitorous lies sound like artful diplomacy. So the way Trump shows there is "no daylight" between him and Zelenskyy is by calling him a dictator? The way Trump shows there is "no daylight" between him and Ukraine is by saying Ukraine started the war? A MAGA kindergartener could see through that ridiculous bullshit. This is not only a massive break from a mostly bipartisan consensus since Russia invaded Ukraine. It also reveals massive daylight between Trump and the American people. Including his own base. Which is why so many Republicans with principles are speaking out. And why the insolent pig is sending out his obedient and more articulate piglets to at least try to cover his dumb ass.