Dems have spent a full decade claiming that Trump is a fascist, white-supremacist, Hitler-like evil and and an unprecedented threat to US democracy: so much so that they had to embrace and unite with the GOP warmongers and neocons they used to condemn in similar terms just a decade ago.
Yet now, with two months before an election, they seem to be reserving their greatest venom and the bulk of their energy attacking Hasan Piker, who isn't on the ballot (while Trump's main allies and enablers are). And it's hard not to notice that those leading the charge are the ones most loyal to Israel, while Hasan's most consequential impact has to been to help many Democratic challengers who are highly critical of the US/Israel relationship oust AIPAC-funded Israel-First loyalists.
This all seems very telling about the real priorities of these Dem officeholders, and the vast difference between those real prioriteis and they ones they deceitfully tell their voters they most care about:
Israel funds and orchestrates invasions of Western nations. They did it with Spain today, Europe for a decade, and against the US under Biden.
"The carrot" is buying your politicians. "The stick" is mass illegal immigration.
This is fringe thinking at present but will be widely understood and accepted very soon.
Honestly, it's genius.
By genius I mean diabolical.
On average, Left wing politicians are not as pro-Israel as right wingers. Flood these nations under left-control. Population gets angry and elects the right winger. Right winger "stops the flood" but it was really Israel who called off the NGO backed invasion. And obviously they fund and own the right wing candidate. (In our case this is Trump)
Now, they have a dutiful puppet to support their expansionary projects in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Iran etc.
You might be thinking "but Clint wasn't Biden backing them in Gaza?" Well, sure. But that wasn't enough. They wanted Iran and Lebanon, next. Only Trump was compromised enough to give them that.
And you have dumb mfers in America who still look at Israel as an ally.
Insane.
This is insane. Regime change will result in a bloody civil war, killing hundreds of thousands and creating another massive Muslim refugee crisis. Topping a leader is NEVER as easy you think. It almost always results in further involvement, a civil war, and chaos. Resist this!
@nicksortor@washghost1@thatonechick627 100% of bootlickers encourage government crackdowns. The police can easily get the situation under control. Or didn't you notice how militarized the police are?
Forget all the camera angles and slow motion replays. Forget all the nonsense about obeying the polive or losing your life. We all know this is about politics.
Imagine Biden was president and Renee Good was a Christian Republican activist shot dead in her car by federal law enforcement at an anti abortion protest.
What do you think Trump and Musk and the entire MAGA media would be furiously posting about?
We all know.
Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There's ugly speech. There's gross speech. There's evil speech.
And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment.
Keep America free.
When MLK was assassinated on April 4, 1968, RFK had to break the news to his campaign workers, many of whom were black.
This was 4 years after his brother's murder. RFK would be assassinated just 2 months later.
Political violence then was worse than now. Here's what he said:
Most of the videos of The Free Press -- including Bari's podcast -- barely break 10k views on YouTube. On a scale of 1-10 for online impact, this might be a 3.
Whatever the $200m is for, it's not for the real value of her blog, but for Bari's role in spouting Israel propaganda.
Larry Ellison's son -- a family whose overwhelming cause is Israel -- bought Paramount and CBS from Sherri Redstone (who has the same cause), and will now give Bari Weiss $100-200m to buy her Israel state media outlet and put her in charge of CBS News' editorial direction.🇮🇱
@LeadingReport No proof, not even a link to the audit. Just red meat to sow division. Skeptical. Who did the census audit? Republicans? Go figure that's what they would come up with. I hate both parties.
This is actually an extraordinary admission to make for a US Vice President
Vance explains that "the idea of globalization was that rich countries would move further up the value chain while the poor countries made the simpler things."
But he laments that it didn't quite work out this way: as he explains it turns out that poor countries (mostly China) didn't want to just remain cheap labor forever and started moving up the value chain themselves. Which is why, according to him, globalization was a failure.
Meaning that the objective of globalization wasn't to reduce global inequalities but very much to maintain them, to institute a system of permanent economic hierarchy where rich countries would maintain their hold over the most profitable sectors while relegating poor countries to perpetual subordination in lower-value production.
This is basically all you need to know to explain 90% of U.S. foreign policy these past few years: colonial thinking is alive and well, and America's shift of strategy in recent years - away from the previous "Washington Consensus" of "free" markets towards a much more overt attempt to contain and restrict China's development - stems precisely from this mindset.
From semiconductor export controls to investment restrictions, these policies aren't about 'national security' in any genuine sense - they're about trying to preserve a global economic order where, simply put, poorer nations know their assigned place and stay there. At the very core, that's the "China threat": a China that stepped out of the economic lane assigned to it by the West.
It's deeply ironic when you think of it: a global game allegedly designed to "spread market principles" worldwide is being abandoned precisely because it worked too well. When China succeeded better than expected, the response wasn't to celebrate the validation of the game's effectiveness but to change its rules. Precisely because the real unspoken game - but now clearly stated by the U.S. Vice President - was to maintain global inequality, not eliminate it.
All in all, in case they hadn't yet gotten the memo, this sends a very clear message to the developing world: economic development will require challenging a U.S.-dominated economic order that views their advancement as a threat rather than a success. Which incidentally is why Vance's words might actually help accelerate the very redistribution of global economic power he laments, pushing more nations to recognize that genuine development requires strategic independence from a system intended to keep them in their place.