use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~2 users here now
Biden says Russia is clearly 'losing the war in IRAQ'
submitted 10 months ago by [deleted] from dailymail.co.uk
view the rest of the comments →
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago* (46 children)
You're kidding, right? Trump knows how to push all the right buttons to get people following him.
"I know words. I have the best words." - literal Trump quote. He's claiming to have superpowers of vocabulary but not managing to treat his audience to a word of two syllables.
I'm not kidding.
It is legally impossible under both American law and common practice for a president or ex-president to mishandle classified documents.
You're very wrong about that. Although i note that the charges bright to date are about defence information, not classified documents.
But under American law, the same law applies to presidents and ex presidents as crackwhores and ex crackwhores. It's called the rule of law, and it's the basis of the American democracy.
And by 2021 his popularity was just 19% after a complete failure to deliver his promises.
They're not NAZIs. Failure to deliver promises isn't being a jew. They knew he was Jewish when he was viewed into power in a landslide.
Ukraine has run out of money and are reliant on loans from the west.
The invasion of Ukraine is an invasion of europe.
Sweden and Finland are joining NATO to help hold the line in Ukraine.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/natos-new-north-fresh-chances-contain-moscow-2023-07-03/
The west isn't going to let Ukraine fall.
[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (35 children)
They're not NAZIs.
If you are slicing extremist far right white supremacists that finely, then I suppose I will have to admit that only some of the Ukrainian far right are genuine neo-Nazis Hitlerites. The rest are merely "Nazi-adjacent" Banderites and other white supremacist extremists who have some minor differences with Hitlerite Nazis. If I was writing an academic political science paper I'd care more about the differences, but this is social media. If you give the Nazi salute and have a swastika tattoo then you're a Nazi even if your political position only agrees 95% with Hitler's.
They knew he was Jewish when he was viewed into power in a landslide.
Who? Zelensky? I never said he was a Nazi. He's just a venal, corrupt, cowardly crack head caught up in events too big for him. He's a media-friendly puppet and his Jewishness is pure whitewashing.
It's not Zelensky that's the problem. Its not even the average Ukrainian voter.
Its people like Andriy Biletsky, founder of Azov. Biletsky stated in 2010 that the Ukrainian nation's mission is to "lead the white races of the world in a final crusade...against Semite-led Untermenschen". He managed to get 33% of the vote when running as an independent, enough to get elected. (Hitler's Nazi Party managed to get about 33% of the vote too. Just saying.) But most far-right political parties don't do quite so well in elections. The average Ukrainian bod on the street is no more likely to be a Nazi than anywhere else.
Nazis exist in every country. Like the USA, and, yes, Russia, there are plenty of far-right extremists in Ukrainian law enforcement and the military, but where Russia actively bans fascist and Nazi groups, and the US turns a blind eye to them so long as they pay their taxes and aren't too vocal in their threats to overthrow the government, Ukraine supports and encourages them.
Oligarchs use the skin-head gangs and "volunteer battalions" (private militias) to settle scores with competitors. Town governments pay extremists like Right Sector to remove "undesirables" like Gypsies (Roma) from their towns. Azov is now officially integrated with the Ukrainian armed forces, but during the early stages of the civil war with Donbas, it was a private militia and recognised all the world over as a far-right neo-Nazi extremist group.
Azov are not even close to the worst. Right Sector and Svoboda are much worse. And they're still active.
Sweden and Finland are joining NATO because their governments are controlled by Russophobic neoliberal globalists.
In practical terms, this makes next to zero difference to Russia. Both Sweden and Finland already had full political and military cooperation with NATO, and mutual defence agreements with the EU and NATO, and a high degree of collaboration when it comes to tactics, training and weaponry. Since 1991, Sweden and Finland have become deeply integrated with NATO despite remaining outside of the formal NATO alliance. If Russia is worried about that, the ship has sailed long ago and they have had plenty of time to get used to the new world order that Sweden and Finland are part of the US-lead coalition of Russophobes in Europe.
For Finland and Sweden, "the greatest change with NATO membership will be with regard to identity and strategic culture". They will lose their identity and their strategic culture will become even more of a vassal of the USA.
By the way: Article 5 does not say what people think it says. Quote: "Article 5 does not lead inexorably to full-scale war; it offers a framework for developing a measured response, with each country deciding what action to take." There is no obligation for any NATO country to go to war.
The bottom line here is that the western media is pushing this ludicrous idea that the threat of Finnish and Swedish membership of NATO concerns Russia, but in practical terms that ship sailed a decade ago or more. Finland and Sweden have been closely integrated with NATO for many years.
Ukraine fell to a hostile coup in 2014.
And the west is not capable of preventing Russia from taking back the ethnic Russian areas of Ukraine and leaving western Ukraine as a neutral shell.
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (34 children)
Ukraine voted in a jew with a landslide.
Very few of them are anti-Semitic.
Ergo very few are nazis.
Azov was formed during the Euromaidan protests. Russia was already trying to set up Ukraine as a puppet state like Belarus.
They had some neo nazi influences, but being invaded brings out people's most base patterns of behaviour as you see your friends and family killed.
But they're divorced from that since they've been absorbed into the national guard, and Neo Nazi was never a particularly significant moment in ukraine by numbers.
Parts of Ukraine are currently occupied by Putin's Russia. The liberation is ongoing.
[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (22 children)
More than 50% of eligible voters either voted against Zelensky, or didn't vote for him. Even in the second round run-off election, Zelensky only received 45% of potential votes. Some landslide.
Quote: "With no previous political experience, Mr Zelensky's campaign focused on his difference to the other candidates rather than on any concrete policy ideas. ... Analysts believe Mr Zelensky's informal style and vow to clean up Ukrainian politics resonated with voters who are disillusioned with the country's path under Mr Poroshenko." Kinda like Trump, don't you think?
So to summarise: Zelensky, a professional actor who was very popular, managed to fool 19% of eligible voters in the first round of the election, which was enough to get into the second round. Poroshenko, already widely disliked, lost the election to somebody even more dirty and corrupt who could put on a better false face.
You're probably right. If I was to take a wildly unscientific stab in the dark, my guess is that probably only about 2% of Ukrainians are hard-core far right extremists, and only a fraction of those are specifically obsessed with THE JOOS like Hitler was. And? What's your point? 2% of 44 million is a lot of people.
Nazism is more than just antisemitism, and its not solely the true believer extremists that are the problem. Its the thousands more of more moderate right-wing fellow travellers who are associated with them, and the millions of easily-lead followers who go along with the true believers out of patriotism, or fear, or greed, or because they're just following orders. Even in Nazi Germany, most Nazis were not raging antisemites who wanted to exterminate all the jews -- not at first. Even Hitler himself originally planned to just expel the Jews from Europe.
There is little or no chance that the extreme right will take power in Ukraine through democratic and fair elections but that's not how the extreme right takes power. The far right never takes over by convincing 51% of the voters to support death camps.
They take power by challenging the state's monopoly on violence, and gaining support and protection from fellow-travellers and sympathisers in positions of power. In 1920s Italy, the government and the king caved to threats from Mussolini's fascist minority and gave him power. In 1930s Germany, the establishment political elite made Hitler Chancellor thinking that they could control him like a puppet, that he would do their dirty work for them and allow them to keep their hands clean.
In Ukraine, far right paramilitary operates with impunity, often with the open support of police and military. They are funded and supported by wealthy oligarchs. Far right terror attacks and even murders are rarely investigated and even more rarely prosecuted. Nobody has been charged for the Maidan murders, or the burning alive of protesters in Odessa, or the attacks against Gypsies.
Azov was so powerful that the Ukrainian government simply integrated them with their military, without making any attempt to weed out the extremists.
Ukraine is officially unapologetic for the murder of tens of thousands of Poles, Hungarians and Ukrainian Jews at the hands of the Banderites during WW2. Even during this war, with Russophobic Poland champing at the bit to fight Russia, there is a certain amount of diplomatic tension between Ukraine and Poland every time the Ukrainians name another street or public arena after a genocidal murderer or celebrate their birthday as a national holiday. Until 2022, all of Ukraine's neighbours agreed that Ukraine has a deep seated problem with neo-Nazis. Until 2022, there was bipartisan recognition in the USA that Ukrainian neo-Nazis were a problem. Obama refused to send them weapons for that reason.
Now the narrative is "bUT tHEy'Ve ChANgEd thEIr WayS aND aREn't NazIS AnYMoRE!" even as they zeig heil on camera.
Azov was formed during the Euromaidan protests.
No, Azov officially was formed after the Euromaiden protests.
Azov Battalion's official creation by Andriy Biletsky was in May 2014. The Euromaiden protests ran from 21 November 2013 to 22 February 2014, so Azov didn't form until three months after the Euromaiden protests and the violent insurrection that removed democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych from power.
Russia was already trying to set up Ukraine as a puppet state
Nonsense on stilts. That's pure American propaganda and not based on any reality at all. In 2014 Russia was still satisfied for Ukraine to remain politically and militarily neutral and Yanukovych frequently went against Russian interests to move Ukraine economically closer to the EU.
And the irony is that after the so-called "Revolution of Dignity" coup, it was the Americans (specifically that poisonous toad Victoria Nuland) who choose the senior Ukrainian government ministers, from people who didn't even have Ukrainian citizenship at the time and had to quickly apply for citizenship to make their new position legal. And you think that it was Russia who was turning Ukraine into a puppet state??? 🙄
like Belarus.
Belarus has more independence from Russia, despite their infinitely closer cultural and ethnic ties, than Germany or the UK has from the USA.
Everything that the US claims Russia does, is what the US actually does.
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago* (21 children)
You're counting people who didn't vote?
Meaning you think that when Trump won in 2016, he only had the support of 27% of the country?
When given a wide choice of 39 candidates, just 30% of voters supported Zelensky;
More than 11 times the average of those 39 candidates?
And about twice as many votes as the second highest polling candidate?
Most people would call that reasonably decisive. I reckon "Landslide" is fair.
In the second round of voting, when asked to choose between only incumbent president Petro Poroshenko and Zelensky, 73% choose Zelensky;
Improving his margin to about 2.7 times Poroshenko's vote. Again, not close.
And a year later, his popularity had plummeted to just 10% approval
I get 11% "strongly approval". But you're missing the 38% "somewhat approve". For a total of 49% approval. From this source. Where do you get the 10% from?
Even so, the 73% support in the final round refutes your claim that Ukrainians are Nazis.
Nazism is more than just antisemitism
Agree. antisemitism is a necessary but not sufficient condition. You also need to be fascist, racist, white supremacist, support eugenics and dictatorship.
Belarus has a Russian puppet government, that retains power through "elections" that are neither free nor fair, and subvert the will of the people. https://www.voiceofbelarus.org/belarus-news/golos-proved-that-tsikhanouskaya-had-defeated-lukashenko-in-the-first-round/
Nonsense on stilts. That's pure American propaganda and not based on any reality at all.
Nope. Russian oligarchs tried to seize power to stop Ukraine moving towards the EU wrt trade.
https://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1vhgp5/yesterday_my_country_became_north_korea_20/
And during the protests, Russians were disappearing protesters to try to cool them. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/where-have-the-many-missing-ukrainian-protesters-gone/
It didn't work, so Putin outright invaded. That's not working either. He's lost support of the Wagner mercenaries, and nearly lost his government. More nearly than Zelensky has to date.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (5 children)
You're counting people who didn't vote? Meaning you think that when Trump won in 2016, he only had the support of 27% of the country?
Absolutely.
In Australia we consider a voter turnout of less than 90% a threat to democracy.
When AOC won her seat in Congress, she did so with the votes of 12% of the eligible voters. Low voter turnout is bad for democracy, it encourages extremists and posers and government for and by special interests (usually the wealthy elite and corporations, but not only them).
More than 11 times the average of those 39 candidates? And about twice as many votes as the second highest polling candidate?
Yes.
The question isn't whether or not he was the most popular candidate at the time. The question is what that tells us about the influence of far-right neo-Nazis (or Banderites, or "alt-right", or whatever you want to call them) in Ukrainian government. And the answer is, precious little.
You seem to be arguing against somebody else's argument that "Poroshenko is literally Hitler, and Jews were prohibited from holding office and even if they weren't nobody would vote for them". If that were my argument, then Zelensky's election victory would be good evidence against my argument -- but that is not my argument.
I don't know how often I have to say this before you will take it in. The problem isn't that all Ukrainians, or even a majority, are Nazis. Or that the Ukrainian government is openly and officially Nazi. It is that there are significant numbers of neo-Nazis, Banderites and other Hitlerite-adjacent extremists in the country, many of them are organised into paramilitary organisations, some are openly part of the government and military, and that they have the support and protection of oligarchs, officials, and organs of the state such as the military, the judiciary, the police and other government agencies.
Before 2022 none of this was controversial. Everyone agreed that Ukraine was home to many powerful far-right groups. Israel and Poland especially were, and remain, upset that Ukraine continues to celebrate genocidal war criminals like Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych. In the US, it was a matter of bipartisan agreement that Ukraine has a Nazi problem. It was why Obama limited aid to Ukraine to non-lethal equipment, due to fears that weapons would end up in the hands of extremists.
Where do you get the 10% from?
I misremembered this source that states his approval was 19%. Sorry.
Nazism is more than just antisemitism Agree. antisemitism is a necessary but not sufficient condition.
Agree. antisemitism is a necessary but not sufficient condition.
Political parties change over time to suit local conditions and the personalities of their leaders, none of whom live forever. Consider how the Republicans of Lincoln differ from the Republicans of Trump, or the neo-con Republicans of Bush Jr. Or the Dixie Democrats who crossed over to become Republicans.
The German Nazi Party of the 1920s through 40s was especially influenced by the malign and unhinged racial views of Hitler, Himmler and a handful of other top leaders. Hitler took the regular anti-semitic views of many Germans in the 1920s and turned it up to 11. But that doesn't mean that all neo-Nazis who follow have to be equally obsessed with Jews beyond all else, or even that all antisemites are Nazis. Local conditions matter.
People forget that while Hitler attempted genocide against the Jews, killing six million of them, he also attempted genocide against the Slavs and killed around 8 or 9 million civilians and POWs, mostly Russians. You know who aren't Slavs? Western Ukrainians.
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (4 children)
The higher turnout is attributable to compulsory voting.
The question isn't whether or not he was the most popular candidate at the time.
Yes it is.
And his margin was vast.
The question is what that tells us about the influence of far-right neo-Nazis (or Banderites, or "alt-right", or whatever you want to call them) in Ukrainian government.
No. The question is what influence far right neo-Naizis have over the Ukrainian people.
It states that he was polling at 19%. That would be amongst all parties, because it is an incorrectly rounded down of the lowest poll that he had amongst that which was 22 Jan 2021. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Ukrainian_presidential_election). The comparable figure to this 20% would be the 30% that he won in the first round of the election, not the 70% that he won in the second round.
At that time he still would have come first in the first round of a presidential election.
Nazism is more than just antisemitism Agree. antisemitism is a necessary but not sufficient condition. that doesn't mean that all neo-Nazis who follow have to be equally obsessed with Jews beyond all else
that doesn't mean that all neo-Nazis who follow have to be equally obsessed with Jews beyond all else
As with the original Nazis
or even that all antisemites are Nazis
You know who aren't Slavs? Western Ukrainians.
You know who's a jew? The Ukrainian Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (3 children)
Gosh, thanks for explaining it to me, an Australian. All these years I thought it was because of the democracy snags.
The question isn't whether or not he was the most popular candidate at the time. Yes it is.
Actually not.
Zelensky's popularity in the presidential elections has zero to do with the existence of a genuine far-right neo-Nazi threat in Ukraine.
In Germany after World War One, Kurt Eisner was elected as premier of Bavaria. Walther Rathenau and Rudolf Hilferding were both elected to the cabinet in the Weimar Republic (Rathenau served as Foreign Minister, and Hilferding as Finance Minister). By your logic this proves that there was no antisemitism in Germany between the wars.
Of more immediate concern is the power and influence of neo-Nazis within the apparatus of the state: government, police, military. And there is no doubt that this is much too high.
In America, the amount of official government support for the Confederacy and various slave-owning Confederate generals is remarkably high, but at least nobody has made Nathan Bedford Forrest's birthday a national holiday, or put the Aryan Brotherhood organisation into the US Army to be trained and supplied while still allowing them to keep their extremist ideology and recruiting.
And then, when the international media spotlight falls on them, simply declares that although the Aryan Brotherhood Battalion still uses all the same language, rhetoric and symbology of their racist past, they're no longer actually racist anymore, just because 🙄
The FBI is soft on the far-right until they commit actual crimes, but they do go after those who commit crimes. In Ukraine, right-wing violence is often not investigated at all, and local authorities have been known to pay the far-right to attack Roma (gypsy) communities to fore them to move away. "We're not nazis, but the thugs we pay to strong-arm our enemies are" summarises the Ukrainian governments. That puts them closer to German 1930 than 1940.
that doesn't mean that all neo-Nazis who follow have to be equally obsessed with Jews beyond all else As with the original Nazis
Even among the Hitlerite Nazis, levels of antisemitism varied greatly from those who had no strong feelings towards Jews either way to those who wanted them all dead -- especially once the Nazi Party gained power.
In any case, Ukraine in 2023 is not Germany in 1923 and Ukrainian neo-Nazi far-right white supremacist extremism is not identical to the Nazis. Even the Nazis were not identical to themselves: there are significant differences between the Nazism of Hitler compared to either Ernst Röhm, or the Strasserists.
[–]ActuallyNot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (2 children)
I'm sorry that you needed that explained to you, but when you compare Trump's 27% or Zelenskyy's 45% to Albanese's 44% two-party preferred, corrected for informal votes and people who didn't turn out, the difference is compulsory voting in Australia.
Trump got fewer votes than Clinton, but that's the ballpark what you need to become president. Albanese had a surprise win, but not a landslide. Zelenskyy won in a landslide.
Not zero. They're not that much of an influence if when a jew runs for president, they can't get 27% of people to vote for Poroshenko. Even though 54% voted for Poroshenko in 2014 in the first round.
By your logic this proves that there was no antisemitism in Germany between the wars.
Not exactly:
Here are some important differences:
1) Zelenskyy president of the whole country.
2) My argument doesn't conclude that there's no antisemitism. Only that there's insufficient to justify the Russian invasion.
Okay. Lets start with the government. Who are the neo-Nazis in Zelenskyy's government, and what is the evidential basis for claiming that their power and influence is "much too high"?
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (1 child)
I'm sorry that you needed that explained to you
I'm sorry that I thought you could recognise sarcasm without an emoji.
Who are the neo-Nazis in Zelenskyy's government
You don't pay attention to what I say, do you? I have never said that the Ukrainian government was openly Nazi, or that the Nazis have widespread electoral support. That's not the point -- the Germany government wasn't openly Nazi in 1928 either, and nor did the Nazi Party gain widespread electoral support until 1932 or so, and even then it was not even close to a majority.
With the obvious exception of the founder of Azov, I'm not aware of many openly far-right neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian government. That's not to say that there aren't, just that I'm not aware of them.
what is the evidential basis for claiming that their power and influence is "much too high"?
Are you actually going to bother reading the sources I supply? Am I wasting my time?
Far-right attacks against Roma.
Self-described National Socialist (i.e. Nazi) vigilantes openly operate as parallel law enforcement.
Until Donald Trump reversed the ban, both the USA and Canada refused to give Azov military support. Japan listed them as a terrorist organisation.
Ukrainian officials glorify people who committed genocide during WW2, including Roman Shukhevych who massacred 100,000 Poles, and Stepan Bandera.
Bandera's birthday is a national holiday.
The Ukrainian military openly displays Nazi iconography.
Ukraine's Nazi issue used to be of bipartisan concern.
Facebook used to classify Azov as a Nazi hate group for wanting to wage a race war.
Until it got dropped down the memory hole, the influence and power of Ukrainian Nazis to operate openly with impunity while the government either does nothing or gives them tacit support was widely recognised by the media everywhere.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (14 children)
Belarus has a Russian puppet government
So you say, but you give no evidence for your claim that Belarus and Lukashenko exist only to do Russia's bidding.
There is a spectrum from puppet government (one which is independent only in name), to vassal state (one which still retains some independence, but only within limits), to allies linked by shared culture and interests.
Americans in particular seem to have trouble believing that any two countries can be on friendly terms unless one of them is the master and the other at least a junior staff, if not outright slave. Probably because that's how they behave so they think everyone else must too.
If you want to demonstrate that Belarus is a puppet state of Russia, you need to prove that they actually have no real independence at all, not just that they are friendly, collaborate, and have each other's backs.
that retains power through "elections" that are neither free nor fair
If you expect me to defend Lukashenko as a paragon of democracy, I'm going to disappoint.
But having said that, you're linking to Voice Of Belarus as your source? Okay.
VOB is aimed at American audiences not the local people of Belarus. That's why its in English. Their funding is obscure, which suggests that most of their money comes from the National Endowment for Democracy or even the CIA. Even if it doesn't, they're still parroting the CIA line: Lukashenko bad, Tsikhanouskaya good, Belarus needs a colour revolution to bring them into the US sphere of influence.
Tsikhanouskaya is astonishingly unpopular in Belarus even among the pro-Western, anti-Lukashenko crowd. The method used by VOB to cough "prove" cough she won is laughably bad. It might as well have been a Twitter poll.
And then you go on to use an anonymous Reddit user -- a deleted user at that -- as your source that "Russian oligarchs tried to seize power". A few problems with that:
He's lost support of the Wagner mercenaries, and nearly lost his government.
Its hard to take you seriously when you fall for such cartoon takes. You're believing the same clowns who claimed that Putin had fled the country and that this silly little drive to Moscow by an egotistical billionaire caterer ex-con was the start of a new Russian Revolution. You need to get a better source of information than the mainstream US press, which always tells the truth when absolutely no other alternative, including dead silence, presents itself.
Only a tiny fraction of Wagner were active participants of this aborted march on Moscow. Most of the rest are signing up with the Russian military. I'll admit I have no idea of what's happening with Progozhin or why he hasn't fallen out of a window yet, but his home has been raided and his companies have lost all their MoD contracts. (Mind you, the contracts were already under investigation for financial fraud before the march occurred.)
No Russian government officials supported Progozhin. No regional governors supported him. No military officers supported Progozhin, and no military units deserted or joined him. There was no popular support for his aborted drive on Moscow, and Putin's popularity has gone up, not down, for taking a fucked up situation and unfucking it quickly, decisively and without having to slaughter the heroes of Bakhmod.
Even if you hate Putin for personally raping your dog and shooting your wife and kids, you have to admit that he called Progozhin's bluff masterfully.
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (13 children)
While Ukraine is resisting Putin, Belarus is becoming his puppet
RUSSIAN INFLUENCE IN BELARUS
Americans in particular seem to have trouble believing that any two countries can be on friendly terms unless one of them is the master and the other at least a junior staff, if not outright slave.
Both countries are dictatorships. The relationship is not between the people but between Lukashenko and Putin. Neither takes advice from their country.
And then you go on to use an anonymous Reddit user -- a deleted user at that -- as your source that "Russian oligarchs tried to seize power".
He describes the fall from democracy, and the laws that were attempted to be pushed through, that set of the Euromaidan protests. And he links to those laws, and he describes how the parliament voted on them outside the normal process.
That that happened and that the Euromaidan protests resulted is known to history.
this silly little drive to Moscow
It's a silly litte drive that took out Russian Military Helicopter, and a shot down a Il-22M airborne command-center plane.
How much defending hardware to you have to destroy or capture before you're no longer "silly"?
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (12 children)
Quote: "Katia Glod is an independent analyst and Fellow with the Democratic Resilience Program of the Center for European Policy Analysis (Washington, DC)." So another state-affiliated NGO doing Washington's propaganda for them 🙄
Did you read the article? Or stop at the headline? Its a long-list of assertions that Belarus is "becoming" a puppet of Russia (which implies that they aren't a puppet yet), but a complete shortage of any credible evidence for this claim except that Vladimir Makei "pledged" that all Russian troops would leave Belarus after the military exercises but they didn't. That's pretty thin stuff. Ministers often say one thing and do another.
Wikipedia is completely colonised by Anglo-American TLA shills, but even their page on Russian-Belarussian relations is less one-sided and more credible than your source.
Belarus is a small, poor state next to a big, powerful, rich one. Actually, in area they're not that small. But they are weak and poor. It has a lot of economic problems, including corruption and the generally backwards nature of the country. Culturally they're effectively Russian, and Russia gives Belarus billions in subsidies. But Russia doesn't hold all the cards and Belarus is frequently able to dictate terms to Russia, or stare them down, e.g. during the 2004 dispute over gas when Belarus started stealing Russian gas intended for Germany and Poland, and again in 2007, and the Milk War.
Russia and Belarus are close, but Belarus guards its independence jealously and Lukashenko is quite capable of saying no to Putin.
Both countries are dictatorships.
Our common political language is so impoverished. 🙁 Everything is either an "authoritarian dictatorship" (bad) or a "Free™ democracy" (good) and democracy is put up on a pedestal as the One True Perfect Political System. Unless the People vote for Donald Trump.
Dictators rule by fiat. I see no evidence that Putin rules by personal fiat. Let us agree that Russia is a semi-autocratic hybrid democracy.
Lukashenko I have no comment because I don't know enough about the country to comment sensibly.
He describes the fall from democracy, and the laws that were attempted to be pushed through, that set of the Euromaidan protests.
He describes what he claims is the fall from democracy, which other Ukrainians who don't celebrate genocidal murderers dispute. Gosh, people can have different opinions about political events, who would have imagined it???
And he links to those laws
Yeah, you didn't actually click on that link did you? You just assumed that it supported his story.
So we're told, but its not exactly clear what happened. I don't think that the Russian government has at yet confirmed that Wagner shot down anything, which could just be them staying mum, or it could be because it didn't happen.
But let's suppose that they did shoot down two Russian aircraft and killed two pilots. How does that get them closer to overthrowing the government?
Nidal Hasan killed 12 soldiers and 1 civilian, and injured 33 more people, at Fort Hood. Does that mean that the US government was at risk of collapse too? It takes more than a few random acts of violence to overthrow a government.
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago* (11 children)
Its a long-list of assertions that Belarus is "becoming" a puppet of Russia (which implies that they aren't a puppet yet)
Puppet's not a step function. Lukashenko depends on Moscow to remain his grip on the country, over the will of the people.
I did at the time. Do you not recall 2014?
I don't think that the Russian government has at yet confirmed that Wagner shot down anything,
I don't think they've confirmed shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. So if that's your standard, you may be waiting a while.
But let's suppose that they did shoot down two Russian aircraft and killed two pilots.
The helicopters shot down are somewhere in the 1 to 6 range.
The l-22M airborne command-center plane had a crew of 10, all of who were killed.
How does that get them closer to overthrowing the government?
The forces that shot down the planes were on their way to Moscow. When they got there you have one of those coup things you can have when you've got tanks at the Duma building.
I didn't suggest that the Russian Military people killed while attempting to stop them would overthrow the government directly. You're mistaken about that. I said that it refutes your characterisation of it as "this silly little drive to Moscow". But you know that don't you?
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (5 children)
Lukashenko depends on Moscow to remain his grip on the country, over the will of the people.
That's what US-funded NGOs claim. Belorussians seem to have a different opinion. "Uncle Sasha" is apparently quite popular. But then we know that nations can be strongly divided: Trump is simultaneously much beloved and much hated.
Don't you find it strange that not one single government anywhere in the world that is opposed to the US that doesn't get labelled illegitimate?
I did at the time.
Ah right. Nine years ago you not only read that Reddit thread, but you clicked on the link to a Ukrainian website and read it. I believe you. Thousands wouldn't, but I do.
I don't think they've confirmed shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.
That would be the shooting down of a Malaysian plane where the Malaysians were not permitted to take part in the investigation because they would not agree to give Ukraine a veto over any findings.
That would be the incident where a private firm run by ex-British Special Forces agents, Pilgrims Group, was heavily involved in ferrying journalists to the site and deciding on what they could, and couldn't, see.
The one where it took months for the bodies to be collected while the crash site remained unguarded and unprotected from tampering for extended periods.
The same incident where the defendant who defended himself in court was found not guilty.
The same crash where only close allies of the US were involved in the investigation, including one of the prime suspects themselves, who expressed their belief that Russia was to blame before the investigation even started. How fortunate it was that investigators were able to rely on so much critical information that came directly from the Ukrainian SBU and the MI6 sock puppet Bellingcat. Saved them from getting their feet wet wandering around in the fields looking for evidence or asking inconvenient questions .
Yes, I seem to remember that incident. How about you?
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (4 children)
The helicopters shot down are somewhere in the 1 to 6 range. The l-22M airborne command-center plane had a crew of 10, all of who were killed.
Okay, let's say that there were 20 people killed on the Russian for the sake of the argument. So Putin is a completely ineffectual leader incapable of dealing with outright treason and at the same time the most evil man on the planet who has his enemies killed by "falling out of windows" and poisonings at the drop of the hat.
This must have something to do with quantum mechanics.
Reminds me of Umberto Eco's list of features of what he calls "Ur-Fascism", especially number 8:
"The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy." (Emphasis added.)
Russia is the greatest threat to peace and is preparing to roll over western Europe all the way to Portugal like a steamroller, and at the same time a paper tiger being defeated by tiny little Ukraine in every battle, and is going to run out of missiles, tanks, munitions, soldiers and money Any Day Now For Sure.
Putin is a strongman dictator who can have anyone murdered at any time and at the same time a weak and indecisive leader who only survives as president because Progozhin decided at the last minute to let him off the hook out of humanitarian kindness.
Western perception of Russia is half Stalin's USSR in 1945 after the Red Army had smashed Hitler's army and occupied Berlin, and half Russia of the 1990s after the IMF and World Bank shock treatment had wrecked the country and the Russian army couldn't even pay their troops.
And then what happens? Let's say that Wagner arrest or kill the guards there and take over the building, and Progozhin walks into Putin's office and sits in his chair. Now what?
Is it a magic chair that makes whom so ever sits in it the legal and legitimate ruler of the land? Once Progozhin sits in the chair, does he become president, or does he have to defeat Putin in one-on-one mortal combat in front of the assembled tribes from all over Russia?
Is there a popular uprising either for or against the coup? Do the regional governors support Putin or Progozhin? Who do the army chiefs support? What does the Russian constitution say, and are the supreme court judges likely to back him or at least stay quiet? Progozhin needs at least the illusion of legality since he doesn't have the manpower to rule all of Russia by force and intimidation.
What's the MoD doing? If the MoD decides to stop supplying Wagner, does Progozhin order his equipment on Amazon Prime? Will he pay extra for expedited shipping?
For that matter, how many of the Wagner forces supported the coup once they knew what was going on? Most of them had no idea what was happening, and when they found out they were probably all "Overthrowing some tin-pot African dictatorship is one thing, but if we do this we're going to get creamed!" and refused to continue.
Don't get me wrong. The insurrection was pretty fucked up for Putin, and he probably put his fist through a wall or two over this. Unless it turns out that it was actually a complicated 4-D psyop, which is pretty unlikely but not impossible. But without the collapse of the Russian army it had no chance of succeeding, and Progozhin must have realised that. And that is why it was a silly little drive to Moscow.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (10 children)
Ukraine voted in a jew with a landslide. Very few of them are anti-Semitic.
Zelensky received 13.5 million votes in the second round of the 2019 presidential election, out of about 36 million adults in the country. All you have proved is that around 38% of Ukrainians are either not antisemites, or hated Petro Poroshenko enough to vote for a jew. You can't say anything about the 26 million adults who didn't vote for Zelensky. How many of them are antisemites?
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago* (9 children)
You can't say anything about the 26 million adults who didn't vote for Zelensky.
I can say that the overwhelming support for Zelenskyy amongst those who felt strongly enough to vote demonstrates that there's no broad culture of antisemitism in Ukraine that would support the claim that "Ukrainians are Nazis".
The people who felt strongly antisemitic, would have voted. If the country tolerated antisemitism, he wouldn't have had a shit-show.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (8 children)
Your argument in a nutshell: "The election of Barrack Obama proves that there are no racists in the USA -- or at least no broad culture of racism or systematic racism."
there's no broad culture of antisemitism in Ukraine
Oh please. Antisemitism is widespread across eastern Europe including Ukraine. Quote:
Jew-hatred in Ukraine declined from a record 46% index score in 2019 to 29% in 2023, “potentially driven in part by the popularity of the Jewish president, Volodymyr Zelensky, whose approval ratings have risen dramatically over the last few years in response to his defiance in the face of Russian military attacks,” per an ADL release.
So in 2019, the year of Zelensky's electoral victory, 46% of Ukrainians were described as "Jew-haters" by the ADL.
In any case, Ukrainian neo-Nazi hatred of Jews is probably a secondary concern to Putin than their hatred of Russians.
that would support the claim that "Ukrainians are Nazis".
If I meet anyone who believes that all Ukrainians are Nazis, I'll be sure to mention that Zelensky is a Jew to them.
By the way: history is more complicated than the cartoon version most people learn. Even the original Nazis were complicated. Around 150,000 of men of Jewish descent, including practicing Jews, fought for Nazi Germany. If Jews could fight for the Nazis, Nazis can vote for a Jewish president.
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (7 children)
"The election of Barrack Obama proves that there are no racists in the USA
I didn't say that there were no neo nazis in Ukraine. I said that there were few. And it follows that Putin's claim that he is invading to "de-nazify Ukraine" is obviously bullshit. He's invading because the Ukrainian people what the economic freedom of being closer to Europe, and that doesn't mesh with his viscous expansionist ideals.
-- or at least no broad culture of racism or systematic racism."
That's true. Most voters voted for a great politician and great orator. And it didn't detract from that that he was black.
Somebody's figures are wrong. 70% of those people voted for a Jew in the final round of the election.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago* (6 children)
I said that there were few. And it follows that Putin's claim that he is invading to "de-nazify Ukraine" is obviously bullshit.
No, that doesn't follow, not by any form of logic or sense. The absolute number of nazis does not matter one jot. What matters is their position of influence and ability to wield power.
If there were ten million nazis rotting in Ukrainian prisons, never to be released, they would have no power and no influence and nobody would care about them.
If there was one nazi in Ukraine but he was worshipped as Absolute God-Monarch whose every word was law and could not be questioned or gain-stayed, then everyone would care.
He's invading because the Ukrainian people what the economic freedom of being closer to Europe, and that doesn't mesh with his viscous expansionist ideals.
"They hate our freedoms!!! Putin is the next Hitler and wants to conquer the world!!!"
800+ military bases in close to a hundred countries all over the world, 251 wars since 1991, millions dead, promises broken, governments overthrown, nations destroyed, but it's Russia that is the threat to peace 🙄
Everything the US says about Russia is projection.
or at least no broad culture of racism or systematic racism." That's true.
or at least no broad culture of racism or systematic racism."
That's true.
Denying the existence of systematic racism in the USA? That's very fascist of you.
46% of Ukrainians were described as "Jew-haters" by the ADL. Somebody's figures are wrong. 70% of those people voted for a Jew in the final round of the election.
46% of Ukrainians were described as "Jew-haters" by the ADL.
The figures are fine. It is your interpretation of them which is wrong. Real life is not a 1940s western where the Good Guys wear white hats and the Bad Guys wear black hats and the hardest moral decision you have to make is whether or not you have to wait for the baddie to draw his six-shooter before drawing yours.
People are complicated and there is no conflict between people with antisemitic opinions, or even "Jew haters" to use the ADL's term, voting for a Jew, if they think the alternatives are even worse.
Just as Jews fought in Hitler's Wehrmacht, and even Hitler was known to intervene personally to have individual Jews declared honorary Aryan and protected from deportation to the camps.
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (5 children)
What matters is their position of influence and ability to wield power.
Which the election of Zelenskyy also shows is obviously bullshit.
And yet invading and annexing neighbouring countries is still frowned upon.
For some reason the method of throwing criminals at the civilian population to rape and murder is also not admired.
Neither is using neo-nazis like the Rusich Group.
Denying the existence of systematic racism in the USA?
Not exactly. I'm saying the election of Obama is part of the evidence that a culture of racism doesn't dominate in the USA.
Having said that, Zelenskyy's margin was much greater than Obama's.
The figures are fine. It is your interpretation of them which is wrong.
You've got a weak definition of "Jew-hater" if at least 40% of them, and likely much more, voted for a Jew than for Poroshenko.
Just as Jews fought in Hitler's Wehrmacht
They did. While Hitler exterminated their families. Some of them might have genuinely felt "down with us". I suspect some of them hope that their loyalty to their country would allow them to have their lives back. I suspect some of them were intentionally ineffective at critical moments in battle.
But this is a fringe phenomena. A lot less that 40% of Jews were in the German military.
[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (4 children)
The US has invaded dozens of countries and that's fine, right? Its always self defence, even when the country is tiny and helpless like Haiti, or on the opposite side of the world. They just don't annex them, they merely install pliant, obedient vassal governments, or smash the country into collapse and then walk away from the chaos. When America says they have to invade because "they hate our freedoms" we have to believe them. Right?
Not one single country the US has invaded since WW2 has threatened the US, or has been in a position to threaten the US. Whereas Ukraine is literally on Russia's doorstep and NATO membership is a genuine threat. Over the last few centuries, Russia has suffered at least five existential threats by military invasion that threatened their very existence, and in all five cases the invasion route was through Ukraine: Sweden, Poland, France and Germany twice.
The most recent time, still in living memory, was an attempted war of annihilation that saw 9-10 million Soviets (mostly Russians) outright murdered in cold blood, over and above the ordinary casualties of war.
When President Obama said that Ukraine was of critical importance to the security and safety of Russia, and of no importance at all to the US, he wasn't mistaken.
If NATO was genuinely a peaceful defensive alliance, they could have easily offered defence guarantees to Ukraine without NATO membership, like Finland had.
Since the fall of the USSR, NATO and especially the US have proven themselves to be untrustworthy, duplicitous and aggressive. There is absolutely no doubt at all that they threaten the existence of Russia, and their moves towards Ukraine are part of that threat. Ukraine's nazis are just a tool for America to use to push Ukraine further out of the Russian sphere of influence and to be a catspaw for NATO.
The people of south and east Ukraine are ethnically and culturally Russian. Their west Ukrainian government wants them dead or suppressed and has weaponized the neo-nazi paramilitaries against them since the 2014 coup. They want out of Ukraine and into Russia.
Self-determination is supposed to be a universal human right, except when it goes against American interests, right?
Russia uses Wagner, including Rusich, in combat against enemy soldiers, and that's bad.
But it's fine when Ukraine use Azov, Aidar, Right-Sector, Svoboda etc against civilians.
Ukraine just targeted civilians again, in an attempt to blow up the bridge to Crimea, which has zero military value, and critically injured a 14 year old girl and killed both her parents, and that's not terrorism at all 🙄
Wikipedia is colonised by US aligned intelligence agencies, so we have to take their page on Rusich with more than a generous heaping of salt. But it does seem that they are nasty characters and in a perfect world they would be suppressed. War crimes are war crimes whoever does them.
But in Russia, far-right groups are generally suppressed, not encouraged. Look at the Wikipedia page on neo-Nazis in Russia and seen how many of the groups are described using the word "was" rather than "is". Rusich escapes because they are useful and stay out of politics. We don't live in a perfect world, and the far-right exists in every country. I am sure you will find plenty of Aryan Brotherhood folks in the US military too.
Zelenskyy's margin was much greater than Obama's.
Yes. Zelensky was a popular TV celebrity and he tuned into the ordinary Ukrainian's disgust against the oligarchs and their neo-Nazis and their desire to end the civil war. I'm not surprised that many Ukrainians voted for him. 45% of the eligible voting population voting for a comedian tells us a lot about both the desperation of Ukrainians to end the civil war and their gullibility to think that a comedian with no political experience could do it.
Shame that he turned out to be the biggest and most corrupt crook of all, a protégé of the oligarch funding Azov, a totally ineffective president, completely unable to rein in the neo-Nazis, and an easy mark to NATO.
I actually feel sorry for the man. He probably did have good intentions in 2019, but as soon as Azov threatened him, his complete lack of backbone and moral fibre came out. But then I remember that he's a corrupt oligarch who has stolen billions, so fuck him.
But again, none of this has any bearing on the existence of a large and influential neo-nazi far-right in Ukraine. You're just white-washing them.
Its not my definition, its the ADL's. And yes, I dare say that they're using sensationalist language. Not every person who thinks Jews have too much power is a jew-hating Nazi who wants them dead.
I don't see how you get "at least 40%" there. Suppose the ADL is correct and not sensationalising even a bit, and 46% of Ukrainians in 2019 actually hated Jews with a passion and wanted to bring back the gas chambers.
But 55% of Ukrainians either voted for Poroshenko or didn't vote at all. There is no need to imagine that even one single "jew hater" voted for Zelensky if you think that it is impossible for people who are prejudiced against jews to vote for a jew as the least worst option.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (9 children)
He's claiming to have superpowers of vocabulary
I never said that Trump has the vocabulary of (say) the late Clive James. I said he knows how to push people's buttons. Short, snappy sentences with simple words are best if you want to appeal to the hoi polloi. He won't attract one single extra vote by using sesquipedalian lexemes in place of ordinary language.
Besides, many intelligent people write short sentences with simple words. Ernest Hemingway sends his greetings. One of the most powerful verses in the bible is two words: "Jesus wept."
You're very wrong about that.
Executive order 13526 says I'm not.
The Espionage Act is frequently and widely abused in the US:
and "defence information" is meaningless.
But under American law, the same law applies to presidents and ex presidents as crackwhores and ex crackwhores.
Indeed. If a crack whore becomes president, executive order 13526 will apply equally to her as it does to Obama, Trump and Biden, and she too will be able to declassify documents on a whim.
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago* (8 children)
Short, snappy sentences with simple words are best if you want to appeal to the hoi polloi.
"China has 1.4 billion people, we have 325 -- probably 325 million approximately -- nobody can give the exact count, we're trying to get an exact count but you have, over the years, many illegals who have come into the country, so it depends on how you want to count it." - Donald Trump being snappy
Other examples of snappy oratory from Donald Trump:
"Possibly it's one of the reasons -- certainly it's one of the very big reasons trade and things related to trade that I got elected in the first place -- I've been talking about it for a long time, along with many other subjects, frankly."
"But it's still -- we've done a great job, get no credit for it and I don't want the credit, I want the people that have done this great job -- the people that have done such an incredible job in building the ventilators and doing the testing and building a testing platform that's been amazing."
You're very wrong about that too.
From your link
1) Classification doesn't expire because an ex president wills it:
"If the original classification authority cannot determine an earlier specific date or event for declassification, information shall be marked for declassification 10 years from the date of the original decision, unless the original classification authority otherwise determines that the sensitivity of the information requires that it be marked for declassification for up to 25 years from the date of the original decision."
2) The declassification procedure is detailed. It does not include an ex-president thinking about it.
Illegally keeping government information, revision to give it back, and lying about having it will lead to charges under the espionage act.
If a crack whore becomes president, executive order 13526 will apply equally to her as it does to Obama, Trump and Biden, and she too will be able to declassify documents on a whim.
Wrong and also irrelevant.
The declassification procedure detailed in your linked order does not include "on a whim". Moreover Trump is on tape saying that he didn't declassify the documents about the invasion plan of Iran was still classified.
“It is like, highly confidential,” Trump told those present, “see as president I could have declassified it… Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”
And the charges bright under the espionage act are USC 18 section 793
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
You'll notice that it's about defence information. It doesn't mention the classification status of the information.
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (1 child)
Donald Trump being snappy
Is there something wrong with those sentences? They make sense to me. You probably hear sentences more mangled a dozen times a day and don't even notice. Some of them obviously are following on from a previous sentence and so they don't express a complete thought on their own.
"Donald Trump is a bad speaker" is a weird hill for you to die on. A bit like "Bill Clinton and JFK were not popular with the ladies." Shall we compare him to Joe Biden or George Bush Jr? Or Dan Quayle?
I'm reminded of this experiment: what if Clinton and Trump swapped sexes?
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (0 children)
Is there something wrong with those sentences?
They're not snappy.
The "snappy" line for explaining why Trump's got the vocabulary of a precocious three year old didn't work.
The espionage act is the weapon the US government uses when the gloves come off and they go full on authoritarian. Is quite ironic that Trump is being hit by it too.
After spending months attacking Trump for holding onto "Top Secret" documents, the prosecutors presumably realised exactly the point people have been saying all along: the president, and former presidents, are legally empowered to implicitly declassify any documents they like by simply treating them as declassified. This was enshrined in precedence going back to Bush and Clinton and possibly even further back, and then made explicit by Obama. Quote:
As the Times points out, "prosecutors would not technically need to prove that [the documents at Mar-a-Lago] were still classified because the Espionage Act predates the classification system and does not refer to it as an element."
Since the original legal theory that Trump had broken the law by holding onto classified documents failed to hold water, the prosecution had to find another excuse to go after him. And the Espionage Act is great for that because it is so easy to abuse. For example:
Joe Biden just admitted publicly that the US military is all but out of 155mm artillery shells, and that's why they're sending cluster munitions to Ukraine. Many people have attacked him for this, claiming that he's revealed information related to national defence to America's enemies. Which is true, since levels of munitions is related to national defence, and America's enemies have access to the Internet and media where Biden's comment has been widely reported.
Of course it's a stupid accusation, since everyone already knows that America is out of munitions and cannot ramp up production to levels needed to fight a peer adversary like Russia or China. But regardless of whether it is a stupid claim or not, under the Espionage Act Biden has just committed a crime:
"Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with ... information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits ... the same to any person not entitled to receive it ..."
Oops. Maybe Trump and Biden can share the same cell in Guantanamo Bay? 😃
Of course this assumes that the Justice Department is applying the law equally to everyone. And if you think that, I've got a great NFTs to sell you.
That's the problem with the Espionage Act: it is so overly broad and sweeping (almost anything could be related to "national defence" under a sufficiently imaginative prosecutor) that it is easy to abuse. And so it has been abused.
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 10 months ago (4 children)
the president, and former presidents, are legally empowered to implicitly declassify any documents they like by simply treating them as declassified.
Oh, ex presidents too?
You think Jimmy Carter can will secret documents into different classifications by thinking about it too?
That's kind of funny.
"In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law." - Trump 2016
“As president, I could have declassified, but now I can’t,” - Trump 2021
"Secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this" - Trump 2021, same recording as above.
Since the original legal theory that Trump had broken the law by holding onto classified documents failed to hold water, the prosecution had to find another excuse to go after him
The charges weren't changed. Crimes under the espionage act, and mishandling of NARA documents were the ones on the search warrant.
And since the video evidence shows Nauta moving boxes out of the store room the day before Trump's attorneys searched the room to comply with the grand jury subpoena for their return, we know that Trump was attempting to conceal that he had documents.
Biden did nothing of the sort, and you know it.
Oh, ex presidents too? You think Jimmy Carter can will secret documents into different classifications by thinking about it too?
Carter doesn't have access to secret documents any longer and cannot just walk into the White House to get them.
But I expect that if it was discovered that he had taken home some documents in 1980, and 43 years later they were discovered in his sock drawer, or a private think-tank they would probably be covered by the same precedent and Executive Order.
Oh so now Trump is considered the ultimate authority on the law? 🙄
Trump hasn't been charged with being wrong, or being inconsistent, or being mistaken about his failure to declassify the documents.
The charges against him don't even require that the documents be classified. They could be a menu from the White House canteen and the Espionage Act could still apply, provided the prosecutor can come up with a sufficiently imaginative story as how that could effect national security.
Doesn't even have to be that imaginative: if Putin knows what they are serving in the canteen, he could sneak into the warehouses distributing the food and poison it. Actually most judges don't even require a theory for how something affects national security, they're quite happy to believe the prosecutor when he says "we can't tell you how because it is classified". Kinda like juries that believe cops who repeat the catchphrase "I feared for my life" when they shot somebody in the back as they were lying face down on the street in handcuffs...
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago* (2 children)
Oh! Ex-presidents can only change the classification of a document if that document is in their hand?
I didn't see that bit about proximity to the document in any of your links to the law. Can you point out the part where it says that?
Nope.
But it shows that he didn't declassify the document. And it shows that he understands that an ex-president can't.
The first part is important for the trial, because it shows criminal intent.
The charges against him don't even require that the documents be classified.
The ones on the search warrant didn't. But Smith can bring other charges. The photographic evidence in the indictment show that there were crimes being committed with respect to the handling of classified documents.
They could be a menu from the White House canteen and the Espionage Act could still apply, provided the prosecutor can come up with a sufficiently imaginative story as how that could effect national security.
The document that we have in the tape recording was the attack plan for the invasion of Iran.
That's the one that they could release what it was.
The precedent and executive order imply that a president does not have to do anything special to declassify a document (although of course they can go through normal channels if they so choose). The mere act of treating the document as if it were unclassified by, for example, giving it to aides without clearance, or taking it home, makes it so.
Carter, as a former president, cannot do anything at all with documents he doesn't already possess, so he cannot treat them as unclassified if he doesn't already have them. If he does have them now, it would be because he already declassified them in 1980 when he took them home.
So what's your theory here? That Trump is a paragon of virtue who has never lied or bent the truth, and would never, ever big note himself by pretending to be showing classified documents? That everything he says is 100% accurate and he is incapable of misspeaking or being mistaken about the classification status of a document? That by merely stating that the document is classified, he has reclassified it as secret?
There is no executive order or precedent that ex-presidents can reclassify documents as secret. So it doesn't matter if Trump said the document is secret. He was lying, or mistaken.
But as you say, the Espionage Act doesn't require the document to be secret. If the DoJ wanted to, they could go after somebody for showing a copy of the New York Times to a journalist on the theory that the NY Times contains information that could be useful to America's enemies. The Espionage Act does not require the information be secret, or classified, or define a threshold of "militarily useful", and the mere fact that it is common knowledge is no defence.
And if the defendant was Donald Trump, after six years of unrelenting propaganda that Trump is a Russian agent, you could easily find tens of thousands of jury members who would willingly convict him.
That's impossible. Only Russia invades other countries. They must have been plans to deliver freedom to Iran.
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 9 months ago (0 children)
The precedent and executive order imply that a president does not have to do anything special to declassify a document
Does it now? Declassification and downgrading is part three of the executive order isn't it?
The mere act of treating the document as if it were unclassified by, for example, giving it to aides without clearance, or taking it home, makes it so.
Would this come under section 3.3 Automatic declassification?
So what's your theory here?
Trump took and kept from NARA documents that were classified. Moreover he knew they were classified, and that they hadn't been declassified. So we have him committing the crime, but we also have criminal intent.
That by merely stating that the document is classified, he has reclassified it as secret?
The claim that he can declassify things with his mind has no basis in law. Important for the criminal trial is that he knew that. Because as with most crimes, you can't be guilty if you didn't intend to commit a crime.
But as you say, the Espionage Act doesn't require the document to be secret.
Yes. The search warrant and indictment were focused carefully to avoid issues with potentially violent Trump supporters influenced by the stuff Trump was spouting on truth social.
He's been charges are under the laws Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant, Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy, Fraud and false statements: Statements or entries generally.
And it notes 18 U.S. Code § 2 - Principals, which means he's getting charged with actions of his minions:
(a)Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b)Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.
None of those depend on the classification of the documents, but the indictment details the mishandling of classified information, while making it clear that Trump knew that what he was doing was criminal.
Sure. But such freedom might have become urgent if their uranium purification progressed past the point of weapons grade.
view the rest of the comments →
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (46 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (35 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (34 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (22 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (21 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (14 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (13 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (12 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (11 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (10 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (9 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (7 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (6 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (9 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]weavilsatemyface 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)