The most significant Trump-era alliance is between corporate outlets and security state agencies, whose evidence-free claims they unquestioningly disseminate.
Glenn, I love your commitment to calling out these corrupt pricks, but you are pulling the most important punch in this story. The national media hasn’t decided to simply shill for the intelligence community for some random and unknowable reason - and you know it. There is a mutually beneficial corruption partnership that has been formed by the national media, Democratic Party, neocon Republicans who hate Trump, and certain corrupt intelligence officers who either had their power threatened or want to cash in at CNN, or both. None of the lies that come from “unnamed intelligence officers” (former or current) are ever helpful to Trump or harmful to the Democratic Party. This was all born out of Trump Derangement Syndrome, which is a virus that has spread widely and created a lot of strange bedfellows.
Remember, Trump's real sin had nothing to do with boorish behavior. He pointed out that Republicans were full of crap on illegal immigration, Democrats no longer cared about working class voters, both parties were continuing to engage in terrible trade deals, and our foreign policy made no sense. For these things he had to be destroyed.
Trump's real sin was he wasn't part of the club of lifer politicians who are bought and sold by big $ interests on both sides of the aisle.
Like Nancy Pelosi, father was a politician.
Same with Cuomo, his dad was Governor.
Matt Gaetz, father is also a politician
George Bush his dad and grandfather were politicians
Liz Cheney, dad was a politician
So who are the longest serving politicians? For Republicans...its Don Young, he got his seat after multiple congressmen were killed in a plane crash. Hale Boggs, a member of the Warren Commission was also killed.
Don Young has had that seat since Hale Boggs and Nick Begich were killed in that plane crash.
Never in history has someone with 0 political experience ever ascended so far so fast. Trump is/was a threat to both established Republicans like Liz Cheney and a threat to the media and the DNC, but even more that he is a threat to the elite who control the country, because he doesn't need their $ or their fame.
Trump and Sanders terrified them. Two nobodies who almost won the popularity contest, even though they were not invited in the club. "What do you mean the American people do not want to choose between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton?"
My conservative friends were mad as fuck at me when I said every one of them should be thanking Barack Obama. Can you imagine if Hilary had been president instead of Obama? How even more entrenched the DNC would be now?
It seems to me the real coming war is between the two party system and Americans who dont feel adequately represented by it.
Obama got away with a lot which I don’t think Hillary could have because she’s white. Obama started new wars and brought slavery back in Libya. Would people worship Hillary if she had done that?
I know many who voted for her, loved her, and she is the one who strongly advocated for the war in Libya, and called for the death of Gaddafi and spewed the lies that justified overthrowing him. As secretary of state she supported the military coup in Honduras which created more poverty, more violence as the country was now more in the hands of the elites. The issue isn't that it's more acceptable because she's white, it's more a question of people don't know, and if they do they don't care.
Not a fan of trump (not pardoning Assange Snowden etc broke the camels back) but his story is very similar to his grand dad’s story. When his grand dad returned to Germany, they didn’t allow him and expelled him because he refused to do military duties, so he came back to US. He became rich in US but even then, the elites back then hated him because he didn’t have the establishment background. Then he passed away from Spanish flu and Trump’s father took over at the age of 12.
Imo Trump spent a lot of his younger life trying to get along with the establishment elites and learnt their tricks and corruption. That is why they hate him so much when he went around them and started attacking them. Maybe trump did it for political purposes (probably did) but they surely hated the attacks.
I think trump is a flawed man but he truly loves his country but has poor judgement when it comes to hiring people. Maybe the poor judgement comes from him getting backstabbed too often so he only listens to what his cronies tell him.
And then in early 2017 they removed the restriction of foreign ownership of media entities entirely, from a June 2016 lawsuit brought by an Australian couple.
I am not a Trump voter (didn't vote for Biden, either) but the fact that the only thing that changed besides the narrative was the president shows that this was obviously personal.
Trump didnt pay the media in 2016 for his path to the presidency. He was the first candidate in history to do that (he spent more on FB/etc). He represents a threat to their largest revenue funnel (political content) because if he can get elected without paying them, does that mean everyone else can too?
He paid them—through third parties. The media were making money like the proverbial bandits before and during his run, and they admitted as much in public. It's why they gave him $3 billion-worth of free publicity in 2016, and even more for the next four years, which it could be argued is what cemented the loyalty of his fan base.
Now, they're still trying to work him, and the whole "Russian interference" BS to try and keep those advertiser bucks rolling in.
They gave him publicity because hillary told them to. The revelation that she instructed her media sycophants and partners (that she paid more than a billion to out of her own and DNC warchests) to pay attention to him and make him a serious candidate, bit her in that pair of battle-ships she conceals beneath her $10K pantsuits. That she, and no one on her campaign really understood how to manipulate social media, or how eager to amplify social media (specifically twitter) old media was (is), showed her ignorance of overall media manipulation which to this day still adheres to the axiomatic "even bad publicity is good publicity".
Its so odd to me that you are cognizant of the media cabal and yet you pretend it doesn't push liberal misinformation.
It is the single biggest thing that makes me think you work for David Brock. You clearly aren't dumb. Why would you believe the DNC and the media have your interests at heart?
"Its so odd to me that you are cognizant of the media cabal and yet you pretend it doesn't push liberal misinformation."
WTF? I do no such thing. YOU simply confuse my pushback on your and others assault on the left by claiming these liberals are left! And, you know better.
I agree with you on a hell of a lot, you just attribute a lot of shit to "the left" that just isn't the left, it's mostly neo-liberal, and sometimes just liberal, neither of which are left.
I 100% disagree with you being the decider of who and what is left, as we have gone over repeatedly. You've never actually said a single politician you actually think is on the left.
You just say repeatedly these people in the DNC dont represent you. They certainly don't represent "the right" and as a party they claim "left".
Why do you feel you have the monopoly on what can be called "the left" even if it is in conflict with the very party leadership we are talking about???!
No, Trump isn't "far worse than an asshole". He's nothing but a standard issue narcissistic plutocrat who was smart enough to play the peasants like a violin after the "party of the people" decided they weren't useful anymore and switched to courting the grande bourgeoisie.
That's why Trump derangement syndrome is so destructive. It allows people to stay focused on an individual who was easily demonized instead of paying attention to the people behind the dark-money curtain pulling all the levers.
Liz, that is one of the smartest things I have seen written about Trump Derangement Syndrome and the dangers of having the infection. As an adult, we should have the capacity to despise the personal characteristics of someone without losing our objectivity and commitment to our ideals - and also our constitution. I just finished reading the Federalist Papers (what brilliance and eloquence) and our founders are all rolling over in their graves.
Very astute comments Liz. I'd add that Trump was very good at addressing the concerns of disaffected voters who felt abandoned by the Dem party. By focusing on personality those with TDS are failing to recognize the groundswell Trump harnessed. They may be in for a shock when a competent politician takes up that mantel.
I've had this thought, too. I got to figure there are a lot of younger go-getters thinking they could do what DJT did, only better. I say you go young people!!
And I think we were overall lucky to have DJT come along when he did, but we could have gotten luckier: what if he were a Reagan-type personality that had been able to win over many more "across the isle," and win a second term in a landslide.
Calling him a narcissistic is silly. Call him incompetent for making poor hiring decisions or not pardoning Assange Snowden etc sure. But narcissistic is wrong because he actually clearly cared too much about people. He wouldn’t have gotten things like insulin and Epipen price caps, asking for $2000 for people etc if he was a narcissist. If he was narcissistic, he wouldn’t be stopping his car in the middle of the road to meet with complete stranger fire fighters. Imo his surprise video after passing of RBG clearly showed he was taken aback and a narcissist wouldn’t have had that reaction.
Check out Reddit archive from before his election 4 years ago on what people actually thought about him who had met him in person. It was all positive and these are everyday average joes who had met him around NY. That Reddit post got something like 11000 comments and almost all positive. I can find the archive if you want.
What TDS means as a practical matter is that lots of people were willing to believe patent nonsense, just because that nonsense made someone they really really hated look bad.
Not arguing that Trump wasn't and isn't a jackass and an incomp. I did not vote for him (nor did I vote for HRC or for Biden). But just because I detest Trump, just because he does stupid stuff, doesn't mean that he was responsible for the murder of Mickey Mouse or whatever ludicrous accusation is leveled next.
"Democrats have consistently called for closing loopholes in campaign finance law that allow secret donors to bankroll pricey political ads. But that hasn’t stopped them from using secret funds to win elections. Of donations and spending reported to the FEC, liberal groups directed more than $514 million in dark money into the 2020 election, overshadowing around $200 million that boosted Republicans. "
I need a smiley emoji...yes, he was a narcissistic and prima violin maestro...like a Pied Piper? I may have to use your "Trump Derangement Syndrome" description here in Smallville...it is epidemic here....
But, the point of Glenn’s essay and my reply is that this corrupt alliance is threatening to turn our democratic republic into a banana republic, irrespective of Trump’s flaws. So, your comment is just off the mark, and shows the danger of having TDS, as it over-rides everything else in the mind of those infected.
One could argue that we have already crossed the Rubicon of becoming a banana Republic. I would agree that we are still in the adolescent stage of banana republic life cycle, but we continue to mature and will soon reach the young adult stage of the BR life cycle. It is right to resist even though the die may be cast.
Remember all that discussion while the votes were being "counted" about what "The Generals" were thinking and the need to purge disloyal troops?
It's not effective or realistic. It's like somebody somewhere _wants_ to become a banana republic so is pretending before we're all the way there. bizarre.
I blame the Xanax epidemic. Who would've thought that artificially calming people en masse would cause them to collectively behave erratically?
TDS was overly used as an excuse for everything, warranted and not. It is one of those stupid words (or phrases - or acronyms) that should be retired, along with *woke* and the general misuse of *cancel culture.*
OK, I didn’t realize I was corresponding with a lefty nut-job. No need for us to continue this string down the rabbit-hole. With people like you I have learned to not waste my time and quickly agree to disagree.
Indeed, he was HONEST! That is worse even than HORRIBLE.
And he did what he said he would do! AWFUL! Supported the middle class by actions. Supported minorities by actions. Built the wall. Supported human rights by actions. Opposed tyrannical regimes (Russia, Iran, Communist China, Venezuela, North Korea) by actions.
Where did you go to school to learn such inferior critical thinking? Where do you work? Did you grow up in an orphanage? Or are you just from one of those Democratic utopias of inner city peace and love and safety that they have built in the last 65 years of total control?
That poster is a moron, if they are implying that it is OK for intelligence agencies and the media to lie about the President, because they think he is an asshole.
I stand by my ad hominem attack and double down that Nancy lacks critical thinking skills and my guess is she works in a job that doesn't require them.
I understand, Nancy. Of course, if Trump is "far worse than an asshole", you must REALLY think Obama is SO much worse than an asshole. After all, he was the President who set the precedent for assassinating an American cititizen without a trial (something, had Bush done it, would have been shouted from the roof-tops 24/7); and of course Obama used the Espionage Act against more US Government whistleblowers than all Presidents before him COMBINED -- Wow! Talk about using power to sabotage our system of government (and setting yet another incredibly far-reaching and destructive precedent)! And let's not forget how he increased the drone bombings (and covered up their abuses), and empowered despotic regimes. Oh, and of course, he took millions from the insurance and healthcare industries when he was just a Democratic hopeful, and -- what do you know! -- paid them back big time with Obamacare, the greatest windfall those industries have ever seen, as healthcare costs skyrocketed for the middle class.
So I get it, I really do. You have to hold these people accountable. So tell us, please, how much "worse than an asshole" is Obama?
Obama was definitely an asshole re all of the things you mentioned.
However, he wasn't a revanchist POTUS. He didn't push the boundaries of domestic law. He didn't bust norms. He wasn't impeached once, let alone twice, he didn't condition aid from foreign countries to win re-election. He didn't sell his office for private gain. He wasn't accused of sexual abuse. You want more?
And wasn't a White supremacist, nor did he intimidate witnesses or offer pardons for silence. And, he didn't foment an insurrection.
Correction: President Trump was "impeached". Neither of the "impeachments" had any basis in fact, which informed people knew from the start and as has been shown in documents made public in the past couple of months.
Also, "aid from foreign countries" is perplexing. Which country sent aid TO the U.S. while President Trump was in office.
President Trump "sold" his office? Biden seems to be in it, though not very often.
President Trump wasn't accused of sexual abuse while President. Not even remotely.
President Trump surely wasn't a "white supremacist". Blacks in the U.S. did much better under President Trump than under President Obama. Unemployment for them the lowest on record. Gains in income by percentage mainly for the lower income households.
Offered pardons for silence? How many people did he pardon compared to Obama? Answer: Trump: 238 (~60/year); Obama: 1927 (~240/year). And Obama ranks FOURTH among all Presidents (President Trump is 29th)
And you really think President Trump "fomented" Antifa and BLM, which were and are the aggressive insurrectionists in the U.S., killing many people and destroying billions of dollars of property, much of it where blacks live and work.
Are you kidding? He put Monsanto in charge of the FDA and EPA. Crimes against humanity. He made GMO food labels illegal. THE RIGHT TO KNOW cancer causing weed killer is in your food. He shot peaceful protesters protecting their water source from a pipeline. NOTHING Trump did even comes close to those crimes against humanity. Blue Maga FOOL
Amen to that. This hyper-sensitive, hyper-partisan bickering is boring. Can we not all at least agree on the bigger threat to our nation? We have a Press that has become the PR arm of leftists who are destroying our 1st Amendment. Thank God for respected, brave, and real Journalists like Glenn G, Michael T, & Matt T for ringing the alarm. Sure, I’m not 100% politically aligned with anyone, let alone these three, but that’s okay. Can we not lay off the “Trump is God! 🤬Trump is satan!”😩 bandwagons and focus on the real existential threat to our Nation?
Donald Trump has certainly been the "ends justify the means" golem that the liberal elite created just in time to rally their forces.
None of the raving loons on the left can ever argue that they weren't ends justify the means lately. I believe the Nazi's used similar rhetoric, they used Jews instead of conservatives/wealthy to point the finger at.
The statists are trying to oppress innocent white people with the word "racist" the same way they oppressed innocent black people with the word "n*3g*er."
Yet again you manage to miss the view of the ocean from the beach, though.
I've started to wonder if you actively work for Mr. Brock or you are just an older liberal who has bought fully into the "Conservatives are the cause of all your problems" BS that the DNC push.
I read it and I was not impressed. He tries too hard to make the "left" heroes and the "right" villains. I understand his point about how modern definitions of the political spectrum are outdated. The problem for me is how he oversimplifies history. No shit the fascists were bad, but never try to whitewash communism to me.
Can you describe exactly why? From where I sit, he benefited the country more than any modern president. Before COVID, we had the best economy in decades, he funded HBCU's, he passed prison reform, he kept us out of wars, he gave us peace in the middle east, he lowered taxes for the middle class, he made us energy independent. I could go on, so am truly curious why TDS was justified.
My major criticism of his was his poor hiring choices when it comes to draining the swamp and not pardoning Assange Snowden etc. I think he was a flawed man but someone who deeply cared about America. His lack of political experience might be why he made poor hiring choices but the buck stops with him and him not pardoning Assange was unacceptable in my book. One cannot be talking about deep state, spying on campaigns, military industrial complex, free speech etc when they don’t pardon the victims of it. I think he caved towards the very end of his presidency because Mitch threatened him if he pardoned them and he decided to cave.
I agree with you, M. Herbie and M. Jayhawk. However, to be fair to M. Nancy, I think her sentiment is that DJT's personality warranted, if not excused, a TDS mentality/response.
I think BLM needs to find some deserving Blacks to defend.
It is incredible how much more hate and division he sowed. Many people in the rest of the world seem to be following suit. He is not responsible for a lot that has been 40 years in the making, by both parties, but he set a dangerous and ugly tone - which all of us are experiencing. And for one of our major political parties to embrace all of this shit is tragic. We - the US - always require a strong opposition, and although many millions of people think the election was stolen (it wasn't) and that Biden is not a legitimately elected POTUS (he is) and that too many elected Republicans (and other grifters) are continuing to stoke this misinformation for financial gain is detrimental to anybody aspiring to a more equal, equitable, fair, just, and environmentally safer country, this clearly harms democracy.
Very clearly expressed opinion. I mostly disagree, but I have come to understand the anger and division that DJT sowed. There must be a better way than his corrosive manner, to come to legitimate social compromise.
I hope that people of your opinion over-all about DJT realize that we "Trumpists" consider ANY choice of standard-bearer a compromise, and boy did we compromise with DJT. That we still consider ourselves "Trumpists" is a mark of how much we agreed with his policies, not his corrosive personality. We are totally ready to find a more "reaganesque" Trump, or "Trump."
Indeed "hate and division" increased dramatically in the Middle East. President Trump led the negotiations between Israel and the Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco and Kosovo. Their peace and recognition agreements certainly represent an huge increase in hate and division! And Israel and Saudi Arabia signing many agreements, including regular non-stop flights between the countries, and scientific research. President Trump initiated this with his non-stop flight, the first EVER between the two countries. That is clearly "hate and division"
And of course unifying and strengthening NATO is hate and division? And supporting the alliance of the free countries in south and east Asia against the Chinese Communist regime is hate and division?
And "equal, equitable, fair, just and environmentally safer country" defines what President Trump focused on.
Thanks to the President's initiatives, CO2 emissions in the U.S. have gone down while those in the rest of the world have gone up. And the Department of Energy's nuclear energy initiatives will continue that.
I think it's past time to consider that the media is just a front for the entire "deep state". It might be even time to consider if the Democrats themselves are just a front for them.
I use to think the democrats were more trustworthy then their counterparts, the republicans, not by much, but now I don't believe that at all. The democrats have even scared me into watching FOX News. Not bad if you block out things like climate change, really.
And beware of FOX, they are also establishment media and they will betray you when the time comes. They have people like Paul Ryan on their board. Support independent creators like Tim Pool, Jimmy Dore etc.
My background is in environmental science, what I meant was when they express denial I just dismiss it, as I do other things as well. I know what you mean, but during the Trump years they were a whole lot better then CNN, MSNBC and mainstream media, and the left wing sites who in he past were thrust worthy. I like Tucker Carlson most of all, and he is a climate change denier, but the left wing took up that anti-Trump torch and ran with it, and I won't forget that. Thanks for the site, and I'll look into it.
I'm not a denier, but am often called one. The climate is changing; the global climate is the most complex of all complex systems in which we humans are an actor, therefor we cannot help but affect the climate. That's basic complex systems theory.
I favor immediate reduction in use of fossil fuels and their eventual elimination. So, why am I not welcomed as an ally by AGW enthusiasts? I don't back the stated objectives for the right reason. It is possible to build an overwhelming case for immediate reduction and eventual elimination without ever mentioning global warming or climate change. So, why isn't that done?
Every climate prediction made by the AGW enthusiasts has proven wrong. As you're aware, the most recent hockey stick coincided with a change in how global temperatures were measured. Using the previous methodology, there's no hockey stick. The alarmist claims are all simply wrong. Polar bear population rises every year to a new record high. Rate of temperature change is far from the highest it has ever been; geologists are aware of a ten degree Celsius rise in ten years before humans existed. The IPCC admitted the Kyoto Protocols had nothing to do with climate change, they used carbon emissions as a proxy for relative wealth to justify redistribution. The East Anglia model stopped working, and its owners hid that while mocking those who didn't buy that the model was perfect.
I'm a skeptic, not a denier. No one has yet identified the top 100 actors affecting global climate and their relative impact, but we're certain we know that human-caused carbon emissions are #1. Because I don't buy the rationale, my support is rejected. That sounds a lot more like religion than science.
The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea levels have risen. That's a reality and it's due to the use of fossil fuels, and there are very few in the scientific community who would deny that reality. Carbon emissions as well as other gases like methane will provide a shield which doesn't allow heat to escape. That's kind of plain and simple and it's the truth. Nothing knew either since the impact of carbon emissions have been discussed since the industrial revolution. I am not someone who is going to try to make you believe in this reality, not going to do it, because I know from previous experience that it's futile, and it feels like you're a philosophical skeptic.
Oh, and at one point many years ago the democrats actually were a party of the people in their support of the working class, and unions, and certainly pushed a more liberal agenda. They gave that good stuff up over decades, and Bill Clinton and his side kick, Biden, really pushed the party to the right. Now, based on their behavior in the last four years they scare me, and I see them as more dangerous then the republicans. I never thought I would come to believe that.
You should check out this site and this discussion. The site tracks and does analysis on stock trading by politicians. Republicans might be bad but democrats are far worse now a days. Nancy Pelosi bought 10 million of Microsoft right before Microsoft got the military deal.
> For example, Pelosi in Dec 22 was against more stimulus. Her husband buys deep ITM TSLA and AAPL calls that day. December 23rd, she is suddenly for stimulus again, with those same companies ralling 5%, giving her an instant +30 return.
> Congressman Gottheimer is absolutely an incredible options trader. He’s been selling calls at peaks on $MSFT all 2021, & seemingly buying back the contracts on dips. This in blocks of $250,000 - $5,000,000, which is incredible size given the amount of $MSFT shares he owns. For ex, on 02-12 he sold 500k $MSFT $160 strike expiring 06/18/2021. On that same day, he bought deep ITM calls of $1M-5M at $145 expiring 03/19/2021. The whale caught both of his movements as well.
Brilliant! I'm now awaiting the fake yt thread on how Nancy is helping people trade Etherium.
BTW ty for the link to the Quillette article. I learned a lot. Well, I do every time I remember to visit Quillette!
Re climate change though, my opinion that things are falling apart fast are based on a great deal of international travel, seeing saltwater infiltration in Asia, flood notices regularly popping up for Houston, friends all over the globe noting changes in climate patterns. If you live in the US, as Quillette article said, college-educated Dems believe in climate change, college-educated Repubs do not. Internationally, the poorest are those who first face climate change, see refugee numbers increasing.
It's funny. Back in the day, "hard-hitting" journalists used to be admired for taking on a corrupt politician and Watergate was like "WOAH".... Glenn single handedly taking on the whole GOD DAMN state apparatchik by himself. Go Glenn go!
I don't think less of you (actually more impressed with you) that you dropped out of high school, but I do fault you for "throwing babies out with bathwater." Anyway, you'll note I hearted your op, and still think it is spot on. My spelling police response was snarky, but non-substantial, which I thought would be obvious. Would you like me to delete it?
At the time of the bounties first being reported, I remember turning to my wife and asking, “Why would any country need to offer a bounty to kill our people, when those very same people would gladly kill us for free?” Heck, the taliban would likely pay for information leading to the death of an American troop. It was a ridiculous lie and a testament to the left’s limitless ability to believe anything that will work to advance their agenda. It made no sense then and anyone who simply took the time to examine the basic premise of the lie, should have seen it for what it was.
Not only is it totally unnecessary to pay Afghans to kill invaders, the bounties were ineffective, if casualty rates in Afghanistan were anything to go by.
And then there's the fact that the bounties fairy story conveniently made withdrawal from Afghanistan politically impossible, and all the pieces of the puzzle come together.
Yep. This was about keeping us there as long as possible. Anybody who thinks Biden (or whoever) wants to get out is crazy. If they wanted to do that, they'd simply follow the timeline that Trump set out 14 months ago and has been followed step by step.
What do you think is going to happen when we overstay the treaty on May 2? What would you do if you were the Taliban? You've done everything asked and no longer have the leverage of prisoners. Now America just decides it's going to stay?
I know what I'd be thinking if I lived there. Fuck that noise.
Exactly how I see it playing out as well. If we are simply going to change the terms at this point after both sides have followed the agreement, why would they think a 9/11 "deadline" means more than the 5/1 one they've been following for 14 months?
As far as I can tell, the Taliban haven't targeted Americans at all since the agreement was signed over a year ago. Expect that to change in 3 weeks.
Good comment except for one notable error: the people you're citing aren't "left", they're neo-liberals and they are in NO WAY "left." And yes, I know, that's what they call themselves, but I believe that's largely a result of many factors including the push to ONLY think of politics as left-vs-right, and so if you don't see yourself as one you must therefore be the other, secondly, a huge push towards dividing us via party-based tribalism, and finally, and most importantly, the intentional and continuous attempts to eliminate the left by redefining the terms.
I used the term “left” here, in the same context as it is used in the Greenwald article, in that those publishing the lies and propaganda described above, come almost exclusively from the “left.” It would be beyond unwieldy and cumbersome to put a fine point on the various subgroups described in the link you provided in the context of a comment section.
If being lumped in with those other groups disturbs you, then I suggest that you bring the issue up with Mr. Greenwald and leave me out of trying to identify the finer points of each groups political leanings.
While I can understand your possible frustration in being crowded into a group or groups you have no affinity for, it is no more frustrating than I experience when being lumped in with alt.right or white supremacist groups for simply believing in our constitution. So, for the purposes of generalized political discussions, I’m okay with the terminology used here, imprecise as it may be.
"I used the term “left” here, in the same context as it is used in the Greenwald article", yes, and I've traded emails with him in the past about it and my take on his response is - paraphraising for brevity, his primary audience of many of these pieces ARE those people who self-describe as left but who aren't, and related main stream media participants / actors, and so he doesn't want to use the correct / real definitions because he thinks he'll lose them.
I understand his point but think he's making a big mistake; he could do far more good calling it like it is because there's power in language and calling things by their proper names is an important step towards real truth.
Have you ever considered the possibility that the left has moved more to the left, while you stayed in the past, and that perhaps it’s you who are outside the mainstream of what is now almost universally called the left?
Maybe it’s time you sold the old Volkswagon minibus with the multi-colored peace symbols hand painted on its sides, and move to rejoin the working class voter in the middle, where your views would be more in line with the things you now believe. It would sure beat this tilting-at-windmills journey in which you seem to be hellbent on convincing the world that they are out of step, instead of you.
"Have you ever considered the possibility that the left has moved more to the left,"
Yes, and the evidence points to a concerted, long-standing effort to completely eliminate the left by the ultra-rich, beginning in earnest with the rise of FDR.
Your proposition is just the kind of crap they want you to believe.
One has to go to the historical roots and then follow it forward in time, and observe the actions of the actors and the responses by the population at large...
Yes, but... each of us can try to communicate a well-thought out definition, and then speak to that. In other words, a disagreement over what exactly constitutes right and left, however over-complicated I think your definition is, shouldn't mean we cannot ally to defeat the common enemy.
"and now that its enduring effects are impeding the Biden administration" -- I believe this is the key sentence of this great article. We would never have received an admission that this was misinformation except that it now serves the Biden Administration to admit to the lie.
Having come from a place that truly puts its people in chains, I feel unfettered here. We still have access to contrary perspectives, though who knows for how long. I blame media consumers for their short memory, refusal to demand consistency in reporting and accountability. We're in this Substack because we do expect these things. I have no sympathy for those uncritically who eat up whatever that's served up to them, same way I don't have sympathy for people who pick up smoking and claim they didn't know how harmful it was. There's no excuse, in this day and age.
Just because you don't feel the cold steel taking heat away from your body doesn't mean the chains set upon those of us in the USA are any less real; along the lines of a different old adage that he who doesn't move doesn't notice his chains, all one has to do is look to those who have and are moving and what's become of them, such as Assange, Snowden, and even Greenwald... Indeed, this variety of chain might prove to be more durable because they keep many from taking measures to remove them, and without sufficient plurality, such an effort is unlikely to succeed. And, in thinking about THAT, I sure hope you grow sufficient sympathy for your fellows who have succumbed to the propaganda to work to help de-program them and welcome them to the fight for our collective freedom - without them, most of them at least, we hold little hope for our own freedom.
As I wrote elsewhere Russia has been the boogeyman for decades, since the late 1940's, and not long after the war, yet people can still be made to feel scared. You would think the light would have dawned by now, but no, just look how they were able to use Russia to push the lie they got Trump elected. I gave up my fear of Russia as a kid, when I gave up the boogeyman who wanted me to behave.
Overtly, all the way back to the Allied (capitalist) invasion of the USSR in 1919. I duly noted 2019 as the 100 year anniversary of Wall Street vs Russia. Some things never change---so far.
You're right, and we're an anti-communist country, but after WWII Russia was used to scare the hell out of people, especially with the advent of nuclear weapons. As a kid I remember saying if adults, both Russians and Americans drop bombs on each other, and adults are that crazy, I don't want to be here and lost all my fear of Russia.
American conditioning begins in the womb. We can't just blame "consumers;" we need our fellow citizens to work with us. The media elite and security state prey on the poor, who are less likely than ever to get the quality education that everyone deserves.
Education is a completely different story, and we definitely don't deserve the low quality. But the super-educated eat the crap the media serves. In fact, that's the legacy news media's primary targeted demographic and their biggest cheerleaders. I'm surrounded by them. It's disgusting.
Unfortunately those most would call well or super educated in the US are not, IMO, in fact all that well educated. Unfortunately our higher education system has, at least since the 1960s, become more and more about indoctrination rather than fostering critical thinking. I earned my BA in 79, and JD in 82. I hardly recognize what college and law school have become.
I don’t disagree, regarding the miserable state of higher ed. But even your contemporaries, presumably educated before education went into full indoctrination mode, are smugly buying the media’s BS. Ultimately, if you’re not going to hold the educated responsible for supporting the crooked media, because they are agency-less re-enactors of their crap education, then neither can you hold the shameless media perpetrators of false propaganda responsible, because they received that same crap education.
I get that. But the hyper-educated are a minority. Most people watching maddow are as economically precarious as the people watching tucker. When you're struggling to make ends meet, you're more susceptible to manipulation, propaganda, clean narratives with some kind of emotional payoff. They give you a sense of control. Not just psychologically but physiologically. We're not wired to think rationally and critically when our basic physical needs aren't being met, when we need rest, or when we're constantly at risk of losing everything.
Are the economically precarious the target of propaganda? I can't imagine them being fixated on the news cycles and what's up with Hunter Biden's laptop, NSA spying, or what's going on in Afghanistan. I can't imagine the machinery bothering to craft propaganda, delivered in unison, to convince the powerless. These types of news stories, the ones supplied by the spooks, are performances for the attention of the educated. They don't even have to be super-educated, but the college educated crowd. That's who I mean when I talk about media consumers. They consume false narratives, while considering themselves educated and well-informed, while having the tools to discern better but refusing to avail themselves of them, while labeling anyone who wants to examine both sides of the story as brain-washed, agenda-driven fascists/commies.
Nonsense. People who watch Tucker and Maddow are PAYING for CABLE TV. If they *are* economically precarious, then this isn't the best use of their money.
The truly economically precarious get their news from the 15 second updates every hour on their sports talk or hot 100 music station... while they work their shift at the ATT store and/or drive Chinese KD Furniture across the country from warehouse to big box.
The ruling class knows that and they use their immense economic power to design algorithms and discourses that neutralize the threat of a working-class coalition.
I think the word “educated” is meaningless. You could be educated at let’s say tech field but that doesn’t mean you know much about foreign policy or media propaganda.
Incorrect about the education thing. Often the most educated are the ones easily falling for the propaganda. That’s why vast majority of tech people believe this nonsense. Education can have a side effect of people over estimating their intelligence in fields unrelated to your own field.
I have to agree with Art. When virtually every news source of any significance is either corporate (mostly) and/or ideologically driven, it becomes extremely difficult to learn the truth. I have ZERO trust in our news outlets. There are a few writers I trust, such as Glenn, but no general news.
As an ex-spook, I am baffled and embarrassed by today's spooks, which makes me also embarrassed to tell people I was a spook. In the seventies through the nineties the media was transitioning from liberal to authoritarian. My toughest job was convincing our agents that they wouldn't be identified by name and subpoenaed before a Congressional hearing to set up photo ops. By 1990 that took up the majority of my time during short, precious meetings.
The media was liberal, making it skeptical of government. I was, and am, liberal and skeptical. We operated in an environment of near-universal hatred of intelligence when it was mis-use of intelligence that was the problem. I was upbraided by a Congressman for delay in reporting information about Soviet troops in East Germany when, in fact, I reported it in plenty of time. Bureaucrats held it up because it was too hard to do, then politicians held it up to see if it supported their agenda. The Congressman told me if the information had been available earlier, the vote would have been different. If I had leaked a story to the press without supporting evidence or corroboration, I'd have been stoned, and not the good kind.
The DoD, FBI, Customs, Secret Service, NSA, DIA, were prohibited from lying to the US press. The CIA was allowed to do so, but only with presidential permission. Those were the rules, and we lived by them. The press distrusted me and all other spymasters, which is healthy. Obviously, the CIA believes it no longer needs presidential permission to dissemble to the press. The country is poorer for it.
What a low hanging full of baby shit poopy diaper that comment is.... save your “us spooks lived by a code of honor man” bullshit for the next Tom Clancy novel.
May I suggest you rely on more than television and movie portrayals of espionage and/or the CIA, and look for information from sources that aren't fiction.
I try to use it as a tutorial moment. Modern education has left a whole lot of people not only without critical thinking skills and the ability to analyze what they hear and read but resistant to acquiring them. If I can show them how they're being conned, I can hope I can change that a little.
Its really gone down hill. I blame hyper efficiency in monetizing media. They know their target audience. They research what they want to hear. Then they package it and feed it to them. We get these media silos that take the same event and have radically different reporting on it. Our country has always been divided on opinion and maybe that’s a good thing. I never thought we would be divided on basic facts. If someone asked you what media outlet is reliable for just straight news reporting, what would you tell them? I was stumped when someone asked me as I immediately thought of the national outlets and I frankly don’t trust them. Now that I had time to think about it, my answer would be local reporting which is still generally pretty decent if only because it hasn’t yet been corrupted.
Well, it worked. We now have a corrupt career politician back as POTUS. Election fraud, unconstitutional voting processes, non-stop media hatred, a litany of media lies, the intel community and gov bureaucracy sedition (the resistance) and (thanks to our public indoctrination centers ) a sub-literate electorate—-No more non-politicians as POTUS.
I think "well, it worked" may be the operative motto. Recall Harry Reid lying in 2012, stating that Mitt Romney hadn't paid his taxes for 10 years. When confronted years later about his lie, rather than showing contrition his response was *well it worked, didn't it*. I think corporate media is cut from the same cloth.
Mr. Greenwald, where is the accountability for journalists? There has been no repercussions for a decade of lies in the media, none. It is clear the lawyers, DNC and media rule this country.
You can always tell who is in charge by who you cannot criticize.
What will it take for this "reckless PR masquerading as journalism" to change?
I really am not a fan of James O'Keefe either...his personality is extremely grating to me. That said I find his content at times to be credible and compelling. The fact he is constantly persecuted is obvious.
For all of recorded history those in power have attempted to silence dissenting voices.
I stopped caring much about personalities. I find those with the "best" personalities are the worst people often. The slick Obama for example. I only care about actions, substance and policies now as that's all that matters. It's not like I am looking for someone to have my kids idolize or something. I am looking for someone to not fuck up our lives.
One may not be fan of him but he's never lost a lawsuit so far so I am hoping his one against NYT will finally put a dent in NYT.
I wish I would've saved a screenshot but what I saw a few days ago in my Google News headlines made me laugh out loud. Every morning I check Google news headlines mostly to get sense of the what the biggest stories are for the that day. So, a few days ago, Biden announced a full withdrawal of US troops by September 11th from Afghanistan.
I swear to you, I was expecting the 3-4 headlines shown to say something like "Biden announces full withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan on September 11th." You know, a pretty objective headline with facts as the top heading. What I got instead was "What about me? say Afghans as US prepares to Withdraw" or "Will Afghanistan become a terrorist Safe Haven once again"
Interesting how the algorithm works in these weird ways. For Afghanistan, I would have preferred a headline like "2 Trillion dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives destroyed... what was the fucking point of it all?" Looking back, we could've just given the almost 3,000 victims of the 9/11 attacks families $100 million each spaced over these 20 years, and easily would have had a more productive, healthier, happier society no matter what they did with the money.
Man, propaganda is out there in droves from headlines to articles. I'm glad for the number of substack authors I have followed/subscribed to as I feel like I can get a better sense for certain stories as Glenn just posted today about the Russian bounties bullshit.
The point of it all was drugs, the poppy keeps flowing, right over the oxy addicted youth. Look at the numbers, narcotics have always been Afghanistan's main export, except for a brief time sugar. Big Pharma isn't just in bed with the military industrial complex, the military industrial complex is their muscle. Follow the money, it doesn't lie. Funny how TPTB didn't care about the 1,000's of young people overdosing and dying everyday, but they really want to save lives from big scary *Batsoup flu(suure). If you're not angry, you're just not paying attention.
"We cannot leave Afghanistan!" "Now we must leave Afghanistan!" Isn’t it amazing how when the script is flipped everything switches at the same time. Position, talking points, messaging, terminology, all have to be in sync with each other. Unfortunately for our political and “journalism” class this has a slight problem. It makes them sound like preprogrammed, hivemind robots. The best part? They cannot figure out why everyone is starting to see through their crap.
I'm not convinced we will actually withdraw. Even if Biden genuinely wants to pull out, will the defense industries and their bought and paid for pols in both parties allow it to happen? I will not be surprised if this summer some other "blockbuster" CIA leak "forces" the US to remain.
Hey contractors and support staff are not soldiers. Sure they are in danger, carry rifles, and wear uniforms, but they are not soldiers. This way all our "soldiers" get to go home and Biden can say "promise kept!"
Yep me too. I even think that this 4 month delay will create some attacks which will then be justified to stay again. CNN has already started publishing articles on how pulling out of Afghanistan is bad for women rights (I am not kidding). Which is the same script which was employed by Laura Bush in 2001 - we must invade because of women rights:
I saw - heard, more accurately - this same crap last night on NPR of all places; blatant spreading of war mongering, unmitigated bullshit. It was so disgusting I turned them off. ...I'm usually on KPFA anyway, but I'd already heard the story KPFA was running...
UGH, PERSONALLY I just "turn this shit off," but, as a society, they have too much influence and should not be ignored.
Question is, will people like Glenn railing against this shit actually CHANGE things?!
We can hope, and it surely can't hurt, but I we only win this ONE PERSON AT A TIME, reaching out to the people who believe the propaganda and de-programming them. ... We have our work cut out for us.
The proverbial handwriting was on the wall WAY back in the early 80s when the Reagan administration cut PBS / NPR funding substantially. Many of us said then it was the beginning of the end of the most trusted - and most accurate - journalism in the USA. And now, it's over with completely; unfortunately, we were correct.
"Public" radio doesn't need government funding. The station I listen to most, WBJC in Baltimore, gets most of its donations from individuals, and this fiscal year has been as good as any ever.
I think most public radio stations lean quite "left" no matter how you define the term. However, I agree that it should move to private funding. I would be proud to take "ownership" of my public affiliate, and I would support it if I didn't already "give at the office" (i.e. support it non-voluntarily). I would do so even if the "left" tilt continued, because I think that would be something that would change with time, IF (caps intended) the owners wished. But I can understand if those that are happy with a "left" tilt are unhappy with me!
I recall preaching the truth to so many and being told - and this is very nearly verbatim from quite a few people, "SURE, I'd agree with all that you say will happen if only <some facts of the day> were true, but I just don't believe it," (including a long list of facts of the day, one of which was, for example, the collusion of the Republicans and the Reagan Campaign with the new leaders of Iraq to hold the hostiages to help ensure Carter lost and if that happened they'd give Iran weapons) and time has proven me (and a substantial number of the _real_ left) correct.
...I sometimes wonder if the survivors from that time period, living to today, who heard my words ever think back and ponder to themselves, "damn?! That guy was RIGHT!" ... I guess I'll never know!
I have a daughter in the military and this article literally makes me nauseous. These propagandists wanted to maintain our presence in Afghanistan because it helped the military industrial complex so put soldiers, OUR SOLDIERS, in harms way. They are our sons and daughters, moms and dads, brothers and sisters that are expendable to these people. They don't care because it isn't their family that is sent there. I lost my mind on twitter back when I had it because some beastly woman reporter named Liz Sly is so evil that she LAUGHED when she heard that the pentagon was deceiving Trump about troop withdrawals. She is one of those people that is beneath contempt. She doesn't care that people are killed or maimed because it doesn't affect her little life. I literally lack the vocabulary to describe how hellish these people are. Every single reporter on CNN, MSNBC etc. knew they were lying and didn't care because it doesn't affect them. May God have mercy on their souls because I wouldn't want to stand in their place on judgment day.
Further evidence you can say whatever the fuck you want in the media and there are 0 repercussions. We are headed towards doom when accountability for everything is gone.
Sadly for the loyal FOX, CNN, MSNBC and NPR viewers they will never be exposed to this side of the news. Cant tell you how many people I have mentioned how the Russian collusion story was a hoax only to be laughed at by them. Honestly its depressing how little accountability there is now in the media and in fact each side is rewarded with staying on message.
I recommend you laugh back, and call them a propaganda victim. When they react strongly ask them to "follow the money!" WHO is getting rich off all this, and WHY isnt' there any money to pay for the things that would help YOUR life?! GET THEM THINKING.
It can't hurt, they're already laughing at you. You might as well "get your licks in."
People DO notice though, and this is important. Look at the trust in the media. People can detect deception. I used to be a NY Times subscribing liberal team member too. It takes a while but you'll start to notice that people like Paul Krugman are arguing almost the exact opposite position he was prior, when it was the other administration, and the cracks start showing. Pretty soon see start seeing the cracks everywhere. It's clearly happening to most of the country, based on how little trust there is anymore.
Sorry to copy pasting my comment multiple times but this is relevant. Unfortunately, Americans aren't learning. Only Republicans and some independents seem to be learning as shown by this Gallup poll:
Media trust by Democrats is at an all time high of 73-76%. Independents is at 35% and Republicans is at the lowest 10%. Aka Democrats are buying whatever propaganda media is selling.
Glenn, I love your commitment to calling out these corrupt pricks, but you are pulling the most important punch in this story. The national media hasn’t decided to simply shill for the intelligence community for some random and unknowable reason - and you know it. There is a mutually beneficial corruption partnership that has been formed by the national media, Democratic Party, neocon Republicans who hate Trump, and certain corrupt intelligence officers who either had their power threatened or want to cash in at CNN, or both. None of the lies that come from “unnamed intelligence officers” (former or current) are ever helpful to Trump or harmful to the Democratic Party. This was all born out of Trump Derangement Syndrome, which is a virus that has spread widely and created a lot of strange bedfellows.
Remember, Trump's real sin had nothing to do with boorish behavior. He pointed out that Republicans were full of crap on illegal immigration, Democrats no longer cared about working class voters, both parties were continuing to engage in terrible trade deals, and our foreign policy made no sense. For these things he had to be destroyed.
Trump's real sin was he wasn't part of the club of lifer politicians who are bought and sold by big $ interests on both sides of the aisle.
Like Nancy Pelosi, father was a politician.
Same with Cuomo, his dad was Governor.
Matt Gaetz, father is also a politician
George Bush his dad and grandfather were politicians
Liz Cheney, dad was a politician
So who are the longest serving politicians? For Republicans...its Don Young, he got his seat after multiple congressmen were killed in a plane crash. Hale Boggs, a member of the Warren Commission was also killed.
Don Young has had that seat since Hale Boggs and Nick Begich were killed in that plane crash.
Never in history has someone with 0 political experience ever ascended so far so fast. Trump is/was a threat to both established Republicans like Liz Cheney and a threat to the media and the DNC, but even more that he is a threat to the elite who control the country, because he doesn't need their $ or their fame.
On paper I should love Trump. On paper.
Trump and Sanders terrified them. Two nobodies who almost won the popularity contest, even though they were not invited in the club. "What do you mean the American people do not want to choose between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton?"
My conservative friends were mad as fuck at me when I said every one of them should be thanking Barack Obama. Can you imagine if Hilary had been president instead of Obama? How even more entrenched the DNC would be now?
It seems to me the real coming war is between the two party system and Americans who dont feel adequately represented by it.
Obama got away with a lot which I don’t think Hillary could have because she’s white. Obama started new wars and brought slavery back in Libya. Would people worship Hillary if she had done that?
I know many who voted for her, loved her, and she is the one who strongly advocated for the war in Libya, and called for the death of Gaddafi and spewed the lies that justified overthrowing him. As secretary of state she supported the military coup in Honduras which created more poverty, more violence as the country was now more in the hands of the elites. The issue isn't that it's more acceptable because she's white, it's more a question of people don't know, and if they do they don't care.
I agree with you about the race card that Hillary couldnt play but I think everyone forgets the media card she could play.
No one worships the Queen of Warmongers
we are ruled by monopolies - including the two party system. it's just another monopoly.
Technically, it's a cartel.
they did win it. elections are compromised.
How can they possibly think we are all not paying attention?!
I think they just don’t care anymore if we are on to their games.
Not a fan of trump (not pardoning Assange Snowden etc broke the camels back) but his story is very similar to his grand dad’s story. When his grand dad returned to Germany, they didn’t allow him and expelled him because he refused to do military duties, so he came back to US. He became rich in US but even then, the elites back then hated him because he didn’t have the establishment background. Then he passed away from Spanish flu and Trump’s father took over at the age of 12.
Imo Trump spent a lot of his younger life trying to get along with the establishment elites and learnt their tricks and corruption. That is why they hate him so much when he went around them and started attacking them. Maybe trump did it for political purposes (probably did) but they surely hated the attacks.
I think trump is a flawed man but he truly loves his country but has poor judgement when it comes to hiring people. Maybe the poor judgement comes from him getting backstabbed too often so he only listens to what his cronies tell him.
Come on, M. Iconoclast, pull the trigger! Love DJT for what he accomplished for us!!
I wasn't a fan of Trump, but I don't understand how these lies can be on the air 24/7 and Joe Voter doesn't see it.
The TCA changed the way the game was played, forever. We used to have regional media. Now we have big national media controlling all media.
https://www.fcc.gov/general/telecommunications-act-1996
And then in early 2017 they removed the restriction of foreign ownership of media entities entirely, from a June 2016 lawsuit brought by an Australian couple.
https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0223/DA-17-190A1.pdf
You can see some discussion of that below.
https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2017/02/articles/fcc-approves-for-the-first-time-100-foreign-ownership-of-us-broadcast-stations/
Pretty soon the globalists will have total control. Trump for all his faults was imo the last obstacle.
I am not a Trump voter (didn't vote for Biden, either) but the fact that the only thing that changed besides the narrative was the president shows that this was obviously personal.
Trump didnt pay the media in 2016 for his path to the presidency. He was the first candidate in history to do that (he spent more on FB/etc). He represents a threat to their largest revenue funnel (political content) because if he can get elected without paying them, does that mean everyone else can too?
He paid them—through third parties. The media were making money like the proverbial bandits before and during his run, and they admitted as much in public. It's why they gave him $3 billion-worth of free publicity in 2016, and even more for the next four years, which it could be argued is what cemented the loyalty of his fan base.
Now, they're still trying to work him, and the whole "Russian interference" BS to try and keep those advertiser bucks rolling in.
They gave him publicity because hillary told them to. The revelation that she instructed her media sycophants and partners (that she paid more than a billion to out of her own and DNC warchests) to pay attention to him and make him a serious candidate, bit her in that pair of battle-ships she conceals beneath her $10K pantsuits. That she, and no one on her campaign really understood how to manipulate social media, or how eager to amplify social media (specifically twitter) old media was (is), showed her ignorance of overall media manipulation which to this day still adheres to the axiomatic "even bad publicity is good publicity".
PT Barnum is busting a gut yet again
No, not everyone, anyone... Anyone who they give a microphone to. ...You can be sure, at least for a generation, they won't make that mistake again!
Its so odd to me that you are cognizant of the media cabal and yet you pretend it doesn't push liberal misinformation.
It is the single biggest thing that makes me think you work for David Brock. You clearly aren't dumb. Why would you believe the DNC and the media have your interests at heart?
"Its so odd to me that you are cognizant of the media cabal and yet you pretend it doesn't push liberal misinformation."
WTF? I do no such thing. YOU simply confuse my pushback on your and others assault on the left by claiming these liberals are left! And, you know better.
I agree with you on a hell of a lot, you just attribute a lot of shit to "the left" that just isn't the left, it's mostly neo-liberal, and sometimes just liberal, neither of which are left.
Do you think Dave Rubin is a leftist or a classical liberal or a conservative?
I 100% disagree with you being the decider of who and what is left, as we have gone over repeatedly. You've never actually said a single politician you actually think is on the left.
You just say repeatedly these people in the DNC dont represent you. They certainly don't represent "the right" and as a party they claim "left".
Why do you feel you have the monopoly on what can be called "the left" even if it is in conflict with the very party leadership we are talking about???!
TDS was well warranted.
And so you are ok with the national media and our intelligence community manufacturing lies because Trump is an asshole?
Of course not.
That's not at all what I said - or even implied.
Trump is far worse than an asshole.
No, Trump isn't "far worse than an asshole". He's nothing but a standard issue narcissistic plutocrat who was smart enough to play the peasants like a violin after the "party of the people" decided they weren't useful anymore and switched to courting the grande bourgeoisie.
That's why Trump derangement syndrome is so destructive. It allows people to stay focused on an individual who was easily demonized instead of paying attention to the people behind the dark-money curtain pulling all the levers.
Liz, that is one of the smartest things I have seen written about Trump Derangement Syndrome and the dangers of having the infection. As an adult, we should have the capacity to despise the personal characteristics of someone without losing our objectivity and commitment to our ideals - and also our constitution. I just finished reading the Federalist Papers (what brilliance and eloquence) and our founders are all rolling over in their graves.
Well worth the reread, too. I highly recommend.
Very astute comments Liz. I'd add that Trump was very good at addressing the concerns of disaffected voters who felt abandoned by the Dem party. By focusing on personality those with TDS are failing to recognize the groundswell Trump harnessed. They may be in for a shock when a competent politician takes up that mantel.
If the Republican Party figures this out, they could take back all 3 branches.
I've had this thought, too. I got to figure there are a lot of younger go-getters thinking they could do what DJT did, only better. I say you go young people!!
And I think we were overall lucky to have DJT come along when he did, but we could have gotten luckier: what if he were a Reagan-type personality that had been able to win over many more "across the isle," and win a second term in a landslide.
Calling him a narcissistic is silly. Call him incompetent for making poor hiring decisions or not pardoning Assange Snowden etc sure. But narcissistic is wrong because he actually clearly cared too much about people. He wouldn’t have gotten things like insulin and Epipen price caps, asking for $2000 for people etc if he was a narcissist. If he was narcissistic, he wouldn’t be stopping his car in the middle of the road to meet with complete stranger fire fighters. Imo his surprise video after passing of RBG clearly showed he was taken aback and a narcissist wouldn’t have had that reaction.
Check out Reddit archive from before his election 4 years ago on what people actually thought about him who had met him in person. It was all positive and these are everyday average joes who had met him around NY. That Reddit post got something like 11000 comments and almost all positive. I can find the archive if you want.
Yeah all thats great but his first week as President he showed his narcissism talking about it being the biggest inauguration ever.
The first fucking week dude.
What TDS means as a practical matter is that lots of people were willing to believe patent nonsense, just because that nonsense made someone they really really hated look bad.
Not arguing that Trump wasn't and isn't a jackass and an incomp. I did not vote for him (nor did I vote for HRC or for Biden). But just because I detest Trump, just because he does stupid stuff, doesn't mean that he was responsible for the murder of Mickey Mouse or whatever ludicrous accusation is leveled next.
Except if you look at who got the dark money, it wasn't Trump in 2020. It was Biden. Even opensecrets.org which leans left, did a piece on this.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/03/one-billion-dark-money-2020-electioncycle
Quote from that article (fixed formatting)
"Democrats have consistently called for closing loopholes in campaign finance law that allow secret donors to bankroll pricey political ads. But that hasn’t stopped them from using secret funds to win elections. Of donations and spending reported to the FEC, liberal groups directed more than $514 million in dark money into the 2020 election, overshadowing around $200 million that boosted Republicans. "
Bravo!
I need a smiley emoji...yes, he was a narcissistic and prima violin maestro...like a Pied Piper? I may have to use your "Trump Derangement Syndrome" description here in Smallville...it is epidemic here....
Yep. Just so spot on, I have to say, "yep."
But, the point of Glenn’s essay and my reply is that this corrupt alliance is threatening to turn our democratic republic into a banana republic, irrespective of Trump’s flaws. So, your comment is just off the mark, and shows the danger of having TDS, as it over-rides everything else in the mind of those infected.
One could argue that we have already crossed the Rubicon of becoming a banana Republic. I would agree that we are still in the adolescent stage of banana republic life cycle, but we continue to mature and will soon reach the young adult stage of the BR life cycle. It is right to resist even though the die may be cast.
The beatings shall continue until morale improves. Normalization phase.
Remember all that discussion while the votes were being "counted" about what "The Generals" were thinking and the need to purge disloyal troops?
It's not effective or realistic. It's like somebody somewhere _wants_ to become a banana republic so is pretending before we're all the way there. bizarre.
I blame the Xanax epidemic. Who would've thought that artificially calming people en masse would cause them to collectively behave erratically?
Yes. Fight the good fight, at least. Really, it sounds silly, but it is true. And it is good for mental health, too.
TDS was overly used as an excuse for everything, warranted and not. It is one of those stupid words (or phrases - or acronyms) that should be retired, along with *woke* and the general misuse of *cancel culture.*
OK, I didn’t realize I was corresponding with a lefty nut-job. No need for us to continue this string down the rabbit-hole. With people like you I have learned to not waste my time and quickly agree to disagree.
Indeed, he was HONEST! That is worse even than HORRIBLE.
And he did what he said he would do! AWFUL! Supported the middle class by actions. Supported minorities by actions. Built the wall. Supported human rights by actions. Opposed tyrannical regimes (Russia, Iran, Communist China, Venezuela, North Korea) by actions.
REALLY worse than asshole.
Yeah, that anti-Statist!
Where did you go to school to learn such inferior critical thinking? Where do you work? Did you grow up in an orphanage? Or are you just from one of those Democratic utopias of inner city peace and love and safety that they have built in the last 65 years of total control?
These are nasty ad hominems in the midst of an intelligent discussion.
That poster is a moron, if they are implying that it is OK for intelligence agencies and the media to lie about the President, because they think he is an asshole.
I stand by my ad hominem attack and double down that Nancy lacks critical thinking skills and my guess is she works in a job that doesn't require them.
Yeah, agree to disagree and move on.
Those are not serious questions, especially the last one.
Sure they are. You just struggle with thinking.
You don't think the DNC has built up peace and safety and racial harmony in these cities they have had 100% control of since the early 1960's?
Weird. You must need some re-education, comrade.
I understand, Nancy. Of course, if Trump is "far worse than an asshole", you must REALLY think Obama is SO much worse than an asshole. After all, he was the President who set the precedent for assassinating an American cititizen without a trial (something, had Bush done it, would have been shouted from the roof-tops 24/7); and of course Obama used the Espionage Act against more US Government whistleblowers than all Presidents before him COMBINED -- Wow! Talk about using power to sabotage our system of government (and setting yet another incredibly far-reaching and destructive precedent)! And let's not forget how he increased the drone bombings (and covered up their abuses), and empowered despotic regimes. Oh, and of course, he took millions from the insurance and healthcare industries when he was just a Democratic hopeful, and -- what do you know! -- paid them back big time with Obamacare, the greatest windfall those industries have ever seen, as healthcare costs skyrocketed for the middle class.
So I get it, I really do. You have to hold these people accountable. So tell us, please, how much "worse than an asshole" is Obama?
Obama is THE WORST
Obama was definitely an asshole re all of the things you mentioned.
However, he wasn't a revanchist POTUS. He didn't push the boundaries of domestic law. He didn't bust norms. He wasn't impeached once, let alone twice, he didn't condition aid from foreign countries to win re-election. He didn't sell his office for private gain. He wasn't accused of sexual abuse. You want more?
And wasn't a White supremacist, nor did he intimidate witnesses or offer pardons for silence. And, he didn't foment an insurrection.
Correction: President Trump was "impeached". Neither of the "impeachments" had any basis in fact, which informed people knew from the start and as has been shown in documents made public in the past couple of months.
Also, "aid from foreign countries" is perplexing. Which country sent aid TO the U.S. while President Trump was in office.
President Trump "sold" his office? Biden seems to be in it, though not very often.
President Trump wasn't accused of sexual abuse while President. Not even remotely.
President Trump surely wasn't a "white supremacist". Blacks in the U.S. did much better under President Trump than under President Obama. Unemployment for them the lowest on record. Gains in income by percentage mainly for the lower income households.
Offered pardons for silence? How many people did he pardon compared to Obama? Answer: Trump: 238 (~60/year); Obama: 1927 (~240/year). And Obama ranks FOURTH among all Presidents (President Trump is 29th)
And you really think President Trump "fomented" Antifa and BLM, which were and are the aggressive insurrectionists in the U.S., killing many people and destroying billions of dollars of property, much of it where blacks live and work.
Are you kidding? He put Monsanto in charge of the FDA and EPA. Crimes against humanity. He made GMO food labels illegal. THE RIGHT TO KNOW cancer causing weed killer is in your food. He shot peaceful protesters protecting their water source from a pipeline. NOTHING Trump did even comes close to those crimes against humanity. Blue Maga FOOL
Turn your flipping TV off. Insurrection. Idiots like you are helping strip away 1st amendment rights
Nobody. Nobody gets to to presidency without being vetted by the Deep State.
Nobody. Nobody gets to to presidency without being vetted by the Deep State.
Honestly. I just want to know where to go to get my signed copy of Glenn’s new book?
Lol they have the same exact policies. So how is one worse..and don't blabber nonsense nonsense about an asshole being worse
You guys still doing this dreary 5-year old argument? I'm convinced there must be something more edifying we could talk about.
Amen to that. This hyper-sensitive, hyper-partisan bickering is boring. Can we not all at least agree on the bigger threat to our nation? We have a Press that has become the PR arm of leftists who are destroying our 1st Amendment. Thank God for respected, brave, and real Journalists like Glenn G, Michael T, & Matt T for ringing the alarm. Sure, I’m not 100% politically aligned with anyone, let alone these three, but that’s okay. Can we not lay off the “Trump is God! 🤬Trump is satan!”😩 bandwagons and focus on the real existential threat to our Nation?
Hear, hear! No more Right vs Left, it should be liberty vs. authoritarianism.
Well, that possibility (wow!) I believe M. jayhawk meant to cover in the expression of his sentiment.
Donald Trump has certainly been the "ends justify the means" golem that the liberal elite created just in time to rally their forces.
None of the raving loons on the left can ever argue that they weren't ends justify the means lately. I believe the Nazi's used similar rhetoric, they used Jews instead of conservatives/wealthy to point the finger at.
The statists are trying to oppress innocent white people with the word "racist" the same way they oppressed innocent black people with the word "n*3g*er."
Neo-libs aren't left and you know it.
Yet again you manage to miss the view of the ocean from the beach, though.
I've started to wonder if you actively work for Mr. Brock or you are just an older liberal who has bought fully into the "Conservatives are the cause of all your problems" BS that the DNC push.
Neo libs are 100% left of me, and you know it, Mr. Gatekeeper-of-what-can-be-called-liberal
Even presuming this is entirely true, "Neo libs are 100% left of me", that doesn't make them left.
It's all explained here.
http://thetroypress.com/articles/art/20210314/art.20210314.html
If there's anything there you disagree with, we can have a conversation about it.
I read it and I was not impressed. He tries too hard to make the "left" heroes and the "right" villains. I understand his point about how modern definitions of the political spectrum are outdated. The problem for me is how he oversimplifies history. No shit the fascists were bad, but never try to whitewash communism to me.
It actually makes Icon even more right wing than suspected.
Much too complicated. Can be used to obfuscate, making it dangerous as well as garbage.
Can you describe exactly why? From where I sit, he benefited the country more than any modern president. Before COVID, we had the best economy in decades, he funded HBCU's, he passed prison reform, he kept us out of wars, he gave us peace in the middle east, he lowered taxes for the middle class, he made us energy independent. I could go on, so am truly curious why TDS was justified.
My major criticism of his was his poor hiring choices when it comes to draining the swamp and not pardoning Assange Snowden etc. I think he was a flawed man but someone who deeply cared about America. His lack of political experience might be why he made poor hiring choices but the buck stops with him and him not pardoning Assange was unacceptable in my book. One cannot be talking about deep state, spying on campaigns, military industrial complex, free speech etc when they don’t pardon the victims of it. I think he caved towards the very end of his presidency because Mitch threatened him if he pardoned them and he decided to cave.
TDS wasn’t justified though.
I think TDS implies an irrational response to Trump. Not sure how or why that would be warranted
Well said, hard to understand how a person can believe that having “derangement” can be warranted. But, there you go.
I agree with you, M. Herbie and M. Jayhawk. However, to be fair to M. Nancy, I think her sentiment is that DJT's personality warranted, if not excused, a TDS mentality/response.
I think BLM needs to find some deserving Blacks to defend.
It seemed very reasonable to me to have a strong negative reaction to Trump, which is neither unwarranted nor a syndrome.
No. I did not intend to excuse unwarranted reactions and responses.
As I said, it was used as a catch-all to describe all of the reasonable and unreasonable reactions to DJT.
The reasonable ones I expressed in my first sentence here.
Excellent rebuttal and clarification.
This was the point I was implying. There are rational reasons to despise the man.
Let me count the ways. (Another time.)
I despise him for intentionally going so low.
It is incredible how much more hate and division he sowed. Many people in the rest of the world seem to be following suit. He is not responsible for a lot that has been 40 years in the making, by both parties, but he set a dangerous and ugly tone - which all of us are experiencing. And for one of our major political parties to embrace all of this shit is tragic. We - the US - always require a strong opposition, and although many millions of people think the election was stolen (it wasn't) and that Biden is not a legitimately elected POTUS (he is) and that too many elected Republicans (and other grifters) are continuing to stoke this misinformation for financial gain is detrimental to anybody aspiring to a more equal, equitable, fair, just, and environmentally safer country, this clearly harms democracy.
Very clearly expressed opinion. I mostly disagree, but I have come to understand the anger and division that DJT sowed. There must be a better way than his corrosive manner, to come to legitimate social compromise.
I hope that people of your opinion over-all about DJT realize that we "Trumpists" consider ANY choice of standard-bearer a compromise, and boy did we compromise with DJT. That we still consider ourselves "Trumpists" is a mark of how much we agreed with his policies, not his corrosive personality. We are totally ready to find a more "reaganesque" Trump, or "Trump."
Indeed "hate and division" increased dramatically in the Middle East. President Trump led the negotiations between Israel and the Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco and Kosovo. Their peace and recognition agreements certainly represent an huge increase in hate and division! And Israel and Saudi Arabia signing many agreements, including regular non-stop flights between the countries, and scientific research. President Trump initiated this with his non-stop flight, the first EVER between the two countries. That is clearly "hate and division"
And of course unifying and strengthening NATO is hate and division? And supporting the alliance of the free countries in south and east Asia against the Chinese Communist regime is hate and division?
And "equal, equitable, fair, just and environmentally safer country" defines what President Trump focused on.
Thanks to the President's initiatives, CO2 emissions in the U.S. have gone down while those in the rest of the world have gone up. And the Department of Energy's nuclear energy initiatives will continue that.
🤡
Was there a question?
No, a well-stated opposing opinion.
I think it's past time to consider that the media is just a front for the entire "deep state". It might be even time to consider if the Democrats themselves are just a front for them.
Both parties are bought and paid for
I use to think the democrats were more trustworthy then their counterparts, the republicans, not by much, but now I don't believe that at all. The democrats have even scared me into watching FOX News. Not bad if you block out things like climate change, really.
Once you ignore the propaganda about climate change too, maybe your minds will change on that too.
Tony Heller is a good channel to follow:
https://youtube.com/c/TonyHeller
And beware of FOX, they are also establishment media and they will betray you when the time comes. They have people like Paul Ryan on their board. Support independent creators like Tim Pool, Jimmy Dore etc.
My background is in environmental science, what I meant was when they express denial I just dismiss it, as I do other things as well. I know what you mean, but during the Trump years they were a whole lot better then CNN, MSNBC and mainstream media, and the left wing sites who in he past were thrust worthy. I like Tucker Carlson most of all, and he is a climate change denier, but the left wing took up that anti-Trump torch and ran with it, and I won't forget that. Thanks for the site, and I'll look into it.
I'm not a denier, but am often called one. The climate is changing; the global climate is the most complex of all complex systems in which we humans are an actor, therefor we cannot help but affect the climate. That's basic complex systems theory.
I favor immediate reduction in use of fossil fuels and their eventual elimination. So, why am I not welcomed as an ally by AGW enthusiasts? I don't back the stated objectives for the right reason. It is possible to build an overwhelming case for immediate reduction and eventual elimination without ever mentioning global warming or climate change. So, why isn't that done?
Every climate prediction made by the AGW enthusiasts has proven wrong. As you're aware, the most recent hockey stick coincided with a change in how global temperatures were measured. Using the previous methodology, there's no hockey stick. The alarmist claims are all simply wrong. Polar bear population rises every year to a new record high. Rate of temperature change is far from the highest it has ever been; geologists are aware of a ten degree Celsius rise in ten years before humans existed. The IPCC admitted the Kyoto Protocols had nothing to do with climate change, they used carbon emissions as a proxy for relative wealth to justify redistribution. The East Anglia model stopped working, and its owners hid that while mocking those who didn't buy that the model was perfect.
I'm a skeptic, not a denier. No one has yet identified the top 100 actors affecting global climate and their relative impact, but we're certain we know that human-caused carbon emissions are #1. Because I don't buy the rationale, my support is rejected. That sounds a lot more like religion than science.
The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea levels have risen. That's a reality and it's due to the use of fossil fuels, and there are very few in the scientific community who would deny that reality. Carbon emissions as well as other gases like methane will provide a shield which doesn't allow heat to escape. That's kind of plain and simple and it's the truth. Nothing knew either since the impact of carbon emissions have been discussed since the industrial revolution. I am not someone who is going to try to make you believe in this reality, not going to do it, because I know from previous experience that it's futile, and it feels like you're a philosophical skeptic.
Agreed. But both sides have the same donors. Burn it all down
Oh, and at one point many years ago the democrats actually were a party of the people in their support of the working class, and unions, and certainly pushed a more liberal agenda. They gave that good stuff up over decades, and Bill Clinton and his side kick, Biden, really pushed the party to the right. Now, based on their behavior in the last four years they scare me, and I see them as more dangerous then the republicans. I never thought I would come to believe that.
You should check out this site and this discussion. The site tracks and does analysis on stock trading by politicians. Republicans might be bad but democrats are far worse now a days. Nancy Pelosi bought 10 million of Microsoft right before Microsoft got the military deal.
> For example, Pelosi in Dec 22 was against more stimulus. Her husband buys deep ITM TSLA and AAPL calls that day. December 23rd, she is suddenly for stimulus again, with those same companies ralling 5%, giving her an instant +30 return.
> Congressman Gottheimer is absolutely an incredible options trader. He’s been selling calls at peaks on $MSFT all 2021, & seemingly buying back the contracts on dips. This in blocks of $250,000 - $5,000,000, which is incredible size given the amount of $MSFT shares he owns. For ex, on 02-12 he sold 500k $MSFT $160 strike expiring 06/18/2021. On that same day, he bought deep ITM calls of $1M-5M at $145 expiring 03/19/2021. The whale caught both of his movements as well.
https://unusualwhales.com/i_am_the_senate
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26821601
Thanks, will do.
Thanks for the links.
Brilliant! I'm now awaiting the fake yt thread on how Nancy is helping people trade Etherium.
BTW ty for the link to the Quillette article. I learned a lot. Well, I do every time I remember to visit Quillette!
Re climate change though, my opinion that things are falling apart fast are based on a great deal of international travel, seeing saltwater infiltration in Asia, flood notices regularly popping up for Houston, friends all over the globe noting changes in climate patterns. If you live in the US, as Quillette article said, college-educated Dems believe in climate change, college-educated Repubs do not. Internationally, the poorest are those who first face climate change, see refugee numbers increasing.
Time to buy stock in the (current) lesser of two evils. (I just made that up.)
I just checked. Stock doesn’t exist.
It goes by the name Raytheon and Lockheed Martin and tech companies.
LOL
Bunch of comedians! (giggling.)
Welcome to the GULAG
I call dibs on the lower bunker bed. And i can cook the celery water soup for all the comrades.
I'll take the topmost bunk, the one with the gun rack built in to the ceiling 3' above me.
It's funny. Back in the day, "hard-hitting" journalists used to be admired for taking on a corrupt politician and Watergate was like "WOAH".... Glenn single handedly taking on the whole GOD DAMN state apparatchik by himself. Go Glenn go!
And he did it in Brazil too. I am so grateful for what he did for my country...
*"WHOA" fify (No worries, it's a generational thing. The 7th Ed. Official Scrabble Dictionary will probably have it spelled either way.)
I dropped out of high school and fuck the English language. Actually fuck the whole Anglo-Zionist empire, language and culture.
I don't think less of you (actually more impressed with you) that you dropped out of high school, but I do fault you for "throwing babies out with bathwater." Anyway, you'll note I hearted your op, and still think it is spot on. My spelling police response was snarky, but non-substantial, which I thought would be obvious. Would you like me to delete it?
I guess you're right. But ever since Cromwell, the English "ain't" ever been the same. Heretics lol
Ha ha ha! That's a great comment!! Thanks for the laugh!
At the time of the bounties first being reported, I remember turning to my wife and asking, “Why would any country need to offer a bounty to kill our people, when those very same people would gladly kill us for free?” Heck, the taliban would likely pay for information leading to the death of an American troop. It was a ridiculous lie and a testament to the left’s limitless ability to believe anything that will work to advance their agenda. It made no sense then and anyone who simply took the time to examine the basic premise of the lie, should have seen it for what it was.
Not only is it totally unnecessary to pay Afghans to kill invaders, the bounties were ineffective, if casualty rates in Afghanistan were anything to go by.
And then there's the fact that the bounties fairy story conveniently made withdrawal from Afghanistan politically impossible, and all the pieces of the puzzle come together.
Yep. This was about keeping us there as long as possible. Anybody who thinks Biden (or whoever) wants to get out is crazy. If they wanted to do that, they'd simply follow the timeline that Trump set out 14 months ago and has been followed step by step.
What do you think is going to happen when we overstay the treaty on May 2? What would you do if you were the Taliban? You've done everything asked and no longer have the leverage of prisoners. Now America just decides it's going to stay?
I know what I'd be thinking if I lived there. Fuck that noise.
The extra delay will be used to "create" an attack by the "Taliban" and as an excuse to stay there...
"VP Biden on Afghanistan: "We are leaving in 2014. Period."" - Obama tweet from 2012:
https://archive.is/RPjH7
Exactly how I see it playing out as well. If we are simply going to change the terms at this point after both sides have followed the agreement, why would they think a 9/11 "deadline" means more than the 5/1 one they've been following for 14 months?
As far as I can tell, the Taliban haven't targeted Americans at all since the agreement was signed over a year ago. Expect that to change in 3 weeks.
Madness.
Good comment except for one notable error: the people you're citing aren't "left", they're neo-liberals and they are in NO WAY "left." And yes, I know, that's what they call themselves, but I believe that's largely a result of many factors including the push to ONLY think of politics as left-vs-right, and so if you don't see yourself as one you must therefore be the other, secondly, a huge push towards dividing us via party-based tribalism, and finally, and most importantly, the intentional and continuous attempts to eliminate the left by redefining the terms.
For a good discussion of this, please see:
http://thetroypress.com/articles/art/20210314/art.20210314.html
I used the term “left” here, in the same context as it is used in the Greenwald article, in that those publishing the lies and propaganda described above, come almost exclusively from the “left.” It would be beyond unwieldy and cumbersome to put a fine point on the various subgroups described in the link you provided in the context of a comment section.
If being lumped in with those other groups disturbs you, then I suggest that you bring the issue up with Mr. Greenwald and leave me out of trying to identify the finer points of each groups political leanings.
While I can understand your possible frustration in being crowded into a group or groups you have no affinity for, it is no more frustrating than I experience when being lumped in with alt.right or white supremacist groups for simply believing in our constitution. So, for the purposes of generalized political discussions, I’m okay with the terminology used here, imprecise as it may be.
"I used the term “left” here, in the same context as it is used in the Greenwald article", yes, and I've traded emails with him in the past about it and my take on his response is - paraphraising for brevity, his primary audience of many of these pieces ARE those people who self-describe as left but who aren't, and related main stream media participants / actors, and so he doesn't want to use the correct / real definitions because he thinks he'll lose them.
I understand his point but think he's making a big mistake; he could do far more good calling it like it is because there's power in language and calling things by their proper names is an important step towards real truth.
Have you ever considered the possibility that the left has moved more to the left, while you stayed in the past, and that perhaps it’s you who are outside the mainstream of what is now almost universally called the left?
Maybe it’s time you sold the old Volkswagon minibus with the multi-colored peace symbols hand painted on its sides, and move to rejoin the working class voter in the middle, where your views would be more in line with the things you now believe. It would sure beat this tilting-at-windmills journey in which you seem to be hellbent on convincing the world that they are out of step, instead of you.
"Have you ever considered the possibility that the left has moved more to the left,"
Yes, and the evidence points to a concerted, long-standing effort to completely eliminate the left by the ultra-rich, beginning in earnest with the rise of FDR.
Your proposition is just the kind of crap they want you to believe.
One has to go to the historical roots and then follow it forward in time, and observe the actions of the actors and the responses by the population at large...
Sign on my workshop bench:
“Never try to teach a pig to sing.
It wastes your time and annoys the pig.”
Yes, but... each of us can try to communicate a well-thought out definition, and then speak to that. In other words, a disagreement over what exactly constitutes right and left, however over-complicated I think your definition is, shouldn't mean we cannot ally to defeat the common enemy.
LOL. I had, and have, the same thought. Glad to see you voice it.
"and now that its enduring effects are impeding the Biden administration" -- I believe this is the key sentence of this great article. We would never have received an admission that this was misinformation except that it now serves the Biden Administration to admit to the lie.
The old adage needs an update: We get the media we deserve. Shame on the lazy, credulous guzzlers of the sewage the media spews.
That "old adage" is just wrong; NOBODY DESERVES THIS SHIT, it's foisted upon us by the ultra-rich to help keep them in power and us in chains.
Having come from a place that truly puts its people in chains, I feel unfettered here. We still have access to contrary perspectives, though who knows for how long. I blame media consumers for their short memory, refusal to demand consistency in reporting and accountability. We're in this Substack because we do expect these things. I have no sympathy for those uncritically who eat up whatever that's served up to them, same way I don't have sympathy for people who pick up smoking and claim they didn't know how harmful it was. There's no excuse, in this day and age.
Just because you don't feel the cold steel taking heat away from your body doesn't mean the chains set upon those of us in the USA are any less real; along the lines of a different old adage that he who doesn't move doesn't notice his chains, all one has to do is look to those who have and are moving and what's become of them, such as Assange, Snowden, and even Greenwald... Indeed, this variety of chain might prove to be more durable because they keep many from taking measures to remove them, and without sufficient plurality, such an effort is unlikely to succeed. And, in thinking about THAT, I sure hope you grow sufficient sympathy for your fellows who have succumbed to the propaganda to work to help de-program them and welcome them to the fight for our collective freedom - without them, most of them at least, we hold little hope for our own freedom.
As I wrote elsewhere Russia has been the boogeyman for decades, since the late 1940's, and not long after the war, yet people can still be made to feel scared. You would think the light would have dawned by now, but no, just look how they were able to use Russia to push the lie they got Trump elected. I gave up my fear of Russia as a kid, when I gave up the boogeyman who wanted me to behave.
Overtly, all the way back to the Allied (capitalist) invasion of the USSR in 1919. I duly noted 2019 as the 100 year anniversary of Wall Street vs Russia. Some things never change---so far.
You're right, and we're an anti-communist country, but after WWII Russia was used to scare the hell out of people, especially with the advent of nuclear weapons. As a kid I remember saying if adults, both Russians and Americans drop bombs on each other, and adults are that crazy, I don't want to be here and lost all my fear of Russia.
The problem is that we don’t know how to “deprogram” them?
American conditioning begins in the womb. We can't just blame "consumers;" we need our fellow citizens to work with us. The media elite and security state prey on the poor, who are less likely than ever to get the quality education that everyone deserves.
Education is a completely different story, and we definitely don't deserve the low quality. But the super-educated eat the crap the media serves. In fact, that's the legacy news media's primary targeted demographic and their biggest cheerleaders. I'm surrounded by them. It's disgusting.
Unfortunately those most would call well or super educated in the US are not, IMO, in fact all that well educated. Unfortunately our higher education system has, at least since the 1960s, become more and more about indoctrination rather than fostering critical thinking. I earned my BA in 79, and JD in 82. I hardly recognize what college and law school have become.
I don’t disagree, regarding the miserable state of higher ed. But even your contemporaries, presumably educated before education went into full indoctrination mode, are smugly buying the media’s BS. Ultimately, if you’re not going to hold the educated responsible for supporting the crooked media, because they are agency-less re-enactors of their crap education, then neither can you hold the shameless media perpetrators of false propaganda responsible, because they received that same crap education.
I get that. But the hyper-educated are a minority. Most people watching maddow are as economically precarious as the people watching tucker. When you're struggling to make ends meet, you're more susceptible to manipulation, propaganda, clean narratives with some kind of emotional payoff. They give you a sense of control. Not just psychologically but physiologically. We're not wired to think rationally and critically when our basic physical needs aren't being met, when we need rest, or when we're constantly at risk of losing everything.
Are the economically precarious the target of propaganda? I can't imagine them being fixated on the news cycles and what's up with Hunter Biden's laptop, NSA spying, or what's going on in Afghanistan. I can't imagine the machinery bothering to craft propaganda, delivered in unison, to convince the powerless. These types of news stories, the ones supplied by the spooks, are performances for the attention of the educated. They don't even have to be super-educated, but the college educated crowd. That's who I mean when I talk about media consumers. They consume false narratives, while considering themselves educated and well-informed, while having the tools to discern better but refusing to avail themselves of them, while labeling anyone who wants to examine both sides of the story as brain-washed, agenda-driven fascists/commies.
Nonsense. People who watch Tucker and Maddow are PAYING for CABLE TV. If they *are* economically precarious, then this isn't the best use of their money.
The truly economically precarious get their news from the 15 second updates every hour on their sports talk or hot 100 music station... while they work their shift at the ATT store and/or drive Chinese KD Furniture across the country from warehouse to big box.
The ruling class knows that and they use their immense economic power to design algorithms and discourses that neutralize the threat of a working-class coalition.
I think the word “educated” is meaningless. You could be educated at let’s say tech field but that doesn’t mean you know much about foreign policy or media propaganda.
That is exactly why the poor do NOT support environmentalism.
You are right on target!
Incorrect about the education thing. Often the most educated are the ones easily falling for the propaganda. That’s why vast majority of tech people believe this nonsense. Education can have a side effect of people over estimating their intelligence in fields unrelated to your own field.
Worth a read:
https://quillette.com/2021/04/03/persuasion-and-the-prestige-paradox-are-high-status-people-more-likely-to-lie/
I have to agree with Art. When virtually every news source of any significance is either corporate (mostly) and/or ideologically driven, it becomes extremely difficult to learn the truth. I have ZERO trust in our news outlets. There are a few writers I trust, such as Glenn, but no general news.
I'd add: as I read this essay it occurred to me that these corporate news outlets are essentially filling the roll that Pravda did in the USSR.
The difference between Americans and Russians is that Russians know their media is propaganda.
And their parents.
Keep kicking ass, Glenn.
As a retired journalist, I am baffled and embarrassed by today's media, which makes me also embarrassed to tell people I was a journalist.
As an ex-spook, I am baffled and embarrassed by today's spooks, which makes me also embarrassed to tell people I was a spook. In the seventies through the nineties the media was transitioning from liberal to authoritarian. My toughest job was convincing our agents that they wouldn't be identified by name and subpoenaed before a Congressional hearing to set up photo ops. By 1990 that took up the majority of my time during short, precious meetings.
The media was liberal, making it skeptical of government. I was, and am, liberal and skeptical. We operated in an environment of near-universal hatred of intelligence when it was mis-use of intelligence that was the problem. I was upbraided by a Congressman for delay in reporting information about Soviet troops in East Germany when, in fact, I reported it in plenty of time. Bureaucrats held it up because it was too hard to do, then politicians held it up to see if it supported their agenda. The Congressman told me if the information had been available earlier, the vote would have been different. If I had leaked a story to the press without supporting evidence or corroboration, I'd have been stoned, and not the good kind.
The DoD, FBI, Customs, Secret Service, NSA, DIA, were prohibited from lying to the US press. The CIA was allowed to do so, but only with presidential permission. Those were the rules, and we lived by them. The press distrusted me and all other spymasters, which is healthy. Obviously, the CIA believes it no longer needs presidential permission to dissemble to the press. The country is poorer for it.
"The CIA was allowed to do so, but only with presidential permission."
Stupid JFK. He didn't realize he authorized CIA not just to lie to the press. Other than that - those were the times.
And if what this guy is saying was true - looks like presidents were real busy approving all this shit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi9IwQFHJQE&t=1624s
What a low hanging full of baby shit poopy diaper that comment is.... save your “us spooks lived by a code of honor man” bullshit for the next Tom Clancy novel.
May I suggest you rely on more than television and movie portrayals of espionage and/or the CIA, and look for information from sources that aren't fiction.
Go fuck yourself.
How do you know it isn't true?
I can only imagine. But take solace from the fact these propagandists are not truly journalists.
Journalism isn't (just) a job. If you're still digging for and speaking the truth you're still a journalist.
I try to use it as a tutorial moment. Modern education has left a whole lot of people not only without critical thinking skills and the ability to analyze what they hear and read but resistant to acquiring them. If I can show them how they're being conned, I can hope I can change that a little.
Its really gone down hill. I blame hyper efficiency in monetizing media. They know their target audience. They research what they want to hear. Then they package it and feed it to them. We get these media silos that take the same event and have radically different reporting on it. Our country has always been divided on opinion and maybe that’s a good thing. I never thought we would be divided on basic facts. If someone asked you what media outlet is reliable for just straight news reporting, what would you tell them? I was stumped when someone asked me as I immediately thought of the national outlets and I frankly don’t trust them. Now that I had time to think about it, my answer would be local reporting which is still generally pretty decent if only because it hasn’t yet been corrupted.
Well, it worked. We now have a corrupt career politician back as POTUS. Election fraud, unconstitutional voting processes, non-stop media hatred, a litany of media lies, the intel community and gov bureaucracy sedition (the resistance) and (thanks to our public indoctrination centers ) a sub-literate electorate—-No more non-politicians as POTUS.
Bravi!!
I think "well, it worked" may be the operative motto. Recall Harry Reid lying in 2012, stating that Mitt Romney hadn't paid his taxes for 10 years. When confronted years later about his lie, rather than showing contrition his response was *well it worked, didn't it*. I think corporate media is cut from the same cloth.
Forgot the link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/31/harry-reids-appalling-defense-of-his-attack-on-mitt-romneys-tax-record/
Ouch! Man, some zingers today!
Mr. Greenwald, where is the accountability for journalists? There has been no repercussions for a decade of lies in the media, none. It is clear the lawyers, DNC and media rule this country.
You can always tell who is in charge by who you cannot criticize.
What will it take for this "reckless PR masquerading as journalism" to change?
I really am not a fan of James O'Keefe either...his personality is extremely grating to me. That said I find his content at times to be credible and compelling. The fact he is constantly persecuted is obvious.
For all of recorded history those in power have attempted to silence dissenting voices.
I stopped caring much about personalities. I find those with the "best" personalities are the worst people often. The slick Obama for example. I only care about actions, substance and policies now as that's all that matters. It's not like I am looking for someone to have my kids idolize or something. I am looking for someone to not fuck up our lives.
One may not be fan of him but he's never lost a lawsuit so far so I am hoping his one against NYT will finally put a dent in NYT.
I can respect his work without liking his personality
Project Veritas was permanently banned from Twitter today.
I am absolutely shocked. Shocked I tell you.
Project Veritas has not lost a single lawsuit in its history so far so I am hoping he wins against NYT too.
Should be interesting. I did thoroughly enjoy watching their deposition videos of the AFT.
I wish I would've saved a screenshot but what I saw a few days ago in my Google News headlines made me laugh out loud. Every morning I check Google news headlines mostly to get sense of the what the biggest stories are for the that day. So, a few days ago, Biden announced a full withdrawal of US troops by September 11th from Afghanistan.
I swear to you, I was expecting the 3-4 headlines shown to say something like "Biden announces full withdrawal of US troops in Afghanistan on September 11th." You know, a pretty objective headline with facts as the top heading. What I got instead was "What about me? say Afghans as US prepares to Withdraw" or "Will Afghanistan become a terrorist Safe Haven once again"
Interesting how the algorithm works in these weird ways. For Afghanistan, I would have preferred a headline like "2 Trillion dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives destroyed... what was the fucking point of it all?" Looking back, we could've just given the almost 3,000 victims of the 9/11 attacks families $100 million each spaced over these 20 years, and easily would have had a more productive, healthier, happier society no matter what they did with the money.
Man, propaganda is out there in droves from headlines to articles. I'm glad for the number of substack authors I have followed/subscribed to as I feel like I can get a better sense for certain stories as Glenn just posted today about the Russian bounties bullshit.
The point of it all was drugs, the poppy keeps flowing, right over the oxy addicted youth. Look at the numbers, narcotics have always been Afghanistan's main export, except for a brief time sugar. Big Pharma isn't just in bed with the military industrial complex, the military industrial complex is their muscle. Follow the money, it doesn't lie. Funny how TPTB didn't care about the 1,000's of young people overdosing and dying everyday, but they really want to save lives from big scary *Batsoup flu(suure). If you're not angry, you're just not paying attention.
"We cannot leave Afghanistan!" "Now we must leave Afghanistan!" Isn’t it amazing how when the script is flipped everything switches at the same time. Position, talking points, messaging, terminology, all have to be in sync with each other. Unfortunately for our political and “journalism” class this has a slight problem. It makes them sound like preprogrammed, hivemind robots. The best part? They cannot figure out why everyone is starting to see through their crap.
I'm not convinced we will actually withdraw. Even if Biden genuinely wants to pull out, will the defense industries and their bought and paid for pols in both parties allow it to happen? I will not be surprised if this summer some other "blockbuster" CIA leak "forces" the US to remain.
I hate to agree with you, but I have the same fear.
Hey contractors and support staff are not soldiers. Sure they are in danger, carry rifles, and wear uniforms, but they are not soldiers. This way all our "soldiers" get to go home and Biden can say "promise kept!"
Yep me too. I even think that this 4 month delay will create some attacks which will then be justified to stay again. CNN has already started publishing articles on how pulling out of Afghanistan is bad for women rights (I am not kidding). Which is the same script which was employed by Laura Bush in 2001 - we must invade because of women rights:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/laurabushtext_111701.html
"VP Biden on Afghanistan: "We are leaving in 2014. Period."" - Obama tweet from 2012:
https://archive.is/RPjH7
Yup, when an establishment politician says it, the narrative suddenly changes.
Sometimes I just imagine our 'neo'conservative and our 'neo'liberal leaders and pundits literally trading scripts with each other.
Neoliberals are just neocons, prettied up with some self-serving and hypocritical human rights talk.
Note how Kagan, Boot, and other unindicted war criminals can shift from Team R to Team D and never miss a beat.
Neocons are just neoliberals, prettied up with some self-serving and hypocritical freedom talk.
Ouch! (Well said!)
Ha! A double euphemism!
I saw - heard, more accurately - this same crap last night on NPR of all places; blatant spreading of war mongering, unmitigated bullshit. It was so disgusting I turned them off. ...I'm usually on KPFA anyway, but I'd already heard the story KPFA was running...
UGH, PERSONALLY I just "turn this shit off," but, as a society, they have too much influence and should not be ignored.
Question is, will people like Glenn railing against this shit actually CHANGE things?!
We can hope, and it surely can't hurt, but I we only win this ONE PERSON AT A TIME, reaching out to the people who believe the propaganda and de-programming them. ... We have our work cut out for us.
NPR had funding cut in 2012. Now Koch Brothers and Bill Gates control it. Literally like one big Bill Gates commercial
The proverbial handwriting was on the wall WAY back in the early 80s when the Reagan administration cut PBS / NPR funding substantially. Many of us said then it was the beginning of the end of the most trusted - and most accurate - journalism in the USA. And now, it's over with completely; unfortunately, we were correct.
"Public" radio doesn't need government funding. The station I listen to most, WBJC in Baltimore, gets most of its donations from individuals, and this fiscal year has been as good as any ever.
It doesn't cost much and it's worth the investment in ourselves.
I think most public radio stations lean quite "left" no matter how you define the term. However, I agree that it should move to private funding. I would be proud to take "ownership" of my public affiliate, and I would support it if I didn't already "give at the office" (i.e. support it non-voluntarily). I would do so even if the "left" tilt continued, because I think that would be something that would change with time, IF (caps intended) the owners wished. But I can understand if those that are happy with a "left" tilt are unhappy with me!
Wow....didn't know that. Yea a LOT of things changed under Reagan. And not for the better
I recall preaching the truth to so many and being told - and this is very nearly verbatim from quite a few people, "SURE, I'd agree with all that you say will happen if only <some facts of the day> were true, but I just don't believe it," (including a long list of facts of the day, one of which was, for example, the collusion of the Republicans and the Reagan Campaign with the new leaders of Iraq to hold the hostiages to help ensure Carter lost and if that happened they'd give Iran weapons) and time has proven me (and a substantial number of the _real_ left) correct.
...I sometimes wonder if the survivors from that time period, living to today, who heard my words ever think back and ponder to themselves, "damn?! That guy was RIGHT!" ... I guess I'll never know!
OOps, sorry to get Iraq in there! No, it was all Iran, of course!
(Damn that there's no edit capability here!)
Damn. Lol but seriously we are super screwed
I have a daughter in the military and this article literally makes me nauseous. These propagandists wanted to maintain our presence in Afghanistan because it helped the military industrial complex so put soldiers, OUR SOLDIERS, in harms way. They are our sons and daughters, moms and dads, brothers and sisters that are expendable to these people. They don't care because it isn't their family that is sent there. I lost my mind on twitter back when I had it because some beastly woman reporter named Liz Sly is so evil that she LAUGHED when she heard that the pentagon was deceiving Trump about troop withdrawals. She is one of those people that is beneath contempt. She doesn't care that people are killed or maimed because it doesn't affect her little life. I literally lack the vocabulary to describe how hellish these people are. Every single reporter on CNN, MSNBC etc. knew they were lying and didn't care because it doesn't affect them. May God have mercy on their souls because I wouldn't want to stand in their place on judgment day.
The media aren't just the enemy of the people, they're domestic terrorists disseminating fear they themselves manufacture.
Further evidence you can say whatever the fuck you want in the media and there are 0 repercussions. We are headed towards doom when accountability for everything is gone.
No, the little guy will always be accountable. It's accountability for anything and everything "establishment" that's gone.
like feudalism still kicking us in the back every time we try and stand up
its infuriating
Sadly for the loyal FOX, CNN, MSNBC and NPR viewers they will never be exposed to this side of the news. Cant tell you how many people I have mentioned how the Russian collusion story was a hoax only to be laughed at by them. Honestly its depressing how little accountability there is now in the media and in fact each side is rewarded with staying on message.
I recommend you laugh back, and call them a propaganda victim. When they react strongly ask them to "follow the money!" WHO is getting rich off all this, and WHY isnt' there any money to pay for the things that would help YOUR life?! GET THEM THINKING.
It can't hurt, they're already laughing at you. You might as well "get your licks in."
That’s when they call you a FAUX watching conspiracy theorists!
People DO notice though, and this is important. Look at the trust in the media. People can detect deception. I used to be a NY Times subscribing liberal team member too. It takes a while but you'll start to notice that people like Paul Krugman are arguing almost the exact opposite position he was prior, when it was the other administration, and the cracks start showing. Pretty soon see start seeing the cracks everywhere. It's clearly happening to most of the country, based on how little trust there is anymore.
Sorry to copy pasting my comment multiple times but this is relevant. Unfortunately, Americans aren't learning. Only Republicans and some independents seem to be learning as shown by this Gallup poll:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
Media trust by Democrats is at an all time high of 73-76%. Independents is at 35% and Republicans is at the lowest 10%. Aka Democrats are buying whatever propaganda media is selling.
Democrats are, at most, about 20% of the population.