[andy popp]

We already have apocalyptic fires, now we can have an apocalyptic war to go along with them. Oh, happy day!

[TobyD]

We already have apocalyptic fires, now we can have an apocalyptic war to go along with them. Oh, happy day!

We can only hope he's thought carefully about the consequences, and has a clear plan for foreign policy, and the inevitable Iranian retaliation. Or possibly, he just did it on a whim because he thought it'd play well with his voting base. I wonder which is closer to the truth....

[andy popp]

We already have apocalyptic fires, now we can have an apocalyptic war to go along with them. Oh, happy day!

We can only hope he's thought carefully about the consequences, and has a clear plan for foreign policy, and the inevitable Iranian retaliation. Or possibly, he just did it on a whim because he thought it'd play well with his voting base. I wonder which is closer to the truth....

 

[SA Chris]

Can i bet on b) please.

[BrutusTheBear]

  wonder where he got the idea?!

[TobyD]

Multiple tweets also saying what your video clip does, that Obama can't negotiate,  and will choose war because hes weak; it wont mean anything to his base, that Obama negotiated the nuclear deal from which trump has withdrawn,  and manifestly did not go to war. Trump hasn't yet either, but I  the next year, we'll find out if hes seriously miscalculated or has actually weakened the Iranian regime. My fear is that they may retaliate through European targets as they're likely to be easier to hit.

[tomtom]

Is this a play straight out of house of cards? Declare war to win an election? (I know it’s really really not that simple...)

[TobyD]

A thorough, though perhaps slightly melodramatic evisceration of the impeachment process.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/25/trump-legacy-end-of-trust-in-democracy-simon-tisdall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

[andy popp]

I don't think it's melodramatic. I think the sign's for American democracy are grave. The Republicans are determined to turn this trial into a travesty, and through a gerrymandered majority they have the means to do so. Senior Republican senators such as McConnell and Graham declared weeks ago that they had no intention of acting as the impartial jurors they are meant to be (despite being required to swear and oath at the beginning to of the proceedings). They will acquit, no matter what evidence is presented. And then they will crow and gloat about it, revelling in the subversion of the rule of law, and their diehard supporters will lap it up.

Elsewhere, wherever and whenever they can, they will gerrymander (Dems are not innocent of this either), suppress black and brown votes, defend the no longer fit for purpose Electoral College, and pack courts at all levels with the incompetent and unqualified.

He will be acquitted. I doubt one Republican will break rank. He will, I think, win again in November. Impeachment is doomed and will probably play a part in sinking whoever becomes the Democratic candidate. But I still think they were right to do it. The amount and weight of the evidence in the public domain had become so overwhelming that ignore it would have been to say, in effect, that the rule of law no longer counts for anything. However futile it is, this impeachment represents an attempt to stand for something. The Republicans have shown they have no principles beyond  power, for which they will be rewarded. American democracy is deeply impoverished.

[TobyD]

I don't think it's melodramatic ... American democracy is deeply impoverished.

I don't disagree with a word you've said Andy. I'd only add that I don't think it's only American democracy. 
Johnson seems to have avoided the issue of his siphoning public money to the model he was having an affair with,  Cummings has similarly dodged the electoral commission investigation into the conduct of the vote leave campaign.  The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

Democracy is on the wane,  at the behest of gangster capitalism dressed up as populist movement.  'Make America Great', 'Get Brexit Done '; the will of the people is only a slide towards a Putinesque state.

[mrjonathanr]

Cummings has similarly dodged the electoral commission investigation into the conduct of the vote leave campaign.

Cummings is still (!) in contempt of parliament, some 18 months after being found so:
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/technology/data/news/102824/vote-leave-boss-dominic-cummings-found-contempt-parliament-over

What was that you were saying about democracy in decline..?

[sdm]

The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

It would be nice if they tried. The constant lies, bullshit and exaggerations are only effective because the majority of the media parrots them back all the time without scrutiny or fact checking.

They couldn't get away with it without a complicit media.

[TobyD]

The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

It would be nice if they tried. The constant lies, bullshit and exaggerations are only effective because the majority of the media parrots them back all the time without scrutiny or fact checking.

They couldn't get away with it without a complicit media.

This is manifestly not true.  The BBC routinely checks figures and claims.  I hardly heard a single report in the whole election campaign that didn't point out that there would not be 40 new hospitals, for  example.
Rather more on topic,  the Washington Post has a running total of Trump's  lies in office. 

[andy popp]

It is true of parts of the media in the US though. Most people get their news from an extremely limited range of sources, and if the source the rely on is Fox News then they will almost never hear Trump's narrative challenged. I've spoken to numerous people about watching a relative or friend change dramatically after turning to Fox.

[Offwidth]

The UK government has made a habit of repeating proven lies so often that the media gets tired of trying to refute them.

It would be nice if they tried. The constant lies, bullshit and exaggerations are only effective because the majority of the media parrots them back all the time without scrutiny or fact checking.

They couldn't get away with it without a complicit media.

This is manifestly not true.  The BBC routinely checks figures and claims.  I hardly heard a single report in the whole election campaign that didn't point out that there would not be 40 new hospitals, for  example.
Rather more on topic,  the Washington Post has a running total of Trump's  lies in office.

I'd say the BBC dishonestly played it both ways as there were real threats over their shoulder ... most tory politicians got a really easy ride in the peal time interviews in the election and largely avoided in depth challenge that few ordinary viewers watch (Newsnight etc).... they then point to the fact checks that very few read and shows few watch to show their wonderful impartiality and journalistic quality. Its most important that liars are pulled up on peak-time TV news that people actually watch and PMs need public shaming for not attending election debates on the national broadcaster. The BBC will now reap what they helped sow and likely get gutted by this scumbag government.

Teresa Villiers was on Countryfile yesteday (we watched for the climbing, caving and Bamford Angler's Rest clips) and said all farming subsidies and protections would remain and they would get wonderful new deals with other countries. Well thats intersting said the BBC specialist commentator to pure fantasy.

[TobyD]

Offwidth, that comes across as a rather bad tempered post, however you meant it. I don't understand the lefts obsession with trashing the media at every opportunity.
People on the right are equally convinced that the BBC is against them, does it not strike you that they're doing something right? I think people do read the fact checking things, not everyone is a foolish automaton.
Anyway this is rather off topic, I'd certainly agree with Andy in that the media in the US is far more partial and in parts willing to accept and propagate bare faced lies.
If you trash the BBC, you won't get some perfect arbiter, you'll get Fox News.

[tomtom]

Equally Toby, the BBC are not perfect examples of a media organisation - and they made several fuckups during the election coverage (the edits to JC cenetaph for example - and others).

Whether intentional or not they deserve to be called out / picked up for this and their other mistakes. We should not just let things slide otherwise we'll end up with XYZ... You could argue that is what has got us into the present state of politics!

[galpinos]

Equally Toby, the BBC are not perfect examples of a media organisation - and they made several fuckups during the election coverage (the edits to JC cenetaph for example - and others).

They surpassed themselves on the news at ten last night, showing footage of Le Bron James instead of Bryant.

[spidermonkey09]

I don't understand the lefts obsession with trashing the media at every opportunity.

If you trash the BBC, you won't get some perfect arbiter, you'll get Fox News.

As I think you and I have discussed further up this very thread, this comes down to whether or not you think there is a systemic bias at play in the media against leftist thought. You clearly don't; thats fine, but don't pretend you don't understand why people on the left have a problem.

As TTT said, the BBC have had a seriously bad few months. You know this as well as I, but if you really need the evidence I'll make a list this evening. I'd be interested in seeing whether a comparable list could be compiled detailing supposed BBC bias *in favour* of the left. No one will be able to, because it doesn't exist.

I am a massive defender of the BBC, I don't want it gone. I think the license fee is great value for money. Equally, I want it to actually do what its supposed to and be politically neutral. Its possible to hold both those views at the same time I think.

[teestub]

They surpassed themselves on the news at ten last night, showing footage of Le Bron James instead of Bryant.

Ah ha, this was obviously a cunning ploy to pretend to be incompetent,  and therefore mask their Machiavellian pro Tory anti Corbyn editing practices... or something. 

[Ru]

As TTT said, the BBC have had a seriously bad few months. You know this as well as I, but if you really need the evidence I'll make a list this evening. I'd be interested in seeing whether a comparable list could be compiled detailing supposed BBC bias *in favour* of the left. No one will be able to, because it doesn't exist.

Apart from listening to radio 4 on the way to work sometimes, it's been a long time since I've watched or listened to anything on the BBC, so I can't say anything about bias from experience. But I do read a broad political cross section of online media and always browse the comments sections, in which both the "left" and "right" (inverted commas because I think that dividing political thought into two oppositely defined camps is unhelpful) both think the BBC is biased in the opposite side's favour. There are regular calls for it to be disbanded in the Telegraph for being leftwards biased, for example. If the BBC really does have a rightwing bias how can it have done it so badly?

[spidermonkey09]

Brave man reading the comments sections!

Its a good point; both sides do slag the BBC. I suppose I just don't think the slagging from the political right is based on fact. For example, the government boycotting the Today programme on the grounds of being too left wing is manifestly a crock of shit. Humphreys, when he was around, was an ardent Brexiteer and Sarah Sands, current Today editor, is a previous Telegraph/Mail journalist.

I don't want this to sound like crank bullshit because I really don't think its Machiavellian, I think its more pro-establishment deference. The government's line is reported as fact too often without being challenged. I appreciate its a fine line because if a minister gets given a hard time on the radio/TV they simply stop coming on, but I would prefer to empty chair politicians then let their lines go unchallenged. And the same goes for politicians of any stripe; no one should get a free ride.

Just my perspective anyway!

[i.munro]

For me the BBC is repeating the error it made over climate change by  representing both sides as if they were of equivalent weight. An outmoded way of reporting politics when one side has simply abandoned any attempt at being truthful.
As i keep reading "if one side says it's day and the other says it's night the job of the journalist is not to report both positions , it 's to look out of the F$%%ing window and find out who is lying".

[spidermonkey09]

Back on topic, interesting new Israel-Palestine 'peace' deal on the table today...conveniently timed to assist Netanyahu in the upcoming election and with a corruption charge hanging over him!

[andy popp]

Let alone explosive reports on Bolton's forthcoming book ...