Fair.
prospect.org
If you are referring to Viktor Shokin then you know that he was replaced not because he was looking into corruption in Ukraine, but because he wasn't investigating any crimes! His removal was welcomed not only by the United States, but also the European Union, the IMF and World Bank.
Yep. And no suspension of the debt ceiling limit. Trump likely not pleased. Musk testing his own influence.
Unsurprisingly, US lawmakers also don’t want to work over the holidays.
Again, two things can often simultaneously be true. He could be corrupt and useless, and he could be a thorn in Burisma's side at the same time. I know the conventional media concensus on what happened and why. I also know that the conventional media concensus can sometimes be a big lie. The appearance of impropriety hasn't been washed away.
Trump has been acting like he wanted to avoid the political furball of being involved in the next debt ceiling negotiation by effectively pulling it into the present and giving the can a long kick. It will still happen, and when it does, I predict Democrats will - as usual - favour lifting it some more. They just don't want to do it right now, because there's no political advantage to be gained with terms expiring shortly. They know from past experience they will have media support to use it for their "Republicans' fault" orchestra. Republicans will - as usual - use it to negotiate some spending cuts (particularly the 30-odd who are the strongest fiscal hawks).
It's sad there are likely a lot of disappointed Americans (and Canadians) because they can't blame US military members not getting payed on Trump and Musk.
You mean the guy that in March, declared on Twitter that he isn’t donating money to either candidate?
Do people who don’t think it’s already their govt try to strong-arm their own reps to vote for certain things?
I mean that donations and activism aren't a proto-oligarchy conspiracy. Would this be easier to believe if the criticism were aimed in the other direction at rich people who donate money to Democrats and work to advance Democratic policies?
Incoming presidents sometimes try to shape events. Film at 11. See also: Obama, "bigfooting".
I'm not sure. Maybe?
Absolutely not, but there are those people out there. It's a sad sign of how toxic our North American politics have become.
The criticism is fine by me on either side.
I’m not sure how that refutes that the incoming folks don’t think they’ll be leading the show soon.
Ironically a shutdown would have done that.
He isn't going to "control the administration". People with interests - usually involving money - pursue them at city hall, in state and provincial legislatures, in parliaments and congresses, and in international bodies - usually with money. This has gone on for centuries, although rarely - and refreshingly - this openly by directly involving voters. What's different this time is that an entrenched political establishment saw its business model - pork-barreling and other mischief stirred into mega-bills - blown up in a few hours, and already knows the threat of being "primaried" is real. They're frightened, and they're trying to persuade others to adopt their fear, which is why so many people are digging for "reasons" why Musk got involved. The establishments are going to fight hard to resume their opaque ways. I have no interest in helping them in this fight, although others with their own adjacent political interests undoubtedly will.
To judge by recent stories and the resulting discussions, Biden is POTUS-in-name-only and has been for some time.
Never too late to stop defending weak security practices. Amusingly and as usual, many of the reformers have changed tune after years of participating in a practice only when they are no longer in accord with those who hold the levers of power.
To clarify - using US gov systems is the weak security practice?
As you’ve said a few times in the past day or so, both can be true. Musk can control the administration via (as he publicly said) tossing funds at folks challenging the ones who don’t support his decisions. The USG can say “holy crap - this guy is upending our system”.
Stinchcombe is a real challenge. US police will share info with us, but often for leads/intelligence only. Getting them to release information for overt steps like getting judicial authorizations, or laying and prosecuting charges can be a challenge, and they absolutely will not in most cases subject their police to coming up here to testify. Given how much crime goes cross border, being hamstrung from leveraging evidence gleaned in the U.S. can be a real challenge. I’m dealing with this right now and it’s delayed us by probably a couple months, trying to clear some very basic information from their end for use up here.
