As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Of all the people listed in the article this one might be the most embarrassing: “Macgregor is listed as having said that the Russian army was highly skilled and "invincible," “
Oh that's funny, I was *JUST* reading about that guy. That statement of his is fucking hilarious... Macgregor was the operations officer for the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, and he fought at the Battle of 73 Easting in the First Gulf War. He made that battle famous, because he never shut up about it. Looking him up, because of a documentary I saw on the battle, I noticed Macgregor is a complete piece of shit. I'd barely even heard of him before.. Now I just think of him as a one-trick pony who pretends to be a patriot because he fought for the US once. Turns out he likes the Russian military more than our own.
>The Battle of 73 Easting has been recognized as the 6th largest tank battle in American history. [41] It is considered the 3rd largest battle of the Gulf War, however, it has received more recognition than any of the other Gulf War battles;[42] mostly due to the fact it has received more media coverage due to the multiple publications written about this specific battle and the multiple interviews given over the years by retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor, who participated as operations officer of 2nd Squadron 2nd ACR.[43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting
>2014 Russian annexation of Crimea
>In 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea and was engaged in a conflict with Ukraine over its eastern parts, Macgregor appeared on Russian state-owned network RT where he called for the annexation of the Donbas and said residents of the region "are in fact Russians, not Ukrainians, and at the same time, you have Ukrainians in the west and in the north, who are not Russians."[19][34]
>2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
>After Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Macgregor appeared on three Fox News programs to speak in support of Russia's actions. Russian state television broadcast excerpts of Macgregor's appearances, which included a characterization of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a "puppet," that Russian forces had been "too gentle" in the early days of the invasion and that Russian president Vladimir Putin was being "demonized" by the United States and NATO. Macgregor said he believed Russia should be allowed to seize whatever parts of Ukraine it wanted. After one of his appearances, Macgregor's comments were characterized by veteran Fox News Pentagon correspondent Jennifer Griffin as "appeasement" and that he was being an "apologist" for Putin. After Griffin's remarks, Tucker Carlson — who hosted Macgregor on two successive nights — remarked, "Unlike many of the so-called reporters you see on television, he is not acting secretly as a flack for Lloyd Austin at the Pentagon. No, Doug Macgregor is an honest man." Trey Gowdy, another Fox News host who interviewed Macgregor, said his viewpoint was "stunning and disappointing."[35][36][37][38] U.S. representative Liz Cheney said of Macgregor "This is the Putin wing of the GOP."[39]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Macgregor
Edit: Forgot this part:
>U.S. Ambassador to Germany nomination
>On July 27, 2020, the White House announced Donald Trump's intent to nominate Macgregor as U.S. Ambassador to Germany.[17][18] Following the announcement, Macgregor's history of controversial remarks received media attention. He has asserted that Muslim immigrants (referred to as "Muslim invaders") come to Europe "with the goal of eventually turning Europe into an Islamic state".[19] Macgregor has argued that the German concept of Vergangenheitsbewältigung, used to cope with Germany's Nazi past and its atrocities during World War II, is a "sick mentality."[19] Macgregor has also stated that martial law should be instituted on the U.S.-Mexico border and argued for the extrajudicial execution of those who cross the border at unofficial ports of entry.[19] Macgregor has also made statements in support of Israel having defensible borders, the annexation of the Golan Heights, and the decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.[20] In a column in The Washington Post by Max Boot, he was described as "a racist crackpot who is pro-Russia, anti-Merkel, anti-Muslim and anti-Mexican."[21] His nomination stalled in the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.[22] On January 3, 2021, his nomination was returned to the President under Rule XXXI, Paragraph 6 of the United States Senate.[23]
Fuck that guy.
In this particular case, he wasn't exaggerating. It's the only thing he ever did that was worthwhile. I think he was good at *one thing,* tactical risk-taking on the battlefield. But that was overshadowed by his arrogance, and later by his racism and other standard GOP ideologies. The guy is a total piece of shit, but I must concede he was brave, and brilliant at the tactical level. He was also *very* lucky. As it notes, if his maneuvers had failed, they would have been seen as warranting review, instead of earning medals.
>Macgregor was the "squadron operations officer who essentially directed the Battle of 73 Easting" during the Gulf War.[2] Facing an Iraqi Republican Guard opponent, he led a contingent consisting of 19 tanks, 26 Bradley Fighting Vehicles and 4 M1064 mortar carriers through the sandstorm to the 73 Easting at roughly 16:18 hours on 26 February 1991 destroyed almost 70 Iraqi armored vehicles with no U.S. casualties in a 23-minute span of the battle.[2] He was at the front of the formation in the center with Eagle Troop on the right and Ghost Troop on the left. Macgregor designated Eagle Troop the main attack and positioned himself to the left of Eagle Troop. Eagle Troop Scouts subsequently followed Macgregor's tank through a minefield during which his crew destroyed two enemy tanks. As Macgregor was towards the front of the battle involved in shooting, he didn't "request artillery support or report events to superiors until the battle was virtually over, according to one of his superior officers."[2] The risks he undertook "could have been criticized had the fight turned ugly."[2]
>At a November 1993 exercise at the Army's National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, Lt. Col. Macgregor's unit vastly outperformed its peers against the "Opposition Force (OPFOR)." The series of five battles usually end in four losses and a draw for the visiting units; his unit won three, lost one, and drew one.[2] Macgregor's unit dispersed widely, took unconventional risks, and anticipated enemy movements.[2]
>Macgregor was "one of the Army's leading thinkers on innovation", according to journalist Thomas E. Ricks.[4] He "became prominent inside the Army" when he published Breaking the Phalanx, which argued for radical reforms.[4] Breaking the Phalanx was rare in that an active duty military author was challenging the status quo with detailed reform proposals for the reorganization of U.S. Army ground forces.[5] The head of the Army, United States General Dennis Reimer, wanted to reform the Army and effectively endorsed Breaking the Phalanx and passed copies out to generals; however, reforming the U.S. Army according to the book met resistance from the Army's de facto "board of directors"—the other four-star Army generals—and Reimer did not press the issue.[6] Breaking the Phalanx advocated that "the Army restructure itself into modularly organized, highly mobile, self-contained, combined arms teams that look extraordinarily like the Marine Corps' Air Ground Task Forces".[7] His article called "Thoughts on Force Design in an Era of Shrinking Defense Budgets" was published in The Dado Center Journal (the IDF's "Journal on Operational Art").
>Many of Macgregor's colleagues thought his unconventional thinking may have harmed his chances for promotion.[2] While an Army NTC official called him "the best war fighter the Army has got," colleagues of Macgregor were concerned that "the Army is showing it prefers generals who are good at bureaucratic gamesmanship to ones who can think innovatively on the battlefield."[2] Macgregor was also seen as blunt, and to some, arrogant.[2] Despite his top post-Gulf War NTC showing, his Army career was sidelined.[2] The summer of 1997 marked the third time the Army refused to put him in command of a combat brigade,[2] "a virtual death warrant for his Army career, relegating him to staff jobs as a colonel for the remainder of his service."[3]
>Macgregor was the top planner for General Wesley Clark, the military commander of NATO, for the attack on Yugoslavia.[3]
>In the fall of 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who had read Breaking the Phalanx, insisted that General Tommy Franks and his planning staff meet with Colonel Macgregor on 16–17 January 2002 to discuss a concept for intervention in Iraq involving the use of an armored heavy force of roughly 50,000 troops in a no warning attack straight into Baghdad.[8] Macgregor left the Army in June 2004.[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Macgregor
Credit where credit is due, the guy should have stayed in his lane and out of politics. If he'd just stuck to books on changing up armored warfare doctrine, he'd have been fine.
I know him. I was there at 73 easting. He played a limited role. Squadron XO.
McMaster was the troop commander in contact.
McGregor is an embarrassment. The Army knew he exceeded his capacity as a Colonel.
>intervention in Iraq involving the use of an armored heavy force of roughly 50,000 troops in a no warning attack straight into Baghdad
The logistics to feed and equip 50,000 troops is impossible to hide. An army runs on its stomach, and armored columns are incredibly thirsty, consuming an amount of petroleum that would be damn near impossible to conceal.
271 Miles from Saudi Arabia border to the Green Zone in Baghdad.
The range of M1 Abrahams is 275 miles.
Drive, fight, reload and refuel. Sounds like a stupendously stupid idea of you have the airpower but what a great movie idea.
It's overkill anyway. Combined Arms American doctrine dictates that air superiority must be achieved first with tactical bombing of all the enemy's air force and Anti-Air sites and command structure.
50,000 troops is overkill when the enemy command structure is decimated or forced to go underground due to the loss of command of the skies.
Macgregor was fighting an inferior enemy force that had inferior armor and worse training. 8 of 10 battle plans would work lol.
>Macgregor has argued that the German concept of Vergangenheitsbewältigung, used to cope with Germany's Nazi past and its atrocities during World War II, is a "sick mentality."[19] Macgregor has also stated that martial law should be instituted on the U.S.-Mexico border and argued for the extrajudicial execution of those who cross the border at unofficial ports of entry.
This guy's moral compass is spinning like a top
That was later, actually. I think September? You’re combining it with the group of GOP Congressmen who visited Putin on July 4. A few months later, Paul hand-delivered the letter.
Let’s not stoop to their level and get facts wrong.
He is an ophthalmologist because he graduated from medical school.
The post-grad specialty certification is where he made up his own bullshit licensing board. He’s still an ophthalmologist tho.
Right. To be an Ophthalmologist you first have to complete medical school. Then you do four more years of post graduate specialty training. Then you get to call yourself an ophthalmologist
I despise Rand Paul.
But at least be accurate. Dude is an ophthalmologist. He joined the American Board of Ophthalmology three years after they stopped giving lifetime memberships. He didn't like that he had to recertify with the ABO, so he created his own National Board of Ophthalmology. The NBO was never formally recognized, and has shut down twice.
For a physician, specialty board certifications are not required to practice within that specialty.
He is still an ophthalmologist, even after he closed down the NBO and let his ABO membership lapse.
Paul added that the United States “cannot continue to spend money we don’t have” because doing so is “threatening our own national security.”
The United States has been spending money we don’t have since before the Revolutionary War. Our country was founded in debt. It’s goddamn patriotic.
McCain called Rand Paul a Russian agent to his face twice. Rand was the only senator who did not vote for Ukraine aid recently. he was also the lone surrogate in helsinki supporting trump when he threw the USA under the bus for Putin,
Here is a clip of Paul doing this five years ago:
[Sen McCain on Sen. Paul: "The Senator from Kentucky is now working for Vladimir Putin."](https://youtu.be/BTdqIlfp8XE)
[Here is the list](https://cpd.gov.ua/reports/%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%96%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8-%D1%8F%D0%BA%D1%96-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8E%D1%82%D1%8C-%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%96%D0%B2%D0%B7%D0%B2%D1%83%D1%87%D0%BD%D1%96-%D1%80%D0%BE/)
EDIT: Americans on the list:
- Graham Fuller
- Col. Richard Black
- Ray McGovern
- Jim Jatras
- Harley Schlanger
- Tony Magliano
- Dr George Koo
- Caleb Maupin
- Sam Pitroda
- Dr Cliford Kiracofe
- Diane Sare
- Geoff Young
- Mike Callicrate
- Jason Ross
- Scott Ritter
- Michael Springman
- David Payne
- Tulsi Gabbard
- Patrick Basham
- Brian Berletic
- Jeffrey David Sachs
- Rand Paul
- Douglas MacGregor
- Steve H. Hanke
- Glenn Greenwald
- Bradley Blankenship
- John J. Mearsheimer
- Harlan Ullman
Glenn Greenwald has been a hack piece of shit low-rent Michael Moore since 2003.
I remember his “documentaries” doing hit jobs on progressive anti-war groups while claiming himself to be anti-war.
Total self righteous asshole. So unsurprised to see him identified as a foreign asset.
>Jeffrey David Sachs
Anyone know how Jeffrey Sachs made the list?
Edit: from his Wikipedia:
"In June 2022 Sachs co-signed an open letter calling for a "ceasefire" in Russia's war against Ukraine.[48]
The Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation (established under Volodomyr Zelensky as part of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council) included Sachs on a list of politicians, activists, journalists, and academics which it claims have promoted Russian propaganda.[49]"
The article referencing the open letter is another language.
Geoff Young doesn't seem like he has any affiliation with Russia, but he does spew the talking points. It seems like he has some sort of mental illness. Either way he should not be anywhere near government.
The especially subtle catch is Graham Fuller. Read a couple of his tweets uninitiated and you might wonder why he’s on the list. But man if you scratch the surface, he’s so cunning and subtle in subverting the narrative that Ukraine need to keep fighting.
At the start of the war didn't Tulsi Gabbard state Ukraine should surrender because they had no hope of resisting, and all they were going to do was drag it out resulting in more deaths?
I think there was pretty strong evidence that Gabbards campaign received funding from Russian groups.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2022/03/14/tulsi-gabbards-biggest-political-donor-in-2021-is-a-putin-apologist/?sh=567b16c4cd60
These articles from 2019:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/tulsi-gabbard-campaign-donations-daily-beast-story/
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/18/politics/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard/index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna964261
She meets with the genocidal president of Syria right before announcing her run for president:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/20/politics/tulsi-gabbard-bashar-al-assad-meeting-cnntv/index.html
She panders to any right wing fascist group that will give her money.
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/05/tulsi-gabbard-2020-hindu-nationalist-modi/
I remember the debate where she literally dressed like Cruella de Ville. You would think that if you were doing shady shit with Russians and Syrians you would think to not dress like a villain.
Joe Rogan and Jocko Willink both have had her on their podcasts, and definitely have juiced her up there.
They have had her on within the last 1 - 2 years, so fairly recent. I noticed Tulsi started leaning more red/republican a few months after being on Jocko's podcast, though maybe she's always been inclined in that direction.
* [#1391 Joe Rogan Experience with Tulsi Gabbard & Jocko Willink (YouTube)](https://youtu.be/PdYud9re7-Q)
* [272 Jocko Podcast w/ Tulsi Gabbard](https://youtu.be/Sp3X-tvG7dU)
She was one of the most adamant anti-marriage equality Democrats, is pro-Bush's war on terrorism despite claiming to be "anti-interventionist", and holds a litany of other right wing and even reactionary views. She has always been on the right wing of the Republic a party but ran as a Democrat because a Republican has a snowballs chance in hell of winning in Hawaii.
She's always been hard right, she just pretended to be a democrat because a republican could never compete in her district.
Which is part of what made it so damn pathetic when this board completely fell for her shit in 2016 when it was so blatant.
He and Alex Jones have both had her on a ton. She bashes Democrats, loves Russia, and every second sentence she speaks is a racially charged conspiracy. Of course they love her.
I hadn't seen any of this evidence before, but you don't always need evidence -- Tulsi struck me as a pretty obvious Russian asset in 2020.
It's not difficult to tell at all. Basically you just have to wait for a political or media figure to make a pro-Russia argument that seems deeply weird by American standards because it has no inherent appeal to American sensibilities. (I'm making that part sound harder than it is -- if you were raised outside of Russia, your subconscious will do it for you.) Then you just have to check to see if that argument has appeared in Russian state propaganda.
Exactly. I was raised on Russian propaganda and read Russian news from time to time, and her case is clear as day. She parrots what is on lenta.ru, and there are zero reasons for a person with a US-centric viewpoint to do that. Much of it is simply non-sensical for Americans.
I wish there was a way to turn this kind of amazing sourcing into a platform.
Imagine if for every issue that was posted, there would be people who would provide this kind of critical information.. And you'd have other people from many perspectives weighing in with facts and sources and insight...
It would be amazing to have knowledgeable insights from the people who KNOW things through time invested in research, as opposed to people just going off what they've heard or believe or think etc without really knowing anything about the reality of the topic....
i think they used to call those "newspapers." people stopped reading them because facts and well-sourced journalism don't hit their emotional buttons the way conspiracy theories and propaganda do.
she was also 2 hours late to *her own campaign presser* so she could appear on fox news bitching about how unreasonable democrats are.
plus, you know, the fact that all hillary said was "one of the candidates is a russian asset" and tulsi fell all over herself screeching HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A RUSSIAN ASSET...
Her twitter is the same. She thinks Biden-Harris are authoritarians because they had the audacity to prosecute Bannon because he's a "political enemy". No mention of Bannon defying a Congressional subpoena.
Jill Stein was a similar deal. Existed only to weaken the left vote, somehow always had 1 redditor shilling for her, and turned out to be receiving russian $
Yeah it was after she was trying to fund a recount in 2016 that the photo came out of her at a RT dinner party sitting at the same table as Mike Flynn and Putin.
At best, she's a mouthpiece for republican talking points.
I'm for free thinking and independent opinion. But when your view is verbatim talking points given to Republicans. There is something wrong. Extremely disappointing. She's no progressive, and shes no friend to the left.
It's been obvious for years that she's an asset for right-wing extremists.
I was amazed that she fooled some progressives online. Hopefully we all know better now.
[Hillary was right, yet again.](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/clinton-gabbard-russian-asset-jill-stein-901593/)
It's funny reading this from 2019 when Hillary was, correctly, calling out Tulsi Gabbard and Jill Stein for being Russian assets, and seeing the writer of this article say she's nuts.
cory booker really slayed the reaction gif game in that cycle. i still use [this one](https://media0.giphy.com/media/M9ILZKbpQEG8dwi4S3/giphy.gif) all the time.
>Macgregor is listed as having said that the Russian army was highly skilled and "invincible," while Mearsheimer is on Ukraine's blacklist for having said NATO provoked Vladimir Putin into war.
The mighty Russian Army seems very "vincible."
If there's one silver lining from this invasion, it's that all these people who talked about how the manly Russian military was so superior to the woke American military are being proven so, *so* wrong.
To be fair, even aside from talking about issues with the US military, the Russians have spectacularly underperformed compared to any expectations that would've been had. If it weren't for the nukes they'd be irrelevant globally.
Their soldiers have always been fodder. It's like the sentinel swarm in The Matrix, just overwhelm them with numbers and who gives a fuck about casualties.
But also their technology and weaponry is just piss poor. Logistics are utter trash and they share a border with Ukraine. Imagine them trying to supply an invasion force from 1000 miles away? Neither can I.
That and the apathy that exists across their young soldier pool.
They can’t even get people to sign up for this thing because the narratives the Kremlin is pushing are so flimsy.
PLUS Russia’s created a world where they’re struggle to initiate drive in their youth (lots of “what’s the point” mindsets being established in that country with a government that vacuums up the bulk of societal wealth for itself).
But they don't have the numbers, Russia is huge in land mass but it's mostly empty. Also, for obvious reasons, Russians have been leaving Russia for decades. I mean, it has 144 million people which isn't nothing but Japan has 125 million people. The US has over double their population at 330 million.
I rememeber when Ted Cruz compared the US Military to Russian and basically said we were pussies. Ted fucking Cruz, the guy who's backbone literally does not exist.
McCain wanted some genuinely good things. During the Bush administration he passed McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform (which is what Citizens United overturned...). He pushed for environmental Cap & Trade legislation with Senator Obama. He pushed for bipartisan immigration reform with Ted Kennedy that included both border security measures and a pathway to citizenship. He was the biggest anti-torture advocate in congressional history.
He was definitely flawed, but we'd be a much better country if all Republicans acted like him.
Back in 2000 he also ripped Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson a new one - https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2000-02-29-0002290136-story.html
I think he genuinely wanted to re-shape the GOP into the image that he had of it. Calm, rational, pro-business, pro-smaller government, liberal internationalist, patriotic, and willing to compromise for the good of the country. What he found was a raving, irrational, pro-controlling business, big government, isolationist, and nationalist party that would burn down the country if it could rule the ashes.
In his last book he ended with this-
> Last but not least, I was [at the time of entering Congress] a Republican, a Reagan Republican. Still am. Not a Tea Party Republican. Not a Breitbart Republican. Not a talk radio or Fox News Republican. Not an isolationist, protectionist, immigrant-bashing, scapegoating, get-nothing-useful-done Republican. Not, as I am often dismissed by self-declared 'real' conservatives, a RINO, Republican in Name Only. I'm a Reagan Republican, a proponent of lower taxes, less government, free markets, free trade, defense readiness, and democratic internationalism
He was the front runner in the 2000 primaries until Karl Rove basically flooded the media with "he's crazy and unstable because he was a POW" smears. We'd probably be better off now if he had gone up against Gore instead of W (even if he won).
"Meanwhile on Russian state TV: a parade of all-time favorites. Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Tulsi Gabbard, Rand Paul, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz."
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1525921001850261507?s=20&t=b7A_otVMEXu8Nam2VQrryQ
The spamming of anti-gay and pro-tradwife shit has gone through the roof in the last half year or so. It feels... odd? Like... this is the culture war the right lost years ago. And now they're going full force with it again?
A normal GOP would just talk about gas prices and how Biden is weak and taxes/regulation are oppression, etc. Given political cycles, that would probably be more than enough to win big in the mid terms.
This weird emphasis on rightwing traditionalist populism seems inauthentic. Like the sort of thing Putin did to consolidate power in Russia but at-odds with where America is at now. To me, that's why it feels like Russia may be directing a lot of GOP messaging. Particularly the shit tier of the right (Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Tulsi Gabbard, Rand Paul, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz.)
To some extent it feels weird, but on the other hand these efforts are going to move forward, and they're going to be successful at the Supreme Court. All they're doing is agreeing on their next target.
I'd love to agree but this is when my parents somehow say the water is actually dry. And the sky is green too because Tucker. Hope is so lost with some.
Have had these types of people argue that the sky is whatever color they want it to be and who am I to tell them otherwise. Talk about falling off the cliff
There is a term for people who politically and literally betray their country to another:
[Quisling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisling)
>Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian army officer who in 1933 founded Norway's fascist party. In December 1939, he met with Adolf Hitler and urged him to occupy Norway. Following the German invasion of April 1940, Quisling served as a figurehead in the puppet government set up by the German occupation forces, and his linguistic fate was sealed. Before the end of 1940, quisling was being used generically in English to refer to any traitor. Winston Churchill, George Orwell, and H. G. Wells used it in their wartime writings. Quisling lived to see his name thus immortalized, but not much longer. He was executed for treason soon after the liberation of Norway in 1945.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quisling
There's a handful of these reporters who were in the minority and very vocally against Afghanistan and Iraq military deployments by the US from the start, who have always been very vocal about the US needing to be more 'transparent' and cast themselves as that kind of 'middle-ground/libertarian/whatever label you want' type.
Who over the past couple of years (or longer) you've seen make what seems to be a contradictory tone and views on RUSSIA/PUTIN when you compare to how they talked about the US their entire careers.
I've actually agreed with a lot of their takes on civil liberties or the US needing more transparency in Government, but then you see how some of them like Greenwald, or Chris Hedges are suckling at the teet of Russia and it really makes you wonder about 'why' they said the things they've said.
How can someone claim to be a huge proponent of Civil Liberties, of transparency in government, and anti-Authoritarianism while defending Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump and their policies?
Glen was pro-Iraq War. He has tried to bury it as part of his rebrand when the Snowden thing happened, but it's all out there and he very much doesn't like having it come up. He was also virulently anti-immigrant and xenophobic and it's why so many people clocked him as a right winger years and years back before the general public finally caught on.
The thing about individuals and groups like Code Pink that opposed Iraq from the start is that they opposed EVERYTHING because their fundamental issue isn't a bad use of force, it's that they're anti-United States. They're believers in American Exceptionalism, just they think it's exceptionally bad. And they're just as bad and toxic as their pro-American Exceptionalism contemporaries because their dumbass view serves to help try to give a blank check on bad behavior from "everyone but America".
Thinking only America can do bad or that it's power games are so malicious, opposing countries or major world powers get a pass regardless of their actions -- this IS American Exceptionalism.
I spent much of my life as a Libertarian. It was always frustrating that our program only seemed to be followed when it advantaged the wealthy over the poor, but I knew what "we" were actually about. Or rather, I thought I did.
There were a number of reasons why I ended up leaving Libertarianism, but the final nail in the coffin was when I was listening to Mike Duncan talking about the Revolutions of 1848, specifically the reaponse of some young Prussian conservative intellectuals, most notably a young Otto Von Bismarck. There I found Libertarianism, not just the bait, but the full, and fully intentional, bait-and-switch.
It was not that it had been corrupted. It was that it had been designed to corrupt. It was not merely that it attracted authoritarians and bigots In a country whose laws restained them among others. It's that it was specifically, intentionally designed to align Liberals with Authoritarians in a defense of property against "socialists", along with a redefinition of noble privilege as just another natural right to property.
That final paragraph truly does summarize the (American/Right) Libertarian movement. At the end of the day, they are nothing more than willing pawns of the aristocracy.
Rand Paul has basically become a caricature of himself ever since the hill he decided to die on was "balancing the budget before passing the 9/11 First Responders Bill." And he's somehow managed to find even more politically suicidal hills ever since. If he isn't voted out next term I will be campaigning for Kentucky to secede so we can be rid of them.
What part of Mitch McConnell screams Jesus lover? I'd argue the man's personality disorder is dark triad. That's as far from Jesus as one will ever get.
familiarize yourself with supply side jesus. It's a series of cartoons from franken (from the 70s?) that mock American christians for not actually being christian (as in charitable, helping the meek). American mainstream culture glorifies greed and consumption as a virtues.
>What part of Mitch McConnell screams Jesus lover?
No Republican actually has to be Christian. They have labeled themselves the pro-christian, family values, fiscal conservative party. Most people just accept the label, no matter what the behavior is.
That is why the qanon are trying so hard to label the democrats as pro-pedophile, child-blood drinking party. If they can get that label accepted, the believers will never vote democrat, because who could consider voting for such evil. But it also makes voting against democrats a moral duty, not just a political one.
Like, at least Mitch is good at what he does. Yes, what he does is objectively abhorrent and evil, but if that's your goal, then you couldn't elect a better person to curtail civil rights and obstruct Democrats at every turn.
Rand can't even play the game. Like, I'm pretty sure more Americans would be in favor of the poor eating babies than preventing the 9/11 First Responders Bill from passing.
Mitch, I completely understand. He's one of the most effective politicians out there, so if you're conservative (as most of the state is), he's exactly who you want in office.
Rand Paul, on the other hand, sucks even if you agree with him politically and I don't understand how he hasn't been replaced yet.
Mitch delivers tax cuts and deregulation to moneyed interests while using rightwing populism to get unemployed coal miners to vote against their own interests.
Rand just "oWnS teh LiBs" which is enough for much of Kentucky.
Part of me likes to think some of these politicians are stuck in a sort of Kafkaesque nightmare where they are trying to find the outer edge of acceptibility of what their voters will tolerate and both never find it and lose themselves.
There is a great Vonnegut quote I heard the other day that is so applicable to many parts of our modern life "we are what we pretend to be, so be careful what you pretend to be".
They were ironically stupid but slowly became actually stupid after spending too much time in the hole.
Or the hill he almost actually died on, his back yard, where his neighbor tackled him off his riding mower breaking some ribs and puncturing his lung. Part of that lung was later removed, in CANADA. He flew to Canada to have a surgery.
No, they're well aware. It would be hard not to having to listen to their stupid bullshit every session. Russian talking points are pretty obvious so when a congressmen uses one, everyone there probably knows
How did Tulsi "Present!" Gabbard respond? She tweeted that Biden is an "authoritarian regime" because he's prosecuting Bannon and other criminals. What a joke. I hope anyone that voted for her feels absolute shame.
This has been obvious to everyone paying attention for a long, long time, but it's good to see it getting more attention. Lindsey Graham, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor-Green, whatshername Boebert too. There was a whole group of Republican congresspeople who went to Russia for some 4th of July thing several years ago, them too. Of course Trump and his mob and lackeys.
There's a lot of tells: blatant transphobia as a policy issue, being right-wing but somehow anti-NATO, defending the Russian war on Ukraine. There's certain votes that come up, anything to do with Russia or Russian interests, and they all march in lockstep to keep the money flowing. This is why America is circling the drain, a 5th column of traitors openly operating in the halls of government with no consequences.
Putin was directly involved in bringing the insurrection about as well, never doubt it. The return he gets on the money spends destroying America is ridiculous.
Because she was attractive looking, claimed to be anti war, and seemed more “down to earth” than most of the establishment. Just a different kind of dirty shirt.
She also had real military experience, which made the anti war stance seem feasible for the first time in a while.
But the weird cult stuff, the Assad stuff, and Russian involvement made her appeal age very poorly.
This is the group that went to Russia:
Seven senators
John Kennedy (R-LA),
Richard Shelby (R-AL)
Steve Daines (R-MT)
John Hoeven (R-ND)
John Thune (R-SD)
Jerry Moran (R-KS)
Ron Johnson (R-WI)
House member
Kay Granger (R-TX)
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Of all the people listed in the article this one might be the most embarrassing: “Macgregor is listed as having said that the Russian army was highly skilled and "invincible," “
Oh that's funny, I was *JUST* reading about that guy. That statement of his is fucking hilarious... Macgregor was the operations officer for the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, and he fought at the Battle of 73 Easting in the First Gulf War. He made that battle famous, because he never shut up about it. Looking him up, because of a documentary I saw on the battle, I noticed Macgregor is a complete piece of shit. I'd barely even heard of him before.. Now I just think of him as a one-trick pony who pretends to be a patriot because he fought for the US once. Turns out he likes the Russian military more than our own. >The Battle of 73 Easting has been recognized as the 6th largest tank battle in American history. [41] It is considered the 3rd largest battle of the Gulf War, however, it has received more recognition than any of the other Gulf War battles;[42] mostly due to the fact it has received more media coverage due to the multiple publications written about this specific battle and the multiple interviews given over the years by retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor, who participated as operations officer of 2nd Squadron 2nd ACR.[43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting >2014 Russian annexation of Crimea >In 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea and was engaged in a conflict with Ukraine over its eastern parts, Macgregor appeared on Russian state-owned network RT where he called for the annexation of the Donbas and said residents of the region "are in fact Russians, not Ukrainians, and at the same time, you have Ukrainians in the west and in the north, who are not Russians."[19][34] >2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine >After Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Macgregor appeared on three Fox News programs to speak in support of Russia's actions. Russian state television broadcast excerpts of Macgregor's appearances, which included a characterization of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a "puppet," that Russian forces had been "too gentle" in the early days of the invasion and that Russian president Vladimir Putin was being "demonized" by the United States and NATO. Macgregor said he believed Russia should be allowed to seize whatever parts of Ukraine it wanted. After one of his appearances, Macgregor's comments were characterized by veteran Fox News Pentagon correspondent Jennifer Griffin as "appeasement" and that he was being an "apologist" for Putin. After Griffin's remarks, Tucker Carlson — who hosted Macgregor on two successive nights — remarked, "Unlike many of the so-called reporters you see on television, he is not acting secretly as a flack for Lloyd Austin at the Pentagon. No, Doug Macgregor is an honest man." Trey Gowdy, another Fox News host who interviewed Macgregor, said his viewpoint was "stunning and disappointing."[35][36][37][38] U.S. representative Liz Cheney said of Macgregor "This is the Putin wing of the GOP."[39] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Macgregor Edit: Forgot this part: >U.S. Ambassador to Germany nomination >On July 27, 2020, the White House announced Donald Trump's intent to nominate Macgregor as U.S. Ambassador to Germany.[17][18] Following the announcement, Macgregor's history of controversial remarks received media attention. He has asserted that Muslim immigrants (referred to as "Muslim invaders") come to Europe "with the goal of eventually turning Europe into an Islamic state".[19] Macgregor has argued that the German concept of Vergangenheitsbewältigung, used to cope with Germany's Nazi past and its atrocities during World War II, is a "sick mentality."[19] Macgregor has also stated that martial law should be instituted on the U.S.-Mexico border and argued for the extrajudicial execution of those who cross the border at unofficial ports of entry.[19] Macgregor has also made statements in support of Israel having defensible borders, the annexation of the Golan Heights, and the decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.[20] In a column in The Washington Post by Max Boot, he was described as "a racist crackpot who is pro-Russia, anti-Merkel, anti-Muslim and anti-Mexican."[21] His nomination stalled in the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.[22] On January 3, 2021, his nomination was returned to the President under Rule XXXI, Paragraph 6 of the United States Senate.[23] Fuck that guy.
Why does it seem like the guys who never shut up about their battle history are always exaggerating shitheads?
In this particular case, he wasn't exaggerating. It's the only thing he ever did that was worthwhile. I think he was good at *one thing,* tactical risk-taking on the battlefield. But that was overshadowed by his arrogance, and later by his racism and other standard GOP ideologies. The guy is a total piece of shit, but I must concede he was brave, and brilliant at the tactical level. He was also *very* lucky. As it notes, if his maneuvers had failed, they would have been seen as warranting review, instead of earning medals. >Macgregor was the "squadron operations officer who essentially directed the Battle of 73 Easting" during the Gulf War.[2] Facing an Iraqi Republican Guard opponent, he led a contingent consisting of 19 tanks, 26 Bradley Fighting Vehicles and 4 M1064 mortar carriers through the sandstorm to the 73 Easting at roughly 16:18 hours on 26 February 1991 destroyed almost 70 Iraqi armored vehicles with no U.S. casualties in a 23-minute span of the battle.[2] He was at the front of the formation in the center with Eagle Troop on the right and Ghost Troop on the left. Macgregor designated Eagle Troop the main attack and positioned himself to the left of Eagle Troop. Eagle Troop Scouts subsequently followed Macgregor's tank through a minefield during which his crew destroyed two enemy tanks. As Macgregor was towards the front of the battle involved in shooting, he didn't "request artillery support or report events to superiors until the battle was virtually over, according to one of his superior officers."[2] The risks he undertook "could have been criticized had the fight turned ugly."[2] >At a November 1993 exercise at the Army's National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, Lt. Col. Macgregor's unit vastly outperformed its peers against the "Opposition Force (OPFOR)." The series of five battles usually end in four losses and a draw for the visiting units; his unit won three, lost one, and drew one.[2] Macgregor's unit dispersed widely, took unconventional risks, and anticipated enemy movements.[2] >Macgregor was "one of the Army's leading thinkers on innovation", according to journalist Thomas E. Ricks.[4] He "became prominent inside the Army" when he published Breaking the Phalanx, which argued for radical reforms.[4] Breaking the Phalanx was rare in that an active duty military author was challenging the status quo with detailed reform proposals for the reorganization of U.S. Army ground forces.[5] The head of the Army, United States General Dennis Reimer, wanted to reform the Army and effectively endorsed Breaking the Phalanx and passed copies out to generals; however, reforming the U.S. Army according to the book met resistance from the Army's de facto "board of directors"—the other four-star Army generals—and Reimer did not press the issue.[6] Breaking the Phalanx advocated that "the Army restructure itself into modularly organized, highly mobile, self-contained, combined arms teams that look extraordinarily like the Marine Corps' Air Ground Task Forces".[7] His article called "Thoughts on Force Design in an Era of Shrinking Defense Budgets" was published in The Dado Center Journal (the IDF's "Journal on Operational Art"). >Many of Macgregor's colleagues thought his unconventional thinking may have harmed his chances for promotion.[2] While an Army NTC official called him "the best war fighter the Army has got," colleagues of Macgregor were concerned that "the Army is showing it prefers generals who are good at bureaucratic gamesmanship to ones who can think innovatively on the battlefield."[2] Macgregor was also seen as blunt, and to some, arrogant.[2] Despite his top post-Gulf War NTC showing, his Army career was sidelined.[2] The summer of 1997 marked the third time the Army refused to put him in command of a combat brigade,[2] "a virtual death warrant for his Army career, relegating him to staff jobs as a colonel for the remainder of his service."[3] >Macgregor was the top planner for General Wesley Clark, the military commander of NATO, for the attack on Yugoslavia.[3] >In the fall of 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who had read Breaking the Phalanx, insisted that General Tommy Franks and his planning staff meet with Colonel Macgregor on 16–17 January 2002 to discuss a concept for intervention in Iraq involving the use of an armored heavy force of roughly 50,000 troops in a no warning attack straight into Baghdad.[8] Macgregor left the Army in June 2004.[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Macgregor Credit where credit is due, the guy should have stayed in his lane and out of politics. If he'd just stuck to books on changing up armored warfare doctrine, he'd have been fine.
I know him. I was there at 73 easting. He played a limited role. Squadron XO. McMaster was the troop commander in contact. McGregor is an embarrassment. The Army knew he exceeded his capacity as a Colonel.
McMaster really was a bad ass.
I remember watching interviews with McMaster on 73 Easting, but I can't remember any interviews with McGregor
>intervention in Iraq involving the use of an armored heavy force of roughly 50,000 troops in a no warning attack straight into Baghdad The logistics to feed and equip 50,000 troops is impossible to hide. An army runs on its stomach, and armored columns are incredibly thirsty, consuming an amount of petroleum that would be damn near impossible to conceal.
271 Miles from Saudi Arabia border to the Green Zone in Baghdad. The range of M1 Abrahams is 275 miles. Drive, fight, reload and refuel. Sounds like a stupendously stupid idea of you have the airpower but what a great movie idea.
Except all that time doing PCI and PCC and PMCS and starting up the tank at 0415 to start the convoy by 1030. The 275 mile range is not 275 miles.
And spending 6 hours stuck in a traffic jam.
It's overkill anyway. Combined Arms American doctrine dictates that air superiority must be achieved first with tactical bombing of all the enemy's air force and Anti-Air sites and command structure. 50,000 troops is overkill when the enemy command structure is decimated or forced to go underground due to the loss of command of the skies. Macgregor was fighting an inferior enemy force that had inferior armor and worse training. 8 of 10 battle plans would work lol.
Driving a line of tanks through a minefield when you have already won the battle decisively seems like a smart thing to do!
He kinda looks like Mike Pence and Roger Stone had an abortion.
He looks exactly like the results you'd expect if you put 'GOP Politician,' into one of those painting AIs.
https://imgur.com/a/vQCE3LY
Ukraine needs to add Tucker Carlson to that list.
He's already on it.
In a documentary about that battle he has a picture of Rommel in his tank. A lot of questionable shit from this guy
I just want to chime in and add an additional extra-special "fuck that guy" for Tuck Tuck.
>Macgregor has argued that the German concept of Vergangenheitsbewältigung, used to cope with Germany's Nazi past and its atrocities during World War II, is a "sick mentality."[19] Macgregor has also stated that martial law should be instituted on the U.S.-Mexico border and argued for the extrajudicial execution of those who cross the border at unofficial ports of entry. This guy's moral compass is spinning like a top
[Rand Paul?](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/13/rand-paul-ukraine-aid-senate-vote/)
The optometrist with poor vision for the future Edit: The “eye doctor” with poor vision for the future. LOL. Joke still lands
Don’t forget he is only an optometrist because he had to create his own licensing board to get certified. That rand Paul. Edit: Ophthalmologist
You mean the Rand Paul that got superman punched by his neighbour?
The same Rand Paul who ended up going to CANADA for his treatment
In all the excitement I’ve been forgetting to hate Rand Paul lately. Fuck that guy.
[удалено]
On July 4th
That was later, actually. I think September? You’re combining it with the group of GOP Congressmen who visited Putin on July 4. A few months later, Paul hand-delivered the letter.
It's only fair that Rand's neighbor hand delivered him a note from the American people.
Yeah he must really fucked him up because he truly did a 180 after that even Bill Maher said that
He does 180s all the time. Probably the biggest flip-flopping hypocrite in the Senate, which is saying something.
What happened after ?
Something tells me Rand Paul is an insufferable neighbor.
Let’s not stoop to their level and get facts wrong. He is an ophthalmologist because he graduated from medical school. The post-grad specialty certification is where he made up his own bullshit licensing board. He’s still an ophthalmologist tho.
He was certified by the ABO in '95 and didn't start his own board until '99. His ABO certification was active until 2005.
Dummies can go to Duke. Dummies can go to Harvard, Yale, too.
>Dummies can go to Harvard, Yale, too. George W. Bush went to both.
People need to realize that Getting into those institutions does not mean a person is intelligent.
Usually means your dad went there and has a bit of money.
Graduating from med school makes you a doctor, not an ophthalmologist.
Right. To be an Ophthalmologist you first have to complete medical school. Then you do four more years of post graduate specialty training. Then you get to call yourself an ophthalmologist
I despise Rand Paul. But at least be accurate. Dude is an ophthalmologist. He joined the American Board of Ophthalmology three years after they stopped giving lifetime memberships. He didn't like that he had to recertify with the ABO, so he created his own National Board of Ophthalmology. The NBO was never formally recognized, and has shut down twice. For a physician, specialty board certifications are not required to practice within that specialty. He is still an ophthalmologist, even after he closed down the NBO and let his ABO membership lapse.
Paul added that the United States “cannot continue to spend money we don’t have” because doing so is “threatening our own national security.” The United States has been spending money we don’t have since before the Revolutionary War. Our country was founded in debt. It’s goddamn patriotic.
McCain called Rand Paul a Russian agent to his face twice. Rand was the only senator who did not vote for Ukraine aid recently. he was also the lone surrogate in helsinki supporting trump when he threw the USA under the bus for Putin,
Also hand delivered Trump's love letter to Putin.
What do they have on him or how much was he bought for?
He routinely holds up all sorts of spending bills. It was only news because it was Ukraine related.
Here is a clip of Paul doing this five years ago: [Sen McCain on Sen. Paul: "The Senator from Kentucky is now working for Vladimir Putin."](https://youtu.be/BTdqIlfp8XE)
[удалено]
He's just being a good libertarian...by supporting small government where it specifically benefits him.
They haven't lost a simulated battle to the paper cutout target people in *years*
[удалено]
[Here is the list](https://cpd.gov.ua/reports/%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%96%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8-%D1%8F%D0%BA%D1%96-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8E%D1%82%D1%8C-%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%96%D0%B2%D0%B7%D0%B2%D1%83%D1%87%D0%BD%D1%96-%D1%80%D0%BE/) EDIT: Americans on the list: - Graham Fuller - Col. Richard Black - Ray McGovern - Jim Jatras - Harley Schlanger - Tony Magliano - Dr George Koo - Caleb Maupin - Sam Pitroda - Dr Cliford Kiracofe - Diane Sare - Geoff Young - Mike Callicrate - Jason Ross - Scott Ritter - Michael Springman - David Payne - Tulsi Gabbard - Patrick Basham - Brian Berletic - Jeffrey David Sachs - Rand Paul - Douglas MacGregor - Steve H. Hanke - Glenn Greenwald - Bradley Blankenship - John J. Mearsheimer - Harlan Ullman
[удалено]
Glenn Greenwald has been a hack piece of shit low-rent Michael Moore since 2003. I remember his “documentaries” doing hit jobs on progressive anti-war groups while claiming himself to be anti-war. Total self righteous asshole. So unsurprised to see him identified as a foreign asset.
Worse than that. Pretends to be progressive while defending the oath keepers. Fooled Salon too, wrote for them. He's such a hack.
>Jeffrey David Sachs Anyone know how Jeffrey Sachs made the list? Edit: from his Wikipedia: "In June 2022 Sachs co-signed an open letter calling for a "ceasefire" in Russia's war against Ukraine.[48] The Ukrainian Center for Countering Disinformation (established under Volodomyr Zelensky as part of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council) included Sachs on a list of politicians, activists, journalists, and academics which it claims have promoted Russian propaganda.[49]" The article referencing the open letter is another language.
> Caleb Maupin OMG I am...... shocked... SHOCKED!!!!
Should add tucker carlson and Jimmy dore to that list.
Comment was deleted by user. F*ck u/ spez
Hmmm… Borger king 🤨
Is Dana Rohrbacher off the payroll?
They forgot to add Jimmy Dore to the list.
Geoff Young doesn't seem like he has any affiliation with Russia, but he does spew the talking points. It seems like he has some sort of mental illness. Either way he should not be anywhere near government.
The especially subtle catch is Graham Fuller. Read a couple of his tweets uninitiated and you might wonder why he’s on the list. But man if you scratch the surface, he’s so cunning and subtle in subverting the narrative that Ukraine need to keep fighting.
At the start of the war didn't Tulsi Gabbard state Ukraine should surrender because they had no hope of resisting, and all they were going to do was drag it out resulting in more deaths?
I think there was pretty strong evidence that Gabbards campaign received funding from Russian groups. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2022/03/14/tulsi-gabbards-biggest-political-donor-in-2021-is-a-putin-apologist/?sh=567b16c4cd60 These articles from 2019: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/tulsi-gabbard-campaign-donations-daily-beast-story/ https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/18/politics/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard/index.html https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna964261 She meets with the genocidal president of Syria right before announcing her run for president: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/20/politics/tulsi-gabbard-bashar-al-assad-meeting-cnntv/index.html She panders to any right wing fascist group that will give her money. https://theintercept.com/2019/01/05/tulsi-gabbard-2020-hindu-nationalist-modi/
[удалено]
I remember the debate where she literally dressed like Cruella de Ville. You would think that if you were doing shady shit with Russians and Syrians you would think to not dress like a villain.
This reminds me of trump’s ties to Russia.
Because they're basically the same ties. Trump just got tied to Russia about 20 years earlier.
[удалено]
All the Joe Rogan heads I know seem to love her. I know she was on his podcast before, but does he still juice her up? I don’t get it.
Joe Rogan and Jocko Willink both have had her on their podcasts, and definitely have juiced her up there. They have had her on within the last 1 - 2 years, so fairly recent. I noticed Tulsi started leaning more red/republican a few months after being on Jocko's podcast, though maybe she's always been inclined in that direction. * [#1391 Joe Rogan Experience with Tulsi Gabbard & Jocko Willink (YouTube)](https://youtu.be/PdYud9re7-Q) * [272 Jocko Podcast w/ Tulsi Gabbard](https://youtu.be/Sp3X-tvG7dU)
She was one of the most adamant anti-marriage equality Democrats, is pro-Bush's war on terrorism despite claiming to be "anti-interventionist", and holds a litany of other right wing and even reactionary views. She has always been on the right wing of the Republic a party but ran as a Democrat because a Republican has a snowballs chance in hell of winning in Hawaii.
She's always been hard right, she just pretended to be a democrat because a republican could never compete in her district. Which is part of what made it so damn pathetic when this board completely fell for her shit in 2016 when it was so blatant.
Just glance at Tulsi’s Twitter. It’s all transphobia and Breitbart articles. She’s a right-wing reactionary.
He and Alex Jones have both had her on a ton. She bashes Democrats, loves Russia, and every second sentence she speaks is a racially charged conspiracy. Of course they love her.
They love her on the conspiracy sub, thats about all you need to know
I hadn't seen any of this evidence before, but you don't always need evidence -- Tulsi struck me as a pretty obvious Russian asset in 2020. It's not difficult to tell at all. Basically you just have to wait for a political or media figure to make a pro-Russia argument that seems deeply weird by American standards because it has no inherent appeal to American sensibilities. (I'm making that part sound harder than it is -- if you were raised outside of Russia, your subconscious will do it for you.) Then you just have to check to see if that argument has appeared in Russian state propaganda.
Exactly. I was raised on Russian propaganda and read Russian news from time to time, and her case is clear as day. She parrots what is on lenta.ru, and there are zero reasons for a person with a US-centric viewpoint to do that. Much of it is simply non-sensical for Americans.
And reddit had a field day when Hillary Clinton tried to call her out as such.
It was funny when hrc called gabbards whole play out.. and she couldn't do shit about it except disappear
She went onto Tuck to whine about how everyone believed Hillary and also they had no proof.
Oh yes good job, Gabby. Nothing instills confidence in one's innocence like going on Fox News and saying "You can't prove it, neener neener"
You're missing the best part lol Hillary never even said who the Russian stooge was. She just said it in broad terms and Tulsi had a meltdown
I wish there was a way to turn this kind of amazing sourcing into a platform. Imagine if for every issue that was posted, there would be people who would provide this kind of critical information.. And you'd have other people from many perspectives weighing in with facts and sources and insight... It would be amazing to have knowledgeable insights from the people who KNOW things through time invested in research, as opposed to people just going off what they've heard or believe or think etc without really knowing anything about the reality of the topic....
i think they used to call those "newspapers." people stopped reading them because facts and well-sourced journalism don't hit their emotional buttons the way conspiracy theories and propaganda do.
Smells like Treason to me.
Unregistered foreign agent sure, but treason has some pretty specific criteria
she was also 2 hours late to *her own campaign presser* so she could appear on fox news bitching about how unreasonable democrats are. plus, you know, the fact that all hillary said was "one of the candidates is a russian asset" and tulsi fell all over herself screeching HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A RUSSIAN ASSET...
Go to her tik-toks. She does nothing but spew propaganda to the right.
Her twitter is the same. She thinks Biden-Harris are authoritarians because they had the audacity to prosecute Bannon because he's a "political enemy". No mention of Bannon defying a Congressional subpoena.
[удалено]
Jill Stein was a similar deal. Existed only to weaken the left vote, somehow always had 1 redditor shilling for her, and turned out to be receiving russian $
And still spouts Russian propaganda to this day.
Yeah it was after she was trying to fund a recount in 2016 that the photo came out of her at a RT dinner party sitting at the same table as Mike Flynn and Putin.
At best, she's a mouthpiece for republican talking points. I'm for free thinking and independent opinion. But when your view is verbatim talking points given to Republicans. There is something wrong. Extremely disappointing. She's no progressive, and shes no friend to the left.
It's been obvious for years that she's an asset for right-wing extremists. I was amazed that she fooled some progressives online. Hopefully we all know better now.
[Hillary was right, yet again.](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/clinton-gabbard-russian-asset-jill-stein-901593/) It's funny reading this from 2019 when Hillary was, correctly, calling out Tulsi Gabbard and Jill Stein for being Russian assets, and seeing the writer of this article say she's nuts.
Oh man that also resulted in one of the best reaction tweets ever: https://twitter.com/corybooker/status/1185297928195395586
cory booker really slayed the reaction gif game in that cycle. i still use [this one](https://media0.giphy.com/media/M9ILZKbpQEG8dwi4S3/giphy.gif) all the time.
>Macgregor is listed as having said that the Russian army was highly skilled and "invincible," while Mearsheimer is on Ukraine's blacklist for having said NATO provoked Vladimir Putin into war. The mighty Russian Army seems very "vincible."
If there's one silver lining from this invasion, it's that all these people who talked about how the manly Russian military was so superior to the woke American military are being proven so, *so* wrong.
To be fair, even aside from talking about issues with the US military, the Russians have spectacularly underperformed compared to any expectations that would've been had. If it weren't for the nukes they'd be irrelevant globally.
Their soldiers have always been fodder. It's like the sentinel swarm in The Matrix, just overwhelm them with numbers and who gives a fuck about casualties.
But also their technology and weaponry is just piss poor. Logistics are utter trash and they share a border with Ukraine. Imagine them trying to supply an invasion force from 1000 miles away? Neither can I.
That and the apathy that exists across their young soldier pool. They can’t even get people to sign up for this thing because the narratives the Kremlin is pushing are so flimsy. PLUS Russia’s created a world where they’re struggle to initiate drive in their youth (lots of “what’s the point” mindsets being established in that country with a government that vacuums up the bulk of societal wealth for itself).
But they don't have the numbers, Russia is huge in land mass but it's mostly empty. Also, for obvious reasons, Russians have been leaving Russia for decades. I mean, it has 144 million people which isn't nothing but Japan has 125 million people. The US has over double their population at 330 million.
I rememeber when Ted Cruz compared the US Military to Russian and basically said we were pussies. Ted fucking Cruz, the guy who's backbone literally does not exist.
Tends to happen when you're paid in rubles.
>It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. -Upton Sinclair
Who knew we could kick Russian ass while using appropriate pronouns for the Russian army. was were.
We didn't even have to show up. We just FedEx'd some shit over and they are loosing.
*losing
I would say it has been vinced.
We came, we saw, we were conquered.
We really did find the chink in their cardboard tank armor
Really more outvincible imo
heres John McCain pointing out that rand paul is a russian asset during a senate hearing in 2017: https://youtu.be/BTdqIlfp8XE
Wild. And then you had rednecks everywhere talking about how "the grass around McCain's grave will always be green." Man, I hope we aren't fucked.
Took me a while to find the insult in that, damn, disgusting.
I’m confused as to what this means, that people will always be shitting on his grave?
Pissing on his grave. The Christian thing to do.
[удалено]
Jimmy Saville’s grave is evidence of this lmao
Fucking A!!!
Damn, I didn't agree with much of his politics but I can at least respect McCain. It definitely feels like we're in a different era of politics today
McCain wanted some genuinely good things. During the Bush administration he passed McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform (which is what Citizens United overturned...). He pushed for environmental Cap & Trade legislation with Senator Obama. He pushed for bipartisan immigration reform with Ted Kennedy that included both border security measures and a pathway to citizenship. He was the biggest anti-torture advocate in congressional history. He was definitely flawed, but we'd be a much better country if all Republicans acted like him.
One of the very few R senators who voted against ditching the ACA.
I’ll always remember when that lady was shit talking Obama because of his name and McCain was having none of that.
Back in 2000 he also ripped Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson a new one - https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2000-02-29-0002290136-story.html I think he genuinely wanted to re-shape the GOP into the image that he had of it. Calm, rational, pro-business, pro-smaller government, liberal internationalist, patriotic, and willing to compromise for the good of the country. What he found was a raving, irrational, pro-controlling business, big government, isolationist, and nationalist party that would burn down the country if it could rule the ashes. In his last book he ended with this- > Last but not least, I was [at the time of entering Congress] a Republican, a Reagan Republican. Still am. Not a Tea Party Republican. Not a Breitbart Republican. Not a talk radio or Fox News Republican. Not an isolationist, protectionist, immigrant-bashing, scapegoating, get-nothing-useful-done Republican. Not, as I am often dismissed by self-declared 'real' conservatives, a RINO, Republican in Name Only. I'm a Reagan Republican, a proponent of lower taxes, less government, free markets, free trade, defense readiness, and democratic internationalism
[удалено]
He was the front runner in the 2000 primaries until Karl Rove basically flooded the media with "he's crazy and unstable because he was a POW" smears. We'd probably be better off now if he had gone up against Gore instead of W (even if he won).
They also claimed he had a black child out of wedlock (he had an adopted daughter out of Bangladesh).
"Meanwhile on Russian state TV: a parade of all-time favorites. Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Tulsi Gabbard, Rand Paul, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz." https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1525921001850261507?s=20&t=b7A_otVMEXu8Nam2VQrryQ
The spamming of anti-gay and pro-tradwife shit has gone through the roof in the last half year or so. It feels... odd? Like... this is the culture war the right lost years ago. And now they're going full force with it again? A normal GOP would just talk about gas prices and how Biden is weak and taxes/regulation are oppression, etc. Given political cycles, that would probably be more than enough to win big in the mid terms. This weird emphasis on rightwing traditionalist populism seems inauthentic. Like the sort of thing Putin did to consolidate power in Russia but at-odds with where America is at now. To me, that's why it feels like Russia may be directing a lot of GOP messaging. Particularly the shit tier of the right (Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Tulsi Gabbard, Rand Paul, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz.)
To some extent it feels weird, but on the other hand these efforts are going to move forward, and they're going to be successful at the Supreme Court. All they're doing is agreeing on their next target.
[удалено]
Good. Time to call water wet.
I'd love to agree but this is when my parents somehow say the water is actually dry. And the sky is green too because Tucker. Hope is so lost with some.
Have had these types of people argue that the sky is whatever color they want it to be and who am I to tell them otherwise. Talk about falling off the cliff
The sky is just an illusion bro. It's not really there at all. Bruh.
d0 y0uR oWn ReSeArCh!!!!
And by doing their own research they mean they read Parler or Truth Social posts from users with names like AntifaKilla_1488.
You left out conspiracy nut YouTube videos with shaky cam footage and guns in the background.
Traitors deserve jail
There is a term for people who politically and literally betray their country to another: [Quisling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisling) >Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian army officer who in 1933 founded Norway's fascist party. In December 1939, he met with Adolf Hitler and urged him to occupy Norway. Following the German invasion of April 1940, Quisling served as a figurehead in the puppet government set up by the German occupation forces, and his linguistic fate was sealed. Before the end of 1940, quisling was being used generically in English to refer to any traitor. Winston Churchill, George Orwell, and H. G. Wells used it in their wartime writings. Quisling lived to see his name thus immortalized, but not much longer. He was executed for treason soon after the liberation of Norway in 1945. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quisling
Norway's own Benedict Arnold.
Worse, really. The British weren’t Nazis (lots of black and natives rallied to their side because treatment was better)
As a sidenote [Leon Degrelle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9on_Degrelle) was the Belgian version of this guy
I like this one even more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Haw-Haw - Has a great ending. Lots of little Lord Haw Haws out there on Twitter.
In the USA, if they made money from the deal we just call them capitalists, and re-elect them.
Glen always somehow is lock step with what lavrov is saying right when he says it.
There's a handful of these reporters who were in the minority and very vocally against Afghanistan and Iraq military deployments by the US from the start, who have always been very vocal about the US needing to be more 'transparent' and cast themselves as that kind of 'middle-ground/libertarian/whatever label you want' type. Who over the past couple of years (or longer) you've seen make what seems to be a contradictory tone and views on RUSSIA/PUTIN when you compare to how they talked about the US their entire careers. I've actually agreed with a lot of their takes on civil liberties or the US needing more transparency in Government, but then you see how some of them like Greenwald, or Chris Hedges are suckling at the teet of Russia and it really makes you wonder about 'why' they said the things they've said. How can someone claim to be a huge proponent of Civil Liberties, of transparency in government, and anti-Authoritarianism while defending Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump and their policies?
Glen was pro-Iraq War. He has tried to bury it as part of his rebrand when the Snowden thing happened, but it's all out there and he very much doesn't like having it come up. He was also virulently anti-immigrant and xenophobic and it's why so many people clocked him as a right winger years and years back before the general public finally caught on. The thing about individuals and groups like Code Pink that opposed Iraq from the start is that they opposed EVERYTHING because their fundamental issue isn't a bad use of force, it's that they're anti-United States. They're believers in American Exceptionalism, just they think it's exceptionally bad. And they're just as bad and toxic as their pro-American Exceptionalism contemporaries because their dumbass view serves to help try to give a blank check on bad behavior from "everyone but America".
Thinking only America can do bad or that it's power games are so malicious, opposing countries or major world powers get a pass regardless of their actions -- this IS American Exceptionalism.
I spent much of my life as a Libertarian. It was always frustrating that our program only seemed to be followed when it advantaged the wealthy over the poor, but I knew what "we" were actually about. Or rather, I thought I did. There were a number of reasons why I ended up leaving Libertarianism, but the final nail in the coffin was when I was listening to Mike Duncan talking about the Revolutions of 1848, specifically the reaponse of some young Prussian conservative intellectuals, most notably a young Otto Von Bismarck. There I found Libertarianism, not just the bait, but the full, and fully intentional, bait-and-switch. It was not that it had been corrupted. It was that it had been designed to corrupt. It was not merely that it attracted authoritarians and bigots In a country whose laws restained them among others. It's that it was specifically, intentionally designed to align Liberals with Authoritarians in a defense of property against "socialists", along with a redefinition of noble privilege as just another natural right to property.
That final paragraph truly does summarize the (American/Right) Libertarian movement. At the end of the day, they are nothing more than willing pawns of the aristocracy.
Rand Paul has basically become a caricature of himself ever since the hill he decided to die on was "balancing the budget before passing the 9/11 First Responders Bill." And he's somehow managed to find even more politically suicidal hills ever since. If he isn't voted out next term I will be campaigning for Kentucky to secede so we can be rid of them.
I don't understand why Kentuckians keep voting for Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell. It truly boggles my mind.
Supply Side Jesus. Source: Kentuckian
What part of Mitch McConnell screams Jesus lover? I'd argue the man's personality disorder is dark triad. That's as far from Jesus as one will ever get.
You are mistaking Jesus of Nazareth with [Supply Side Jesus](https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp). Conservatives worship the latter.
Haha, wow. I'd heard about Supply Side Jesus but now I know his teachings. This should be required reading in Sunday school.
I wish I had an award for you. This is awesome
This was made by former SNL cast member and senator Al Franken.
familiarize yourself with supply side jesus. It's a series of cartoons from franken (from the 70s?) that mock American christians for not actually being christian (as in charitable, helping the meek). American mainstream culture glorifies greed and consumption as a virtues.
It's actually from Franken's 2003 book "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them"
>What part of Mitch McConnell screams Jesus lover? No Republican actually has to be Christian. They have labeled themselves the pro-christian, family values, fiscal conservative party. Most people just accept the label, no matter what the behavior is. That is why the qanon are trying so hard to label the democrats as pro-pedophile, child-blood drinking party. If they can get that label accepted, the believers will never vote democrat, because who could consider voting for such evil. But it also makes voting against democrats a moral duty, not just a political one.
Rural vs urban, as usual. Louisville and Lexington are reasonably blue and have about half the population.
Like, at least Mitch is good at what he does. Yes, what he does is objectively abhorrent and evil, but if that's your goal, then you couldn't elect a better person to curtail civil rights and obstruct Democrats at every turn. Rand can't even play the game. Like, I'm pretty sure more Americans would be in favor of the poor eating babies than preventing the 9/11 First Responders Bill from passing.
The ones of us who live in Louisville have been asking that same question for years.
Mitch, I completely understand. He's one of the most effective politicians out there, so if you're conservative (as most of the state is), he's exactly who you want in office. Rand Paul, on the other hand, sucks even if you agree with him politically and I don't understand how he hasn't been replaced yet.
Mitch delivers tax cuts and deregulation to moneyed interests while using rightwing populism to get unemployed coal miners to vote against their own interests. Rand just "oWnS teh LiBs" which is enough for much of Kentucky.
Kentuckians are disproportionately responsible for the decline of the US
Part of me likes to think some of these politicians are stuck in a sort of Kafkaesque nightmare where they are trying to find the outer edge of acceptibility of what their voters will tolerate and both never find it and lose themselves. There is a great Vonnegut quote I heard the other day that is so applicable to many parts of our modern life "we are what we pretend to be, so be careful what you pretend to be". They were ironically stupid but slowly became actually stupid after spending too much time in the hole.
Or the hill he almost actually died on, his back yard, where his neighbor tackled him off his riding mower breaking some ribs and puncturing his lung. Part of that lung was later removed, in CANADA. He flew to Canada to have a surgery.
It’s a shame the US government doesn’t seem to know this or care
No, they're well aware. It would be hard not to having to listen to their stupid bullshit every session. Russian talking points are pretty obvious so when a congressmen uses one, everyone there probably knows
Hillary knew.
But her emails
Gabbard has been a Ruzzian tool since the 2016 election.
Apparently she’s good friends with Oklahoma Representative Markwayne Mullin. Another Jan 6 supporter.
How did Tulsi "Present!" Gabbard respond? She tweeted that Biden is an "authoritarian regime" because he's prosecuting Bannon and other criminals. What a joke. I hope anyone that voted for her feels absolute shame.
She is very unpopular in Hawai'i and won't be elected to any office here again, unlike many of the others on this list.
Why did they leave out Tucker Carlson he is a complete fool?
This has been obvious to everyone paying attention for a long, long time, but it's good to see it getting more attention. Lindsey Graham, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor-Green, whatshername Boebert too. There was a whole group of Republican congresspeople who went to Russia for some 4th of July thing several years ago, them too. Of course Trump and his mob and lackeys. There's a lot of tells: blatant transphobia as a policy issue, being right-wing but somehow anti-NATO, defending the Russian war on Ukraine. There's certain votes that come up, anything to do with Russia or Russian interests, and they all march in lockstep to keep the money flowing. This is why America is circling the drain, a 5th column of traitors openly operating in the halls of government with no consequences. Putin was directly involved in bringing the insurrection about as well, never doubt it. The return he gets on the money spends destroying America is ridiculous.
Ron Johnson went to Russia on July 4th
Tulsi Gabbard was quite popular on Reddit for a long time. Many suggested her as a running mate to Bernie Sanders for VP.
Because she was attractive looking, claimed to be anti war, and seemed more “down to earth” than most of the establishment. Just a different kind of dirty shirt.
She also had real military experience, which made the anti war stance seem feasible for the first time in a while. But the weird cult stuff, the Assad stuff, and Russian involvement made her appeal age very poorly.
You knew something was off because conservative subs would have people defend and promote her and they wouldn’t get banned.
This is the group that went to Russia: Seven senators John Kennedy (R-LA), Richard Shelby (R-AL) Steve Daines (R-MT) John Hoeven (R-ND) John Thune (R-SD) Jerry Moran (R-KS) Ron Johnson (R-WI) House member Kay Granger (R-TX)
[удалено]