The Russians could easily see the issue this way as well. The West has been marching eastward despite prior NATO assurances it would not move one inch past Eastern Germany. But has been marching, albeit a long march, for over 25 years further eastward. Nine years ago that march reached Ukraine, with a coup, and was marching Ukraine further, under the auspices of a Biden-Obama corruption, toward NATO, article 5 membership, despite repeated diplomatic injunctions stating that would not be acceptable. Regardless, the West, even under Trump, marched weapons into Ukraine for the past 9 years, past a "Minsk" agreement, steadily arming it for what looked to be the most forward position for NATO, defacto, since 1992 when Russia collapsed under the drunk Yeltsin. By comparison, if you want to go there, a certain Western pseudo-elected leader had built up troops on the most forward position it had attained with Russia, with intent, we found out, to use the forward position to launch a blitzkrieg, having used a prior treaty as cover to march those troops, stealthily, to that forward position, and to arm them to the teeth despite the treaty. Fast forward some decades, the ideological children of that pseudo-elected leader were breaking a treaty, called Minsk, which was basically a cease fire, using it as cover to stealthily re-arm over a longer time horizon, to give themselves a chance to resume the conflict. Fast forward to 2020, the West obtained yet another pseudo-elected leader, who would resume his prior shenanigans in Ukraine, while Ukraine increased its conflict with Russian speaking regions of Ukraine, going so far as to shell it with artillery. Nip it in the bud? Putin has expressed regrets he allowed this to metastasize as far as it did, with the ultimate target looking a lot like Moscow itself, and not just the eastern regions of Ukraine, the most Russian regions . Some regrets, for example, he allowed himself to be deceived by the Minsk treaty, only for it to be used as a cease fire for further rearmament. Comparisons? The ideological children of a certain pseudo elected leader had maneuvered themselves, armed to the teeth, into an extremely forward position toward Moscow, and had sullied any reputation for trustability that it may once have had. By coincidence, the current leader of the West, selected, not elected, with his own trustability issues, kept the puscht pushing...until Russia decided to nip it in the bud, having delayed other opportunities to nip it in the bud. If you are in the West, you only hear the western version of this narrative, yet another coincidence with a certain regime that skunked it's way to the top using "democracy" only to betray it with lies, and take over as a dictatorship over a long, 7 year march of stealth armament toward war. That regime had its own PR machine administered by colorful personalities at the top, which furthered it's agenda through censorship, and ultimately through the fear of a weaponized bureaucracy. Very much resembling the western machine of today. So that's why you only see one side.of the issue.
Well ... for decades these hideaway offices were given to the top U.S. House minority leaders. Forcing them out of these offices breaks with long tradition. I am sure the Democrats will return the favor when they are back in the majority.
Jim Jordan gets the kiss of death. Trump seeks to reassert himself as GOP kingmaker in House speaker fight https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/06/politics/donald-trump-jim-jordan-house-chaos/index.html There was only one way the chaos in the Republican-led House – likened Thursday by one of its members to a “stupid clown car” – could get more extreme. Enter Donald Trump. The ex-president dived into the mayhem following the ouster of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, characteristically seeking to cast himself as kingmaker and to steal the spotlight for himself. On a day of drama that recalled the pandemonium inside the Trump White House, the ex-president’s camp floated rumors of his potential first visit to the US Capitol since his mob ransacked it on January 6, 2021. Then Trump teased the possibility that he could even step in as speaker himself on an interim basis. But the ex-president’s biggest bombshell was still to come – shortly after midnight, he endorsed Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan for the job. “He will be a GREAT Speaker of the House, & has my Complete & Total Endorsement!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social network in a post that spent more time lauding Jordan’s prowess as a student wrestler than his political career. The Ohio Republican, who is one of the most polarizing figures in Washington and one of Trump’s most loyal attack dogs, is playing a key role in an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. Jordan, who is running against Republican House Majority leader Steve Scalise of Louisiana for the top job, would likely augur a new period of fierce combat with the White House if he wins the speakership. He has opposed the US lifeline of arms and ammunition to Ukraine, and a Republican House majority led by Jordan would likely increase the chances of a government shutdown next month in a showdown over spending with Democrats. But Jordan’s candidacy – and a Trump endorsement – will likely alarm more moderate Republicans on whose seats the thin GOP majority was built and who fear voters in their districts will be alienated by Trump on the top of the ticket in 2024. The backing of these and other centrist Republicans could be critical in the race between Jordan and Scalise, the latter of whom may have more appeal, especially with major donors, outside the far-right of the party than Jordan. Scalise, who survived a 2017 shooting at a congressional baseball practice and has recently been treated for blood cancer, is widely popular in the conference. He has also voted in favor of more aid to Ukraine – a factor that is important for some of the moderate Republicans who are closer to the GOP’s traditional hawkish internationalism than Trump’s “Make America Great Again” nationalism. Plans to hold a joint interview between Jordan and Scalise on Fox News on Monday – a day before a scheduled meeting with the House GOP conference – were quickly upended after several House Republicans reacted angrily to the plan, with one calling it “insanity” and another saying it will turn the speaker’s race into a “circus,” CNN’s Melanie Zanona reported. Facing blowback, Jordan said he’ll speak to the conference before participating, throwing the timing of the Fox event into question. Jordan “believes it is crucial to meet with the GOP conference before the event,” a spokesman said Friday. (More at above url)
Weird developments in the selection of the next speaker developing… Trump “endorsed” Jim Jordan for speaker. Now would be a good time for Trump’s challengers to endorse someone else because if the challenger to Jordan wins it’s a win for whoever endorses them and if Jordan wins they hang whatever Jordan does around Trump’s neck for the foreseeable future.
Great point Overnight! But if I may correct your use of the English language: So nipping it in the bud early, and all that. Keep up the good work.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/speaker-jordan-bring-141013906.html Six Reasons Why Liberals Should Salivate at a Speaker Jordan Michael Tomasky Fri, October 6, 2023 at 4:10 PM GMT+2·6 min read You’re familiar with the old leftist phrase “The worse, the better.” It means the worse things get, the better for our side. It’s often attributed to Lenin, but it looks like it was actually uttered by Georgi Plekhanov, a Marxist theoretician who opposed Lenin but had the good fortune to die of tuberculosis before Comrade Ulyanov could have him carted off to Siberia and shot. The worse the material conditions of the working class under the czar, he argued, the more likely it is they’ll embrace revolution. When I was younger, I tried to believe that this was true. But reality, I found, usually subscribed to the dictum “The worse, the worse.” That is, every bad thing that happened in politics, every victory of the right, usually just led to more victories. There was no moment when the working class woke up and saw what a ruse it all was. When the economic meltdown happened in 2008, some people on the broad left thought maybe, finally, here was the moment when the people would rise up and demand a new economic paradigm driven by more government intervention. But instead of getting that, we got the Tea Party. The left did rebound over the next decade, but that was because of long, hard work by activists in movements like the Fight for 15 and by thinkers like the new generation of economists who’ve done so much to remake that profession. It had nothing to do with Plekhanov. However: We who analyze politics for a living must be careful not to rely too much on past patterns; we risk being generals fighting the last war. And it’s with that in mind that I think the possibility of Jim Jordan becoming speaker of the House could finally prove old Plekhanov right. Jordan would be a disaster as speaker. He’d be a disaster for the country, which is bad, but actually I don’t think he could really do that much damage, with Democrats holding the Senate and a Democrat in the White House. No—the real disaster would be for the Republican Party. So while I’m not—let me be clear—exactly cheering on this outcome, I certainly see some big, bright silver linings. Why? Let us count the ways. First, speakers traditionally work their way up, slowly building relationships, doing favors, raising money. Jordan has surely done some of that, but it’s not his real calling card. His real calling card is that he’s a right-wing media star who has made himself memorable and notable with his obnoxious sneer, his wild rhetoric and charges, his sportscoat-less swagger at committee hearings, and the like. I’m obviously not a GOP House caucus insider, but I’d be shocked if he’s bothered to build relationships beyond those that have been useful to him. Second, he has zero, and I mean zero, relationships with Democrats. Kevin McCarthy didn’t have many either, but that just proves my point, because look what happened to him: If he’d bothered to build some relationships across the aisle, a handful of Democrats would have voted “present” this week, and he’d still be speaker. The House minority is pretty powerless, but it isn’t completely powerless. There are times when the speaker has to cut a deal with the minority leader. Do you see Jim Jordan doing that? Third, does he have any kind of relationship with Mitch McConnell? Jordan said this week it’s “fine” and “good.” Um … sure. McConnell has done his share to burn down the Senate, Lord knows, but compared to people like Jordan, he’s Arthur Vandenberg. Cynical and slippery though he is, McConnell at least believes in a kind of old-school decorum that Jordan has utterly rejected. They’re stylistically polar opposites. And then there’s Ukraine aid, which McConnell backs and Jordan staunchly opposes. Fourth, he’s going to make promises about cutting spending that he won’t be able to keep. This in no small part is what brought down the last three Republican speakers—they talked a big game about shrinking government, but they didn’t deliver because they were fundamentally lying. When Republicans say, “We’re going to cut government,” they mean domestic discretionary spending, which is less than 15 percent of the budget. Drastic cuts to those programs are unpopular, so there just isn’t that much to cut. Speaker Jordan will bump up against this reality just as Speakers Boehner, Ryan, and McCarthy did. Fifth, what did Jordan know about January 6? Liz Cheney just said that Jordan “knew more” about Trump’s January 6 plans “than any other” member of Congress. “Jim Jordan was involved, was part of the conspiracy in which Donald Trump was engaged as he attempted to overturn the election,” she said in a speech in Minnesota. If he becomes speaker and Democrats are doing their job, they’ll say “Jim Jordan” and “January 6” with the frequency that Rudy Giuliani used to say “9/11.” The only coup against the United States ever led by one of its major political parties will hang like stink on the GOP. Sixth … ah, the sixth one! This is the best. Back in June, the Supreme Court ruled that a lawsuit against Ohio State University, brought by former athletes in the wrestling program who accused a university doctor of serial sexual abuse, could move forward. The plaintiffs are pressing ahead to depose everyone who might have knowledge of the situation. That would include former assistant coach Jim Jordan. He of course denies knowledge of any abuse. Well, a lawsuit in which he is compelled to answer questions under oath might finally settle things. If he’s telling the truth, he’s telling the truth. If he’s not … he coached there so many years ago that the statute of limitations probably prevents him from being criminally charged. But if—if—it is revealed that he knew something and said nothing, is that the man the Republicans really want leading them? That’s a bit speculative, but the first five reasons are not. Jordan has shown none of the skills that being a good speaker normally requires. Of course, today’s GOP is not a normal political party. He will “succeed” in the sense that he will adequately represent all the extreme and unhinged things the party stands for. But eventually, a speaker confronts reality in the form of process: the need to pass spending bills and cut deals with the Senate and the White House. Everything about Jordan’s career suggests that he will fail operatically at this. The question, to return to Tovarich Plekhanov’s formulation, is whether those crucial slivers of the voting public will recognize it and turn on the GOP. It’s hard to say. But let’s put it this way. He’s been a lightning rod his entire career. The one idea with which he is most closely associated, impeachment of Joe Biden, is broadly unpopular—even 60 percent of independents oppose it. His scowling visage is the true face of the GOP. Let America see it.