The Official World Politics Thread - All Breaking News here.
Options
Comments
-
LLS this dude has one of the dumbest if not the dumbest give no ? mindsets in this world.
I was really hoping they all decided to quite unanimously at the same time. That would have went down in history. -
LLS this dude has one of the dumbest if not the dumbest give no ? mindsets in this world.
I was really hoping they all decided to quite unanimously at the same time. That would have went down in history.
They not trying to embarrass that man or this country anymore than he already embarrasses himself and this country in the eyes of many.
I would've loved that ? as well but its still funny as hell either way. -
Here is ? Chris Cantwell and here is his phone number 631-791-5842.
Call him and tell him how you feel!
https://youtu.be/lyeTj002DCo -
Here is ? Chris Cantwell and here is his phone number 631-791-5842.
Call him and tell him how you feel!https://youtu.be/lyeTj002DCo
This ? got a 631 number......he lives in the same county as me. -
-
infamous114 wrote: »
twitter need to ban his account lol wow i cant wait til the russia ? pop he gonna snitch em all out -
-
-
Angeles1son85 wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »
twitter need to ban his account lol wow i cant wait til the russia ? pop he gonna snitch em all out
how would he react to that? -
This sounds like a pre-rampage video. Y'all better stay alert. These muhfuckin saltines geting ready to start a war now.Here is ? Chris Cantwell and here is his phone number 631-791-5842.
Call him and tell him how you feel!https://youtu.be/lyeTj002DCo
This ? got a 631 number......he lives in the same county as me.
-
2stepz_ahead wrote: »Angeles1son85 wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »
twitter need to ban his account lol wow i cant wait til the russia ? pop he gonna snitch em all out
how would he react to that?
and twitter ceo while back was one of few who wasn't invted to trump towers for a meeting lol if they ban him trump sending missiles at the twitter ceo office -
http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2017/08/16/543394845/in-midst-of-racial-hatred-van-jones-still-pushes-loveIn Midst Of Racial Hatred, Van Jones Still Pushes Love
The Roc Nation signee raps about black America's moral obligation in the era of President Trump.
On the same night that torch-bearing white nationalists wound up staging a rally at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Van Jones stood at a podium, in the nation's capital, telling a theater full of supporters why they should let love rule in the face of racial hatred. The timing was sheer coincidence — the ninth stop on the CNN pundit's 14-city WE RISE tour had been scheduled well ahead of Friday night's prelude to the violent Unite the Right protest — but one that speaks to the reason why Jones' #LoveArmy crusade has been met with criticism from the very circles he's hoping to corral.
"A lot of people are asking, 'Why are you doing this?' " Jones said Friday from the stage of D.C.'s Warner Theatre. "I am sick of you guys being stressed and depressed since this past election."
Deemed "a star of the 2016 campaign" by the New York Times shortly after blaming "whitelash" for President Trump's election, Jones quickly earned the liberal left's ire after characterizing Trump's State of the Union address as "presidential." Since signing with JAY-Z's Roc Nation management firm earlier this year, however, he's earning cred among a different constituency: generation hip-hop. The first political activist on an artist roster ranging from Big Sean to DJ Khaled and Damian Marley to Rihanna, Jones recently got stopped in the airport by a young TSA agent who said she recognized him, not from the cable news network, he tells me, but for appearing in Footnotes for 4:44, the Tidal-exclusive short doc series complementing JAY-Z's latest album.
"JAY-Z's platform is bigger than CNN's platform for this new generation coming up," Jones says by phone.
Though he admits his own hip-hop bona fides are less up-to-date — "I mean, I know Chance the Rapper," he adds — Jones is using his Roc Nation affiliation to fuse a tighter relationship between artists and activists. During his Atlanta stop, he talked to T.I. about the criminalization that leads to mass incarceration among young black men in the hood. Roc Nation artist Rapsody opened Friday night's show in Washington with a performance before Jones brought out former NAACP president and Maryland gubernatorial candidate Ben Jealous for a conversation.
But this isn't some Van Jones-come-lately hip-hop hookup. He's been rallying rap activists since the mid-'90s, when he was a young dreadlocked attorney who got an officer kicked off the San Francisco Police Department following his implication in the death of an unarmed black suspect. With his Dream Corps nonprofit using the same coalition-building tactics to tackle a range of initiatives, Jones' #LoveArmy-powered tour might seem like the perfect setup for a potential candidate who once worked in Obama's White House, before he was forced to resign as a "green jobs czar" following criticism over controversial comments made about Republicans prior to his appointment. But it only takes a candid half-hour conversation with him — which we had a few days before the tragic events in Charlottesville and one week before Jones' tearful on-air response to President Trump's latest remarks, blaming "both sides" for the weekend's violence — to realize Jones is probably too passionate and point-blank for public office. He invoked the names of Civil Rights heroes ranging from Martin Luther King to Ella Baker as we discussed his frustrations with cynicism masked as activism, black America's moral obligation and critics who see his message of love as a hard sell in the era of Trump. This interview was edited for clarity and length.
-
-
van jones over here tryin to be dude love smh
-
-
Steve Bannon, Unrepentant
ROBERT KUTTNER AUGUST 16, 2017
Trump’s embattled strategist phones me, unbidden, to opine on China, Korea, and his enemies in the administration.
You might think from recent press accounts that Steve Bannon is on the ropes and therefore behaving prudently. In the aftermath of events in Charlottesville, he is widely blamed for his boss’s continuing indulgence of white supremacists. Allies of National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster hold Bannon responsible for a campaign by Breitbart News, which Bannon once led, to vilify the security chief. Trump’s defense of Bannon, at his Tuesday press conference, was tepid.
But Bannon was in high spirits when he phoned me Tuesday afternoon to discuss the politics of taking a harder line with China, and minced no words describing his efforts to neutralize his rivals at the Departments of Defense, State, and Treasury. “They’re wetting themselves,” he said, proceeding to detail how he would oust some of his opponents at State and Defense.
Needless to say, I was a little stunned to get an email from Bannon’s assistant midday Tuesday, just as all hell was breaking loose once again about Charlottesville, saying that Bannon wished to meet with me.
Needless to say, I was a little stunned to get an email from Bannon’s assistant midday Tuesday, just as all hell was breaking loose once again about Charlottesville, saying that Bannon wished to meet with me. I’d just published a column on how China was profiting from the U.S.-North Korea nuclear brinkmanship, and it included some choice words about Bannon’s boss.
“In Kim, Trump has met his match,” I wrote. “The risk of two arrogant fools blundering into a nuclear exchange is more serious than at any time since October 1962.” Maybe Bannon wanted to scream at me?
I told the assistant that I was on vacation, but I would be happy to speak by phone. Bannon promptly called.
Far from dressing me down for comparing Trump to Kim, he began, “It’s a great honor to finally track you down. I’ve followed your writing for years and I think you and I are in the same boat when it comes to China. You absolutely nailed it.”
“We’re at economic war with China,” he added. “It’s in all their literature. They’re not shy about saying what they’re doing. One of us is going to be a hegemon in 25 or 30 years and it’s gonna be them if we go down this path. On Korea, they’re just tapping us along. It’s just a sideshow.”
Bannon said he might consider a deal in which China got North Korea to freeze its nuclear buildup with verifiable inspections and the United States removed its troops from the peninsula, but such a deal seemed remote. Given that China is not likely to do much more on North Korea, and that the logic of mutually assured destruction was its own source of restraint, Bannon saw no reason not to proceed with tough trade sanctions against China.
Contrary to Trump’s threat of fire and fury, Bannon said: “There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.” Bannon went on to describe his battle inside the administration to take a harder line on China trade, and not to fall into a trap of wishful thinking in which complaints against China’s trade practices now had to take a backseat to the hope that China, as honest broker, would help restrain Kim.
“To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we're five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we'll never be able to recover.”
Bannon’s plan of attack includes: a complaint under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act against Chinese coercion of technology transfers from American corporations doing business there, and follow-up complaints against steel and aluminum dumping. “We’re going to run the tables on these guys. We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”
But what about his internal adversaries, at the departments of State and Defense, who think the United States can enlist Beijing’s aid on the North Korean standoff, and at Treasury and the National Economic Council who don’t want to mess with the trading system?
“Oh, they’re wetting themselves,” he said, explaining that the Section 301 complaint, which was put on hold when the war of threats with North Korea broke out, was shelved only temporarily, and will be revived in three weeks. As for other cabinet departments, Bannon has big plans to marginalize their influence.
“I’m changing out people at East Asian Defense; I’m getting hawks in. I’m getting Susan Thornton [acting head of East Asian and Pacific Affairs] out at State.”
But can Bannon really win that fight internally?
“That’s a fight I fight every day here,” he said. “We’re still fighting. There’s Treasury and [National Economic Council chair] Gary Cohn and Goldman Sachs lobbying.”
“We gotta do this. The president’s default position is to do it, but the apparatus is going crazy. Don’t get me wrong. It’s like, every day.”
-
Bannon explained that his strategy is to battle the trade doves inside the administration while building an outside coalition of trade hawks that includes left as well as right. Hence the phone call to me.
There are a couple of things that are startling about this premise. First, to the extent that most of the opponents of Bannon’s China trade strategy are other Trump administration officials, it’s not clear how reaching out to the left helps him. If anything, it gives his adversaries ammunition to characterize Bannon as unreliable or disloyal.
More puzzling is the fact that Bannon would phone a writer and editor of a progressive publication (the cover lines on whose first two issues after Trump’s election were “Resisting Trump” and “Containing Trump”) and assume that a possible convergence of views on China trade might somehow paper over the political and moral chasm on white nationalism.
The question of whether the phone call was on or off the record never came up. This is also puzzling, since Steve Bannon is not exactly Bambi when it comes to dealing with the press. He’s probably the most media-savvy person in America.
I asked Bannon about the connection between his program of economic nationalism and the ugly white nationalism epitomized by the racist violence in Charlottesville and Trump’s reluctance to condemn it. Bannon, after all, was the architect of the strategy of using Breitbart to heat up white nationalism and then rely on the radical right as Trump’s base.
He dismissed the far right as irrelevant and sidestepped his own role in cultivating it: “Ethno-nationalism—it's losers. It's a fringe element. I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.”
“These guys are a collection of clowns,” he added.
From his lips to Trump’s ear.
“The Democrats,” he said, “the longer they talk about identity politics, I got ’em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”
I had never before spoken with Bannon. I came away from the conversation with a sense both of his savvy and his recklessness. The waters around him are rising, but he is going about his business of infighting, and attempting to cultivate improbable outside allies, to promote his China strategy. His enemies will do what they do.
Either the reports of the threats to Bannon’s job are grossly exaggerated and leaked by his rivals, or he has decided not to change his routine and to go down fighting. Given Trump’s impulsivity, neither Bannon nor Trump really has any idea from day to day whether Bannon is staying or going. He has survived earlier threats. So what the hell, damn the torpedoes.
The conversation ended with Bannon inviting me to the White House after Labor Day to continue the discussion of China and trade. We’ll see if he’s still there. -
Good vid, i used to think russia would be his downfall(and it still could) but now i think itll be the response to charlottesville, thats got the ball moving, shitll get worse, hes gonna say worse, people will continue to turn on him, the backlash will get bigger, hell look more and more unhinged and incompotent to where its next to impossible to back him..and he finally says ? it and resigns..rather see him impeached but i think him resigning has a better chance of happening, i always said he wont make it a full term, now?? NO WAY IN HELL that happens -
Must Read Charles Blow piece in the NyTDonald Trump chose Trump Tower, the place where he began his presidential campaign, as the place to plunge a dagger into his presidency.
Trump’s jaw-dropping defense of white supremacists, white nationalists and Nazis in Charlottesville, Va., exposed once more what many of us have been howling into the wind since he emerged as a viable candidate: That he is a bigot, a buffoon and a bully.
He has done nothing since his election to disabuse us of this notion and everything to confirm it. Anyone expressing surprise is luxuriating in a self-crafted shell of ignorance.
And yet, it seems too simplistic, too convenient, to castigate only Trump for elevating these vile racists. To do so would be historical fallacy. Yes, Trump’s comments give them a boost, grant them permission, provide them validation, but it is also the Republican Party through which Trump burst that has been courting, coddling and accommodating these people for decades. Trump is an articulation of the racists in Charlottesville and they are an articulation of him, and both are a logical extension of a party that has too often refused to rebuke them.
It’s not that Democrats have completely gotten this right, either. Too often, in response to the conservative impulse to punish, the liberal impulse is to pity. Pity does not alleviate oppression; it simply assuages guilt. The pity is not for the receiver but for the giver.
But in the modern age one party has operated with the ethos of racial inclusion and with an eye on celebrating varied forms of diversity, and the other has at times appealed directly to the racially intolerant by providing quiet sufferance.
It is possible to trace this devil’s dance back to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the emergence of Richard Nixon. After the passage of the act, the Republican Party, the party of Lincoln to which black people felt considerable fealty, turned on those people and stabbed them in the back.
In 1994 John Ehrlichman, Nixon’s domestic-policy adviser and a Watergate co-conspirator, confessed this to the author Dan Baum:
“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or blacks, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
The era Ehrlichman referred to was the beginning of the War on Drugs. Nixon started his offensive in 1971, declaring in a speech from the White House Briefing Room: “America’s public enemy No. 1 in the United States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive.”
The object of disrupting communities worked all too well — more than 40 million arrests have been conducted for drug-related offenses since 1971, with African-Americans being incarcerated in state prisons for these offenses at a rate that is 10 times greater than that for whites, according to Human Rights Watch.
In 1970, Nixon’s political strategist Kevin Phillips told The New York Times, “The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans.”
The Republican Party wanted the racists. It was strategy, the “Southern Strategy,” and it too has proved wildly successful. From there this cancer took hold.
The party itself has dispensed with public confessions of this inclination — at least until Trump — but the white supremacy still survives and even thrives in policy. The stated goals of the Republican Party are not completely dissimilar from many of the white nationalist positions.
If you advance policies like a return to more aggressive drug policies and voter suppression — things that you know without question will have a disproportionate and negative impact on people of color, what does that say about you?
It says that you want the policies without the poison, but they can’t be made separate: The policies are the poison.
And yes, this is all an outgrowth of white supremacy, a concept that many try to apply only to vocal, violent racists but that is in fact more broadly applicable and pervasive.
People think that they avoid the appellation because they do not openly hate. But hate is not a requirement of white supremacy. Just because one abhors violence and cruelty doesn’t mean that one truly believes that all people are equal — culturally, intellectually, creatively, morally. Entertaining the notion of imbalance — that white people are inherently better than others in any way — is also white supremacy.
The position of opposing racial cruelty can operate in much the same way as opposition to animal cruelty — people do it not because they deem the objects of that cruelty their equals, but rather because they cannot continence the idea of inflicting pain and suffering on helpless and innocent creatures. But even here, the comparison cleaves, because suffering black people are judged to have courted their own suffering through a cascade of poor choices.
This is passive white supremacy, soft white supremacy, the kind divorced from hatred. It is permissible because it’s inconspicuous. But this soft white supremacy is more deadly, exponentially, than Nazis with tiki torches.
This soft white supremacy is the very thing on which the open racists build.
The white nationalists and the Nazis simply take the next step (not an altogether illogical one when wandering down the crooked path of racial hostility) and they overlay open animus.
This is apparently what draws the ire, what leaves people aghast: open articulation of racial hatred. That to me is a criminal act of denial that refuses to deal with the reality that racism is also signified far more subtly than through the wielding of slurs and sticks.
White supremacy, all across the spectrum, is what lights the way to the final step as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. articulated in his “The Other America” speech in 1967:
“In the final analysis, racism is evil because its ultimate logic is genocide. ? was a sick and tragic man who carried racism to its logical conclusion. And he ended up leading a nation to the point of killing about six million Jews. This is the tragedy of racism because its ultimate logic is genocide. If one says that I am not good enough to live next door to him, if one says that I am not good enough to eat at a lunch counter, or to have a good, decent job, or to go to school with him merely because of my race, he is saying consciously or unconsciously that I do not deserve to exist.”
Republicans, these people and this “president” are your progeny. That is the other inconvenient truth.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/opinion/republicans-white-supremacy-charlottesville.html?src=trending&module=Ribbon&version=context®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Trending&pgtype=article -
Are any of you watching this woman on CNN? We're in a golden era of Uncle Toms...
-
Angeles1son85 wrote: »infamous114 wrote: »
twitter need to ban his account lol wow i cant wait til the russia ? pop he gonna snitch em all out
No the ? they don't.
If anything twitter needs allow his fool ass to use more than 140 characters -
thegreatunknown wrote: »Are any of you watching this woman on CNN? We're in a golden era of Uncle Toms...
Name so I can see if its on youtube -
Trump doubling down
-
-
thegreatunknown wrote: »Are any of you watching this woman on CNN? We're in a golden era of Uncle Toms...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaKHhkbJ11I‘Who Killed Heather Heyer?’ CNN Panel Between Trump Supporter, Michael Eric Dyson Melts Down
Michael Eric Dyson faced off with Brunell Donald-Kyei on CNN this morning…and it quickly became an extended verbal battle about how President Trump contributed to America’s racial divisions with his handling of Charlottesville.
Dyson began the segment by saying that Republicans are “complicit” with Trump’s bigotry if they don’t stand up and denounce the president for saying both sides of last weekend’s race riots were equally blameworthy. Donald-Kyei was asked by Poppy Harlow to respond to the new anti-Trump cover from The Economist, and her answer was that Trump’s white supremacist supporters are a negligible portion of the American population, yet they are being magnified by the press.
When Harlow asked if Trump expanded racial divisions by drawing an equivalence between racists and their counter-protesters, the panel fell apart as Dyson and Donald-Kwei began fighting over whether white supremacists or Antifa behaved worse last weekend. As the “bickering” and accusations of race-baiting continued, Harlow tried to rein things in by asking Donald-Kyei a very direct question.
“Who killed Heather Heyer?”
Donald-Kyei deflected by talking about how both sides of the Charlottesville clash were armed, but she did agree with Harlow that the 32-year old legal worker was murdered by a white supremacist. As Donald-Kwei tried to talk up the president’s efforts to improve the country, she took fire from Dyson and questions from Harlow about how much good Trump can do if he’s allowing for the perpetuation of racism.
The conversation continued to dissolve even further as the three discussed Trump’s years of birthersim, hatred on both sides of the political aisle, and whether it was possible to put white supremacists and their counter-protesters on the same level of morality.
https://youtu.be/ScgVbT_fry0
