The All Things Political Topic - world tidings

[Amentep]

Old topic - 

 

[Malcador]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/08/trump-power-international-law

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

5 hours ago, Lexx said:

"JD Vance says ICE agent who killed US citizen is protected by ‘absolute immunity’."

What could possibly go wrong.

JD Vance is a sniveling pig man who doesn't even have the spine to defend his wife and children.

[uuuhhii]

1 hour ago, PK htiw klaw eriF said:

JD Vance is a sniveling pig man who doesn't even have the spine to defend his wife and children.

 

chance of this mollusca getting elected president are almost 0

yet the chance of becoming president of most powerful nation in history are still high

hope someone enjoy this thought

Edited 18 hours ago by uuuhhii

[BruceVC]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0mkwl2g499o

Venezuela has started releasing political prisoners, this is positive outcome now that Maduro is gone 

"The Venezuelan government has begun releasing detainees considered political prisoners by human rights groups, in what officials described as a goodwill gesture.

Spain's foreign ministry said five of its nationals, including one dual national, had been released. Among them is thought to be rights activist Rocío San Miguel.

The move comes after the US seized Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro in a lightning raid on the capital, Caracas, on Saturday, to face drug trafficking charges in New York.

The release of political prisoners in Venezuela has been a long-held US demand, especially during moments of heightened repression around elections or protests."

Also something else that doesn't get much attention, 32 Cubans were killed protecting Maduro

Why would any president need foreign fighters as bodyguards and how common is this?

https://apnews.com/article/cubans-killed-venezuela-strike-us-oas-a8d8fcbe3e825979c5d3171f9b076a85

 

 

[BruceVC]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-leaders-push-back-trump-openness-military-greenland-rcna252814 

 

As expected Republican Leaders  in both the House and Senate have rejected  suggestions that the US will invade Greenland and take it by military force. The likely option  is the US will make an offer to buy Greenland and that will be decided by the people in Greenland through a referendum

"  Top Republicans on Capitol Hill, including leaders of the House and the Senate, are pushing back against President Donald Trump on Greenland, saying it would be inappropriate for the United States to use military force to take over the Arctic island.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said Tuesday night he did not think it would be “appropriate” for the U.S. to use military action to acquire Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory controlled by Denmark, a founding member of NATO.

On Wednesday morning, Johnson told reporters he did not think “anybody’s seriously considering that."

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., also rejected the idea, telling reporters Tuesday he does not see “military action being an option" in Greenland. “That, to me, is that’s not something that anybody is contemplating seriously at this point,” he said."

[Malcador]

55 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Also something else that doesn't get much attention, 32 Cubans were killed protecting Maduro

Sure, if you're not following any news on it at all.  Rather small detail, and from what Cuba says, has some high ranks. 

[Lexx]

56 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

As expected Republican Leaders  in both the House and Senate have rejected  suggestions that the US will invade Greenland and take it by military force.

Does it even matter if they aren't asked anyways.

[majestic]

5 minutes ago, Lexx said:

Does it even matter if they aren't asked anyways.

"The Senate will no longer be of any concern to us. I've just received word that the Emperor has dissolved the council permanently." -- JD Tarkin
                                                                                                                                 

[BruceVC]

45 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Sure, if you're not following any news on it at all. Rather small detail, and from what Cuba says, has some high ranks. 

Yes it was common knowledge and reported on that 32 Cubans were killed, it hasn't  featured much in South Africa coverage but its out there

My interest is more what it means and why Maduro was using them. It was generally believed that Maduro always had the support of his own security forces.

So why would you have foreign fighters as personal bodyguards if you trust your own military? I can just imagine the understandable outrage if our government was using foreign soldiers from any African country because all the questions would be " why dont you trust our own security forces"

I believe the US had help from within the Venezuelan security forces, thats why the extraction was so easy. At least from an information gathering perspective 

We wont know until much later the full details 

And the movie about this  is going to be very entertaining 

 

[Malcador]

Wouldn't be the US without some propaganda movies about their operations, yes.

Why Cubans, maybe they are better trained than his domestic troops, but he also had 2000 presidential guard troops as well.

[rjshae]

10 hours ago, BruceVC said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-leaders-push-back-trump-openness-military-greenland-rcna252814 

As expected Republican Leaders  in both the House and Senate have rejected  suggestions that the US will invade Greenland and take it by military force. The likely option  is the US will make an offer to buy Greenland and that will be decided by the people in Greenland through a referendum

Referendum? You must mean Anschluss...

[Gromnir]

am thinking @Malcador and similar posters learned their lesson and am not seeing the need to embarrass them with their initial failure o' imagination (reasonable and understandable) followed by a curious obstinate reluctance to ignore just how different were the trump threat compared to previous examples o' bad Presidents from post ww2. 

converse, people who has invoked TDS as a response to those critical o' trump post january 6 deserve the same scorn and ridicule as the seth rich conspiracy nutters... and people who set off fireworks after midnight multiple days before or after holidays such as new years, chinse new years and the fourth of july.  it were raining here on new years, so once the weather cleared a few folks in our neighborhood felt justified in firing off their unused arsenals a couple days later. not cool.

sadly, suing kriti noem for her defamation is gonna be difficult... and perhaps surprising, her dhs post ain't what is insulating her from deserved legal punishment. maybe hurl has heard us caution people against speaking out before facts is clear. has been a few doozy examples where we highlighted that the rush to craft a narrative in the absence o' evidence has a tendency to mark the lightning quick pundits as clowns and fools... not that such happening over and over again has slowed those most egregious purveyors o' stoopid even a little. so it goes.

unfortunate, the lack o' facts, or at least the possibility o' a counter-narrative before accepted facts is widely available, results in a legal defense to slander even if such behavior is moral repugnant. most o' us believe that government figures should have facts straight before they make accusations o' criminal behavior or moral turpitude, but that ain't a rule for kristi noem anymore than it is for the clowns posting on this board.

when discussing matters o' public interest, or when speaking o' individuals who is loosely defined as public figures, you may only receive damages if you are able to prove that the speaker knew  (or should have known... which gets a little fuzzy at the margins, eh?) they were lying when they made their outlandish utterance. krisit noem has shown time and again that she is not only extreme ignorant but that she will speak before it is even possible to know a truth. as far as we can tell, her definition o' domestic terrorist is less a legal identifier than it is a label o' political affiliation, and at the moment, there is literal millions o' fox news, newsmax and oan viewers who has only seen selected video o' the incident which could be interpreted in such a way that the victim o' the minneapolis shooting were trying to run down an ice agent. go after kristi noem for her abject stoopid is no easier than winning a court judgement against your fellow boardies who misspoke about police shootings in wisconsin or the unfortunate events at Uvalde. 

is functional your right as an american to blow your ignorant load.

... 

also, and am feeling gross even mentioning, but the victim o' the shooting is dead, so kristi is further insulated from legal pain. is much more difficult (although not impossible) for surviving family members to be successful plaintiffs in defamation cases.  if the victim had survived, brought a defamation claim, and then died, her family might be able to continue her defamation claim, depending on the state. regardless, as a general rule, you cannot defame a dead person... except in texas. 

aside, even if kristi noem were held legal responsible, american tax payers would cover the damages. 

HA! Good Fun!

[HoonDing]

[Malcador]

The ICE commando was filming, video there will probably lead to it being ruled as justified I suspect.  These ICE guys aren't the brightest though, who walks in front of a car and they also seem bent out of shape due to the women jawing at them.

Wonder if they get doxed if the Dems take 2028.

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

unfortunate, the lack o' facts, or at least the possibility o' a counter-narrative before accepted facts is widely available, results in a legal defense to slander even if such behavior is moral repugnant. most o' us believe that government figures should have facts straight before they make accusations o' criminal behavior or moral turpitude, but that ain't a rule for kristi noem anymore than it is for the clowns posting on this board.

when discussing matters o' public interest, or when speaking o' individuals who is loosely defined as public figures, you may only receive damages if you are able to prove that the speaker knew  (or should have known... which gets a little fuzzy at the margins, eh?) they were lying when they made their outlandish utterance. krisit noem has shown time and again that she is not only extreme ignorant but that she will speak before it is even possible to know a truth.

I'm sure you can appreciate the sad irony for your eternal refrain of waiting for the full story to come out against the actual legal reality requiring that someone speak as soon as humanly possible if they want to safely tell lies or drive an agenda...

Edited 2 hours ago by Bartimaeus

[Zoraptor]

The shooter himself is already thoroughly doxxed.

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

has been a few doozy examples where we highlighted that the rush to craft a narrative in the absence o' evidence has a tendency to mark the lightning quick pundits as clowns and fools... 

lol.

 Yes, the last one you highlighted was someone- well, you- speculating without any hard evidence about Trump having dementia. Y'know, him taking a test was evidence he had it. And when was his first test again... like, 8 years ago, for a progressive disease... Funny how there was no need to avoid rush to judgement and wait for all the evidence to be in there, eh. Could it possibly be because that was your speculative conclusion. 

Last line from my previous post still applies, I'm not going to bother arguing with you so no need for a thesis length word soup (yep, not just Trumpists used the technique) reply.

Edited 2 hours ago by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

Yeah, but just envisioning a mass doxxing. Would be amusing 

[Elerond]

Considering how poorly maintained some of the US government databases have been, I would not be surprised if all the ICE agent's personal data is already in sale in darker corners of the internet. And when public hatred towards official rise there is always those who see it as opportunity make fame and publish data from one of the many data breaches in past.

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Bartimaeus said:

I'm sure you can appreciate the sad irony for your eternal refrain of waiting for the full story to come out against the actual legal reality requiring that someone speak as soon as humanly possible if they want to safely tell lies or drive an agenda...

yeah. am having reflected on this more than once.

in ye goode olde days (maybe twelve years past?) if a politician said something objective wrong before facts were known, there were consequences as all major news outlets would lambast the yutz for his/her stoopid. political foes would seize on such a moment and even political allies would seek to distance themselves from the wrongdoer.

sadly, in the post algorithm age, getting out in front o' the narrative with the most extreme take possible is how you get views and go viral. the speaker reveals self as alternatively clownish (ignorant) or sinister (mendacious) but those is ephemeral flaws which will disappear when the next viral take grabs the national attention. 

worst is that kinda mentality has filtered down so that we see as increasing normal behavior amongst ordinary people ands not just politicians and media personalities.

have linked previous. the two we share here is the offerings which show how much has changed as 'posed to remaining the same 'cause is specific dealing with politicians dealing with press. gotta politician saying he would never lie to the press 'cause doing so always turns out bad... and most o' the people, some o' the biggest brains in america in 1989, is nodding their heads in agreement? feels positively surreal, no?

 

@Zoraptor

actually, the last example we specific highlighted were your purposeful gaslighting about the time-frame for iran to build a nuclear weapon. recall when you selecta-quoted Gromnir, cnn and others as you fumbled repeatedly to make coherent sense outta an original bad take?

what you are describing with your gaslighting on the cognitive test is not actual the same is it? is hardly a rush to frame a narrative before evidence is available as much as you wanna smash a round peg into a square hole. after all, 2017 were the cognitive test zor misremembers as trump distancing himself from not-yet-candidate biden... so, hardly the same. our pointing out that 2017 is a long time remote and we still don't have reliable reasons for the test being administered is so not same as a few o' the clowns making up facts to fit a preconceived narrative regarding contemporaneous events. heck, am the only guy in that linked exchange who shared the insights o' actual experts. 

but you keep pluggin' away little fella. eventual, if only by accident, you might trip over a valid argument instead o' repeated stepping on rakes. 

aside, who in their right mind boasts about remembering "person woman, man, camera, tv,"

 

 

ff to 11:45ish

we still don't know why trump doctors keep giving trump the cognitive test no other President has received... and again, zor's biden excuse is pure fantasy as biden weren't running for office when trump were first tested, and it sure seems unlikely trump is measuring himself against biden in 2025.

typical wacky stuff from triggered zor. thanks.

edit:

"Last line from my previous post still applies, I'm not going to bother arguing with you so no need for a thesis length word soup (yep, not just Trumpists used the technique) reply."

am not thinking we need to point out how funny it were zor had to add this... after his triggering.

another rake.

*chuckle*

HA! Good Fun!

Edited 1 hour ago by Gromnir

[uuuhhii]

1 hour ago, Malcador said:

Yeah, but just envisioning a mass doxxing. Would be amusing 

 

that would be very post internet way to look at the situation

ss should have all been arrested and punished post ww2

but instead france recruit them to help suppress their colony

because they have so much experience stamping down dissent

at this point one should assume same will happen to ice 

when this regime they serve fall

someone else will use them to perform more atrocity

[Gromnir]

am not doubting doxxing is a genuine concern for federal law enforcement, but such has been an issue for all kinda cops for years. cops got a license to use force ordinary citizens do not possess. seems like an issue where we reasonable way the possible harms, yes?

am admitted a teeny bit surprised just how passive the freedom loving and gadsen flag waiving folks has been as fed cops in dark glasses and masks has become the norm. yeah, am getting that with the current polarization in the country, as long as the feds are attacking them (minorities, non south african foreigners, libs) as opposed to us, (white christian nationalists) then any possible hypocrisy accusation or shame is nullified, but we nevertheless thought a few more o' the don't tread on me people would be worried about what happens when the libs got power and began erecting their fema concentration camps targeting god-fearing americans.

...

not joking about the fema camps thing. serious, do a search: alt-right, conspiracy, fema, concentration camps.

 

but shame is dead, or dying.

the internet provides anonymity to d-bags who wish to say things they would hesitate to utter aloud in public. 

cops who might otherwise hesitate to twist-up an abuelita 'cause o' fear somebody could be filming them is gonna be less restrained when wearing a mask.

doxxing is a newish and real concern for law enforcement and am not completely numb to the fact the cop job, as difficult as it is, has become increasing hard 'cause who wants the aggravation? selective edited video could make saint francis appear to be a psychopathic animal molester. most cops cop get paid pretty well, but they also need take a whole lotta abuse and 'cause firearms is so widely accessible to the american population, the stress o' the job is rare worth the money. everybody expects cops to be superheroes who will run into oncoming fire to protect and serve, and given the nature o' the job, chances are high that if they make a mistake, somebody is gonna get hurt... and maybe even dead. 

unlike some, we don't expect every cop to be a highly trained sooper soldier with lighting fast processing skills and fantasy hero courage. 

at the same time, 'cause cops is authorized to use force on Gromnir if they got probable cause (recently a fed judge revealed that far too many dhs officers and leadership were under a mistaken belief that reasonable suspicion were enough to trigger use o' force,) am thinking it is not too much to ask that they is denied the faceless anonymity o' an internet troll. 

shame is not necessarily a bad thing... and am not just saying that 'cause we were raised catholic.

HA! Good Fun!