Trump 2.0

[ChpBstrd]

Things like fireside talks only work if people listen - and don't listen to just bullshit him. But MAGAs are so disconnected from reality, besides not switching that on, they would just ignore it.
A big part of that problem is that anti-intellectualism that was always strong in the US (and is strong in e.g. the German AfD). If there is someone with a Prof. title that has worked 30 years in the field tells you that you are wrong... way too many people, instead of thinking about his arguments, will just tell themselves he is bought by XYZ.
And then beleive someone who is actually, proofable bought by XYZ because that is a little bit more comfortable.

Related:

Last summer I spent a lot of time with young men.  I was taken aback how many of them were spouting right-wing talking points without really understanding them.  It turns out that almost all of them watched Joe Rogan's videos, as soon as they came out.  They'd parrot what he said, similar to Limbaugh listeners in the 90s.  (I had thought Rogan was a Bernie supporter, but apparently he had taken a hard right turn.)  There was also a lot of right-wing TikTok going around, but I don't know how influential it actually was, they were just sharing the clips like Millennials would share memes.

I think the left and center need something similarly compelling for younger guys.  Something that will make them feel like they are getting inside knowledge, fresh ideas, etc...  These two youtubers were making the rounds recently:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqiUU8dT95c (Secular Talk)
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RpPTRcz1no (Blonde Politics)

I'm sure there are more, possibly better ones out there.

Exactly. MAGA ideas are everywhere on social media, humor sites/apps, and gaming culture.

All the Democrats I know, on the other hand, want to talk about the latest series they're watching on whatever streaming service (if not what book they've read). They aren't as into humor, short videos, or gaming like young people are doing, and to the extent they're on social media, like Facebook or Reddit, the algos insulate them from the prevalent culture there. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that Democrats have assumptions from the old age of broadcast television/radio, and can't imagine how the people who disagree with them make the decisions they make with all the same (assumed) information.

I've suggested the Democratic Party invest in creating a social media service connecting people who are nominally democrats with local "friends", physical gatherings, grassroots organizations, non-right information sources, etc. This would only be catching up to where the conservatives were doing 20+ years ago, but the cost is now minimal. Would it be more appealing to young people than X? Maybe not, but it would at least be a start and an attempt. Plus it's what you'd need to rebuild those whithered local communities, grassroots organizations, and local networks which could lead to greater commitment from people with busy lives who'd like to help or join something.

As it stands, the Dems have lost generations X, Y, and Z by being the old folks who think of the world in terms of broadcasting.

I disagree with this take. If Dems weren’t on social media of all forms, who would be fighting with Musk, Tate, etc? Who would have heard of AOC or Bernie Sanders? Obama pioneered the use of social media, but underestimated Putin’s resolve. Ultimately our freedoms were used against us and more and more outrageous content became the norm. Extreme identity-questioning went haywire on social media and was amplified by the right (horseshoe theory). Very “leftist” ideas were extremely widespread on social media and perhaps hit an inflection point with a certain Budweiser spokes”girl”. Everyone should question ALL forms of propaganda, not wish for better propaganda from “the other side”.

This may be an idealism vs. effective political tactics debate, but...

• The right wing increasingly controls the media (FoxNews, X,... now Google and Meta are falling into line, and TikTok is set to be purchased or controlled by the ruling party),
• Right-wing voices are systematically amplified by these platforms, which is a well established fact,
• Democrats are increasingly absent from all forms of media, with the right-wingers sucking all the attention,
• Democrats are increasingly being targeted by misinformation and anti-morale campaigns when they use existing social media,
• Democrats are losing the ability to spread information about meetings, protests, elections, organizations, fundraising drives, social organizations, etc. because the algos demote them,
• and Democrats already have far fewer people involved in grass roots organizations or the party itself compared to the right wing.

All these factors together have culminated in a complete loss of influence in all 3 branches of government, and a one-party United States that might never hold another free and fair election. Whatever Dems are currently doing is the pathway to losing. What they need is a communication system that can't be silenced, so that they can re-organize grassroots resistance groups.

So is it morally wrong to create an independent source of information for interested people to connect and work together for IRL change? Is that being as bad as the other propagandists? Isn't the alternative just as suspect - using right-wing platforms and letting them sell your attention for cash that goes to Republicans? What's the moral high ground worth if it leaves America a dictatorship?

Sure people "should" question all propaganda. But what does it mean when there are no longer any alternatives to right-wing propaganda? That essentially summarizes social media right now - and no, bluesky is not the answer. Jack Dorsey will sell it to the first billionaire to wave cash under his nose, just as he did with Twitter, and it will become another X. That's why the party should run its own information mouthpiece - while it still can.

[BNgarden]

...Jack Dorsey will sell it to the first billionaire to wave cash under his nose, just as he did with Twitter, and it will become another X. That's why the party should run its own information mouthpiece - while it still can.

Bluesky is employee-owned now, per:
https://www.ccn.com/news/technology/why-did-jack-dorsey-quit-bluesky/

[Travis]

The Federal prosecutor working the Mayor Adams case quit after being told to drop the charges against him. Also, she alleges that his lawyer offered a quid pro quo to sweeten the deal:

https://bsky.app/profile/taniel.bsky.social/post/3li3okb6uvk24

Other attorneys the DoJ tried handing the case to also resigned.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/13/nyregion/danielle-sassoon-quit-eric-adams.html

https://bskye.app/profile/ryanjreilly.com/post/3li3s72vqt22n

[Sailor Sam]

Seventeen states are suing to end 504 protections for students and workers. This is just pure and unbridled hatred.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2025/02/13/17-states-sue-to-end-protections-for-students-with-special-needs/

[Fru-Gal]

Things like fireside talks only work if people listen - and don't listen to just bullshit him. But MAGAs are so disconnected from reality, besides not switching that on, they would just ignore it.
A big part of that problem is that anti-intellectualism that was always strong in the US (and is strong in e.g. the German AfD). If there is someone with a Prof. title that has worked 30 years in the field tells you that you are wrong... way too many people, instead of thinking about his arguments, will just tell themselves he is bought by XYZ.
And then beleive someone who is actually, proofable bought by XYZ because that is a little bit more comfortable.

Related:

Last summer I spent a lot of time with young men.  I was taken aback how many of them were spouting right-wing talking points without really understanding them.  It turns out that almost all of them watched Joe Rogan's videos, as soon as they came out.  They'd parrot what he said, similar to Limbaugh listeners in the 90s.  (I had thought Rogan was a Bernie supporter, but apparently he had taken a hard right turn.)  There was also a lot of right-wing TikTok going around, but I don't know how influential it actually was, they were just sharing the clips like Millennials would share memes.

I think the left and center need something similarly compelling for younger guys.  Something that will make them feel like they are getting inside knowledge, fresh ideas, etc...  These two youtubers were making the rounds recently:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqiUU8dT95c (Secular Talk)
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RpPTRcz1no (Blonde Politics)

I'm sure there are more, possibly better ones out there.

Exactly. MAGA ideas are everywhere on social media, humor sites/apps, and gaming culture.

All the Democrats I know, on the other hand, want to talk about the latest series they're watching on whatever streaming service (if not what book they've read). They aren't as into humor, short videos, or gaming like young people are doing, and to the extent they're on social media, like Facebook or Reddit, the algos insulate them from the prevalent culture there. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that Democrats have assumptions from the old age of broadcast television/radio, and can't imagine how the people who disagree with them make the decisions they make with all the same (assumed) information.

I've suggested the Democratic Party invest in creating a social media service connecting people who are nominally democrats with local "friends", physical gatherings, grassroots organizations, non-right information sources, etc. This would only be catching up to where the conservatives were doing 20+ years ago, but the cost is now minimal. Would it be more appealing to young people than X? Maybe not, but it would at least be a start and an attempt. Plus it's what you'd need to rebuild those whithered local communities, grassroots organizations, and local networks which could lead to greater commitment from people with busy lives who'd like to help or join something.

As it stands, the Dems have lost generations X, Y, and Z by being the old folks who think of the world in terms of broadcasting.

I disagree with this take. If Dems weren’t on social media of all forms, who would be fighting with Musk, Tate, etc? Who would have heard of AOC or Bernie Sanders? Obama pioneered the use of social media, but underestimated Putin’s resolve. Ultimately our freedoms were used against us and more and more outrageous content became the norm. Extreme identity-questioning went haywire on social media and was amplified by the right (horseshoe theory). Very “leftist” ideas were extremely widespread on social media and perhaps hit an inflection point with a certain Budweiser spokes”girl”. Everyone should question ALL forms of propaganda, not wish for better propaganda from “the other side”.

This may be an idealism vs. effective political tactics debate, but...

• The right wing increasingly controls the media (FoxNews, X,... now Google and Meta are falling into line, and TikTok is set to be purchased or controlled by the ruling party),
• Right-wing voices are systematically amplified by these platforms, which is a well established fact,
• Democrats are increasingly absent from all forms of media, with the right-wingers sucking all the attention,
• Democrats are increasingly being targeted by misinformation and anti-morale campaigns when they use existing social media,
• Democrats are losing the ability to spread information about meetings, protests, elections, organizations, fundraising drives, social organizations, etc. because the algos demote them,
• and Democrats already have far fewer people involved in grass roots organizations or the party itself compared to the right wing.

All these factors together have culminated in a complete loss of influence in all 3 branches of government, and a one-party United States that might never hold another free and fair election. Whatever Dems are currently doing is the pathway to losing. What they need is a communication system that can't be silenced, so that they can re-organize grassroots resistance groups.

So is it morally wrong to create an independent source of information for interested people to connect and work together for IRL change? Is that being as bad as the other propagandists? Isn't the alternative just as suspect - using right-wing platforms and letting them sell your attention for cash that goes to Republicans? What's the moral high ground worth if it leaves America a dictatorship?

Sure people "should" question all propaganda. But what does it mean when there are no longer any alternatives to right-wing propaganda? That essentially summarizes social media right now - and no, bluesky is not the answer. Jack Dorsey will sell it to the first billionaire to wave cash under his nose, just as he did with Twitter, and it will become another X. That's why the party should run its own information mouthpiece - while it still can.

This is a false dichotomy. It isn’t right vs left. It’s controlled vs federated. Hopefully we can move more toward open source and federated social media. We’re already seeing movement in that direction.

[Travis]

All probationary employees across the federal government are to be out by Monday. (200k people)

https://bskye.app/profile/crampell.bsky.social/post/3li3uawrxjk2e

[Morning Glory]

Seventeen states are suing to end 504 protections for students and workers. This is just pure and unbridled hatred.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2025/02/13/17-states-sue-to-end-protections-for-students-with-special-needs/

This is scary. It won't just affect people in those states, and the Trump appointed justice department is unlikely to defend the law.  If they get away with it I expect them to try it with any law congress passes that they don't like. 

It's also just dumb from their perspective.  Conservatives tend to have larger families,  increasing their odds of having a kid with a disability....unless they're doing it on purpose to keep women home. Fuckers.

I have 2 IEP meetings coming up this month and I'm going to ask what the state and district's plans are if they lose the federal mandate and /or funding.  I'm sure the teachers are just as worried as I am though.

[Fru-Gal]

Seventeen states are suing to end 504 protections for students and workers. This is just pure and unbridled hatred.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2025/02/13/17-states-sue-to-end-protections-for-students-with-special-needs/

Could be hatred. Or it could be distraction as we place Gabbard in an intelligence position. This is what Bill Browder had to say about Gabbard in 2019:

From https://www.salon.com/2019/11/16/so-is-tulsi-gabbard-really-a-russian-asset-how-would-we-know-for-sure/

I reached out first to Bill Browder, an American-born British businessman who spent many years in Russia and became a leading foe of Vladimir Putin. He later pushed Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act, which allows the U.S. government to freeze assets and ban visas for human-rights violators around the world.

"All I have is an observation on a number of observable facts about Tulsi Gabbard in connection with Russia or Russian interests,” Browder said. “The first fact is that Tulsi Gabbard had hired a man named Chris Cooper from a firm called Potomac ... to help her run interference on people who were doing negative reporting on her. Chris Cooper has an ugly history of having been involved in the anti-Magnitsky campaign,” including work in 2016 intended, Browder says, to discredit him personally along with the Magnitsky Act.

Adding that Gabbard was one of the few members of the House to vote against the Global Magnitsky Act in December 2016, Browder cited as his “next piece of circumstantial evidence” the fact that “Tulsi Gabbard is celebrated on Russian state television." He also pointed to the “very unpleasant fact” that Gabbard “is a supporter of Bashar al-Assad, the dictator in Syria, and the person responsible for the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Syrian civilians. And that is a position which is exactly consistent with the position of the Russian government." (Gabbard has said she does not support the Assad regime, although she has met the Syrian president and has at times expressed skepticism about charges that Assad has used chemical weapons in Syria’s civil war.)

[NorCal]

Things like fireside talks only work if people listen - and don't listen to just bullshit him. But MAGAs are so disconnected from reality, besides not switching that on, they would just ignore it.
A big part of that problem is that anti-intellectualism that was always strong in the US (and is strong in e.g. the German AfD). If there is someone with a Prof. title that has worked 30 years in the field tells you that you are wrong... way too many people, instead of thinking about his arguments, will just tell themselves he is bought by XYZ.
And then beleive someone who is actually, proofable bought by XYZ because that is a little bit more comfortable.

Related:

Last summer I spent a lot of time with young men.  I was taken aback how many of them were spouting right-wing talking points without really understanding them.  It turns out that almost all of them watched Joe Rogan's videos, as soon as they came out.  They'd parrot what he said, similar to Limbaugh listeners in the 90s.  (I had thought Rogan was a Bernie supporter, but apparently he had taken a hard right turn.)  There was also a lot of right-wing TikTok going around, but I don't know how influential it actually was, they were just sharing the clips like Millennials would share memes.

I think the left and center need something similarly compelling for younger guys.  Something that will make them feel like they are getting inside knowledge, fresh ideas, etc...  These two youtubers were making the rounds recently:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqiUU8dT95c (Secular Talk)
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RpPTRcz1no (Blonde Politics)

I'm sure there are more, possibly better ones out there.

Exactly. MAGA ideas are everywhere on social media, humor sites/apps, and gaming culture.

All the Democrats I know, on the other hand, want to talk about the latest series they're watching on whatever streaming service (if not what book they've read). They aren't as into humor, short videos, or gaming like young people are doing, and to the extent they're on social media, like Facebook or Reddit, the algos insulate them from the prevalent culture there. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that Democrats have assumptions from the old age of broadcast television/radio, and can't imagine how the people who disagree with them make the decisions they make with all the same (assumed) information.

I've suggested the Democratic Party invest in creating a social media service connecting people who are nominally democrats with local "friends", physical gatherings, grassroots organizations, non-right information sources, etc. This would only be catching up to where the conservatives were doing 20+ years ago, but the cost is now minimal. Would it be more appealing to young people than X? Maybe not, but it would at least be a start and an attempt. Plus it's what you'd need to rebuild those whithered local communities, grassroots organizations, and local networks which could lead to greater commitment from people with busy lives who'd like to help or join something.

As it stands, the Dems have lost generations X, Y, and Z by being the old folks who think of the world in terms of broadcasting.

I disagree with this take. If Dems weren’t on social media of all forms, who would be fighting with Musk, Tate, etc? Who would have heard of AOC or Bernie Sanders? Obama pioneered the use of social media, but underestimated Putin’s resolve. Ultimately our freedoms were used against us and more and more outrageous content became the norm. Extreme identity-questioning went haywire on social media and was amplified by the right (horseshoe theory). Very “leftist” ideas were extremely widespread on social media and perhaps hit an inflection point with a certain Budweiser spokes”girl”. Everyone should question ALL forms of propaganda, not wish for better propaganda from “the other side”.

This may be an idealism vs. effective political tactics debate, but...

• The right wing increasingly controls the media (FoxNews, X,... now Google and Meta are falling into line, and TikTok is set to be purchased or controlled by the ruling party),
• Right-wing voices are systematically amplified by these platforms, which is a well established fact,
• Democrats are increasingly absent from all forms of media, with the right-wingers sucking all the attention,
• Democrats are increasingly being targeted by misinformation and anti-morale campaigns when they use existing social media,
• Democrats are losing the ability to spread information about meetings, protests, elections, organizations, fundraising drives, social organizations, etc. because the algos demote them,
• and Democrats already have far fewer people involved in grass roots organizations or the party itself compared to the right wing.

All these factors together have culminated in a complete loss of influence in all 3 branches of government, and a one-party United States that might never hold another free and fair election. Whatever Dems are currently doing is the pathway to losing. What they need is a communication system that can't be silenced, so that they can re-organize grassroots resistance groups.

So is it morally wrong to create an independent source of information for interested people to connect and work together for IRL change? Is that being as bad as the other propagandists? Isn't the alternative just as suspect - using right-wing platforms and letting them sell your attention for cash that goes to Republicans? What's the moral high ground worth if it leaves America a dictatorship?

Sure people "should" question all propaganda. But what does it mean when there are no longer any alternatives to right-wing propaganda? That essentially summarizes social media right now - and no, bluesky is not the answer. Jack Dorsey will sell it to the first billionaire to wave cash under his nose, just as he did with Twitter, and it will become another X. That's why the party should run its own information mouthpiece - while it still can.

This is a false dichotomy. It isn’t right vs left. It’s controlled vs federated. Hopefully we can move more toward open source and federated social media. We’re already seeing movement in that direction.

The platform or moderation doesn’t matter much.

The truth is that all social media is information warfare. Left wing, right wind, corporate, dispersed etc. doesn’t make much difference.

Those that understand how to use social media as a weapon will control those who don’t.  This is why Trump and Musk are the two most powerful people in the world. They and their supporters fundamentally understand how to weaponize social media while their opponents are still stuck on things like a “marketplace of ideas” and reliance on experts.

There’s no putting the social media genie back in the bottle. It will lead to violence and destruction on par with the creation of the printing press and the Protestant reformation.

[Sailor Sam]

All my probationary employees just got terminated. By email, directly to their work accounts. Arrived at 2100 EST. Words cannot describe my…something.

[seattlecyclone]

All my probationary employees just got terminated. By email, directly to their work accounts. Arrived at 2100 EST. Words cannot describe my…something.

So...what percentage of your crew complement does this represent, and is it reasonable to assume the coast won't be properly guarded anymore?

[Travis]

The Deputy AG was coaching Eric Adams' legal team on how to get his charges dismissed. Someone in the room was ordered to destroy notes taken during this discussion, and that's what prompted several US Attorneys to resign rather than participate in naked corruption that could get them all disbarred.

https://bsky.app/profile/jfloyd314.bsky.social/post/3li447pundk2y

[lhamo]

All my probationary employees just got terminated. By email, directly to their work accounts. Arrived at 2100 EST. Words cannot describe my…something.

I cannot believe the number of times I have screamed "WTF!" this week.  I am so sorry you and your employees have been caught up in this shit cyclone.  Thank you all for your service.  I hope their jobs can be restored soon.

[Panly]

A good number of the suddenly unemployed feds must have voted for Trump, right?   

[Just Joe]

The Deputy AG was coaching Eric Adams' legal team on how to get his charges dismissed. Someone in the room was ordered to destroy notes taken during this discussion, and that's what prompted several US Attorneys to resign rather than participate in naked corruption that could get them all disbarred.

https://bsky.app/profile/jfloyd314.bsky.social/post/3li447pundk2y

If everyone resigns when things get difficult - who guards the government?

[Just Joe]

A good number of the suddenly unemployed feds must have voted for Trump, right?

The one I know did, I think. I think the loss of income will put them in a serious bind fast due to tuition and home reno. I hope not.

[Captain FIRE]

The Deputy AG was coaching Eric Adams' legal team on how to get his charges dismissed. Someone in the room was ordered to destroy notes taken during this discussion, and that's what prompted several US Attorneys to resign rather than participate in naked corruption that could get them all disbarred.

https://bsky.app/profile/jfloyd314.bsky.social/post/3li447pundk2y

If everyone resigns when things get difficult - who guards the government?

The stakes are higher for lawyers to stay as they could be disbarred and lose their license to practice law. You can’t really expect them to lose the rest of their career to momentarily try to protect the government (I’m not anticipating they’d be able to stay much longer anyways). In fact, when your client tells you they’re going to do something like lie on the stand (which is prohibited when known - candor to the court is required), you are taught techniques to ethically handle it (withdraw representation if possible, put them on the stand, but ask no followup questions just a single “tell me your story” question if not).

And part of it is that they can’t guard the government anymore. They are ordered to do something they feel they can’t do and is required for continued employment.

[Travis]

The Deputy AG was coaching Eric Adams' legal team on how to get his charges dismissed. Someone in the room was ordered to destroy notes taken during this discussion, and that's what prompted several US Attorneys to resign rather than participate in naked corruption that could get them all disbarred.

https://bsky.app/profile/jfloyd314.bsky.social/post/3li447pundk2y

If everyone resigns when things get difficult - who guards the government?

The stakes are higher for lawyers to stay as they could be disbarred and lose their license to practice law. You can’t really expect them to lose the rest of their career to momentarily try to protect the government (I’m not anticipating they’d be able to stay much longer anyways). In fact, when your client tells you they’re going to do something like lie on the stand (which is prohibited when known - candor to the court is required), you are taught techniques to ethically handle it (withdraw representation if possible, put them on the stand, but ask no followup questions just a single “tell me your story” question if not).

And part of it is that they can’t guard the government anymore. They are ordered to do something they feel they can’t do and is required for continued employment.

DoJ upping the stakes to get somebody to do it.

https://bsky.app/profile/barbmcquade.bsky.social/post/3li5l7iirvh2s

https://bsky.app/profile/harrylitman.bsky.social/post/3li5lkemkfs24

One of the other resignation letters. Attorney is a retired Green Beret.

https://bsky.app/profile/marcelias.bsky.social/post/3li5keettac2x

[RetiredAt63]

I saw a comment elsewhere that Trump is a modern day Loki. 

Seems correct.    ;-(

[ixtap]

I can't imagine upcoming job reports are going to look too great.

[Kris]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

[GuitarStv]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

I'm not familiar with this particular outrage.  Doesn't the president have the constitutional power to pretty much pardon anyone he wants for anything he wants?

[Travis]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

I'm not familiar with this particular outrage.  Doesn't the president have the constitutional power to pretty much pardon anyone he wants for anything he wants?

See my postings about it a little higher up. It's not a pardon. It's getting the Department of Justice to drop corruption charges on a mayor explicitly because he said he'd help them with their immigration agenda.

[Kris]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

I'm not familiar with this particular outrage.  Doesn't the president have the constitutional power to pretty much pardon anyone he wants for anything he wants?

He can. But this way he can get rid of all those lawyers in one fell swoop. They're in a bind for sure, but hopefully they emerge with their integrity intact.

[bacchi]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

I'm not familiar with this particular outrage.  Doesn't the president have the constitutional power to pretty much pardon anyone he wants for anything he wants?

He can. But this way he can get rid of all those lawyers in one fell swoop. They're in a bind for sure, but hopefully they emerge with their integrity intact.

The first US Attorney to quit, Sassoon, is a Federalist Society member. I would've put Trump and Sassoon on the same side but apparently some arch-conservatives can see through him.

[jrhampt]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

I'm not familiar with this particular outrage.  Doesn't the president have the constitutional power to pretty much pardon anyone he wants for anything he wants?

He can. But this way he can get rid of all those lawyers in one fell swoop. They're in a bind for sure, but hopefully they emerge with their integrity intact.

Aren't these state charges?  The president can pardon for federal charges but not for state charges.

[bacchi]

The DOJ leadership has just put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss NY mayor Eric Adams' indictment or else all of them will be fired. Send them courage to stand by their oath to uphold the Constitution.

I'm not familiar with this particular outrage.  Doesn't the president have the constitutional power to pretty much pardon anyone he wants for anything he wants?

He can. But this way he can get rid of all those lawyers in one fell swoop. They're in a bind for sure, but hopefully they emerge with their integrity intact.

Aren't these state charges?  The president can pardon for federal charges but not for state charges.

Federal, which is why the US Attorneys in the Southern District of New York were handling the case.

[Travis]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/federal-prosecutor-will-sign-motion-dismiss-adams-charges-bid-save-colleagues-2025-02-14/

Someone fell on the sword. As mentioned earlier, somebody could make a case that this is a blatant ethics violation that could cost that attorney their license.


The director of ICE making jokes about Adams' quid pro quo

https://x.com/emilyngo/status/1890396344927343048?s=46&t=0Se8YtjymFbsnOSBZQrb4g

[Kris]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/federal-prosecutor-will-sign-motion-dismiss-adams-charges-bid-save-colleagues-2025-02-14/

Someone fell on the sword. As mentioned earlier, somebody could make a case that this is a blatant ethics violation that could cost that attorney their license.


The director of ICE making jokes about Adams' quid pro quo

https://x.com/emilyngo/status/1890396344927343048?s=46&t=0Se8YtjymFbsnOSBZQrb4g

Dammit. Horrible precedent.

[Glenstache]

Gotta admit it... The shock and awe blitzkrieg of bad shit is successful at being demoralizing. It seems that unless the courts manage to form a successful constitutional guardrail, nothing short of widespread public civil disobedience will be effective.

[Kris]

Gotta admit it... The shock and awe blitzkrieg of bad shit is successful at being demoralizing. It seems that unless the courts manage to form a successful constitutional guardrail, nothing short of widespread public civil disobedience will be effective.

Agreed. I'm fighting against being thoroughly demoralized by making sure I do at least one thing every day to push back against this fascism. (The new thread about "Small daily acts of resistance" is potentially a heartening place for all of us if we participate.) I find making this part of my routine is helping combat anxiety and feelings of hopelessness. And I'm hoping it will also help me train my resistance muscles for the coming needed civil disobedience.

[seattlecyclone]

Gotta admit it... The shock and awe blitzkrieg of bad shit is successful at being demoralizing. It seems that unless the courts manage to form a successful constitutional guardrail, nothing short of widespread public civil disobedience will be effective.

There have been a number of heartening rulings by courts when they've heard challenges to this stuff so far, and more are sure to come. Will anyone remaining in the executive branch care what the courts rule?

[GuitarStv]

Gotta admit it... The shock and awe blitzkrieg of bad shit is successful at being demoralizing. It seems that unless the courts manage to form a successful constitutional guardrail, nothing short of widespread public civil disobedience will be effective.

There have been a number of heartening rulings by courts when they've heard challenges to this stuff so far, and more are sure to come. Will anyone remaining in the executive branch care what the courts rule?

What I don't understand . . . if the courts say you can't do it, but they go ahead and do it anyway then the worst the court can do is charge people with a crime, right?  But Trump can then pardon them of committing a crime.

So, checkmate?

[seattlecyclone]

Gotta admit it... The shock and awe blitzkrieg of bad shit is successful at being demoralizing. It seems that unless the courts manage to form a successful constitutional guardrail, nothing short of widespread public civil disobedience will be effective.

There have been a number of heartening rulings by courts when they've heard challenges to this stuff so far, and more are sure to come. Will anyone remaining in the executive branch care what the courts rule?

What I don't understand . . . if the courts say you can't do it, but they go ahead and do it anyway then the worst the court can do is charge people with a crime, right?  But Trump can then pardon them of committing a crime.

So, checkmate?

Pretty much, yeah. I suppose the idea was a president who went so far out of line would be impeached in short order, but the Founding Fathers failed to anticipate a situation where less than two-thirds of Congress would be interested in holding the president accountable.

[lhamo]

Research indicates that 3.5% of a population engaged in effective non-violent resistance can be enough to topple a dictatorship.

https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/advocacy-social-movements/paths-resistance-erica-chenoweths-research

I'm gonna start a separate thread on it to encourage people to think about how they can be part of such a movement.

[Fru-Gal]

Research indicates that 3.5% of a population engaged in effective non-violent resistance can be enough to topple a dictatorship.

https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/advocacy-social-movements/paths-resistance-erica-chenoweths-research

I'm gonna start a separate thread on it to encourage people to think about how they can be part of such a movement.

Yes I shared this earlier as well.

Musk is ADDICTED to eyeballs. They need us, desperately, to pay attention to them.

[Travis]

CDC and IRS layoffs

https://bsky.app/profile/lewiskamb.bsky.social/post/3li5yhexnhs2x


Hope you don't need any help from the government with your taxes this year

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/us/politics/irs-layoffs.html

[GuitarStv]

CDC and IRS layoffs

https://bsky.app/profile/lewiskamb.bsky.social/post/3li5yhexnhs2x


Hope you don't need any help from the government with your taxes this year

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/us/politics/irs-layoffs.html

Man, IRS layoffs make no sense at all from a cost perspective.  These are the folks in charge of making sure the government gets it's money, and it has been underfunded for years.  Seems to make it clear that this is about dismantling the government rather than looking for ways to make it run efficiently.

[Travis]

CDC and IRS layoffs

https://bsky.app/profile/lewiskamb.bsky.social/post/3li5yhexnhs2x


Hope you don't need any help from the government with your taxes this year

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/us/politics/irs-layoffs.html

Man, IRS layoffs make no sense at all from a cost perspective.  These are the folks in charge of making sure the government gets it's money, and it has been underfunded for years.  Seems to make it clear that this is about dismantling the government rather than looking for ways to make it run efficiently.

Kneecapping the collection of taxes has always been a Republican cause. They want to prove that government is broken - by breaking it.

[Travis]

Vance was in Munich today giving a speech that was supposed to be about continental security, but it was basically free advertising for AfD a week before their elections. Anti-immigration, anti-liberal agenda, they're out to get the Christians, etc.

https://x.com/cspan/status/1890445693250126224

[mtnrider]

There's worse things going on in the admistration, but somehow this one got under my skin:

Paula White - She left her first husband, dumped the second one after cheating on him, then married
a member of the rock band Journey, broke into the band's bank account & embezzled hundreds of
thousands of dollars after committing fraud and running a Ponzi scheme. 

Now she'll lead the White House *Faith Office*.

https://bsky.app/profile/atheistelena.bsky.social/post/3li3agutu4c2c

[ChpBstrd]

Here's a fascinating explanation of why voters dumped the "everything is rosy" democrats. This isn't some political hack job; it was written by the former US Comptroller of the Currency! Dems were interpreting data around inflation, purchasing power, GDP growth, and employment in a way that ignored disparities in their effects on the "lower 60 percent of American income earners".
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/02/11/democrats-tricked-strong-economy-00203464

Driving into the office each day in Washington, I noted a homeless encampment fixed outside the Federal Reserve itself. And then I began to detect a second pattern inside and outside D.C. alike. Democrats, on the whole, seemed much more inclined to believe what the economic indicators reported. Republicans, by contrast, seemed more inclined to believe what they were seeing with their own two eyes.

Our research revealed that the data collected by the various agencies is largely accurate. Moreover, the people staffing those agencies are talented and well-intentioned. But the filters used to compute the headline statistics are flawed. As a result, they paint a much rosier picture of reality than bears out on the ground.

Take, as a particularly egregious example, what is perhaps the most widely reported economic indicator: unemployment. Known to experts as the U-3, the number misleads in several ways. First, it counts as employed the millions of people who are unwillingly under-employed — that is, people who, for example, work only a few hours each week while searching for a full-time job. Second, it does not take into account many Americans who have been so discouraged that they are no longer trying to get a job. Finally, the prevailing statistic does not account for the meagerness of any individual’s income. Thus you could be homeless on the streets, making an intermittent income and functionally incapable of keeping your family fed, and the government would still count you as “employed.”

If you filter the statistic to include as unemployed people who can’t find anything but part-time work or who make a poverty wage (roughly $25,000), the percentage is actually 23.7 percent. In other words, nearly one of every four workers is functionally unemployed in America today — hardly something to celebrate.

My colleagues and I have modeled an alternative indicator, one that excludes many of the items that only the well-off tend to purchase — and tend to have more stable prices over time — and focuses on the measurements of prices charged for basic necessities, the goods and services that lower- and middle-income families typically can’t avoid. Here again, the results reveal how the challenges facing those with more modest incomes are obscured by the numbers. Our alternative indicator reveals that, since 2001, the cost of living for Americans with modest incomes has risen 35 percent faster than the CPI.

In a nutshell, our statistics around employment, inflation, wages, and more are oriented toward averages instead of medians, and based on assumptions that applied in the era of full-time work more so than the current gig economy. If you look at how the bottom half of the country is doing - the half that swung toward Trump - it's a steadily worsening picture. No wonder the MAGA slogan held such appeal among people who remember living better a couple of decades ago. And no wonder Democrats' optimistic message that everything is already getting better got no traction, and indeed offended people.

Overall this is an optimistic piece. All Dems need to win over millions more voters is drop the condescending, misinformed tone about things being great and adopt a "middle class is in crisis" posture. Understand statistics, how statistics can mislead, and pay attention to the working class, which Dems are supposed to be concerned about.

[ixtap]

There's worse things going on in the admistration, but somehow this one got under my skin:

Paula White - She left her first husband, dumped the second one after cheating on him, then married
a member of the rock band Journey, broke into the band's bank account & embezzled hundreds of
thousands of dollars after committing fraud and running a Ponzi scheme. 

Now she'll lead the White House *Faith Office*.

https://bsky.app/profile/atheistelena.bsky.social/post/3li3agutu4c2c

Ah, but you see, if you get money, even by fraud, it is because Jesus is smiling on you. This property gospel proponent was already Trump's personal advisor 8 years ago.

Of course, this only applies to the fascists. If a non fascist gets money, by any means, that is clearly corruption.

[Travis]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/federal-prosecutor-will-sign-motion-dismiss-adams-charges-bid-save-colleagues-2025-02-14/

Someone fell on the sword. As mentioned earlier, somebody could make a case that this is a blatant ethics violation that could cost that attorney their license.


The director of ICE making jokes about Adams' quid pro quo

https://x.com/emilyngo/status/1890396344927343048?s=46&t=0Se8YtjymFbsnOSBZQrb4g

So now it's looking like Bove signed it rather than any other attorney stepping up.

https://bsky.app/profile/taniel.bsky.social/post/3li6gyp3ppc2o

[MustacheAndaHalf]

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/02/11/democrats-tricked-strong-economy-00203464

In a nutshell, our statistics around employment, inflation, wages, and more are oriented toward averages instead of medians, and based on assumptions that applied in the era of full-time work more so than the current gig economy. If you look at how the bottom half of the country is doing - the half that swung toward Trump - it's a steadily worsening picture. No wonder the MAGA slogan held such appeal among people who remember living better a couple of decades ago. And no wonder Democrats' optimistic message that everything is already getting better got no traction, and indeed offended people.

Median income would be a step in the right direction.  The article suggests further improvements to the data, to reflect people who are under-employed.  The extreme case they mention is a homeless person working a few hours a week, which counts as employed.

I recall there being CPI-U, which focuses on "urban".  Perhaps CPI should be split into thirds, with the poorest and richest receiving their own weights for goods and services.  Luxury goods in the CPI would remain for the richest third, but not be counted in the lowest third.

(Even more accurate would be deciles, every 10% of the population, but I think that might be too much data for people to process).

[bacchi]

In a nutshell, our statistics around employment, inflation, wages, and more are oriented toward averages instead of medians, and based on assumptions that applied in the era of full-time work more so than the current gig economy. If you look at how the bottom half of the country is doing - the half that swung toward Trump - it's a steadily worsening picture. No wonder the MAGA slogan held such appeal among people who remember living better a couple of decades ago. And no wonder Democrats' optimistic message that everything is already getting better got no traction, and indeed offended people.

What the article author fails to present is how it's different now when compared to other stable economic periods. If we're undercounting now, were we undercounting then? And is it worse now?

Without that data, all we can state is that there are more people un/underemployed than the (Edit: U-3) .gov numbers. We can't claim conclusively that there are more un/underemployed than, for example, 2007, right before the GFC. If it's not worse than 2007, then it changes the conclusion -- people are more pissed now because of...social media, inflation, political teams, cultural wars, inflation, the piece of straw, ???.


Edit: Can't we compare U-5 or U-6 to previous periods?

"U-6, total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers."

[LennStar]

In a nutshell, our statistics around employment, inflation, wages, and more are oriented toward averages instead of medians, and based on assumptions that applied in the era of full-time work more so than the current gig economy. If you look at how the bottom half of the country is doing - the half that swung toward Trump - it's a steadily worsening picture. No wonder the MAGA slogan held such appeal among people who remember living better a couple of decades ago. And no wonder Democrats' optimistic message that everything is already getting better got no traction, and indeed offended people.

Well, I could have told them that without any study, from here in Germany. Because it is always the same. It's called neoliberlism. If you favor big companies over people, big companies will fare better than people.
If the share of GDP that goes to working income is 3%-points lower (German number) than 20 years ago (and dividends up by that), it might not sound like much, but in case of the US we are talking about roughly a trillion dollars that is not in the pockets of the lower and middle class (mustachians are the exception) but in the pockets of the millionaires+.

-----

hm... I saw a video yesterday about an American taking the German Wahl-O-Mat (vote-o-meter) to see which party he would "belong" to, but it seems there is no official english version. That explains how one party name became pregnancy week. Too bad, it was really interesting to see his reasoning and not least his result. (was one and a half hour, so I am not posting that video also to not spoiler.)

If you are interested in doing a google "translate this page" go at it: https://www.wahl-o-mat.de/bundestagswahl2025/app/main_app.html
38 short questions (so it's simplifying a lot). If you do not have a position, use skip instead of neutral, neutral is the neutral position, not abstain.

[ChpBstrd]

In a nutshell, our statistics around employment, inflation, wages, and more are oriented toward averages instead of medians, and based on assumptions that applied in the era of full-time work more so than the current gig economy. If you look at how the bottom half of the country is doing - the half that swung toward Trump - it's a steadily worsening picture. No wonder the MAGA slogan held such appeal among people who remember living better a couple of decades ago. And no wonder Democrats' optimistic message that everything is already getting better got no traction, and indeed offended people.

What the article author fails to present is how it's different now when compared to other stable economic periods. If we're undercounting now, were we undercounting then? And is it worse now?

Without that data, all we can state is that there are more people un/underemployed than the (Edit: U-3) .gov numbers. We can't claim conclusively that there are more un/underemployed than, for example, 2007, right before the GFC. If it's not worse than 2007, then it changes the conclusion -- people are more pissed now because of...social media, inflation, political teams, cultural wars, inflation, the piece of straw, ???.


Edit: Can't we compare U-5 or U-6 to previous periods?

"U-6, total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers."

The author says the data are accurate, and collected in a competent way by honest employees. The problem is that our interpretations pre-suppose an older form of the economy than exists now. A specific example is the unemployment statistic counting people as employed regardless of whether their income is sufficient not to be homeless. At the time these measures were devised, having any job meant having a full time job that would pay enough for food and rent. Now many people are employed but unable to earn enough to buy food and shelter.

The stats were also never designed for an environment of extreme income and wealth inequality. Hence the growing difference between medians and means, or between GDP growth and a rapidly declining middle class.

I’ll agree that a full academic article would be more persuasive, with evidence and citations supporting claims that (1) the meanings of the stats have changed over time, such as the quality of employment or the purchasing power of low end wages falling over time, and (2) that specific other metrics could do a better job of explaining the economic picture. Unfortunately it is a politico article, not a journal article or book.

[bill1827]

What the article author fails to present is how it's different now when compared to other stable economic periods. If we're undercounting now, were we undercounting then? And is it worse now?

I'm not in the US but we have the same problem.

Society and work was completely different in the post war period up to the 1980s. Almost every job was a full time, reasonably paid and reasonably secure one. Part time work was very rare and it was quite difficult to get employers to agree to it if you wanted to work part time.

Now employers don't want the costs associated with adequately paid, long term, full time employment, so a lot of people are employed in a very precarious way. Zero hour contracts, so called self employment etc.

[LennStar]

Now employers don't want the costs associated with adequately paid, long term, full time employment, so a lot of people are employed in a very precarious way. Zero hour contracts, so called self employment etc.

Yes, as I said it's the same everywhere.
6 Years ago satirist Böhmermann even made a song about it: We are dispatch soldiers - Jan Böhmermann & the choir of bogus self-employed workers 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQsS0VqM4aA
Great stuff. Unfortunately it is only DE subtitles?? Too bad.

If you have the original this is based on, you will recognize it.