Trump has committed dozens of impeachable offenses in his first 100 days. There is no chance he is going to stop doing them and even if he did, he still deserves to be removed from office, what is wrong with you
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
It’s so frustrating that the same all platitudes (he’s growing into the job, there are “adults in the room” that will temper this change, he didn’t mean what he said etc….) are being used AGAIN. Didn’t we learn this is all bullshit from the last time he was pres?
They think our current concerns are going to look overwrought in a few years because they expect things to get *so much worse* that we'll look back and think "remember when he was deporting children with cancer? It was a simpler time"
He ignored the Supreme Court and has done EOs that are things that require Congressional approval! Some may argue we're well into a constitutional crisis
No. It is not the job of ordinary citizens to show perfect message discipline.
It is the responsibility of actors with agenda-setting power — like, say, national newspapers — not to treat random-ass people exaggerating as a threat equivalent to the madman president.
it's not that liberals conflate conservative policies with unconstitutional ones, it's that at least since dubya these two things have had strong overlap
I’m not reading the editorial - why lol it’s the NYT - but my take on this particular screenshot is that you highlighted the wrong half and this whole specific section is on point.
I agree. Unfortunately, it is the editorial board that has placed its own emotional gratification above effective opposition to Trump. In pursuit of winning yesterday's arguments, you have repeatedly conceded to the contrived justifications of Trump's illiberal attacks.
In service of the emotional gratification of being the most sober, sensible voice in the room, you dismiss and dissuade Trump's most organized, dedicated, and perceptive opponents.
Mr. Trump aspires to tyranny. It is those who first observed this, and stated their case most forcefully, who have won this argument. If it wants effective opposition, the Times should heed their wisdom, not seek to call them to heel.
These fuckers just want want to make sure that they are clearly stating in advance that when Some People start smashing windows and burning buildings this summer when the food runs out, they think that's the Wrong Way so nobody thinks they support That Kind of civil war.
I love all the times they demanded that tea partiers/MAGA assholes attenuated their messages to the appropriate level instead of calling President Obama a muslim monkey or calling for the execution of President Biden or made sexual assault threats and death threats on AOC. Oh wait, they didn't
This is a case of Trump being so bad they have to agree with the left, but they really don’t want to, so they try to carve out a nonexistent centrist position.
The typical “centrist” position tends to be a “Centrist™” performance: marketing right-wing rhetoric via “reasonability discourse” or “reasonability language”. It exploits the egos of people claiming to reject “taking sides” in a way that gets them to emotionally invest in right-wing ideologies.
Good manners before good trouble? @nytimes.com your normalization of Trump is absolutely pitiful. He has declared war on Americans, and if we fight this five-alarm fire with strongly worded letters and a garden hose, there’ll soon be nothing left to burn.
We need you in the resistance to overturn this crazy mofo, but do it gently, with strongly worded letters to the editor and your representative, not with rowdy street protests that could destabilize the economy and ruin our stock portfolio worse that the mofo is already doing
Making Jewish students feel like they belong on college campus is called INCLUSION. trump's attack on Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging has one goal and that is to create a lower class race to work for free in prisons we pay for. Now add that up.
Yet again, progressive policies and independent searches for truth are not inherently mutually exclusive. Political policies can in fact also be independently verified to be objectively correct.
Notice that the smooth brains who created that highlighted sentence cannot detect the contradiction between the two accusations: “blase about antisemitism” means the universities were not progressive enough. At the same time, universities are also too progressive?
Racism isn't that big a deal. We should talk to Nazis and hear them out. But if a brown skinned person speaks ill of Netanyahu senpai and a Jewish Zionist says they feel scared, send in Seal Team Six.
Wait is this suggesting that Trump's theft of thousands of government documents, including many classified at the highest levels, and tireless efforts to hoodwink the NARA and FBI out of getting them back, are not "truly outrageous"?
I think he means that the Times is just saying vague both-sidesy bullshit that they couldn't actually back up if pressed. Like saying there's "reasonable arguments" against some of the cases against Trump, but not saying which cases and what those arguments are because they don't actually have any
Could someone please write the NYT's advice to, say, Czechoslovakians in 1989 or Parisians in 1789? Bangladesh in 2024? "Ladies and gentlemen, above all else, remember your manners, and do not rush about hastily...."
"The Czechoslovak and Hungarian uprisings stumbled by underestimating their protest divisiveness and neglecting the broader perception of Soviet actions as stabilizing, if not benevolent."
Not sure if this comment is meant to be facetious but the NYT did whitewash tf out of and “everyone really needs to calm down they don’t ACTUALLY want to kill the Jews” the rise of Nazism.
Or since much, much before. You & @michaelhobbes.bsky.social both know well the sainted New York Times’ relentless efforts through history—with a single-minded focus & prodigious use of equivocations—towards normalizing fascism & minimizing the authoritarian takeover of our democratic institutions.
That ruling truly put him in a bind. It must have been so strong that he hasn't even attempted to use the AEA. *Hand to earpiece* well that can't be true or we wouldn't be writing this, next you are going to tell me he is deporting American children. *Hand to earpiece* oh shut up and give us this!
These points are all well-taken in the abstract but they’ve been acting since before November like they agree with his claim of a broad mandate to remake society and also desire to get revenge for Biden and woke
I note that no author's name is listed. This opinion comes from "The Editorial Board."
When I see an accusation that a university allows antisemitic speech, I wonder if the truth is that the university tolerates objections to Israel's policies toward Palestinians.
So interesting how they're tut-tutting over college students not protesting 'the right way' but I have yet to see pieces about the rampant racism, homophobia, and violent rhetoric that comes out of every single Trump rally
Their snobbery demands that college kids should what...know better because they're in school? But the adults who attend Trump rallies get a pass for reasons?
Among the many troublesome parts of this approach is that it essentially disappears any possibility of accountability after this is over (if it is). Folks who are systematically, aggressively, and violently dismantling democracy must be held to account.
Rubio, Bondi and the rest are just following orders, doing their duty. Surely we can't suggest they are unfit to ever hold political office and should never get some college professor sinecure! That would be ... uncivil.
We are talking about the same assholes that actually don't understand why it takes more time to do research if one uses LLMs bc one still has to spend the same if not more time just to verify anything it spits out.
This editorial feels like every word has been calibrated to be as pointless and mealymouthed as possible."If he is going to defy the judiciary now"? Hasn't he done that defying already? I haven't heard about Mr. Garcia being returned to the US, as ordered by the Supreme Court.
Acknowledging that I haven't read anything except the snippets you've posted here, this really sounds like someone trying to talk Americans out of protesting.
Can we also look at the fact that no one signed their name to that slop. Also, look @ this, “On several key issues, his views were closer to public opinion than those of Democrats.”. When one clicks the citation they’re using, it’s fr a piece the NY TIMES wrote on January 18th, 2025.
it's also a meaningless statement when "on several key issues his views are much further away from public opinion than Democrats" is at least equally true (like for example social security and DOGE). So does that sentence even say anything?
The double standard they’ve always enforced. The left is only as good as the worst example that can be found. The right deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Certainly the press and media need to shore up bigly and quickly. But it’s all hands on deck as far as how we as consumers strip the oligarchs who fostered this disaster. Like supporting local supply Like targeting the ass kissing oligarchs with their hands out and demanding no rules for them.
"Stop decrying the threat of being kidnapped and sent to a gulag. Tolerate in silence your future with less food and higher prices on everything. Lean into the headwind not created by nature, but by a felonious blowhard who needs to hoard money and power in his grievance tour."
Why the fuck do these guys always want message discipline?? A coalition isn’t about messaging. It’s about uniting for a common cause and acknowledging each group’s legitimate concerns. Fuck message discipline.
I swear to fucking god if I go to one more fucking local “organizing” meeting and someone brings up unified messaging Ima scream. If we’re talking about numbers that doesn’t work UNLESS there’s a mega viral thing that most everyone agrees is the most important bad thing (George Floyd murder)
That’s not the case right now. There are many different things that are most important to many people. The only to do “protest numbers” is by appealing to a wide swath of people and trying to find commonality. Convince them that their cause is important enough to amplify. That it needs it.
Remember: politics are NOT won with emotion. A successful political movement is one who's messages are delivered with exactly as much fervor and conviction as a Wikipedia article! If you feel any kind of fire stirring in your heart you better stamp that out or you're just as bad as them
That last sentence. "Don't yell about Mr Hitler too loudly or you'll create more Nazis!" Just the most Harvard brained trust fund executive liberal shit ever.
This is the message discipline that would have us view the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia as a distraction, right? Because he might be a not nice guy and he was merely deported to the wrong country?
Fuck that! Maximalist responses work to change the narrative.
“Don’t get too emotional now!” we admonish the left, as the White House press corps is taken over by twitter posters who earnestly believe Haitians are eating pets and teachers are sending children to get sex change operations.
“We must remain calm and collected, protesting in only the correct ways” we are told as the most hysterical and violent protestors in history are pardoned by their ascendant President.
"it remains possible concerns are over wrought" is true about absolutely anything? What is their point? It remained *possible* that George Wallace would've had a Road to Damascus moment right after taking the presidency, but you go with the tons of evidence available, not an imagined possibility
He's deporting US citizens and ending food safety. What the hell are they on about, if anything we're already, as a country, dramatically underreacting
The New York Times: "Now remember folks, the guy openly trying to turn the US into a fully realized fascist dictatorship might fail, and everything might be fine, so there's no need to react as if he's trying to set up a fascist dictatorship. Stop being such paranoid weirdos!"
This Times piece is pretty much the old-guard Democrats' playbook: restrained, measured, "sober". It's doomed to fail. The only thing that will constrain Trump & his minions is raw, unbridled people power. Wave after wave of Americans in the streets, demanding a complete change in direction.
“Perhaps federal courts will continue to constrain him and he will ultimately accept their judgement.”
Doesn’t this assume that he has already been constrained by them? And isn’t that evidence-free assumption patently false? Did Trump find some literate somewhere to write this for yuks?
Comments
that has never happened in his entire life why would it suddenly start now
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps 🎶🎵
This is absolutely pathetic @nytimes.com
https://bsky.app/profile/michaelhobbes.bsky.social/post/3lo4arhuhec2m
everyone focused on him, who cares, he doesn't know anything that they aren't telling him.
remove him and then what? they permeated the entire govt and we all missed it
he's the bright, and shiny toy
It is the responsibility of actors with agenda-setting power — like, say, national newspapers — not to treat random-ass people exaggerating as a threat equivalent to the madman president.
- Defying a Supreme Court order.
End of the fucking story.
Kill em all by bankrupting them, I say. Start over with new media.
Don’t buy, don’t click, don’t put your eyeballs on them. Seek the truth from independent media! Sharpen your YouTube algorithm.
The editorial board writes that, in opposition to Trump, "the stakes are too high to prioritize emotion over effectiveness."
Sincerely,
Louis Evans
This is NYT speak for “Fuck your feelings.”
https://bsky.app/profile/thesnarkygent.bsky.social/post/3lo2gldub722u
"Being angry, being loud, feels good... but is it productive?" Maybe not for you, Marie...
It isn't enough to just state that it is a fact that institutions have done these things.
(please don't read the first paragraph btw)
"The Czechoslovak and Hungarian uprisings stumbled by underestimating their protest divisiveness and neglecting the broader perception of Soviet actions as stabilizing, if not benevolent."
I can imagine this article existing somewhere lol
We’ve written about the coverage of the pro-democracy movement.
Please take a look.
https://bsky.app/profile/mediaanddemocracy.bsky.social/post/3lmb5ynl4ak26
Good people don't work for the times
When I see an accusation that a university allows antisemitic speech, I wonder if the truth is that the university tolerates objections to Israel's policies toward Palestinians.
What reasons might those be, NYTs?
Their advice is only worth the penny Trump wants to get rid of.
His #s are BAD
Are the "stakes too high", or has he "been effective" and this may prove "overwrought in a year"?
Because those feel like very different things.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Veteranpolitics/s/rX2LUNfdM1
https://bsky.app/profile/thejenniwren.teamlh.social/post/3lo2u6qqbts2w
Fuck that! Maximalist responses work to change the narrative.
THEY broke the law! Full stop!
Not at all surprised the 'editorial board' isn't signing their names to this.
BTW:
https://bsky.app/profile/shrithanedar.bsky.social/post/3lnvfttwdls2d
What’s going to change in the next year or two to make our objections to this seem overwrought?
Doesn’t this assume that he has already been constrained by them? And isn’t that evidence-free assumption patently false? Did Trump find some literate somewhere to write this for yuks?