If a Democrat were in the White House, Taylor's testimony would be blaring news everywhere. Instead it has mostly been greeted with a shrug. The numbness toward Trump's corruption will be what gets him out of this. Sad. 

 

As for Brexit, there are a lot of MPs who go along with the "people are tired of waiting, just get this done" mentality. A Labour MP went on TV saying he was going to vote for the bill even though he hadn't even read it. 

3 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

As for Brexit, there are a lot of MPs who go along with the "people are tired of waiting, just get this done" mentality. A Labour MP went on TV saying he was going to vote for the bill even though he hadn't even read it. 

 

Let's face it: even Bill Bell would have wrapped up this [!@#$%^&*] a long time ago.

Didn't see this posted, but if it was sorry about that. Trump made a very quick reference to Obama being killed. At 0:09 he says "they could have killed him"

 

He hates Obama and what he was thinking slipped out.

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

If a Democrat were in the White House, Taylor's testimony would be blaring news everywhere. Instead it has mostly been greeted with a shrug.

That is just not true. It was treated as a major bombshell all day.

 

Meanwhile:

 

 

 

32 minutes ago, Vee said:

That is just not true. It was treated as a major bombshell all day.

 

It got coverage, but I've seen more about Trump saying he's been lynched and whether he should use that term and whether Democrats are hypocrites because a few of them used that term when Clinton was impeached, and so on. Trump distracted the press and they fell for it, as usual. 

I will just say I've seen the opposite and leave it at that. The lynching comment was seen for what it was.

Speaking of Brexit coverage, this is a pretty good article on the complicity of the British press in essentially being mouthpieces for Boris Johnson.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/

Pathetic. As a few of the tweets mentioned, I'm getting 2003 vibes, which is not great. 

 

 

Edited October 23, 20196 yr by DRW50

It's really too late for anyone else to get into the race. Besides, it's really hard to see Hillary Clinton even considering running for President again.

Nothing the NY Times says about the Democratic race should be believed.

Bloomberg said he would not run yesterday.

 

 

Anyway, this, in a nutshell is how the E.U. feels about the U.K. and Brexit. Junker is letting the exasperation show.  He says that Brexit has been a "waste of time and energy".

 

In his farewell speech, Juncker urged Europe to "fight ignorant nationalism with all your strength."https://t.co/7AJouFtiPX

— DW News (@dwnews) October 22, 2019

Edited October 23, 20196 yr by DramatistDreamer

6 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Pathetic. As a few of the tweets mentioned, I'm getting 2003 vibes, which is not great. 

 

 

I'm with Marceline. I don't believe a thing the times political desk reports. Especially after 2016. And I am frankly tired of their "access" reporting. That's how Judith Miller helped craft a narrative leading up into Iraq.

Edited October 23, 20196 yr by JaneAusten

16 minutes ago, JaneAusten said:

I'm with Marceline. I don't believe a thing the times political desk reports. Especially after 2016. And I am frankly tired of their "access" reporting. That's how Judith Miller helped craft a narrative leading up into Iraq.

 

I don't have much belief in them alone, but there's been lots of wariness of the field for a while now, especially since clearer and stronger choices to combine establishment and a new future, like Kamala Harris (or to a degree Cory Booker or Julian Castro - or even Pete Buttigieg) haven't really broken through. You have two people who are distrusted or untested for many in the party and one person who seems to be falling apart in slow motion. It reminds me of how wary many in the Democratic establishment were of the state of the field in 2003, which is when Wesley Clark was parachuted in to save the day. I don't think the fantasies about Hillary, Michelle Obama, Holder, etc. are true, but I can believe there's a lot of unhappiness about the state of the primary. It's just you can't parachute a 'dream' candidate in the way you could have in the past - they'd be chewed up and spat out.  

I hope you're not talking about that bollocks article by Maggie Haberman about the dozen Democratic donors, @DRW50 because I'd have to agree with the sentiments expressed by others. IMO, it is too damn early to be hand-wringing and making these prognostications.  Also, it's damaging psychically.  Primary voting hasn't even begun, whatever happened to waiting until the first rounds to see how this unfolds?  I don't get this type of thinking. 

 

Also, I also have to disagree about the sentiment that somehow Taylor's testimony was undermined by Trump's ignorant lynching comments.  Yes, people were upset by his comment but also recognized it for what it was-- a deliberately provocative comment meant to obfuscate and draw attention away from Taylor's statements, which, imo, did not work.  Most people I know were talking about the "bombshell" statements given by Taylor and what that meant.  This morning the news focused more on that, as well as on the news that at least 50% of registered Independents polled are in favor of impeachment. Trump's "lynching" remarks were a very distant 3rd or 4th story.

1 hour ago, marceline said:

Nothing the NY Times says about the Democratic race should be believed.

 

Agreed.

 

I do think a lot of centrist Dems are spooked by Warren and trying to manufacture a narrative in the press. But I don't think the real situation is as dire as they want to make people believe it will be unless we nominate someone less progressive. We can certainly differ on how viable she is or isn't, but I think the recent fishing articles are an attempt to slow her down coming both from that wing and even from the center-right Beltway media, and it won't work.

Edited October 23, 20196 yr by Vee