Well time will tell...
But I think so called judges and fake news is the tip of the iceberg as we head into a twitter based tyranny
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
But I think so called judges and fake news is the tip of the iceberg as we head into a twitter based tyranny
Thanks, it's surprising that there isn't a proper equivalent in the liberal side. And I agree on CNN, they are fairly balanced.
Admittedly, a different form of broadcasting, but there was an attempt at a left-wing version on talk radio some years beck (during Bush's tenure IIRC). Rush Limbaugh's opposite number if you will.
That's a good point, I forgot about the myriad of radio shows and local radio stations, that's generally a big medium.
Of course 45 is totally unfit for being president, and it shows every time he opens his mouth.
He did disappoint me in the pressers with Abe though. I totally expected him to take the opportunity to mention that he won big bigly, that 3 million buses from Massachusetts crossed the border to New Hampshire, carrying 15+m cheating voters, that his inauguration crowd was bigger and that the legal system in the US is broken. I couldn't cross any of these off my '45 bullshit bingo' card.
Massive twitter fight between JK Rowling and Piers Morgan on Twitter after he was told to 'fcuk off' on Bill Maher's show.
Quite hilarious
Quite hilarious
Possibly the Daily Kos. It's a openly liberal political blogging site.
She handled him very well.
Trump should hire Piers to be his press secretary. You know it makes sense.
it really does
I actually dread his state visit as no doubt it will be 2 days of watching Morgan and farrage flounce about being his mouthpiece whilst trump invites the Queen to play at his golf course (and I fully expect him to kick off about the wind turbines again)
It's going to be excruciating watching may faun all over him... though watching him dismiss corbyn (Jeremy who?... where is Tony?) Will provide some small amusement
Just remembered that the job requires a top secret clearance, so we can safely rule Piers out.
This is what i was thinking of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_America_(radio_network)
I listen to NPR fairly regularly, the output of which i find to be more...rational than many of its counterparts in TV news.
Just had a look that's an interesting blog, particularly the labor section.
Andrew Sullivan has been a pretty reasonable voice throughout all this.
That's what I've being saying. Even you too were kind of accusing us of hysterics. No-one actually is/was hysterical though are/were they? It's exaggeration, a variant of 'don't take it all so serious' or 'wait until something actually happens'...
All this has prompted him to get back to regular writing - http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/02/andrew-sullivan-the-madness-of-king-donald.html
Could you imagine if he was threatened with impeachment unless he agreed to an extensive and thorough psychiatric examination by an independent mental health expert?
Could you imagine if he was threatened with impeachment unless he agreed to an extensive and thorough psychiatric examination by an independent mental health expert?
There wouldn't be enough popcorn when watching how he handles it.
It's actually a sad state of affairs but these two paragraphs are so spot on.
It's really sad when I'm convinced that I could help him.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/protest-movement-republicans-234863
Inside the protest movement that has Republicans reeling
A group of former House Democratic staffers wanted to channel their post-election grief. They never imagined what would happen next.
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich — Hill Republicans are openly accusing liberal mega-donors of bankrolling the tide of local protesters storming their offices. They’re beefing up their physical protection from demonstrators. And they’re imploring out-of-state critics to stop clogging their phone lines.
“It’s just yelling and criticizing. There is no substance,” said Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.). “It’s a protest against the election.”
To which Angel Padilla, a co-founder of the group organizing the demonstrations that have spread across the country in a matter of weeks, had this to say: You'd better get used to it.
"We want to pressure these members of Congress for as long as we have this president,” Padilla said.
Dubbed “Indivisible,” the group launched as a way for Padilla and a handful of fellow ex-Democratic aides to channel their post-election heartbreak into a manual for quashing President Donald Trump’s agenda. They drafted a 26-page protest guide for activists, full of pointers on how to bird dog their members of Congress in the language of Capitol insiders.
The booklet concludes with a stirring promise to fellow Trump enemies: “Good luck — we will win.”
The group isn’t planning to limit itself to the town-hall resistance to repealing Obamacare that it’s becoming known for. Indivisible has marshaled demonstrations against Trump’s Cabinet nominees and his immigration order, and it’s partnering with the organizers of the Jan. 21 Women’s March for a new action next week.
Its handful of senior leaders count about 100 contributors to their national organizing work but insist that all are working on a volunteer basis. They know conservatives are spreading unfounded rumors that their success is being driven by wealthy donors like George Soros, which they flatly deny.
“It doesn’t matter who we take money from — we’re always going to get blamed as a Soros group, even if we don’t take money from Soros,” said Padilla, now an analyst with the National Immigration Law Center. “That’s one of the attacks and that’s fine.”
The group began when Ezra Levin, a former aide to Texas Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett, commiserated over the election in late November with his wife Leah Greenberg, a longtime aide to ex-Virginia Democratic Rep. Tom Perriello. The couple was “going through the stages of grief, like a lot of progressives,” Levin recalled in an interview, “and wanted to do what we could to help.”
They got to work on what became the "Indivisible Guide," billed as a set of “best practices for making Congress listen.” The manual borrows openly from the early tactics of the Tea Party, which sprouted on the strength of local conservative resistance to former President Barack Obama’s hefty government stimulus bill and health care reform plan.
“Trump is not popular,” the guide states. “He does not have a mandate. He does not have large congressional majorities. If a small minority in the Tea Party could stop President Obama, then we the majority can stop a petty tyrant named Trump.”
The Indivisible manual is often blunt about what it says members of Congress really tick — and how protesters might use it to their advantage. One chart compares what "your MoC cares a lot about" (an example: "an interest group's endorsement") vs. what a lawmaker "doesn't care much about" (for one, "your thoughtful analysis of the proposed bill").
Levin, Greenberg, Padilla, and another former Doggett aide, Jeremy Haile, continued tweaking the guide even as their burgeoning effort mushroomed a full-fledged movement. About two dozen veteran Hill staffers and activists contributed or edited the guide in some way since that November first draft, according to Levin.
While the millions-strong turnout for anti-Trump Women’s Marches captured the nation last month, the Indivisible founders were conscious of the need for protest tactics that could truly force members of Congress to pay attention — or risk losing their seats.
“Marches are great to bring people together, but our experience as congressional staffers had taught us that energy needed to be channeled in a smart way to make a difference on Capitol Hill,” Haile said.
Indivisible's founders never planned or expected the groundswell of interest that resulted from their guide, which prompted them to organize as a 501(c)4 group this month. "The last thing the progressive ecosystem really needed was yet another nonprofit," Levin said.
But Indivisible's guide has spread at the grassroots level at an unpredictable speed this year, with the help of other liberal groups amplifying its message. Less than two months after the group launched its website, 225,000 interested participants have registered to learn more, according to Levin.
It helped that Doggett was one of the first Democrats targeted by the tea party in the summer of 2009. During one of his routine Saturday morning office hours that August, hundreds of local conservative activists showed up wearing Revolutionary War costumes, Haile recalled. They chanted and jeered while carrying tombstones and coffins, and the chaotic scene caught the attention of the national media. Doggett required an escort to leave his own event that day.
Fast forward to last weekend. Police escorted Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) out of his own town hall meeting after a local Indivisible chapter joined other progressive groups to protest it.
When the tea party began rattling lawmakers with local disruptions, Haile explained, “what mattered was this sense around the members that their constituents were unhappy. And what that is did is create discontent around Congress but also energized angry people who said, 'I’m angry; we’re angry; and if we join together we can make a difference and get members of Congress to change their positions.'”
That alignment of protesters galvanized by many different issues is a linchpin of Indivisible’s early success. The group doesn’t have a core policy mission: some chapters protest in defense of Obamacare; others embrace criminal justice reform or rally against Trump’s controversial travel ban.
Chapters don’t even have to call themselves Indivisible. Levin estimated that no more than 40 percent of the 6,200 local affiliates registered on the group’s website use the name.
The organizers of Indivisible Grand Rapids, for example, hadn’t spoken to any original drafters in Washington before they helped marshal a crowd of several hundred to a Thursday night town hall meeting held by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.). Chapter leaders explained to POLITICO that they’d heard about the movement through friends, visited the website to register themselves, then found others registered in their area who wanted to start a group.
The Michiganders downloaded the Indivisible guide and started a Facebook group in mid-January. The group now includes more than 300 people, a third of whom are registered for a Sunday training session on how to approach lawmakers.
“It’s important for us that we rise above; we don’t want to be depicted in any way as only being an angry mob, and we’re not,” said Claire Bode, 49, the co-founder of Indivisible Grand Rapids. “It’s a long-haul effort.”
Indivisible is also embracing collaboration with other major anti-Trump protest outlets. Leaders of the group were in communication with Women’s March organizers before their main event on Jan. 21, and that partnership will become official when the March unveils the third in its series of 10 direct actions that attendees have been asked to pursue in their communities.
In addition, MoveOn.org and the Working Families Party joined with Indivisible for its first nationwide call on Jan. 22. Nearly 60,000 people phoned in that day, according to Levin and MoveOn organizing director Victoria Kaplan. Indivisible estimates that its second national call, on the impact of Trump’s immigration order with assistance from the ACLU and Padilla’s group, drew 35,000 people.
Kaplan said MoveOn plans to team up again with Indivisible ahead of the Presidents' Day recess week. They want to help to major local chapters organize demonstrations while lawmakers are back home in their districts.
The White House has aggressively pushed back at any comparisons between the new Indivisible-boosted efforts and the tea party. Trump spokesman Sean Spicer told Fox News on Monday that the anti-Obama conservative opposition was “a very organic movement” but the rippling wave of liberal protest is “a very paid, Astroturf-type movement.”
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) sounded a similar note in an interview. “I think it’s going to be a demonstration a week until they run out of funding,” he said, predicting that “they will incrementally die off.”
It doesn't look like that will happen soon. Two House Republican chairmen faced fierce pushback at town halls in their districts on Thursday night, with budget committee chairwoman Rep. Diane Black fielding tough questions on the party’s lack of a united plan to replace Obamacare and oversight committee chairman Rep. Jason Chaffetz shouted down by furious boos.
Organizers at the Amash town hall said they're in it for the long haul. At the event in Grand Rapids, Mich., they passed out pamphlets encouraging attendees to "boo when he falls back on regressive values."
And they recruited the best interrogators in the crowd to join their cause.
"Do you mind if I grab your contact information?" group organizer Colin McWatters asked one Amash constituent who grilled the lawmaker about GOP plans to repeal Obamacare.
The constituent signed up.
A group of former House Democratic staffers wanted to channel their post-election grief. They never imagined what would happen next.
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich — Hill Republicans are openly accusing liberal mega-donors of bankrolling the tide of local protesters storming their offices. They’re beefing up their physical protection from demonstrators. And they’re imploring out-of-state critics to stop clogging their phone lines.
“It’s just yelling and criticizing. There is no substance,” said Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.). “It’s a protest against the election.”
To which Angel Padilla, a co-founder of the group organizing the demonstrations that have spread across the country in a matter of weeks, had this to say: You'd better get used to it.
"We want to pressure these members of Congress for as long as we have this president,” Padilla said.
Dubbed “Indivisible,” the group launched as a way for Padilla and a handful of fellow ex-Democratic aides to channel their post-election heartbreak into a manual for quashing President Donald Trump’s agenda. They drafted a 26-page protest guide for activists, full of pointers on how to bird dog their members of Congress in the language of Capitol insiders.
The booklet concludes with a stirring promise to fellow Trump enemies: “Good luck — we will win.”
The group isn’t planning to limit itself to the town-hall resistance to repealing Obamacare that it’s becoming known for. Indivisible has marshaled demonstrations against Trump’s Cabinet nominees and his immigration order, and it’s partnering with the organizers of the Jan. 21 Women’s March for a new action next week.
Its handful of senior leaders count about 100 contributors to their national organizing work but insist that all are working on a volunteer basis. They know conservatives are spreading unfounded rumors that their success is being driven by wealthy donors like George Soros, which they flatly deny.
“It doesn’t matter who we take money from — we’re always going to get blamed as a Soros group, even if we don’t take money from Soros,” said Padilla, now an analyst with the National Immigration Law Center. “That’s one of the attacks and that’s fine.”
The group began when Ezra Levin, a former aide to Texas Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett, commiserated over the election in late November with his wife Leah Greenberg, a longtime aide to ex-Virginia Democratic Rep. Tom Perriello. The couple was “going through the stages of grief, like a lot of progressives,” Levin recalled in an interview, “and wanted to do what we could to help.”
They got to work on what became the "Indivisible Guide," billed as a set of “best practices for making Congress listen.” The manual borrows openly from the early tactics of the Tea Party, which sprouted on the strength of local conservative resistance to former President Barack Obama’s hefty government stimulus bill and health care reform plan.
“Trump is not popular,” the guide states. “He does not have a mandate. He does not have large congressional majorities. If a small minority in the Tea Party could stop President Obama, then we the majority can stop a petty tyrant named Trump.”
The Indivisible manual is often blunt about what it says members of Congress really tick — and how protesters might use it to their advantage. One chart compares what "your MoC cares a lot about" (an example: "an interest group's endorsement") vs. what a lawmaker "doesn't care much about" (for one, "your thoughtful analysis of the proposed bill").
Levin, Greenberg, Padilla, and another former Doggett aide, Jeremy Haile, continued tweaking the guide even as their burgeoning effort mushroomed a full-fledged movement. About two dozen veteran Hill staffers and activists contributed or edited the guide in some way since that November first draft, according to Levin.
While the millions-strong turnout for anti-Trump Women’s Marches captured the nation last month, the Indivisible founders were conscious of the need for protest tactics that could truly force members of Congress to pay attention — or risk losing their seats.
“Marches are great to bring people together, but our experience as congressional staffers had taught us that energy needed to be channeled in a smart way to make a difference on Capitol Hill,” Haile said.
Indivisible's founders never planned or expected the groundswell of interest that resulted from their guide, which prompted them to organize as a 501(c)4 group this month. "The last thing the progressive ecosystem really needed was yet another nonprofit," Levin said.
But Indivisible's guide has spread at the grassroots level at an unpredictable speed this year, with the help of other liberal groups amplifying its message. Less than two months after the group launched its website, 225,000 interested participants have registered to learn more, according to Levin.
It helped that Doggett was one of the first Democrats targeted by the tea party in the summer of 2009. During one of his routine Saturday morning office hours that August, hundreds of local conservative activists showed up wearing Revolutionary War costumes, Haile recalled. They chanted and jeered while carrying tombstones and coffins, and the chaotic scene caught the attention of the national media. Doggett required an escort to leave his own event that day.
Fast forward to last weekend. Police escorted Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) out of his own town hall meeting after a local Indivisible chapter joined other progressive groups to protest it.
When the tea party began rattling lawmakers with local disruptions, Haile explained, “what mattered was this sense around the members that their constituents were unhappy. And what that is did is create discontent around Congress but also energized angry people who said, 'I’m angry; we’re angry; and if we join together we can make a difference and get members of Congress to change their positions.'”
That alignment of protesters galvanized by many different issues is a linchpin of Indivisible’s early success. The group doesn’t have a core policy mission: some chapters protest in defense of Obamacare; others embrace criminal justice reform or rally against Trump’s controversial travel ban.
Chapters don’t even have to call themselves Indivisible. Levin estimated that no more than 40 percent of the 6,200 local affiliates registered on the group’s website use the name.
The organizers of Indivisible Grand Rapids, for example, hadn’t spoken to any original drafters in Washington before they helped marshal a crowd of several hundred to a Thursday night town hall meeting held by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.). Chapter leaders explained to POLITICO that they’d heard about the movement through friends, visited the website to register themselves, then found others registered in their area who wanted to start a group.
The Michiganders downloaded the Indivisible guide and started a Facebook group in mid-January. The group now includes more than 300 people, a third of whom are registered for a Sunday training session on how to approach lawmakers.
“It’s important for us that we rise above; we don’t want to be depicted in any way as only being an angry mob, and we’re not,” said Claire Bode, 49, the co-founder of Indivisible Grand Rapids. “It’s a long-haul effort.”
Indivisible is also embracing collaboration with other major anti-Trump protest outlets. Leaders of the group were in communication with Women’s March organizers before their main event on Jan. 21, and that partnership will become official when the March unveils the third in its series of 10 direct actions that attendees have been asked to pursue in their communities.
In addition, MoveOn.org and the Working Families Party joined with Indivisible for its first nationwide call on Jan. 22. Nearly 60,000 people phoned in that day, according to Levin and MoveOn organizing director Victoria Kaplan. Indivisible estimates that its second national call, on the impact of Trump’s immigration order with assistance from the ACLU and Padilla’s group, drew 35,000 people.
Kaplan said MoveOn plans to team up again with Indivisible ahead of the Presidents' Day recess week. They want to help to major local chapters organize demonstrations while lawmakers are back home in their districts.
The White House has aggressively pushed back at any comparisons between the new Indivisible-boosted efforts and the tea party. Trump spokesman Sean Spicer told Fox News on Monday that the anti-Obama conservative opposition was “a very organic movement” but the rippling wave of liberal protest is “a very paid, Astroturf-type movement.”
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) sounded a similar note in an interview. “I think it’s going to be a demonstration a week until they run out of funding,” he said, predicting that “they will incrementally die off.”
It doesn't look like that will happen soon. Two House Republican chairmen faced fierce pushback at town halls in their districts on Thursday night, with budget committee chairwoman Rep. Diane Black fielding tough questions on the party’s lack of a united plan to replace Obamacare and oversight committee chairman Rep. Jason Chaffetz shouted down by furious boos.
Organizers at the Amash town hall said they're in it for the long haul. At the event in Grand Rapids, Mich., they passed out pamphlets encouraging attendees to "boo when he falls back on regressive values."
And they recruited the best interrogators in the crowd to join their cause.
"Do you mind if I grab your contact information?" group organizer Colin McWatters asked one Amash constituent who grilled the lawmaker about GOP plans to repeal Obamacare.
The constituent signed up.
When you put enough loons inside one place, there is only one way to go. I just hope when the dust settles down, clowns like Ryan, McConell, Priebus and Chaffetz etc dragged into the mud along with the orange man for enabling and assisting him.
Democracy Now is probably the US's biggest genuinely left wing media channel. Unlike their right wing counterparts though, they don't conjure up news and are usually very good with fact checking.
Only criticism I have of them is they tend to hire the same fringe leftist guests to their show like a Chomsky and Nader so it's pretty much everyone agreeing with each other instead of there being a genuine debate.
Amy Goodman is a fantastic journalist though, one of the best in the country IMO.
Well its funded by the federal government and its listeners so it can't really afford not to be rational
I'd have been embarrassed going to a high school class this unprepared, let alone face a senate hearing on national TV.
"We're going to win so much, we'll be tired of winning....."
Sarah Palin ambassador to Canada, I hope you've got your drilling shoes on @Dwazza
Be quite the constitutional crisis since I am not sure refusing a mental health exam is grounds.Could you imagine if he was threatened with impeachment unless he agreed to an extensive and thorough psychiatric examination by an independent mental health expert?
Why can't they set the grounds? "The majority are of the opinion that a mental health examination is required if they are to have any confidence in him going forward, failure to take part in such an examination would result in a vote of zero confidence and start the movement towards impeachment".
Stephen Fry with a subtle dig at the BAFTAs. How long till the tweets begin, then?
I would imagine the wording of the constitution as to what constitutes an impeachable offense would come into play.
While in the end it is a political process there are still rules to go by. Setting a precedent where you impeach a President based on him not following orders that Congress may not even have the authority to give is a bit dangerous.
I have to say, Sen. Hassan hits the nail right on the head.
The executive branch is separate from the legislative, so there's no mechanism for a simple "vote of no confidence" that is common in parliamentary governments.
They could do it tomorrow based on those words. Plenty of his actions could constitute "misdemeanours".
Yes I am aware of that, but it has zero to do with the scenario you brought up originally.
As I have said a few times it is largely a political process. But there are rules to follow.
I would not quite get my hopes up if anyone voting any time soon to impeach Trump. Nor would I get to excited about parts of the 25th anmendment coming into play.
- Status