Makk

So far Iran is playing everything down and saying no damage so that is hopeful as long as Israel doesn't overdo it. 

4 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Credit where it’s due.  Mike Johnson has realised that it’s time to act like an adult.

I'll believe it when I see the aid actually going to Ukraine. At this point it wouldn't surprise me if there is a problem that is picked up in the senate, sent back to the house to be amended, then never voted on again. Meanwhile the Israel aid already gets signed off.

I think the judge should grant Trump leave to attend Barons high school graduation. Trump doesn't even want to go, he didn't for any of his other children, but now he's made such a big fuss about it he would have to sit through it.

4 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Meh.  This is a results based business.  The Republican House is not going to pass much that will actually become law regardless, and the weakness/disunity amongst the Republican members has already allowed Democrats to have influence over bills they otherwise would not.  If the Democrats need to vote "present" on a motion to vacate to get important bills passed like keeping the government funded and preventing Ukraine from being overrun, that is a small price to pay. 

I personally can see the upside of a Republican speaker who needs to stay in the Democrat's good graces.  It sounds completely untenable for Johnson, but it sounds pretty good for Democrats (and the country as well). 

I completely realise how important, and way overdue, the aid to Ukraine is. Not just for Ukraine but to the entire global security. But I absolutely despise Mike Johnson as much, if not more, than Trump. I would not trust him and it would not surprise me at all if after being saved by the dems he pulled a 180 and altered whatever deal they had agreed on. For that reason I don't believe he is any asset going forward. 

It would have been better off to reach out and save McCarthy. Or strike a deal with some other republican now. How long does it take? If he was vacated does the house go back into recess? Or can someone new be nominated and voted in straight away? You could make up time by voting on the original Senate bill therefore sending it straight to Biden.

MTG will probably go ahead with her motion to vacate and the dems will have to protect Johnson. It will be a very bitter pill to swallow. 

Why did Iran do this? Superficially it just seems incredibly stupid. You don't announce publicly you are going to do this weeks in advance if you actually want to inflict damage. But its a staggering amount of ordinance for them to just throw away. And you can't even say they did this to make it "look" like they were taking revenge because the whole thing just makes them look weak.

It's possible it is to provoke a response. I think it is entirely likely that they will get a response and Israel will fully unleash inflicting massive damage and casualties with bombs and missiles over the next few months. This might help condemn Israel even more in the the eye of the world but is that really worth it having your country blown to pieces?

Another more worrying theory is that this was all just an intelligence gathering exercise. They wanted to see how the Israeli air defense worked and test their own systems. They were given a quasi-justification and they took it. This would mean there could be the real attack coming later.

Israel really needs to take the high road here but the chances of Netanyahu doing that are slim to none. 

4 hours ago, karaddin said:

If Iran is satisfied with waving it's dick around in response to the consulate bombing then I'll take it. Escalation is really not something anyone needs.

I'm not worried about Iran. I'm worried what netanyahu is doing to do now. I can easily see him going completely over the top again. 

15 hours ago, Bironic said:

Ukraine signed a new law lowering the age for military conscription from 27 to 25 and reducing the time of service from unlimited to 36 months. I wonder what they do when this war continues after 36 months…?

This was described as rotation, those who were originally called up can be called up again after 3 years. 

1 hour ago, DMC said:

…And a week later 22 GOP Senators voted for a clean foreign aid supplemental without the immigration provisions, which is what I’m talking about.

Which allows Johnson to repeat his earlier line of no foreign aid until the border is fixed. This is not an example of standing up to Trump.

Yes Johnson would have tanked it anyway but he would have been under much more political pressure to allow a vote on it. And if the republican senate actually did stand up to trump it may have emboldened those in the house to try to solve the problem rather than meekly resign or carry on doing nothing.

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yeah this is the type of absurd hyperbole I was referring to.  It was already mentioned that Murkowski and Romney would not go along with Trump on NATO.  Romney’s, of course, retiring, but McConnell would be another obvious example - as long as, ya know, he stays alive.  Not because of his words, but because of his actions.  Not to mention the fact Trump has absolutely zero political leverage on him and the two haven’t spoke in over three years.

Actions? Like voting against the bi-partisan border/aid deal he himself had basically been largely responsible for crafting, rather than fighting for it, because Trump told him to? I would never rely on McConnell for anything. 

9 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Should we look forward to an SEC investigation and subsequent charges? I may be wrong but I think he doesn’t have one of those yet? Is he trying to ace the criminal code like it’s a test or something? 

There were already two and a half years of SEC investigations into Digital World (the company that merged with Truth Social) before the merger was allowed. There were a bunch of issues exposed (not disclosing fund was formed with single target acquisition in mind, undisclosed Chinese investors) which led to the ceo and major shareholder having to resign and some fines but the merger, and then public float, was allowed to go ahead.

The biggest single investor in digital world was a banker named Patrick Orlando (the guy who had to resign) with $420 million, but otherwise its reported all the other investors a significantly smaller. Even 420 million in the overall size of the fund isn't that big.

I don't particularly want to get into an argument over the definition of a "scam" but this has faced a lot of scrutiny. I don't think the share price will collapse instantly because there should be billions of real dollars in some sort of fund thanks to the merger sitting in the companies account. If there is something dodgy going on I think it likely to be around what happens to that cash, but otherwise the value is only inflated by dumb investors and people profiting off those dumb investors.

In good news Trump Media and Technology Group has shed value down to about $6.5 billion currently, which is well down from its peak of over $10 billion. Trumps stake is currently worth $3.7 billion, down for over 6. An almost 25% drop occurred on monday after new filings reported a $58 million loss for 2023 with only $4 revenue. Hopefully this downward trend can continue before Trump can pull any money out although with the investor base being made up entirely of maga trumpists and people who are there solely to take the trumpists money, it is difficult to know how they will react.   

4 hours ago, Zorral said:

Why in the world would you assume that?

In a world in which a kid sits for three + years w/o a trial in Rikers for marijuana possession because his parents can't come up with a $3000 bond?

I'm making that assumption because the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority have been investigating digital world since they were formed in late 2021. Along with many investigative journalists looking for a scoop. They found some faults and digital world were fined a relatively small amount, fired their ceo and major shareholder, and had to revise filings. I'm trusting that if there was a smoking gun pointing to foreign money trying to manipulate weak minded truth social users, it would be found in the digital world shareholder base.

5 hours ago, maarsen said:

Twitter with many more subscribers barely made money which is why Musk refused to buy it after looking at the books. Even now after Musk was forced to buy it it has dropped in value by 1/2 at least. Truth Social is a scam.

Truth social has tiny revenue, high net losses, and prevailing biased content that is going to cap potential revenue by keeping away advertisers who don't want their brands associated with it. The combined share value of it and digital world is massively overvalued. But it is a transparently bad investment rather than a scam. It would be a scam if they reported false revenue or user counts to justify the valuation but they are not, these numbers are just publicly terrible.

29 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

To me, that 'deal' is looking more and more like a scam. Trump's media outlet has been bleeding money from day one and was never valued anywhere close to a billion dollars. Plus, the whole NYC civil/criminal trial revolved around Trump falsely inflating property values. Might be interesting to see who gets burned when it blows up and what actions they might take.

I'm not sure its a scam precisely but it certainly looks like a terrible investment in the long term. I'm assuming the origins and current holders of Digital world funding has been thoroughly investigated for this merger to go ahead, but digital world is a publicly traded company. There seemed to originally be a lot of Chinese investment, I would hope the entire thing isn't a front to channel foreign money in illegally.

Truth social itself, which is the only "asset" involved after the merger as far as I am aware, has really badly performing numbers that don't in anyway come close to justifying the combined $10 billion dollar valuation. But people do seem to want to invest in dumb shit these days, it may be legit.

Very disappointing, I was really looking forward to waking up to good news but it would be so epic if Trump couldn't come up with a $170 million bond.

32 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

You really can't because of those supply lines. You're basically betting on being able to hold it with whatever you're carrying. And you're dealing with a fixed position that has no built defenses and is cut off from most of whatever cover and firepower you have. 

Raiding might work, but holding? Not likely.

I think with Nekhoteyevka the supply lines look very good. It's right next to the border, there is a highway running through, and it is far removed from where the Russian forces are currently positioned. There is really very little difference between holding it and holding the border. 

It would normally have zero strategic value, but politically it would probably require putin to focus on it. Yes defenses would have to be built, but you could quickly scatter mines across the roads and mud season might give you the time. 

Would Russians use glide bombs and other aviation on their own village? I really don't think this is unrealistic. If Russia did assemble a massive force quickly you could pull back but I suspect they would try first with a more moderate level. 

54 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I don't think this is about embarassing Putin during his sleepwalk to another election victory.

I'd guess this is about to disrupting Russia's momentum by having them divert men and resources to deal with those incursions. Would be great if it works and takes some pressure off the Ukrainian defenders. But no, RLF are not gonna hold any cities. It's about disruption and causing as much damage as possible with their partisan warfare.

You could in theory hold these villages though. I'm not sure how good the supply routes are but they are close enough to Ukraine to be supported by artillery and drones. Start building defenses and if Russia wants to use their usual tactics of destroying every building when they take a settlement, it is Russian buildings they are flattening.

It's not Kursk city. The incursions are all right next to the border but in three different locations. Just forcing the relocation of troops to stop this is an issue for the Russians although I think it is mainly about the embarrassment and propaganda. Coming just after Navalny's funeral and leading up to the sham elections, this is a good time to be adding to the political instability.

3 hours ago, Kalbear said:

I'm saying that running on the economy being great when your own supporters are not really agreeing with you - at least a lot of them - is a good way to alienate the people who you need to vote the most. And those are people that Biden is already losing too many of.

You can run on the idea that the economy is improving right? The entire world is pretty shitty with a lot of problems at the moment but from a foreigners perspective the US seems to be one of the most robust countries at the moment in terms of economic recovery. Assuming the economy continues to improve I think he absolutely should run on it or at least the contrasting directions between where it is now and where it was going when he inherited it.

Ukraine has signed a decree to improve rotation. Conscripts will be discharged into the reserves and will not be called up again within 12 months. Really addresses manpower rumours if they can handle that acceptably. 

1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

While I have little doubt Trump has policy for sale, I have no idea what you mean by "most likely around unions"?

There are some problems with rank and file idiots that are deluded enough to believe Republicans have something to offer, the majority of Internationals still understand that Trump is a wolf in sheeps clothing and is not a friend to Labor.

A few renegade Unions not withstanding, weve rarely had 100% uniformity, but the majority of National leadership will still be funding Democrats, were not going to bail the Orange pos.

Maybe I should have said, "possibly around unions". I must admit to not having any real sort of grasp of US labour laws and whether trump could even deliver anything here but Musk has been complaining about trade unions for some time, he has been stung by them overseas, and workers at his various companies have started to unionise and lay legal complaints in more recent times. I think he would jump at any laws helping him out here 

Another possibility is that he is seeking to maintain the ability to sell cars directly to consumers rather than go through a third party dealership which I understand is required by law for all other manufacturers in many states. 

Trump has met Elon Musk in a one on one meeting in Florida. If Trump suddenly stumps up with a 450 million bond for his legal troubles we will know where at least some of it came from. The big worry is that in return there is effectively policy for sale likely around unions which is a pretty sickening indictment on democracy. Not sure if Musk will go for this or not. He has had troubles with Trump in the past but has been very anti Biden and endorsed Ron De Santis after being apolitical earlier. I suspect he would stump up some cash if he thought Trump had a good chance of winning.

I'm not from the US and I don't understand exactly who you can vote for and when you can vote for them. However I suspect that if people are intending to vote for Biden as president who would normally vote Republican, and are only voting that way because Truimp is deranged, then they are even more likely to vote Republican for the house and senate so Biden doesn't get too much power. 

On 3/2/2024 at 7:34 AM, Zorral said:

So you recommend something far more radical? Or less radical? To keep the fascists from committimg prolonged, escalating violence committed w/out consequences for them, while the rest of us either kowtow to their murdering, executing, humiliating, degrading, raping -- yes, that too -- oppressing, censoring, destroying the economy, finishing off the health system by prohibiting the arts and sciences, technology, medications, vaccines, surgical procedures, aiding and abetting climate catastrophe -- and bringing in Putin to rule us all and with one ring bind us all, with or w/out him?  But you won't pay taxes and will sing praises to the deliverer in mandatory church services several times a week!

Very curious to learn how you thread that needle!

I'm not really sure how you got to this from what I wrote. Perhaps I didn't state clearly enough what I was thinking.

I was not suggesting any course of action, I was merely remarking that I thought it would be better in the long term if Trump was defeated again in an election and then sent to jail, rather than being sent to jail before the election (which I am doubtful about the outcome in the timeframe even if the supreme court had not stepped in).

I think I am a lot more optimistic/woefully deluded than most people on this board and there seemed to be a lot of despair about the supreme courts decision to hear the immunity case. I think Ukraine will win in the long term with even moderate western assistance, and I think Trumps support and strength peaked around this last November. I'm definitely not suggesting MAGA cultists should be pandered to or any lenience should be shown to Trump, but eventually the issue of the MAGA crowd does need to be addressed and dealt with. I have no idea how you do this as I am continually shocked by their absolute lack of reasoning but I do think they gain strength in numbers. The best way to address them might be a gradual erosion until they lose interest. If Trump was sent to jail before the election there may well an explosion in their numbers fueled by some sort of righteous anger.