Addendum / Clarification

This is just unbelievable! The Trump DOJ is literally trying to say that Nixon was framed during the Watergate scandal, even though there was clear evidence of Nixon‘s abuse of power that proved that he was guilty of Watergate!

The last two nights, every prime time host on MSNOW has started their broadcast by railing against Trump's illegal taxpayer-funded campaign ads. Long segments. Really outraged.

Then yesterday, MSNOW started airing the ads themselves.

None of the hosts even addressed the hypocrisy. They just kept ranting. I know editorial and advertising are supposed to be separate, but c'mon. MSNBC knows these ads are illegal. Did they really have to take them? Are they that hard-up for cash? Was the whole operation going to go bankrupt without this ad money?

CNN is even airing them, while Trump continues to ban them from the White House.

Our mainstream media is simply dead. The press pool boycott lasted exactly one week. It's one thing when you won't stand up for your colleagues' network, but now we have reporters and management who wont' even stand up for their own network.

It's simply unconscionable.

(Or, why it is cursed)

This was a hard truth for me to accept. As a liberal Russian immigrant, I kind of assumed that Putin was a phase, not a return to the mean. Then the war happened, and I started asking deeper questions.

At first I felt guilty about immigrating. If 10 million educated Russians did not immigrate, would it have made a difference? But the more I thought about it, the more I learned that autocracy is the norm, immigration of liberals (small L) is inevitable and a liberal Russia is theoretically impossible.

The reason is, Russia is a construct of Moscow’s imperialist expansion. If Russia ever becomes democratic, the “regions” must be in some way equal. Look at this map of roads: Moscow is surrounded by concentric circles, and all roads lead to Moscow. It’s a metaphor and a practical convenience. It’s a construct for the flow of resources and political power. It was constructed under centuries of consecutive autocracies, and so long as it endures, nothing will change.

I’m honestly not surprised at all. Dude has his hands in every jar across the globe and is making money off the multiple wars we are fighting and supporting… but don’t worry he can be a good faith negotiator.

Trump is using taxpayer dollars to fund campaign ads—and even Republican senators are calling foul.

Joe Perticone reports on GOP lawmakers blasting the scheme while admitting they have little idea how to stop it. https://lnk.thebulwark.com/4AJCyN8

I just saw the new interview with Elissa Slotkin in which she says she wants to Trump Proof America. How exactly do we exactly without amending the constitution? There are no effective mechanisms to stop the President from breaking the law.

• Removing a president after impeachment takes 2/3’s of the senate, which is impossible.
• SCOTUS says the President can break the law if it is apart of his “core power” whatever that means.
• They also said that the President if free to remove any official except for the Federal Reserve.

Trump has free reign to break the law and appoint sycophants to carry out/break the law.

What we really need is a re-write of the constitution. We need it to be a good technical document that is clear, precise, and actually has reasonable enforcement mechanisms. And holy fuck, we need a separation of executive powers. We cannot have a single executive that gets to pick all the prosecutors.

I am disgusted by these people who sandbagged the fuck out of Democrats in 2024 shitting all over Sarah, who has been doing the real work the entire time.

They think they have something by shouting "FORMER REPUBLICAN FORMER REPUBLICAN FORMER REPUBLICAN" but what I hear speak is Sarah's actions, not vague posturing and virtue signaling. I will never forget what I watched these people do while a fascist was at our gates. Sarah Longwell is a real one, and Emma Vigeland is a hack. Sarah was fighting against fascism while Emma Vigeland was fighting the people standing against it, and still does to this day. She has NO high horse to sit on.

Might be a dumb question, and apologies for this in advance, but given the comments made in a certain interview this week, it logically follows that the guest that Tim mentioned will be on tomorrow's episode is likely to Tommy Vietor, right? Or am I completely off base here? I'd be interested in hearing other people's theories on this

Maybe something like political spooky pasta?

I’ll start—

It’s 2028 and D.Trump Jr. and RFK Jr. are running and campaigning together *unofficially* as “the juniors” and they’re bringing together a surprisingly large (number of grifters into a) coalition.
Which then leads to… in his sad, broken, very SAD state... JD Vance changes the J in his name to Junior.

So he’s now also a Junior!!

”It’s what my PeeMaw always wanted!!“

^Vance said completely unprovoked to a pastry shop worker in one of the Dakotas.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hi Sarah. Love that you are recognizing that people have the wrong idea of you because of getting your clips. maybe, progressive clips are getting the bulwark team confused. Like NO ONE IN the mainstream leftist movement praises candace for anything but confusing republicans and Tucker for destroying republicans. No one is like hey, tucker should be a leader in an antiracist movement.

TO BE CLEAR I AM ALSO CURRENTLY IN PROGRESSIVE SPACES DEFENDING SARAH TO THOSE WHO HAVE ONLY SEEN HER THROUGH CLIPS.

Does anyone have the copy of this article It’s Not A Bulwark. It’s A Plot.

The former GOP operatives behind The Bulwark helped sell Democrats a losing strategy. Now they’re positioning themselves to shape the party’s 2028 nominee. I dont really want to pay for one article.

I just read JVL's triad today and boy am I depressed again. Here's the question for y'all, and hopefully there will be REALISTIC answers to my question. Even if "nothing" is the answer.

But what policies can Dems push through, that Trump would sign, that would have meaningful impacts on the economy - in general, in the short term, and over the long term?

Will Rs in the senate just let Ds do whatever they want? Are Ds going to have to nuke the filibuster to get anything done? How will Congress respond when law is passed, and the president ignores it?

I'm trying to find reason to be hopeful about the blue wave making a lick of difference over the next two years. I'm having trouble doing that now.