I think that trump has become disconnected from reality. To him, a trade war with Canada and a shooting war with Iran are at the same place on his scale of reality. It's all just a board game - all the same to him. Reality for him is his golf course and his girlfriend.
And a Big Mac, followed by another Big Mac, two Filet-o-Fish and a Chocolate Malt. That’s your days calories in five minutes.
Especially anything that diverts attention from the Epstein files.
Even without Trump's distraction tactics, I'm actually not convinced Epstein would be getting a lot of coverage at this point. I think his main agenda is diverting attention away from Hormuz and the accompanying gas prices.
Has he actually renamed the Strait of Hormuz yet? AIUI, he regards it as US territory...but, as you say, he may not want to keep it at the forefront of the news.
BTW, one of the many satirical YouTube videos has him renaming Europe as 'America Plaza East'.
Has he actually renamed the Strait of Hormuz yet? AIUI, he regards it as US territory...but, as you say, he may not want to keep it at the forefront of the news.
I think he's only said he "like(s) the idea of it being American territory", but has not returned to that particular trope. He mighta thought that saying that would convince his dimwitted cultists that it really now is an American possession and hence the oil will soon be forthcoming, but as you suggest, that's prob'ly outweighed by the drawback of more people paying attention to the overall issue as a result of his bravado.
Especially anything that diverts attention from the Epstein files.
Even without Trump's distraction tactics, I'm actually not convinced Epstein would be getting a lot of coverage at this point. I think his main agenda is diverting attention away from Hormuz and the accompanying gas prices.
Ah, but that's something that is a direct consequence of his decision to launch an illegal war to distract from the Epstein files.
Especially anything that diverts attention from the Epstein files.
Even without Trump's distraction tactics, I'm actually not convinced Epstein would be getting a lot of coverage at this point. I think his main agenda is diverting attention away from Hormuz and the accompanying gas prices.
Ah, but that's something that is a direct consequence of his decision to launch an illegal war to distract from the Epstein files.
Well observed. I probably wasn't taking into account that this war goes back to the days when Epstein was a regular headline.
In other regurgitations, this latest round of attention to the Argentine beef thing seems to be drawing a bit more of a crowd than usual. From what I've seen on social media(granted, mostly YouTube), sympathies are leaning heavily toward the ranchers betrayed(according to one side's narrative) by Trump, rather than to the consumers being liberated(according to the other side's narrative) by the reversion to free trade.
And, now, Trump has signed an agreement for Venezuelan Oil. Supposed to cost nothing to Americans. Will help us replenish our strategic oil reserve. Problem is our Strategic Oil Reserve currently is made up of light crude. Venezuelan oil is a heavy crude. The more I hear about this "deal" it sounds like Flim Flam.
Some commentators over here are picking up on a question Trump answered about Wall Street not buying government bonds. Apparently they are not attractive at the moment but Trump wants the money for his projects. A reporter asked what he would do about the issue and he said military action is a last resort. He seems to be getting very confused now. I don’t really think he will be sending tanks down Wall St.
Sometimes I think Trump thinks he's joking (and therefore that he thinks he's in a situation where it's appropriate that he's joking).
Just watched the clip. Going by tone-of-voice and mannerisms, I'd say he wasn't consciously joking, but had heard the word "intervention", which his brain linked with "military intervention", and then to the stock phrase "military intervention is always a last resort".
[EDIT: Just re-watched. He DID seem aware for most of it that the question was about bond markets.]
The Guardian reports that Trump is indeed suggesting renaming the Strait of Hormuz as 'Trump Strait'. This inspired piece of brilliance by the most brilliantest president that ever was will, of course, immediately bring an end to the conflict...
I still think that renaming it as 'Trump Straitjacket' would be more appropriate.
The Guardian reports that Trump is indeed suggesting renaming the Strait of Hormuz as 'Trump Strait'. This inspired piece of brilliance by the most brilliantest president that ever was will, of course, immediately bring an end to the conflict...
I came here just to post that!
Will say that "Trump Strait" is an improvement over Lake America"'s repetition of "Gulf of America". He seems to be branching out a little, even if it is just to his own personal surname.
Trump is using “The Art of The Deal” as his playbook for diplomacy, as he does for everything, and his first principle is that there can be no win-win outcomes.
Some commentators over here are picking up on a question Trump answered about Wall Street not buying government bonds. Apparently they are not attractive at the moment but Trump wants the money for his projects. A reporter asked what he would do about the issue and he said military action is a last resort. He seems to be getting very confused now. I don’t really think he will be sending tanks down Wall St.
I think they are still bringing pens to a tank fight.
Military intervention in a bond market would be perfectly possible, you take armed squads to the various firms that are pissing you off, having defined them as “terrorists” or “traitors” if they don’t cooperate, and insist with ballistic persuasion that they buy from you what you want them to buy at the price you think they should pay, and/or lean on national governments with military threats to get their national banks to do likewise.
I am not suggesting this is in any way a good idea, I am just suggesting that it is not beyond the bounds of possibility or as literally impossible as some people seem to think it is.
Which reminds me that he can be both Wrong and Repulsive (or should that read Wrepulsive?).
And also reminds me that I must dig out my copy of 1066AAT, and read it again. Gods know, we could do with some laughs...
Mine sits next to my copy of Arthur Mailey's "10 For 66 And All That" - which went with me when I played at Cheltenham College, where he took that 10-66 way back in 1921.
Rumor has it if the Republicans lose the midterms badly, Trump may resign rather than face another round of impeachments--notice the plural. While he may not be found guilty in any of them, his name will be so soiled he may just feel he should cut and run.
Rumor has it if the Republicans lose the midterms badly, Trump may resign rather than face another round of impeachments--notice the plural. While he may not be found guilty in any of them, his name will be so soiled he may just feel he should cut and run.
Wishful thinking?
The pig's name has been irredeemably soiled for years, and he doesn't give a damn - never has and never will. He wears it with pride and feels it strengthens his position as a role model for the masses.
Rumor has it if the Republicans lose the midterms badly, Trump may resign rather than face another round of impeachments--notice the plural. While he may not be found guilty in any of them, his name will be so soiled he may just feel he should cut and run.
Wishful thinking?
I mentioned, maybe in this thread or maybe in another, that James Carville believes Trump will resign sometime before his term ends, even if just the day before, in order for Vance to grant him a full pardon. He thinks bad mid-term losses may hasten that resignation, but he thinks it will happen.
The trouble is that if he resigned, you'd get Vance, and he seems almost as bad, but with a couple of brain cells.
The words "frying pan" and "fire" spring to mind.
Vance would certainly be another disaster, but Vance lacks the ability to control the GOP in the way Trump has. There are a number of Republicans who would challenge Vance to further their own ambitions.
Vance would certainly be another disaster, but Vance lacks the ability to control the GOP in the way Trump has. There are a number of Republicans who would challenge Vance to further their own ambitions.
Also, while I haven't read his recent comments on the antichrist in-depth, I'm guessing he doesn't subscribe to the concept in the same way that pre-mil Christians do, ie. Satan incarnate trying to take over the world and thus demanding a geostrategic response. By most accounts, he was a skeptic on the recent Iran adventure, which would indicate he's not in the camp of Christian Zionist true-believers.
So my guess would be that with Vance you're back to what my gaming friends call lawful-evil, as opposed to chaotic-evil, Republicanism. Which would be preferable for the interests of people trying to oppose the administration or at least deal with the menace it presents.
File this under the "O Brother" category: Last week, the United Nations General Assembly voted 164 to 1 to redraw the map of Africa to show its actual size in relation to the rest of the world. Guess who voted against it.
Now, people are worried New Mexico may get a new name by fiat.
Now, people are worried New Mexico may get a new name by fiat.
That’s something that unquestionably can’t be done by executive order. Not that technicalities like that seem to bother Trump.
Btw, I was confused upthread when I said Carney said he was renaming Lake Michigan “Lake Wisconsin.” It was Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers who wrote that “executive order” on a napkin.
Now, people are worried New Mexico may get a new name by fiat.
That’s something that unquestionably can’t be done by executive order. Not that technicalities like that seem to bother Trump.
And I'm pretty sure that that precedent, even as a powerless bit of symbolism, would be most unappreciated by all the other state governments and that portion of their respective populations that have at least partially state-based cultural identities.
I could see Trump issuing meaningless EOs or Truth Socials re-naming a perceived outlier liberal jurisdiction like San Francisco, and almost all of MAGA would cheer it on and even some swing-voters would shrug it off as "just Trump being Trump". But even then, the political establishments of most states and cities would still view it as an ominous encroachment.
I could see Trump issuing meaningless EOs or Truth Socials re-naming a perceived outlier liberal jurisdiction like San Francisco, and almost all of MAGA would cheer it on and even some swing-voters would shrug it off as "just Trump being Trump". But even then, the political establishments of most states and cities would still view it as an ominous encroachment.
Renaming a city is another thing that unquestionably can’t be done by presidential executive order.
Comments
And a Big Mac, followed by another Big Mac, two Filet-o-Fish and a Chocolate Malt. That’s your days calories in five minutes.
[Deleted the rest of my rant because so many others have expressed my feelings and frustrations with better words than mine.]
Even without Trump's distraction tactics, I'm actually not convinced Epstein would be getting a lot of coverage at this point. I think his main agenda is diverting attention away from Hormuz and the accompanying gas prices.
BTW, one of the many satirical YouTube videos has him renaming Europe as 'America Plaza East'.
I think he's only said he "like(s) the idea of it being American territory", but has not returned to that particular trope. He mighta thought that saying that would convince his dimwitted cultists that it really now is an American possession and hence the oil will soon be forthcoming, but as you suggest, that's prob'ly outweighed by the drawback of more people paying attention to the overall issue as a result of his bravado.
Well observed. I probably wasn't taking into account that this war goes back to the days when Epstein was a regular headline.
In other regurgitations, this latest round of attention to the Argentine beef thing seems to be drawing a bit more of a crowd than usual. From what I've seen on social media(granted, mostly YouTube), sympathies are leaning heavily toward the ranchers betrayed(according to one side's narrative) by Trump, rather than to the consumers being liberated(according to the other side's narrative) by the reversion to free trade.
Just watched the clip. Going by tone-of-voice and mannerisms, I'd say he wasn't consciously joking, but had heard the word "intervention", which his brain linked with "military intervention", and then to the stock phrase "military intervention is always a last resort".
[EDIT: Just re-watched. He DID seem aware for most of it that the question was about bond markets.]
I still think that renaming it as 'Trump Straitjacket' would be more appropriate.
I came here just to post that!
Will say that "Trump Strait" is an improvement over Lake America"'s repetition of "Gulf of America". He seems to be branching out a little, even if it is just to his own personal surname.
I think they are still bringing pens to a tank fight.
Military intervention in a bond market would be perfectly possible, you take armed squads to the various firms that are pissing you off, having defined them as “terrorists” or “traitors” if they don’t cooperate, and insist with ballistic persuasion that they buy from you what you want them to buy at the price you think they should pay, and/or lean on national governments with military threats to get their national banks to do likewise.
I am not suggesting this is in any way a good idea, I am just suggesting that it is not beyond the bounds of possibility or as literally impossible as some people seem to think it is.
History will very soon come to a.
According to Sellar and Yeatman it already did, in 1918, when America became Top Nation. Maybe it will restart now it isn't any more.
A most thoughtful observation. Encouraging, too.
So 1066AAT predicted Fukuyama's thesis of 1992.
And also reminds me that I must dig out my copy of 1066AAT, and read it again. Gods know, we could do with some laughs...
That would be a good soundbite for the opposition to use.
Mine sits next to my copy of Arthur Mailey's "10 For 66 And All That" - which went with me when I played at Cheltenham College, where he took that 10-66 way back in 1921.
Wishful thinking?
The pig's name has been irredeemably soiled for years, and he doesn't give a damn - never has and never will. He wears it with pride and feels it strengthens his position as a role model for the masses.
The words "frying pan" and "fire" spring to mind.
Hegseth is another Armageddon freak.
It’s a terrible thought, but maybe we need Trump to survive his term.
Vance would certainly be another disaster, but Vance lacks the ability to control the GOP in the way Trump has. There are a number of Republicans who would challenge Vance to further their own ambitions.
Also, while I haven't read his recent comments on the antichrist in-depth, I'm guessing he doesn't subscribe to the concept in the same way that pre-mil Christians do, ie. Satan incarnate trying to take over the world and thus demanding a geostrategic response. By most accounts, he was a skeptic on the recent Iran adventure, which would indicate he's not in the camp of Christian Zionist true-believers.
So my guess would be that with Vance you're back to what my gaming friends call lawful-evil, as opposed to chaotic-evil, Republicanism. Which would be preferable for the interests of people trying to oppose the administration or at least deal with the menace it presents.
Now, people are worried New Mexico may get a new name by fiat.
Btw, I was confused upthread when I said Carney said he was renaming Lake Michigan “Lake Wisconsin.” It was Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers who wrote that “executive order” on a napkin.
And I'm pretty sure that that precedent, even as a powerless bit of symbolism, would be most unappreciated by all the other state governments and that portion of their respective populations that have at least partially state-based cultural identities.
I could see Trump issuing meaningless EOs or Truth Socials re-naming a perceived outlier liberal jurisdiction like San Francisco, and almost all of MAGA would cheer it on and even some swing-voters would shrug it off as "just Trump being Trump". But even then, the political establishments of most states and cities would still view it as an ominous encroachment.