Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scriver]

Coopernation

[Starver]

You should have an Empire, like us Brits had, or thereabouts. Maybe not exactly the same as our Brit one, but a British Empire nonetheless.

[SaberToothTiger]

Dunamidedos, please put that gif in a spoiler. It slows down viewing the topic on mobile quite taxing on the old internet.

[Loud Whispers]

Union of Cooperative States

[ChairmanPoo]

Dunamidedos, please put that gif in a spoiler. It slows down viewing the topic on mobile quite taxing on the old internet.

Putting it in a spoiler wont decrease the loading times.


I think the forum still has a wap mode. You might want to try that

[Hanslanda]

You should have an Empire, like us Brits had, or thereabouts. Maybe not exactly the same as our Brit one, but a British Empire nonetheless.

Empire of the American States.

[Kagus]

You should have an Empire, like us Brits had, or thereabouts. Maybe not exactly the same as our Brit one, but a British Empire nonetheless.

Empire of the American States.

The Amerimperium.

[misko27]

The only good name is the FREEDOM FORCE FIFTY. Each state will be required by law to send one person to be trained as a superhero.

Anyway, the NY Times published an anonymous op-ed by a senior Trump Administration official, calling themselves a member of the "Resistance" within the administration. This person makes clear that they are not part of the left-wing "Resistance movement", but nonetheless are attempting to, in their words, "preserve our democratic institutions".

Trump has denounced the letter as "gutless".

[Dunamisdeos]

That is a remarkable letter, and shows that there is still hope for reconciliation at the end of this Wonka-esque tunnel ride of political hate.

[Hanslanda]

Finally a bright spot. I am less... Afraid now, of the future than I was before.

[Gentlefish]

I dunno. The fact he feels the need to mention he's continuing to strengthen our "robust" military tells me his heart is still in the wrong place. But I'll take what I can get, eh?

[smjjames]

Hopefully that reconcillation doesn't involve pardoning Trump. Ford may have had good intentions and while we'll never know whether things would have been better if Nixon went through the whole trial, it seems like pardoning Trump would just make things worse. Though pardoning Trump would be a double edged sword because it wouldn't stop him from being subopenaeted and he wouldn't be able to use the 5th.

Anyways, meanwhile, Trump is raging about it and demanding that whoever did the op-ed be turned over to the government (or otherwise have their name revealed).

Finally a bright spot. I am less... Afraid now, of the future than I was before.

There are some people who just won't reconcile, but healing is definetly possible.

I dunno. The fact he feels the need to mention he's continuing to strengthen our "robust" military tells me his heart is still in the wrong place. But I'll take what I can get, eh?

Who? The anonymous author?

[smjjames]

I'm reminded of FiveThirtyEight's analysis of several projected paths that the presidency could take. They recently did a re-analysis and find that the most likely outcomes, at least as far as seems apparent, were routes 1, 7, and 8.

This was, of course, prior to various events indicating that 12 might actually be a contender.

They did a podcast looking over it a few days ago. Didn't listen to it because hard of hearing

That was BEFORE the Woodward exerpts started coming out and then this. It's definetly looking like 12, but hasn't reached the point of constitutional crisis, though I guess in a way it already is since it's pretty unprecedented. Sure, every President gets some resistance, but this is Nixon-is-in-a-drunken-stupor-and-we-must-keep-him-from-doing-dumb-things tier resistance.

[Rolan7]

As the comments show, this public letter only gives fuel to Trump's "anti-establishment" voters.  I don't see how it accomplishes anything else.  If they're truly working against Trump, this admission only reduces their ability to do so, by making him suspicious.

Imagine if Trump had issued a press release through Sarah Sanders that there are insidious forces within the administration, working against him, responsible for the administrations apparent self-contradictions and failures to enact his policies.

We'd call it old news, because he's always gone on about "the swamp", "establishment", etc.  But here is a supposed part of the establishment, verifying it all.  It's 1984's 2-minute hate.

The anonymous author criticises Trump for unpredictability and "little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people".  Unpredictability is the "virtue" his base voted for, and the rest is a meaningless "attack" by the establishment on Trump.

When it comes to actual campaign promises, even this nameless villain acknowledges Trump's "victories":

Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.

These are terrifying times.

If this is real, then the dissenters need to come forward with the evidence necessary for impeachment - as they claim to have.  This essay only strengthens Trump.

[smjjames]

The Democrats have WAY more than plenty of things to use as a basis for impeachment, not like there is a shortage of reasons.

Given what I've read, whoever did the op-ed is going to be outed sooner or later anyway.

However, I agree, they really need to come forward publicly with the evidence.