MTG is a true MAGA. True MAGAs believe in the cause, not necessarily its leader. MAGA believes in the child pornography conspiracy run by Democrats. That's why she broke with Trump on Epstein. True MAGAs are isolationists so MTG is against the Iran war. You have to hand it to MTG. At least she's sticking to her guns. But AOC is correct to not make peace or trust a true MAGA. Especially one that went after AOC and wanted to do it physically.
LOL, Glenn Greenwald still thinks he’s relevant. How quaint.
Empty G may have flounced from MAGA because the dementia patient stomped on her ambitions, but she’s still a conspiracy-addled right-wing extremist looking for shortcuts to power. Nobody should trust her.
Anyone who believes that MTG has changed is fooling themselves. If anything her stance on Epstein is merely grandstanding. As Sheriff Taylor once told Barney, “Don’t help me boy”.
On July 12, 2022, the United States House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol publicly named the following as Congressional leaders of the Republican Insurrection:
Darth Maul might help you out against a common enemy, but at the end of the day, he's going to betray you and backstab you at the earliest convenience because he's still a Sith Lord.
Same thing with MAGA Republicans who have waited this long to turn against Trump and only because he's finally hurting them.
One of the things we need to remember, as we look at the ranks of people criticizing AOC for not wanting to trust or work with Three Names (who, let's again point out, STALKED her...and has stalked others like David Hogg)...is that professional credulity requires a lack of accumulated memory. In order to give bad-faith actors the benefit of the doubt for clicks and clout, you have to forget a lot of things.
This is the same sort of reason why a number of "reporters" covering America's Pilonidal Cyst don't preface his statements by pointing out he's a liar who says lots of things. He generates content and thus escapes actual scrutiny.
Three Names will benefit from this as it's quite a nice "story," it's a cool redemption narrative for a monstrous person. Kinda like how it's a "cool story" how Fetterman is a "moderate" who bucks his party.
"Ocasio-Cortez did claim in the 2024 Democratic National Convention speech that Harris was “working tirelessly to secure a cease-fire in Gaza and [bring] the hostages home,”
And since she didn't win the election there es no way to prove she WASN'T working for that
Always remember, Murc's Law is Cruise Control for Cool (and Clout!). So you can say whatever bad-faith shit you want about Democratic figures and you'll get plenty of people happy to gobble it up.
Murc's Law was one of the most eye opening 'laws' I've run across...There needs to be a book written on it...Its one of those things that's been running as background noise for SO long that no one really noticed it...but once you 'see' it, you can't unsee it. Its breathtaking in its explanatory scope...
"He wrote, “AOC emphatically condemns policies only when Trump and the GOP do them"
There IS no better 'blind' metric to go on than being against what Trump and the GOP do. Name ONE goddamn thing that the GOP and/or Trump 'stands' for that deserved our consideration and support
We aren't seriously calling Glenn Greenwald "left" are we? And why would we listen to anybody who thought it would be great for Dick Darth fucking Vader's daughter to campaign with Kamala? Sorry, no, MTG is not welcome in the tent.
Greenwald was never a progressive, it just suited his purposes to let people think he was. He’s more of a libertarian crank with an affinity for white supremacists.
Well, I never said he was progressive in the AOC/Bernie sense of the word. But you’re correct he has long held civil-libertarian positions that aligned with the left especially on surveillance, war, and press freedom, while also bashing the left itself (this particular critique is more about AOC tactics than politics). A more accurate critique IMO is that his alliances and emphasis have radically shifted in ways most of us now see as pretty selectively anti-establishment and self serving.
Glen kicked off his legal career defending a literal church of white supremacy. Keeping that in mind makes everything he's done since a lot easier to understand.
Pretty sure he did that on free speech grounds, not on the merits of racism-he was an attorney who focused on first amendment issues. (He's not the only one, the ACLU defended Rush Limbaugh after all). When your position is that free speech is absolute, you wind up defending some really unsavory characters.
First, a reality check: Glenn Greenwald used to be a functional reporter who, over the past decade or so, has let the brain worms take over. He is an unserious person and can be summarily dismissed as such.
Re: MTG, I don't really see her renouncement of Trump as anything different than a more crass version of never trumpers like Charlie "I love Scott Walker!" Sykes or Rick "let's smear a war hero and multiple amputee for power" Wilson, and progressives slobber all over them. No! None of these people are to be trusted, ever, considering they are big reasons we are where we are today. That the Lincoln Project types do not also bear MTG's burden of stupidity is no reason to carve an exception for them.
THANK YOU. I got into a lot of fights with people who practically worshipped the ground the Lincoln project walked on. One particular dumbfuck in particular comes to mind for the sheer fucking idiocy of it all. The exchange went thus:
Me: *cites study showing Lincoln project ads didn't have any tangible effect* They didn't do anything, and they're still Republicans. They're the reason we're here to begin with.
Dumbfuck: And who is president now?
Me: Biden, but the Lincoln project didn't have anything to do with it. I just showed you the citation.
Dumbfuck: Right, Biden is president now! They helped and I'll never stop supporting them!
Then they blocked me.
To this day I wonder how they managed to live as long as they did being that fucking gullible.
I think a lot of people just don't realize the background these guys come from, the causes they believe in and the politicians they have championed over the years. Plus, they are very engaging writers, and they truly despise Trump. They have made a ton of money since 2015.
I don't think the Lincoln project people hate Trump. They're more like Cheney. They want the fascism and genocide, they just wanted it done the polite way. By the book.
If anything, they're mad that trump pulled the mask off before they could completely cement white Christian theocracy beyond any hope of removing it.
I can't bring myself to believe they're sincere in their disdain. Partly because they advocated for everything he's doing for years, and also because being Republican requires being a goddamn sociopath that's incapable of human empathy or genuine emotion like that.
I think there is a difference between Trump’s criminality and Roberts’ awfulness. Dems need to be able to tell the difference and realize a rejection of the former is not a rejection of the latter
They are intelligent people who say the right things for the moment, but beyond the anti-Trump, anti-authoritarian bent of them (which I admit is sincere and worth acknowledging and using) they are not allies. George Conway is not a Democrat, and thankfully NY primary voters seem to get that. Neither is that mouth on a stick Joe Walsh. I truly fear that many of us don’t get that and consider them allies in the larger fight for rights and freedoms, which they are not. Their vigorous washing of Dick Cheney’s dead balls after he passed should prove that to anyone with a long enough memory.
I don't ever trust the Bulwark folks. But I know there's a whole segment of progressive left that do—I had frequently seen Brian Tyler Cohen doing segments with Tim Miller a bunch. But that's how American political science works now, Democrats trusting Republicans and hoping they don't get fucked later!
I don’t know how much they “trust” them really, but they do know they’re good interviews and they’ll get a sizable audience for having them on. It’s the MSNBC version of resistance politics.
MTG is a true MAGA. True MAGAs believe in the cause, not necessarily its leader. MAGA believes in the child pornography conspiracy run by Democrats. That's why she broke with Trump on Epstein. True MAGAs are isolationists so MTG is against the Iran war. You have to hand it to MTG. At least she's sticking to her guns. But AOC is correct to not make peace or trust a true MAGA. Especially one that went after AOC and wanted to do it physically.
>> Glenn Greenwald posted a lengthy diatribe on social media that spun Greene as a principled actor and Ocasio-Cortez as a partisan opportunist.
:D :D :D
Ah, man. I'm old enough to remember when he was Glenzilla, the guy who wrote lengthy screeds on Salon.
MTG has done one thing right. Great.
She’s done a thousand things wrong.
Posts like this remind me why I don't read or pay attention to "social media" (tag line, it ain't social).
But I do recognize the Greenwald dude as the fuck wit who said Trump would keep us out of foreign wars and entanglements. Paraphrasing there...
Wow.
LOL, Glenn Greenwald still thinks he’s relevant. How quaint.
Empty G may have flounced from MAGA because the dementia patient stomped on her ambitions, but she’s still a conspiracy-addled right-wing extremist looking for shortcuts to power. Nobody should trust her.
One thing I desperately wish people would get through their fucking heads:
The enemy of my enemy is *NOT* ALWAYS my friend.
Anyone who believes that MTG has changed is fooling themselves. If anything her stance on Epstein is merely grandstanding. As Sheriff Taylor once told Barney, “Don’t help me boy”.
At least Barney meant well...
Just a reminder:
On July 12, 2022, the United States House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol publicly named the following as Congressional leaders of the Republican Insurrection:
Brian Babin (R – TX);
Andy Biggs (R – AZ);
Matt Gaetz (R – FL);
Louie Gohmert (R – TX);
𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘆𝗹𝗼𝗿 𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗲 (𝗥 – 𝗚𝗔);
Andy Harris (R – MD);
Jody Hice (R – GA);
Jim Jordan (R – OH);
Scott Perry (R – PA).
Darth Maul might help you out against a common enemy, but at the end of the day, he's going to betray you and backstab you at the earliest convenience because he's still a Sith Lord.
Same thing with MAGA Republicans who have waited this long to turn against Trump and only because he's finally hurting them.
And they aren't, really. Just ask Bill Cassidy.
One of the things we need to remember, as we look at the ranks of people criticizing AOC for not wanting to trust or work with Three Names (who, let's again point out, STALKED her...and has stalked others like David Hogg)...is that professional credulity requires a lack of accumulated memory. In order to give bad-faith actors the benefit of the doubt for clicks and clout, you have to forget a lot of things.
This is the same sort of reason why a number of "reporters" covering America's Pilonidal Cyst don't preface his statements by pointing out he's a liar who says lots of things. He generates content and thus escapes actual scrutiny.
Three Names will benefit from this as it's quite a nice "story," it's a cool redemption narrative for a monstrous person. Kinda like how it's a "cool story" how Fetterman is a "moderate" who bucks his party.
I'm thoroughly over redemption arcs. The one in avatar the last Airbender was good, but that was a cartoon. In real life they never seem to work out.
"Ocasio-Cortez did claim in the 2024 Democratic National Convention speech that Harris was “working tirelessly to secure a cease-fire in Gaza and [bring] the hostages home,”
And since she didn't win the election there es no way to prove she WASN'T working for that
Greenwald is SUCH a mewling little shit stain
Always remember, Murc's Law is Cruise Control for Cool (and Clout!). So you can say whatever bad-faith shit you want about Democratic figures and you'll get plenty of people happy to gobble it up.
Yup!
Murc's Law was one of the most eye opening 'laws' I've run across...There needs to be a book written on it...Its one of those things that's been running as background noise for SO long that no one really noticed it...but once you 'see' it, you can't unsee it. Its breathtaking in its explanatory scope...
"He wrote, “AOC emphatically condemns policies only when Trump and the GOP do them"
There IS no better 'blind' metric to go on than being against what Trump and the GOP do. Name ONE goddamn thing that the GOP and/or Trump 'stands' for that deserved our consideration and support
NOT
ONE
FUCKING
THING
Glen Greenwald can eat shit
We aren't seriously calling Glenn Greenwald "left" are we? And why would we listen to anybody who thought it would be great for Dick Darth fucking Vader's daughter to campaign with Kamala? Sorry, no, MTG is not welcome in the tent.
He's a guy, kind of like RFK Jr or Matt Tiabbi, who went so far left he started going right. Weird phenomenon.
Greenwald was never a progressive, it just suited his purposes to let people think he was. He’s more of a libertarian crank with an affinity for white supremacists.
https://newrepublic.com/article/116253/edward-snowden-glenn-greenwald-julian-assange-what-they-believe
Well, I never said he was progressive in the AOC/Bernie sense of the word. But you’re correct he has long held civil-libertarian positions that aligned with the left especially on surveillance, war, and press freedom, while also bashing the left itself (this particular critique is more about AOC tactics than politics). A more accurate critique IMO is that his alliances and emphasis have radically shifted in ways most of us now see as pretty selectively anti-establishment and self serving.
Not to mention, he is just insufferable.
Funny how Glennie has "forgotten" that MTG stalked AOC.
Glen kicked off his legal career defending a literal church of white supremacy. Keeping that in mind makes everything he's done since a lot easier to understand.
Pretty sure he did that on free speech grounds, not on the merits of racism-he was an attorney who focused on first amendment issues. (He's not the only one, the ACLU defended Rush Limbaugh after all). When your position is that free speech is absolute, you wind up defending some really unsavory characters.
He's also said that he did it because he really hated the people bringing the suit against the klansmen.
First, a reality check: Glenn Greenwald used to be a functional reporter who, over the past decade or so, has let the brain worms take over. He is an unserious person and can be summarily dismissed as such.
Re: MTG, I don't really see her renouncement of Trump as anything different than a more crass version of never trumpers like Charlie "I love Scott Walker!" Sykes or Rick "let's smear a war hero and multiple amputee for power" Wilson, and progressives slobber all over them. No! None of these people are to be trusted, ever, considering they are big reasons we are where we are today. That the Lincoln Project types do not also bear MTG's burden of stupidity is no reason to carve an exception for them.
THANK YOU. I got into a lot of fights with people who practically worshipped the ground the Lincoln project walked on. One particular dumbfuck in particular comes to mind for the sheer fucking idiocy of it all. The exchange went thus:
Me: *cites study showing Lincoln project ads didn't have any tangible effect* They didn't do anything, and they're still Republicans. They're the reason we're here to begin with.
Dumbfuck: And who is president now?
Me: Biden, but the Lincoln project didn't have anything to do with it. I just showed you the citation.
Dumbfuck: Right, Biden is president now! They helped and I'll never stop supporting them!
Then they blocked me.
To this day I wonder how they managed to live as long as they did being that fucking gullible.
I think a lot of people just don't realize the background these guys come from, the causes they believe in and the politicians they have championed over the years. Plus, they are very engaging writers, and they truly despise Trump. They have made a ton of money since 2015.
I don't think the Lincoln project people hate Trump. They're more like Cheney. They want the fascism and genocide, they just wanted it done the polite way. By the book.
If anything, they're mad that trump pulled the mask off before they could completely cement white Christian theocracy beyond any hope of removing it.
I think they are sincere in their Trump disdain, but I also think his re-election was the best thing that could have happened to their wallets.
I can't bring myself to believe they're sincere in their disdain. Partly because they advocated for everything he's doing for years, and also because being Republican requires being a goddamn sociopath that's incapable of human empathy or genuine emotion like that.
Well, whatever the truth is about that doesn't make them less obnoxious.
I think there is a difference between Trump’s criminality and Roberts’ awfulness. Dems need to be able to tell the difference and realize a rejection of the former is not a rejection of the latter
OMG the love for the Bulwark people, I don't get it.
They are intelligent people who say the right things for the moment, but beyond the anti-Trump, anti-authoritarian bent of them (which I admit is sincere and worth acknowledging and using) they are not allies. George Conway is not a Democrat, and thankfully NY primary voters seem to get that. Neither is that mouth on a stick Joe Walsh. I truly fear that many of us don’t get that and consider them allies in the larger fight for rights and freedoms, which they are not. Their vigorous washing of Dick Cheney’s dead balls after he passed should prove that to anyone with a long enough memory.
I don't ever trust the Bulwark folks. But I know there's a whole segment of progressive left that do—I had frequently seen Brian Tyler Cohen doing segments with Tim Miller a bunch. But that's how American political science works now, Democrats trusting Republicans and hoping they don't get fucked later!
It's the non-elected version of the Charlie Brown and the football routine democratic leadership in Congress does all the time.
I don’t know how much they “trust” them really, but they do know they’re good interviews and they’ll get a sizable audience for having them on. It’s the MSNBC version of resistance politics.