The Sunday Rumble: 10.1.21

Some good news - for a change:   Courtesy of The Mail I bring you these glad tidings:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will never return to social media after claiming to have dealt with an 'almost unsurvivable' amount of abuse, a source has claimed.

Ohdearwhatapitynevermind!  Don't worry about being missed - you won't be!

 

Three cheers for 'plucky little, er, Taiwan', actually:   'The Donald', in a last mischievous throw of his Presidential dice, has lifted all previous American restrictions on Taiwan - and about time, too!  'Xi Ping-a-ling' will not be amused!

 

The Scottish Play - no, not that one, the real one!  Yet more obscurity from me - sorry, sorry!  I refer to the current claymore fight going on in Edinburgh between the Sturgeon clan and the Salmond clan.  It is always amusing to learn, yet again, that the smaller the territory the more vicious is the fight.  Let us hope that neither party applies that favourite Scottish ploy and 'puts their heed in wi' their bonnet on!'

 

That Starmer fella' is beginning to impress me!   I am grateful - again! - to Guido for informing me of this:

Starmer Rejects FoM and Re Joining EU

Jolly good show, Keir, old chap - ooops, sorry, I mean 'Comrade'!

 

 

 

            More Rumbles later . . .

 

 

 

Comments

[Whitewall]

What? The poor Duke and Dukess are off social media? After unsurvivable abuse? What are they, Conservatives?

[Whitewall]

Taiwan unrestricted now at long last? Oh Lord, China Joe's handlers will be po'd.

[Bob]

China needs to be confronted, but if the Trump administration thinks this particular action is in the US's best interest, why did they wait until they won't have to deal with the consequences to enact it?

[Whitewall]

Trump's gift to the Dems and deep state for 4 years of insurgency against the administration. The start of a counterinsurgency.

[Bob]

Do you even believe that yourself, Whitewall?

[Up2L8]

China needs to be confronted

And what do you suggest, Bob? Try to be specific.

[Whitewall]

Bob, why yes, yes I do. I have had a bit of experience in these matters long ago and far away. The last 4 years were "textbook". The only difference is that was then and down there as opposed to now and right here. It couldn't happen here until it did.

[JK]

He also moved our embassy to Jerusalem followed up by some, daresay I "shrewd diplomacy" which it presently appears may improve the general ME situation. Providing, if I may be so bold to suggest - a roadmap for his successor[s] to follow similarly viz Taiwan.

[JK]

Jes' tossing into the Rumble David, figure it 'a gimme.'

https://notthebee.com/article/apple-just-banned-parler

(To save y'all from having to go to CNN.)

"Threats of violence and illegal activity."

HAS NO ONE FROM APPLE EVER BEEN ON TWITTER OR FACEBOOK?

"The processes Parler has put in place to moderate or prevent the spread of dangerous and illegal content have proved insufficient"

(That's from the above link but now from a FB er, "page"[?] I'm unfamiliar with the proper lingo. JK)

"Nightengale routinely posted short video clips to his Facebook page over the past two years. Dozens of recently-posted and disturbing videos remained on his account Saturday night."

"In a video posted Wednesday, he talks about carjacking a woman. In another, he talks about “popping” a woman he’s seeing. “I might kill this bitch,” he said."

Sourcelink:

https://cwbchicago.com/2021/01/days-of-disturbing-facebook-posts-end-with-cross-city-shooting-spree-that-leaves-3-murdered-3-wounded-gunman-dead.html

Commentary from the usual suspects regards to that obviously 'violent content'?

Crickets ...

[Loz]

China needs to be confronted, but if the Trump administration thinks this particular action is in the US's best interest, why did they wait until they won't have to deal with the consequences to enact it?

You think the Don wasn't squaring up to kicking Ping-a-Ling in the pants, Bob?

He's only pol in world who would actually do such a rightful thing.

And what a great political move - screws Sleepy Joe before he's even started.

The Mad Mullahs are back on track too, and Rocketman, cowering from any action until the Don steps out the door of course, but full of gobshite just now.

If Sleepy Joe is anything other than brutal with these regimes the Dems are gonna pay a fearsome price at the next election - and the Don's bidding that price right up! One scintilla of reticence or doubt and that lot and Vlad will be at Sleepy Joe's throat!

If we aren't able to chant "Are you the Don in disguise?" by the end of four years, it's curtains for the Dems.

SoD

[Bob]

Whitewall, terrorist acts from any quarters aren't necessary or inevitable. Since law enforcement in America is generally right of center and only specialists study social media, the powers that be were slow to understand the dangers of Trumpism. That's already beginning to change, as JK points out.

Up2L8, I'm not a foreign policy expert (neither is anyone else here), but the Trump administration's approach to foreign relations has relied heavily on tough talk, personal relationships, and nearly random actions at the expense of coordinated diplomacy and military pressure. We'll be seeing what and how much blowback it generates besides NK going ahead full speed with its nuclear weapons program.

SoD, very little the Trump administration has done in foreign policy has been predictable even to experts, and your interpretation is extremely limited and repetitious, but you're probably right that this was a middle finger to the incoming administration, and damn the results.

[Up2L8]

Wasn’t asking about President Trump’s actions, Bob, nor was I asking about your qualifications. You made a direct statement; was curious as to how you would handle the situation. So, by your own admission of not being an expert, your answer is to criticize another.

[JK]

"[O]nly specialists study social media"

Owe Contrary Bob (pardon my French) LE has been studying (and utilizing) social media for at least as long as there's been 'Fusion Centers' [Which as I recall, were initially set up when the Department of Homeland Security was created]. Everybody (well sometimes I think 'except for me') studies social media.

"[T]he powers that be were slow to understand the dangers of Trumpism."

Oh? Is that why when, during the campaign for 2016, the Dems, the McCains, the Comeys & the Brennans, and virtually the whole of Legacy Media in combination set out on the Get Trump! crusade?

"[R]elied heavily on tough talk."

With the possible exception of Obama ("Cut it out you knuckleheads!" being about the extent of my recollection) I am of the opinion every President since Buchanan, had that as the top tool in the kitbag.

"[P]ersonal relationships"

See for example GHW Bush and the House of Saud. See also Eisenhower.

"[N]early random actions at the expense of coordinated diplomacy and military pressure."

'Random action' I would argue, does have a certain quality. "Coordinated diplomacy and military pressure" - You mean like the Libya Concert?

So far as the Norks go - which President since Eisenhower has demonstrated the *best result, elicited from the Family Kim? (Show your work defining 'result.')

"[V]ery little the Trump administration has done in foreign policy has been predictable"

See above 'Random action/certain quality.' Would you argue, for instance Bob that the changes among the Gulf nations diplomatic relations toward (and now 'with') Israel, resulting from I believe, and I think SoD would agree, Trump's "Syria Pullout" (you can argue 'since' as opposed to 'resulting from' Bob) has less or more 'potential' benefit?

[Whitewall]

Bob, you missed the whole goddam point. Stick with where you need to go, it's easy.

[Bob]

Up2L8, do you think China doesn't need to be confronted? I didn't think that would be a controversial statement.

JK, what I meant to refer to was the decisions made about protecting the Capitol that ignored information from the FBI based on internet surveillance. What's your guess about why that happened?

The "get Trump crusade" sounds paranoid and ignores the facts of all the things he did that the legacy media euphemized as "unprecedented". You can't make a case that he acted within the norms of past presidents, and it's silly to try. It's highly doubtful he's a student of "mad man" theory like Nixon and Kissinger.

Who do you think has had the most success with NK? You'll just disagree with whoever I name.

Whitewall, what did I miss? Be specific. It's easy.

[Up2L8]

China needs to be confronted

Maybe you forgot my previous question.
And what do you suggest, Bob? Try to be specific. It is easy.

[JK]

"What's your guess about why that happened?"

The narrative.

"You can't make a case that he acted within the norms of past presidents, and it's silly to try."

https://havechanged.blogspot.com/2021/01/and-i-dont-like-guy-coming-through-door.html

"Norms of past presidents" Bob?

You jest Shirley.

[Bob]

Up2L8, I'll repeat: I'm not a policy expert and won't make a fool of myself pretending to be. I'll read your comment that solves all the world's problems if you care to write it.

JK, maybe you're kidding. There's never been a president like Trump before, with no experience, knowledge of any aspect of presidentin', or lack of common sense. The blog post is the same old same old trying to project characteristics onto anyone who isn't on the political right. It's going to take a while for the right to understand how completely self-defeating their little revolution has been. We'll be lucky if we don't get something like the Patriot Act that gives government even more power.

For what it's worth, I don't think Biden is great presidential material either, but he deserves the benefit of a doubt for now.

[Up2L8]

I didn't make the statement, Bob. You have already made a fool of yourself by making such a statement, then back peddling when challenged on it.

[JK]

"but he deserves the benefit of a doubt for now."

Pity that wasn't applicable most lately.

"There's never been a president like Trump before, with no experience, knowledge of any aspect of presidentin', or lack of common sense."

https://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/andrew-jacksons-inauguration.htm

"Accounts differ."

I'll say!

[Bob]

Up2L8, I reject your fanciful timeline.

JK, from your link:

"But unlike Trump, who was born rich, Jackson was a self-made man who literally fought his way to the top. He also served with distinction in the military and was elected to multiple vital governmental positions before assuming the presidency."

[Up2L8]

Reject doesn't erase.