781 Comments

I wish more people were more afraid of the Empire than Trump. Why is Trump on his way out? Because he messed up the corporate empire. He cut off their slave labor, he messed up their cushy trade deals, he exposed their phony Russiagate nonsense, and he messed up their income stream by bringing boys home from endless wars and created peace in the middle east. Biden is a puppet of the corporate empire, so be afraid of the future.

Expand full comment

The funny thing is that Trump did this stuff more or less by accident. I'm sure the analogy has been made already, but he was like Peter Sellers as Chauncey Gardener in "Being There."

It really illustrates how fragile the whole system is and how inept the "Boys at the Top" are. Promoting fear is their last-ditch effort to cow the public and distract us from their greed and ineptitude. Out of quarters, guys.

Expand full comment

The scary part is how the media, big tech, the Roberts court all colluded to oust Trump. That is empire.

Expand full comment

Yup. They ran the Russia hoax, Ukraine hoax / impeachment, social media bans / censorship, 90% negative media coverage and, last but not least, a ham-fisted ballot stuffing scheme. And even after all that, he expanded his base. This isn't over - not by a long shot.

Expand full comment

Evidence please for Jan-fisted ness in ballot stuffing? Source? Evidence?

Expand full comment

There is a great deal of evidence publicly available; are you sure you're not asking for proof? Evidence must be judged to become proof. That has yet to be permitted. I also suspect that RAH is using ballot-stuffing as a proxy for the multiple ways in which elections can be manipulated.

Expand full comment

Dr. Peter? And some discredited PA vote totals? Case closed.

Expand full comment

Um, whether they colluded or not, he lost the election (fair or fraud). Whomever was stupid enough to believe the MSM or big tech was the reason he lost. You can't collude to convince intelligent people who seek the truth. You can collude with idiots that only believe one part of the story anyway. If they want to hear bullshit, they will hear and see bullshit. You don't have to be a master colluder to convince people of what they want to hear and see. You just have to give it to them.

I can tell you one thing for sure, if the US was rid of all people who believe Trump was their savior AND all people who thought Trump was Hitler, we would have a much happier and more reasonable country.

Expand full comment

I am in neither of those groups.

Expand full comment

I just came across a video clip of Dan Bongiorno (on Hannity) cautioning Dems about the censorship issue, and referencing "Coming for you next." The comments section was filled with people vowing to cancel FB and Twitter accounts. I suggest you do the same and spread the word. It's a hopeful idea during these difficult times. F 'em. Btw, I quit FB five years ago and have never joined Twitter.

Expand full comment

Conservatives should organize a “Dump Twitter Day”.

Expand full comment

Everybody should organize a "Dump Twitter Day," including and especially me.

Expand full comment

This morning I can’t believe I live in a country where people can be silenced and ruined for their political views. Hawley and Cruz are being destroyed for asking for a ten day audit. We live in a tyranny of giant corporations. It was a sad day yesterday when America got scolded about freedom of speech by Angela Merkel from a foreign country. Today I am blocked by FaceBook for discussing election problems. These are very dark days.

Expand full comment

So let me get this straight. You are more afraid of the Roberts court and the rest of the empire than you are of Donald Trump in his present mentally ill condition? I wonder if you realize how much Trump is compromising national security every day he remains in office. And did you see the pictures from the Capitol? Are you in favor of what that mob did? Trump explicitly sent the crowd there, and even lied and said he would be marching with them. Of course he then went immediately back to the WH.

Expand full comment

Yes, I am more afraid of the Empire. Trump is not crazy and he said nothing to incite violence. He said the marchers would walk to the capitol and “greet the Congressmen as they came out”. His security team probably nixed the walk with them idea.

Do not call those protesters a mob. They were there all day peacefully protesting. Time will tell who actually incited or committed the breakin. The FBI said there was a busload of Antifa people there.

Expand full comment

Mostly peaceful protest as CNN used to say. Also, CNN pundits kept saying that "rioting is the language of the unheard" all summer long. Wonder why they aren't saying that now?

Expand full comment

You get an angry crowd together and it's hard to control them. It just takes a couple of agitators to guide people into doing what they shouldn't. Trump should have figured that out and directed the rally away from any buildings.

I'm so angry that he never learned, even after that mess in 2017 in Virginia. And he knew that the media would be on fire if someone was even rude to a passerby. He destroyed it all just because he wanted to have his ego stroked. What a foolish man.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Oh right. Antifa . Source please.

Expand full comment

I guess you get your information from Fox News. They were in no way peaceful. There are photos of them smashing things. If you want to believe that the destructive ones were Antifa under a false flag, I'm sure no one is likely to change your mind.

Expand full comment

Dang Ralph, I guess anything that doesn't fit your world view and Orange Man bad narrative is all conspiracy theories and craziness, huh?

Expand full comment

Yes. I'm also way more afraid of a hidden Tech oligarchy with increasing carte blanche to spy on, censor, and imprison citizens than I am of a dork with bad hair and makeup that may or may not have encouraged a mob that did 1/1000th the total damage and violence than a year of BLM/Antifa did supported by mainstream media blessings and corporate sponsorship.

I hope that you got that straight.

Expand full comment

I can tell you one thing for sure, if the US was rid of all people who believe Trump was their savior AND all people who thought Trump was Hitler, we would have a much happier and more reasonable country.

Expand full comment

and I'd add that we'd be left with the majority of citizens, as well.

Expand full comment

Trump wishes he was hitler.

Expand full comment

I do not think Trump is a savior and I do not think he is Hitler.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Whom did the Scots support in the English Civil War-Royalists or Parliament/Roundheads?

Expand full comment

Lowland civilization is about status signaling and genuflecting before your betters. Highland civilization is about sitting on your porch drinking from a clay jug labeled "XXX" and shooting squirrels. Jim Webb wrote a book about this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_Fighting

Expand full comment

You mean the mostly "Peaceful protesters?"

Expand full comment

"firey but mostly peaceful." The "firey" part was important, lest one think the media coverage and non-substantive corporate support was somehow biased.

Expand full comment

We all know that fire is a tool of peace. Prometheus stole it from the gods to keep us warm in the winter.

Expand full comment

The big takeaway from the last two presidential elections is that democracy is broken under our one party of two factions. Ive taken for granted the democrats rigged the primaries twice and I fully expected the 2016 election to be rigged as well. Was this general election rigged? Maybe, but it doesnt really matter, since its already an established practice and the time for outrage was 4 years ago, but we got anally forcefed russiagate instead. Seems as though there was a long game at play and suffering through the last four years, whipping polarization up to the point of last wednesdays unauthorized tour of the Capitol was all according to plan. Now were prepped to lose the 2nd amendment which is what this is probably all about. And that probably means a lot of people will have their weapons pried from their burnt dead hands once you realize a well armed militia with black rifles has no chance against drone warfare. I watched a couple videos from nagorno karbakh and that was my takeaway from that. If the 20th century is any measure we are overdue for another engineered population reduction event. The bar for survival is the level of ones addiction to rage inducing clickbait agitprop

Expand full comment

"a well armed militia with black rifles has no chance against drone warfare."

Dunno about that. The Taliban seem to have done pretty well for themselves over the past 19 years. There are other examples.

It's a question of motivation.

Expand full comment

I do not want to reply to each of your points because your level of paranoia feels exhausting to me. But one or two points: Democrats have absolutely no plan to take away anyone's guns. They might try to restrict semi-automatic rifles with high-capacity magazines, but no more than that. And if the militia has no chance against drones (true, I think) why worry about the guns now? Finally -- and this is significant -- any realistically possible engineered population reduction event would not kill enough people to make a substantive dent in a world of 7.5 billion souls.

Expand full comment

I AM more afraid of the Robert’s court and you would be too if you had any sense.

Expand full comment

Great comment. ) Wall Street, Big Tech, and the military industrial complex jumped off his bandwagon after 2016 because he was a less reliable ally than Bush The Simple, the Clintons, and Obama.

Expand full comment

hmm, Biden seems like way more of a Chauncey to me. At least the senile dumbass he is today.

Being fed speeches to just barely recite successfully after days of practice? Also, Trump might joke about grabbing a pussy or three, but Joe is definitely the one with the blank look in his eyes that would cluelessly say to a bunch of women "I... I like to watch!" Doesn't seem far from all of his idiotic hair sniffinz.

Trump at least had some media savvy (and an underrated talent for Improv that would put most Second City alumn to shame), for what he completely lacked in personal and professional wisdom. Trump's just a tantrum and a semi-erect penis, looking for action. It was his vain stubbornness that made him (likely) less manipulateable than Joe, not his stupidity.

I didn't think it could get genuinely worse than Trump but I'm pretty sure we're about to cross the Rubicon on that. God... what a hopeless mess this Republic is, lol.

Expand full comment

Props for calling out Trump's improv talent; it's an (if i may pirate the adjective) underrated element of charisma, that deeply-difficult-to-define but all-too-necessary quality for successful politicians.

Speaking rigidly from a script tends to put most people off. Not making a moral judgement; just a thing I've observed.

Expand full comment

Bingo. Great improv is a very rare talent, but if you can find it, it's great for making the audience feel engaged and every performance feel novel or even authentic. Obama made fun of disabled people as well, but Trump owning it and refusing to apologize arguably made people feel like anything was possible with him.

Your perspective is valid for Trump as Chauncey, maybe I just find imagining Joe in the place of Sellers more amusing in my head.

I started imagining 2022 when Kamala whispers to a mentally failing Joe that he might be able to walk on water "like in that movie." Then, umbrella in hand, Biden walks out into a lake and quickly falls in and drowns, as the Veep tries to contain her smirk.

That has to be considered at least a plausible end to his life at this point.

It's going to be another completely buffoonish 4 year slog.

Expand full comment

I don't think Joe could do improv to save his life.

Scratch that, I'm wrong. When he does improv, it's about fighting Corn Pop with a bicycle chain and his hairy legs getting fondled. I really want 4 years of Off-Script Joe.

Expand full comment

I'm banking on it getting a lot weirder, and more aggressive. More push-up contest challenges, more hair-sniffy. "Look, fat"

Expand full comment

Look fat... you want to talk fitness we'll go out and do some push-ups.

Expand full comment

I'm not. His stream of consciousness is pretty creepy. Now to be fair I think his mind is failing and so it may not be his fault.

Expand full comment

lol yep. Joe is the Trustifarian kid that keeps paying for expensive Second City or UCB courses even though they know he's hopeless. Just milking him for all they can get.

Or if he was in Chicago in the old days, an incompetent Joe would have irritated Del Close to the point of rage.

Then Joe would take the stage and somehow get laughs from his r____ed Corn Pop story, get called up to SNL, and cause Del to relapse.

Expand full comment

If we're all being honest, "Pocahontas" was a minor stroke of genius.

Expand full comment

I'd put it in the Major category since it juked Liz into doing the DNA test self-own.

Expand full comment

He killed with this stuff. Troll-in-Chief. I'll miss him.

Expand full comment

Wasn't that coined during the Scott Brown campaign, along with my fave, Lieawatha?

Expand full comment

He knew all right and so did a bunch of US. That's why he stopped the US from signing on to the TPP and said "Make America Great Again".

Expand full comment

Hey Grisha, I was thinking of another fictional/IRL comparison a week ago and wanted to hear your thoughts:

Jimmy Dore is the current "Lonesome" Rhodes from "Face in the Crowd." Rhodes has always been and was written to be an evergreen character, these fake-populist demagogues constantly pop up, but...

That clip last week of Jimmy going off on how the DSA or whoever "I shouldn't go to them, they should come to ME!" or something like that vibe just made Rhodes pop into my head.

Expand full comment

I'd like to be able to give you a better answer, but in truth I've never seen "A Face in the Crowd," a deficit I should probably correct.

I recall Dore having some good insights when he appeared on Useful Idiots and otherwise don't know much about him. I'm not a podcast/YouTube kind of guy (mainly because I'm a monotasker and am trying, although largely failing, to reduce my online time). Me doing my Fukuyama bit; at the end of history, there's too much media to consume.

Sorry, but thanks for asking! Others may have some more useful thoughts.

Expand full comment

I'd recommend it if you're looking for a good classic to watch. You'll never look at Andy Griffith shows - especially when he smiles - the same way ever again.

Well, just my thoughts: I'm sorta mixed on Dore. He can be funny and I like that he can get passionate about genuinely fucked up things but he almost always goes too far with his negativity. ex. He's the type that completely shits on Bernie because he didn't meet Jimmy's expectations after nearly a lifetime of public advocacy and service. Meanwhile all Jimmy does is scream in front of a green screen. So it's cheap.

Dore also has an especially bad fan community in my experience. I know that's a tricky criticism, but I think it follows his energy in this case.

Expand full comment

"Dore also has an especially bad fan community in my experience."

"I'm trying to get away from fan communities," I said while posting in Matt Taibbi's comments section.

Expand full comment

They say a man has two wolves inside him...

Expand full comment

Sam Harris made the comparison between Trump and Chauncey Gardener on one of his podcasts.

Expand full comment

Harris has completely lost his mind with TDS!

Expand full comment

He knew what was happening. The breaking up of the US and parceling it out to failing nations which has been happening since Daddy Bush. That's why the first thing Trump did was SQUASH the TPP. That would have been the death knell. And Biden will JOIN because he can be President for ever as there is no longer a need to vote.

Expand full comment

Well, I think we need to vote. Even if it is fraud, there will still be 270 electoral votes to stay in office. Republicans need to learn how to cheat better next time if fraud is what you believe happened.

I believe there is no proof of fraud and I believe there is no proof that there wasn't fraud. Both sides saying otherwise are simply idiots with no ability to think logically.

Expand full comment

So you're for a banana republic and may the most corrupt win?

I think there probably was fraud and there has been for decades. I find it hard to believe there were so many near 50 50 splits, and how come Joe couldn't pull in a crowd no matter where he went. Even those who voted for him didn't like him. Why so much relaxation on rules? No ID checks, no signature checks, keep changing the deadlines, etc. All this stuff was probably done to facilitate ballot harvesting. Why should driving, flying or operating a drone take more ID than voting.

Expand full comment

My personal tin foil hat feeling is that Donald Trump was allowed to win in the same way we know Hillary cheated Bernie out. We flat out know the the DNC cheated to make Hillary the nominee. That fact can't be disputed.

Think about it in big picture form though. Most people aren't able to think about things that way. Donald Trump being elected president did more for the Progressive movement in 4 years than they've been able to achieve in 4 decades. Most of this is actually very good, but you have to look at the next steps of such a situation.

The next 4 years are going to be very interesting, and I hope for all of our sakes, my thoughts are serious tin foil, and not reality. Our Tehnocracy however is taking over in big ways.

Expand full comment

If I'm understanding you correctly the powers that be are secretly progressives and let trump win to sway public opinion? Okay then, why did they discard Bernie and friends and shove a Joe and Kamala in the WH? That doesn't seem very progressive.

Expand full comment

Although I voted, “needing to vote” is the Apostles Creed ofAmerianity ...

Expand full comment

Trump did nothing to expose the Russiagate nonsense other than the fact that he was the subject of most of it and they discredited themselves in the process. Also, Trump was worse than Obama when it came to Russia policy and imperialistic (empire) nonsense. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/11/18/25-times-trump-has-been-dangerously-hawkish-on-russia/

Expand full comment

It is hard to expose something when most media censors it.

Expand full comment

Agree. Like what about Julian Assange? It's like he doesn't exist anymore - exactly what both Trump and his detractors wanted. I told too many people to remember that he wouldn't be pardoning Assange or anyone else who exposed crimes of the American government.

Expand full comment

Assange and Snowden are American heroes and should receive protection under whistle blower laws. It will never happen. The NSA andCIA are excellent at covering their own asses.

Expand full comment

Agree again, but Trump could and should have pardoned them or gone public about what forces were preventing him from doing so rather than spend so much time contesting election results.

Expand full comment

I am pretty sure he is on his way out because he lost the election. Whether fair or fraud, he lost the election. That is why he is on his way out. They are all puppets of money.

Expand full comment

Ok, but Trump would have stayed in power permanently if he had been reelected. I am afraid of the Dems too (Lyndon Johnson was my first political "enemy" in the 1960s), but Trump is worse. And by the way Noam Chomsky says vote for the opponent of the worst candidate if you think that one is dangerous. I think concentrating on hating the Dems under current circumstances is a case of the best becoming an enemy of the good.

Expand full comment

Living with that much fear is unhealthy.

Expand full comment

True, but living with no fear probably makes us naive and gullible.

Expand full comment

I can't seem to trace your reply back to my prior comment. Which fear are you referring to?

Expand full comment

It could be many. This delusion that so many have about Trump wanting to be emperor. I scoffed at Republicans when they said Obama was going to do it, it's only fair I scoff at delusional folks that think Trump would have. That is ultimately the issue. We are a totally delusional society now. We seem to be afraid of so many things that aren't real. Thanks to our intelligence agency owned media.

Expand full comment

That's a reasonable point, but in this case there is actual evidence suggesting that Trump is trying to become an autocratic leader. As far as I know, there was never any credible evidence that Obama was trying to do that. Have you read any of Masha Gessen's work, including interviews on youtube, about signs of autocracy?

Expand full comment

In truth, the presidency of Donald Trump can be summed up fairly simply. A quasi businessman (unsuccessful in my mind) that lives on the loopholes that only 0.25% of American's get to benefit from made his way to the Presidency of the United States where he was completely and totally unprepared for the sheer level of corruption, lying, cheating, scandal, and criminality that takes place on an hourly basis. He was ill prepared for how you have to handle all of that scum through proxy and favor, and back room deals.

Donald's failure is his open mouth nature, and the inability of those around him to take his twitter feed away from him. Donald did nothing that more seasoned Politicians hadn't done before him, he just didn't know how to do it within the system.

Sadly, Donald Trump was one of the least criminal Washington Politicians of my lifetime. He will be the first to face the music for it though, which is irony in a level that defies all logic and reason.

Expand full comment

If you truly believe that The Don was working on autocracy, then you must believe that the Biden admin coupled with Democratic control of both chambers is on it's way towards Authoritarianism. There is FAR more evidence (real and imagined) for that outcome over a Trump Dynasty.

Expand full comment

Briefly, but Masha is very very biased in all of their writing. Sorry, that is not a reasonable journalist that I would give credence to their evidence. Trump made a trolling remark (mind you, I hate Donald Trump) that the Democrats destroyed his first term, and as a result there was some obscure Constitutional loophole that would allow him to run a 3rd term. His minions gobbled it up, and the left ran around screaming that they were going to die. It's just that. Extreme delusional paranoia. Exactly like the Obama years had in reverse.

It's just like I've said the left today is very much like the Moral Majority of the 80's. It's amazing how when you live long enough and manage to maintain objectivity this shit just all comes around again from a different angle.

Expand full comment

US Presidents can only stay for eight years.

Expand full comment

Don't you see that with another four years in power Trump would have arranged to amend the Constitution so he could rule indefinitely?

And in fact he already said that's what he wants.

Expand full comment

Can you back up that with facts? He was the least oppressive President in modern history. Sure, he tried to stop undocumented immigration. But as far as citizens of the US, he was sort of hands off unless there was explicit ressurections like Portland and the DC riots over the summer.

Give one factual thing he did, other than tweeting, that proves he was an authoritarian dictator.

As far as I see it, the media says he was authoritarian and people just go along with that without examining the facts. It's like, right now, they are saying that the capitol riots on the 6th killed five people. That's garbage. One person was shot by LE. The Capitol policeman died, but the three medical emergency people that died passed away because of medical emergencies, not the protest. The only reason those three are included is because five deaths sounds more serious than two, although two deaths is a stain on the day and makes me want to bow my head and cry. But that's not good enough for the media. No. They have to pump up the hatred, by inflating the damage. It's a pure propagandists’ play. Manipulate the emotions. Get people emotional enough and they won't be able to use logic. Makes them all easy to lead around by their noses.

And bringing it full circle. I read some of the documents dumped by Wikileaks. Specifically the ones about keeping Europe engaged in Afghanistan and the war on terror. The bureaucrats planned and printed PR media articles specifically about children and women because they knew their citizens are more easily swayed if one or both of those groups are involved. It was deliberate propaganda used on citizens to manipulate them into approving the continuation of the war. Every time the allied nations began to flag in their support, the women and children articles would flood the media.

Expand full comment

1. There is no way I can back up my assertion that Trump would have arranged to amend the Constitution so he could rule indefinitely, because it hasn't happened. That is a prediction, with zero certainty. One might also reasonably call it speculation. I call it plausible speculation.

2. With respect to the number of people killed, if five people died during that event, I certainly want the media to report that. Cause and effect with respect to each death cannot be known without further study.

3. I don't follow what you are getting at with respect to Wikileaks and the other points in your last paragraph.

Expand full comment

When an administration manipulates their citizens to continue an unpopular, wasteful, unwarranted war...then that is the embodiment of being an authoritarian. Just because those administrations, both specifically baby Bush and Obama, are using soft power and velvet chains doesn't mean they are not equally as authoritarian as your wildest dreams about Trump.

You didn't mention what actions Trump did to cause you to say it was a plausible speculation. What did he do to make you come to your conclusion? What specific acts?

Expand full comment

Sure buddy. And I have a bridge to sell you so please call me. As I said above:

...if the US was rid of all people who believe Trump was their savior AND all people who thought Trump was Hitler, we would have a much happier and more reasonable country.

Expand full comment

Amen. It seems there are NO good sides here and maybe that's perfectly natural. It would also seem that there are no good outcomes to this.

Expand full comment

I dunno, it would be lonely for just 20 people.

Expand full comment

That is at least the third time you have inserted that lasts sentence in a comment. Why?

Expand full comment

Sure, Ralph... this goes right along with him being a Russian plant, a dictator, a despot and an authoritarian. Unfortunately for you, and aside from making Twitter rants a daily news item, he's done none of these things. I don't believe him CAPABLE of these things, and believe me when I say that if he had tried it... he'd have been yanked out by his hair.

It's nice to see you here defending your own news programming though, it really shows your devotion to your sad old religion.

Expand full comment

Do you at least see there is a possibility that your estimate of what Trump is capable of doing could conceivably be wrong? I mean, how can you or anyone know that? I'm not even sure what I am capable of under stressful circumstances, let alone knowing that about someone else. Maybe you have a clear vision of people's characters and future actions, but if you do, you are the only human in the history of the planet who has ever possessed the power to do so.

Expand full comment

My sad old religion? I suppose you are devoted to Trump, then. Now there is a religion. Trump the Savior! Only He can fix our country. Sure.

Expand full comment

If he was going to do that why wait until the second term? The premise is ridiculous: if I lose the election I will concede but if I get reelected I'm going to change the constitution (how exactly?) And appointment myself dictator for life? Lay off Maddow for a bit, man.

Expand full comment

Exactly! Thank you for some sanity in Ralph’s embarrassing morass of stupidity!!!

Expand full comment

Do you think I am stupid? Do you think I am uninformed? Are you really embarrassed on my behalf? If so, please don't worry. I can handle being embarrassed on my own, having done so practically every day of my life.

I know for certain that I could be wrong. Do you realize that you could be wrong?

Have you ever been wrong about anything in the past?

Expand full comment

Trump was doing a fantastic job of accumulating the power to run the government unilaterally -- until he lost the election, which has spoiled his bright future as an autocrat. You should try dominating a large militarized technologic country sometime. These things take time! More than four years, for certain.

Expand full comment

All I can say is go read on the process of how a constitutional amendment is ratified and then tell me how in the world he would get that to happen.

Here are a couple of alternative takes for you to consider:

1. Trump is a savvy businessman. He is setting the stage for an alternative news network. It's no secret a lot of his fans have been leaving FOX, and there is a business case to be made for another news network to meet their consumption needs.

2. Much like the russia garbage that the D's latched on to, this is something to keep the R base fired up until the next election. And it might even make a case for Trump to run again in 2024.

Matt's whole premise that the Trump is too incimpetent to govern properly. You believe he's an evil genius? Which is it? Trump is the boogey man now, he takes whatever form you fear the most.

Expand full comment

"You should try dominating a large militarized technologic country sometime."

I'm sincerely looking forward to Joe Biden's efforts at doing this. I'm sure it will be a vast success, not at all funny (instead sober and serious), and everyone's lives will improve.

Expand full comment

Are you THAT dense to actually believe that?!?!

I expect far more fro Taibbi readers, c’mon!

Shame on you!

Expand full comment

You are asking if I believe Trump would install himself as President for life? (maybe not a constitutional amendment, but somehow) -- I cannot, nor can anyone predict the future, but don't you have the thought that after last Wednesday, that is very plausible? Without a crystal ball, one can only try to formulate the best guess of someone's future actions on the basis of past actions. Trump's past actions have disregarded the rules and customs of US government over and over again. I don't see why you should feel so certain Trump would not try to stay in office indefinitely. Naturally I could be wrong, but have you stopped to think that you also could be wrong? Do you have a crystal ball?

Expand full comment

Get a grip, Ralph! Trump has NO interest in being an authoritarian, has kept us completely out of war, brought troops home(only one of the last 4 presidents that can say that) and regardless is neutered by the vile progressive Left and gutless turd RINOS in his party...you need to heavily look into your TDS, Sir! Trump isn’t even clever enough to think in ‘dictator’ terms!

Expand full comment

That could not happen. The Congress would not stand for it, especially since Republicans lost the majority.

Expand full comment

You have to be kidding. Republicans, after the riot, still voted to reject electoral college votes! 8 Republican Senators and most of the Republican Representatives. Do you really believe the Republican Senate would have stopped Trump in any way if he had managed to get the election results reversed? That is how you grab power and never let go of it. Fortunately for the rest of us, Trump lost the election and lost his 60 court cases trying to get the election overturned somehow.

Expand full comment

Do you u understand how constitutional amendments are made?

Expand full comment

Do you really believe that Ralph? I mean _really_ believe? Not just a hyperbolic response to someone you disagree with.

Expand full comment

Tom... Ralph Dratman is really just Adam Schiff's fake account.

Expand full comment

Still trying to figure Ralph out; I admit I'm no genius. He seems to have an intense interest in other commenters' personal data and brings it up irrelevantly and awkwardly. Age? Country of origin? Work history? Current employment status? Present location? Ralph wants to know.

Expand full comment

I do believe it and if you look over Trump's recent actions with some semblance of objectivity you might start to believe it too. Did you ever hear Masha Gessen talk about surviving autocracy? You might want to try. It's very educational, and you want to learn, don't you?

Expand full comment

Yeah I did and I'm not taken in by her shtick. I had some sympathy for her experience and points of view at first, years ago, but she's clearly just coning it in on the new cold war bandwagon.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I don't know. Maybe.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

LBJ got the Civil Rights passed, he cut poverty in half, and created the two best social programs ever. Not a bad record.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I completely agree. Vietnam was the first of the “endless wars” where big corporations got rich and the government didn’t have to sell war bonds. They just stole the money from taxpayers.

Expand full comment

Ever hear of Korea ... ... ... ?

Expand full comment

Thank you, George Hamilton, for pointing that out. That is the part of Lyndon Johnson's career in government that I am most familiar with, and was the reason I called myself an enemy of Lyndon Johnson. I know he also got civil rights legislation passed, so I'm not going to say he was a monster in every respect, but his record with respect to Vietnam still fills me with horror -- as does that of Richard Nixon.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I remember Vietnam, more than you know. LBJ made the mistake of listening to the Joint Chiefs. His wife said the sad struggle with Vietnam killed him. It also killed 60,000 bright young soldiers. What a waste!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Yes and he also warned us to never get involved in a land war in Asia, but we did it twice anyway, once in Korea and once in Vietnam. Both wars were futile and ended for the same reason: because we were afraid of what China might do.

Expand full comment

I should not have implied that Trump is worse than LBJ in everything. Johnson ran a horrific war; Trump has done no such thing. I meant to say that Trump is worse than contemporary Democrats, and I think that is the case.

Expand full comment

Sorry to have said what I did and thank you for the additional information, Dir.

Expand full comment

Thanks for your reply. I don't think you really have anything to apologize for, certainly not in that message. You raised a good point.

Expand full comment

He "messed" up the "corporate empire"???!!! Seems they messed him up. And who knew slave labor was cut off...someone should tell the kids.

Expand full comment

Yes, be very afraid. Maintain maximum fearfulness. Paralyze yourself with panic and fear. Imagine the worst that can happen and worry about it incessantly. Zzzzzz..... 😴

I’m usually impressed with the general level of Taibbi Substack Comments Section commentary, but it seems like the furies are released this morning.

Expand full comment

Have you all looked into the rumors coming out of Italy?

Expand full comment

Exactly, Trump is gone now and unlikely to come back so what now? The same jackwads who gave us the Iraq war and the Drone war and slavery in Libya are back in charge (and arguably never lost power)! Sweet. Now we get them with the added power of full blown mainstream media and tech censorship/cancel culture to back them up. Awesome. I can't wait to upload my social credit score and medical history on my global passport. The future is going to suck.

Expand full comment

You forgot to add Hollywood & Academia to the wings of the DNC. They’ve infiltrated everywhere. Anywhere in the U.S. where bureaucracy reigns, you will find the DNC lurking nearby.

Expand full comment

I think this is due less to DNC operatives being hyper-competent masterminds and due more to Hollywood, academia, and local bureaucracies wanting to hitch their wagons to the perceivedly ascendant star.

I wonder what happens when the magical star doesn't deliver on its promises.

Expand full comment

None of their fans will notice. They'll be too busy sniffing their own farts.

Expand full comment

How far did you get in school?

Expand full comment

Hollywood will always be in thrall to the DNC for the foreseeable b/c they provide them moral cover for collaborating w/ the ChiComs to market their CGI schlockfests in China. Good movies don’t play well and n China b/c you have to speak English to get them. Marvel Milan vs. Uighur Thanatos-just get the explosions and shiny things right and it will sell tix in Wuhan and Harbin w/out subtitles.

Expand full comment

Remember when Martin Scorsese got canceled for expressing his opinion that Marvel CGI schlockfests "weren't cinema?" Good times.

Expand full comment

All you need to know about Hollywood is that Three 6 Mafia (whom I actually like) got an Oscar before Scorsese finally did!

Expand full comment

We will find out. Normally the Democrats don't do much of anything. Obamacare was one big exception.

Expand full comment

My insurance premiums and deductibles went up 300% after that was passed. Not sure if I would celebrate that. Unless it evolves into universal healthcare then it might be worth it but it’s pretty sucky right now.

Expand full comment

In fairness, Ralph only claimed that Democrats "did a thing" with Obamacare. He didn't say it was a good thing.

I just don't have health insurance and took the tax hit for it.

Expand full comment

Lol, as Nancy Pelosi said at the time “We’ll have to pass it to see what’s in it”. 🙄

Expand full comment

Obombneycare.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

This reminds me of the meme going around w/ 2 bombers, the one above is the “republican” which is plain w/ bombs dropping. The one under it is “democrat” which has a rainbow, blm sticker ect... but it’s still dropping bombs. That meme explain so much w/ so little.

Expand full comment

👏 MORE 👏 INTERSECTIONAL 👏 WAR 👏 CRIMES! 👏

Expand full comment

Great, The Hunger Games minus teenagers with flamethrowers on reality TV. We’ll probably start seeing them in Queens and Baltimore tho.....

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

This basically sounds correct. Heterosexuality will be frowned on basically. Straight white guys will either fake being gay or trans to fit in. They will start having to keep their straightness in the closet. White women will become the new white straight males as they become the new punching bag for minority men and women and aren’t allowed to defend themselves. (this has already begun, aka Karen, white women tears, ect...). Of course white and some poc lesbians won’t fare much better because trans-women are encroaching on spaces they see as their own. Nothing anyone can do either as the new intersectionality world order says the most “oppressed” wins.

Expand full comment

Come on now, that won’t happen because 1) most men would only suck their own wienies (if they could) yet find the idea of doing so amongst others to be revolting and 2) sexual orientation is actually grounded in biology (hence the failure of heteros to exterminate homos despite their best efforts at conversion therapy and violent opposition) and 3) the US and Europe and their experiments with liberalism will be overcome by the sheer numbers from cultures for whom life is not sacred and individuals are not possessed of civil rights.

Expand full comment

I will never self-describe as "cis." Just not doing it.

I myself deploy "Karen," but in my understanding it's not intended to be a slur against all white women, just affluent white women who call the manager on you. If these people weren't an identifiable type, it wouldn't have become a trope.

Expand full comment

Yep. We (and I mean everyone) just lost one of the few willing to stand in the way of inspiring headlines like this. https://twitter.com/ChineseEmbinUS/status/1347247602094534658?s=20

Expand full comment

Read the ending of Fahrenheit 451 again if you want to recover some small, shriveled hope.

"You'll stink like a bobcat for a few days, but it'll be all right."

Expand full comment

...and control of the house, senate and white house.

What's the worst that could happen?

Expand full comment

Does anyone really think that the incoming Biden administration is going to magically restore civil liberties and usher in a new golden era of real journalism? The military industrial complex/deep state/Uniparty monster that grew exponentially after 9/11, right through the Obama/Biden administration, is firmly entrenched and overflowing with power and money. The last feeble possible check on this swamp, the fatally flawed Donald Trump, has finally been neutered. You may not want to admit that. You are about to see the State, at the behest of its true masters, unleash a final devastating attack on what remains of our civil liberties and an independent press, all in the name of our safety and security, against what they label to be insurrectionists and seditionists. Why they will even come after you Matt; Glenn, and any other remaining actual journalists. Watch your back.

Expand full comment

I am old enough to remember a time when broadcast TV news and a stodgy newspaper syndicate controlled what the public heard. If you didn't like what they were saying, you had to run down to a street corner in the center of town and hand out flyers to random pedestrians. If you were lucky, a few deep-thinkers plus the local crackpots and lonely-souls stopped to talk. Today, substack is the street corner and we're the crackpots, lonely souls, and one-in-a-million deep-thinkers.

Since the rise of the internet and a massive influx of user commentary (and other reasons), the establishment has lost control of their narrative. They are busily trying to re-assert it. As I said on other threads, watch out for an attempt to repeal section 230 which will remove liability protection from internet sites like this one. Without any further protection for public forums, the removal of 230 will leave the little platforms with an enormous, and perhaps impossible, task of allowing this kind of discussion forum. I think there lies a real threat to Matt and Glenn, etc. The can vet their own writing for liability but the costs of the current format might be too high to maintain.

Expand full comment

A buddy of mine saw the future of our internet in China a couple years ago-“Lots and lots of My Pretty Kitty vid”.....

Expand full comment

Yes, we are seeing the beginning of the of the internet good old days. Once credit card and other services that make the internet go round start restricting access, we will be back on the actual street corner.

Expand full comment

Sorry . . . beginning of the end of the . . .

Expand full comment

I think you misunderstand 230.

“No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

Substack is a publisher. It isn't using section 230 to avoid being liable for it's content.

Expand full comment

I’m referring to substack’s liability for content that is posted here, including Matt’s. Such content is understood legally as not being content that is created or developed by the internet publisher - substack in this case - and is covered by 230.

Content that is created by a platform itself is not covered under 230 and is not protected from the usual liability exposure. Many of the lawsuits that involve 230 turn on the question of whether content is user generated or not.

Substack is now protected from liability arising from us commenters who both pay Matt and in some measure provide a value to him with our comments. That’s why I said the current format might not be sustainable without 230. See, for example, Pornhub’s removal of user generated content to protect itself from liability. Without 230, internet platforms like substack or YouTube or whatever will have to screen all user generated content for liability issues.

The larger platforms probably are already developing algorithms to do so, while the smaller, less well funded ones are going to struggle with this task and probably will be forced to eliminate user generated content like this forum. Whether the elimination of a forum results in a platform no longer being a viable business and therefore shutting down altogether will depend upon how critical user generated content is to that platform.

Thank you for the opportunity to clarify.

Expand full comment

"Substack is now protected from liability arising from us commenters who both pay Matt and in some measure provide a value to him with our comments."

My comments probably provide a detriment to Matt, but otherwise, good post.

Expand full comment

You are too modest. You provide a great detriment:)

Expand full comment

That's what I'm here for. Can't wait for the permaban!

In all seriousness, I greatly respect Matt's hands-off policy with respect to the comments section. When the "boss" starts "liking" some comments over others, that's the slippery slope to the echo chamber. IMO Greenwald is guilty of this, but everyone has the right to run their own shop as they see fit.

Expand full comment

No. I still think you are wrong. FB, Google, Twitter...they don't create their own content. Their whole premise is that they only provide a space for people to comment. They provide a service to those independent people. The users aren't in a contractual economic relationship with the service providers.

Substack is a for-profit company that subcontracts with writers to provide original created content. They are like any other media company. The content here is not a service. It is a product. Since the company was created to provide a product, if doesn't qualify for section 530. Since they provide a product, they can be sued just the same as CNN and any other media company.

Expand full comment

Eloquently put!

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I rest my case.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Man too much morning coffee lol!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

No, he is a disruptor. Whoever is paying him to do this just wants to make sure nothing coherent gets done here.

Expand full comment

You were an international terrorist lol

Expand full comment

"Does anyone really think that the incoming Biden administration is going to magically restore civil liberties and usher in a new golden era of real journalism?"

I'm gonna do an ageism here, but a bunch of dumb kids who spend all day on Twitter?

Expand full comment

No. The kids think they can more easily manipulate Biden. They have no idea yet that they are riding currents and not steering them

Expand full comment

Watch Kulinski, Nina Turner, Jimmy Dore’s crew, Gabbard...

Seder is on MSDNC payroll now so...

TYT is on DNC payroll now....

Expand full comment

Biden is Obama's surrogate/proxy (albeit unwanted and disdained) so why would anyone expect any interest in civil liberties from him?

Expand full comment

Obama is every bit as much the frontman as Biden

Expand full comment

This is the thing that gets to me in terms of visible power moves. It must have been deeply humiliating for Biden to play second fiddle to Obama after he put more time in, and for career bureaucrats, it's all about putting in the time.

How was Biden the best thing the DNC had to put forward this time around? The cracks are showing.

Expand full comment

It really is no longer the Military/Industrial complex. We don't have industry anymore. It's the Democrats super heroes. Banking and Big Tech. Bill Clinton gave up on being the party of the people when he ran, and embraced banking. Now they've embraced Big Tech. This is how you dominate a people. The world is now hooked on Technology like no heroin addict has ever been hooked on that drug. The end is already here. We have been submitted. Just figure out how you can follow along with the herd and still feel somewhat like your own person.

Expand full comment

It's not over yet. Individuals can still choose to be moral actors. Your don't have to work for Google, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon if you don't want to. You can take your talents somewhere else. Or collect unemployment. It's a moral choice.

I'm not judging anyone. I'm just saying that we do have choices. Computer programmers have choices for sure. When the full AI is in place many programmers won't be necessary, so no one should be fantasizing that they will be exempt.

We are building our own endgame, and we can stop anytime.

Expand full comment

This "AMWL" message is talking about "Deep State" theories that are right wing in nature.

"You are about to see the State, at the behest of its true masters, unleash a final devastating attack on what remains of our civil liberties and an independent press"

We will see what happens. If Biden does not do any of that stuff, will you admit you made a mistake?

Expand full comment

Ralph, The Deep State is simply the set of unelected power brokers and their institutions, which obviously exists. The concept is independent of left or right wing. However, the concept is uncomfortable for the Deep State itself, which is why "belief in a Deep State" is the first accusation you will see being tied to Q-anon in the Mainstream Media.

I went to highschool with a girl who is now a Q-anon member, and I spoke a lot to her at the last reunion. The Deep State thing is only a small part of their world view. And believe it or not, she had some good points, but overall quite insane.

Expand full comment

"The Deep State is simply the set of unelected power brokers and their institutions, which obviously exists."

I say again, like a stuck record, "Who elected James Clapper and John Brennan to anything, and why do they have a platform to tell me what to think on national TV?"

Expand full comment

And if you think the CIA (for example) doesn't know how to whip the White House, Congress or Supreme Court into line when necessary, well...

Expand full comment

Whatever became of Sen. Feinstein's (creditable, if feeble) effort to hold the CIA to account for hacking into Senate computers? What happened and who was punished? Nothing and no one, I believe.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dianne+feinstein+senate+computers

Expand full comment

I agree with you on that point. Fortunately, we now have YouTube, so no one has to watch an anchor or a news channel they dislike. You can read and watch other commentators... such as Matt Taibbi. Noam Chomsky. And even grisha koshmarov, if he creates his own youtube channel.

Expand full comment

YouTube is censored.

Expand full comment

Youtube certainly does not censor politics, unless perhaps if you advocate violence.

Expand full comment

"Deep state" is to stable federal bureaucracy as "conspiracy theory" is to analysis of available facts.

Expand full comment

Who is really cool with the likes of Vindman running things?

Expand full comment

Vindman is a type; a fat, easily triggered staff officer deeply concerned with their status. The Pentagon is full of them.

Expand full comment

Obviously in a sense there is a "deep state" that confronts every politician in the form of personal cooperation and institutional inertia/strength. However, that phenomenon is, by its nature, not controlled by any one person or group. I certainly believe your friend had some good points. I would be very interested to learn what they were, in your view.

Expand full comment

The "controlled by any one person or group" is very misleading and I urge you to try thinking about institutional power instead. Maybe start with Jerry Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy. (I remember reading his column in Byte.)

Another way of thinking about this is that an organization can exhibit consistent and specific intentional behaviors even if nobody working in the organization seeks or even understands them. And these characteristics (ultimately disposition to behave in power-preserving/expanding ways) are often stable even in the face of turmoil within the organization.

Another way of thinking about it: it's sufficient for every individual to be motivated by career, budgets, org charts, money while the organization appears (and by all epistemological reason does) seek other goals.

Expand full comment

I will try to understand your comment overnight, but it's not very promising because, among other problems, I very much disliked Jerry Pournelle's column in Byte -- "Chaos Manor" I think he called his home, and named his computers and put in an insult for Apple in every single column but I guess he was smarter than Steve Jobs, eh?

Expand full comment

Pournelle was a tiresome grumpy old fart. I was never even tempted to read his SF given Chaos Manor. And the Iron Law of Bureaucracy is kinda painful since it appears to be premised on his anti-government ideology but I think it's correct.

There's a fashion for referring to something called the Iron Law of Institutions, which sounds more relevant to my point on its surface, but I haven't found its original form or attribution so I didn't want to refer to it myself.

Anyway, it's no big deal. It's simply that there is no need for a person or conspiracy with a specific agenda to be at the center of "the deep state", i.e. the permanent federal bureaucracy. Indeed I believe its ad hoc behavior suggests there isn't one and that the dynamic network of power relationships we have is more stable and robust in the long term than a central command and hierarchy.

Expand full comment

"I guess he was smarter than Steve Jobs, eh?"

Insofar as Jobs got richer. I'll take Pournelle over Jobs.

Expand full comment

Obviously the Deep State is not controlled by any one person or group - I don't think anyone ever implied that it was. But the wealthy and powerful are highly networked with each other, which gives it a collective consciousness.

As for my high school friend's "good points", I just meant that I agreed with her on a lot of things. When she was not talking about a "drop" or a "Q-drop" (some secret message to the followers), we talked about Jeffrey Epstein and how his crimes were covered up by powerful people (deep state). The government-pedophile lore in Q is partly true, the problem is that they are taking it to the nth degree. We also talked about "the swamp" and the corrupt Democratic party and how we both would like to see them out. We talked about how our politicians don't represent us, and spend our tax money on war.

See, they have some of the same gripes that we do about our government. They unfortunately act insane, thinking Trump is some kind of messiah, and all the mystical "drops" and other B.S. that are cult-like. One of their favorite things to say is that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago for hitting on girls, so that proves that he was the good guy, while Clinton et. al. were guilty. I think the whole Epstein scandal fueled the Q movement a lot.

Expand full comment

The sad fact is that many children have been sexually abuse, some horribly so (in fact it even happened to me when I was 17 years old). People who have had to keep that pain inside probably remember how the abuse was perpetrated by authority figures (stepfather, priest, teacher and so on) and they not unreasonably assume it might be happening all over.

Expand full comment

I'm very sorry to hear that you were abused. It does seem like sexual abuse has happened to many children and your suggestion is very smart. I wonder what Jordan Peterson would think.

Expand full comment

I do not believe there is a "Deep State." Rather, I see a confluence of interests. Democrats are the party of government, wanting ever-increasing size, spending and power. Government employees behave rationally, i.e. in their own interests, which includes ever-increasing size, spending and power. Requires no overt nor covert collusion.

Expand full comment

Ralph, the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 is not a "right wing conspiracy." Nor is that fact that several major Intelligence officials are on the payroll at CNN and other news sources.

AMWL is right on point. The impending state of permanent lockdown with "privileges" granted to those with "social credit" and the proper ideology is being imposed on the US RIGHT NOW, brick by brick.

We can stop this. Businesses like Twitter, Google, and Facebook require employees. All moral actors should resign from these companies and go work somewhere else. Talented programmers from MIT and CalTech can always find a high-paying job.

Expand full comment

I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but India of 6 billion or so people has state sponsored coding degree holders like America has fat people. Not even to mention the rest of Asia.

They already don’t need or want American workers in big tech. They Dems are happy to align with the Koch bros to accommodate supply for the demand

Expand full comment

b-b-but Hillary told me to "learn how to code"

Expand full comment

Ha! She told me she wanted fries with her burger

Expand full comment

I agree with you overall but their employees consist of a lot of high tech immigrants who won't care.

Expand full comment

You visualize permanent lockdown continuing even after the pandemic has subsided; why? Also, can you recommend any site or article that might help me understand your concerns about the the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, or tell me more about it?

Expand full comment

It won't be a lockdown. That idea is about as unhinged as you thinking Trump would declare himself emperor. There will be a new Social Credit Score system implemented however. It will be tied to Covid at first. If you want to travel outside the US, or fly? You'll need your health Passport to prove you've had all your vaccinations. It won't be quite as rigorous as the Chinese system, but it may get close in time.

All of this will take year, maybe a decade or more, but it's coming. Gasoline vehicles, and likely personal ownership of transportation will be phased out as well. In fact, I hypothesize that ownership of anything will be gone maybe in my lifetime (I am very middle aged). Subscription based enjoyment of "things" will just be the new way.

Expand full comment

Turd, that is a form of lockdown, is it not? Any limitation on travel or personal movement that is enforced by LEOs is lockdown.

There will be more "pandemics" as well and these will include lockdowns.

Expand full comment

Even AOC was talking about carbon credits, by which they price combustion engine travel and recreation out of reach for the plebes

Expand full comment

That would be bad! Do you have evidence or documentation or any facts suggesting that there will be a social credit score or a health passport, or that personal ownership of transportation or anything else will be phased out?

Expand full comment

Ralph, the US Treasury has been systematically looted for 25 years. Please take a look at TARP and other "programs." Also our debt has been sold overseas to China and others, this is common knowledge. The Dollar has been over-sold and over-printed and over-obligated. If I have five Mercedes Benz cars and then sold fifty based on my reputation, I'd have to come up with 45 cars to make good on my agreements. Obviously I could not do this.

So the dollar-based world financial system is in serious trouble. To game China and others we've devalued in various ways. The Global authorities have to come up with something new. This is blockchain.

Expand full comment

Put this into Google, and have fun. It'll be a good start for you on your way to reading a lot of stuff that is some bullshit intermixed with events that actually happened, or are in plan.

"you will not own anything and you will be happy"

I'd suggest you start paying attention to things like Davos, and the World Economic Forum, and all the cool meetings that take place around the world with a very select invitation.

As for gasoline vehicles. The UK just passed a law stating no vehicle running on petrol will be permitted to be sold after 2030. That is just the start. Yes, the rest is my surmising. But it isn't that far fetched.

Expand full comment