this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024

101 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19221 readers

2403 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

101

‘That son of a bitch’: New Woodward book reveals candid behind-the-scenes conversations of Biden, Trump, Harris and Putin (www.cnn.com)

submitted 2 months ago by Rapidcreek to c/politics

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 47 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Rapidcreek 47 points 2 months ago

In 2020, Woodward writes, Trump had “secretly sent Putin a bunch of Abbott Point of Care Covid test machines for his personal use.”

“Please don’t tell anybody you sent these to me,” Putin said to Trump, according to Woodward.

Citing a Trump aide, Woodward reports that there have been “maybe as many as seven” calls between Trump and Putin since Trump left the White House in 2021.

[–] Carrolade 11 points 2 months ago

I actually really want to read this book.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker -2 points 2 months ago

CNN - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for CNN:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/08/politics/bob-woodward-book-war-joe-biden-putin-netanyahu-trump/index.html

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Biden is so dumb he didn’t know BIBI is a super shitbag even tho Israelis have been trying to jail him and his retard wife for 10 years +.

[–] Rapidcreek 23 points 2 months ago

Biden knew Bibi was a shitbag probably since the day he met him long ago. Obama called Bibi the biggest liar of all the world's leaders

[+] [email protected] -36 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

This whole article just points to a man so frustrated with all that's going on around him, has the power to change it, but still does nothing. Biden is literally blaming everyone around him but himself. He blamed Obama for not taking a firmer stance on the Russian invasion of Crimea in 2014 and now he has to deal with Russia and he blamed Bibi for not having a strategy but still sent him money and arms unconditionally. This man is literally the dealer in an international poker game and is still somehow losing control of so many players.

[–] Rapidcreek 26 points 2 months ago (1 children)

First of all, both could arguably be true. Secondly, in the case of conditional sales of weapons to Isreal, you're asking Biden to do what Sen. Bernie Sanders couldn't get congress to do. Which amounts to be the expenditure of immense political capital during an election year. The big chair is not that easy to sit in.

[+] [email protected] -18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No one said it was going to be an easy chair to sit in. This man ran for president on being a career politician who knew how to get stuff done and work with people on both sides of the political spectrum. Sure, he had some good wins domestically like the infrastructure bill and the chips act. But this man is losing all credibility on the world stage. Even the most hard line Zionist presidents in the past have been able to control Israel, Biden cannot. Putin has never been so brazen and openly defiant in the past. And now, organizations like BRICS are being formed in light of these kinds of weaknesses America is displaying. If you're the leader of the richest and most powerful nation on the world and you can't control any situation you're directly involved in except to bitch about it in private, then you're not a competent leader. Leaders really need to be help to a much higher standard, especially when the stakes are so high.

Regarding your comment on the weapons sale to Israel. Bernie isn't Biden. Biden holds a lot more executive authority and his words carry a lot more weight than a senator, even one as popular and well known as Bernie. This wouldn't even be that unpopular of a decision either. As of February, two thirds of Americans support the decision for Biden to call for a ceasefire. And these numbers have been more or less consistent for the past year.

[–] Rapidcreek 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Biden has lost no credibility on the world stage, only on your very small stage.

Bernie couldn't even get close to having Congress act on weapons condition. Congress is a representation of the people. So, the people have spoken and you don't like what they said. So, of course, you blame Biden.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Congress is a representation of the people. So, the people have spoken and you don’t like what they said

Congress rarely represents more than their donors. Our government has been a joke for decades and decades. A government of the corporation by the corporation for the corporation.

[–] Rapidcreek 1 points 2 months ago

Thank you for your input, joke wise

[–] Yggnar 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Congress is a representation of corporate interest and little more. Maybe there's some religion in there too, but it's definitely not representing the average American citizen.

[–] Rapidcreek 7 points 2 months ago

So, do you vote?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Biden has lost no credibility on the world stage, only on your very small stage.

If you want to believe that then that's your choice. Just don't act surprised when other American proxies decide to lobby American politics so heavily in their favor like Israel is currently doing. The past year has shown the world just how susceptible American politicians are to foreign interference, and that includes presidents.

Congress is a representation of the people. So, the people have spoken and you don’t like what they said.

If that were true then US would have had things like universal healthcare a long time ago.

[–] Rapidcreek 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I guess we are running off on a tangent. Most countries do lobby. Some spend just as much money doing that as Isreal. Nothing new there. Never liked it myself.

Universal health care was discussed in congress and was rejected.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

It's not a tangent, it's my whole point. How can you honestly expect people to actually respect the POTUS when they fail to even control their own proxies? Foreign lobbying has never been so bad. Trump should have been the oddity in this case but Biden is normalizing it. Keep in mind the US has military bases all over the world and is the only country to be able to launch a full scale offensive anywhere in the world at any moments notice. Not to mention the fact that they have the most advanced and largest arsenal of weapons. Recent years have signaled to the whole world that the might of the American military is open to the highest bidder, and there's a lot of deep pockets around the world. That doesn't exactly scream credibility and respectable now does it?

Universal health care was discussed in congress and was rejected.

It was rejected in defiance of the majority of American's opinion. The same as the inaction when it comes to Israel. That's been my point. Congress doesn't always act in the interest of it's constituents like you claim they do.

[–] Rapidcreek 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Lobbying is basicly as it's been for years and years by foreign countries. US military bases are there for a multiple of reasons. Mostly, to face aggression like Ukraine is experiencing today. It's a leftover notion from WWII.

The majority of Americans don't know what Universal health care is. You could ask why it was defeated, but instead you jump right to congress not listening to their constituents.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Lobbying is basicly as it’s been for years and years by foreign countries.

That is false. It's been trending upwards for some time and has never been so high.

The majority of Americans don’t know what Universal health care is. You could ask why it was defeated, but instead you jump right to congress not listening to their constituents.

The reason's are irrelevant. Fact is, majority wanted it and continue to not get it due to corporate lobbying. This is a common and growing trend within American politics. Again, because of lobbying.

[–] Rapidcreek 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

It's not false. Cost of money.

Well, thats sort of the reason Univeral health care failed, yes. The majority of people were polled on it. If I remember right it was inconclusive. Lobbying didn't have much to do with it. It was one Senator.

So here's what happened...the Senate during the Health Care debate had very tight voting. During the creation of ACA, Senator Sanders introduced 'Meicare for All' which would give you universal health care. He got support to proceed. Then an independent Senator, Joe Libberman from New Hampshire without whose vote the bill could not proceed to the floor, killed it. Why? Because New Hampshire is home to a lot of insurance companies that would lose money. Pretty sure they would lay off a lot of people too. So, you see he did listen to his constitutes.

[–] idiomaddict 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Joe Lieberman, an independent who caucused with democrats from Connecticut, listened to the businesses in Connecticut, not his constituents. They didn’t re-elect him, but that’s cold comfort.

[–] Rapidcreek 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, but there is no doubt those constitutes would have been affected.

[–] idiomaddict 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Of course we were affected. The last year I lived in Connecticut, I paid $13k for healthcare, as a mostly healthy person in my 20s.

[–] Rapidcreek -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You would have paid the same with Univeral Healthcare, but if you worked f9r a Connecticut insurance com0any you'd be out of work.

[–] idiomaddict 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Other countries with universal healthcare don’t pay nearly as much as Americans do and not every industry needs to be saved. Health insurance companies are not even the biggest insurance employer in Connecticut, the vast majority of people in Connecticut had a net loss in not getting single payer through.

[–] Rapidcreek -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A lot of other countries own their entire health care structure. Hospitals, the whole lot. That isn't part of Universal health care and is the big component to lower costs overall.

[–] idiomaddict 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Some, but a lot don’t. Even if that was the only way to reduce healthcare costs, it would be a great application for eminent domain. Luckily, everyone else has a better solution than ours.

[–] Rapidcreek 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The US is a big country in size and population. So, efforts in this area aren't easy and very expensive. If you maintain everyone to have insurance, as with the ACA, you can lower about 1/3 of health care costs. Move to Universal Care, you're looking at almost 2/3. Nationalize the entire Healthcare structure and you'll see almost 3/3. I don't really see that last one happening in my lifetime. It took a lot to convince people the ACA was good for them.

[–] idiomaddict 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So we agree that Joe Lieberman voted against the interests of his constituents (the difference between the 1/3 and 2/3 of savings).

[–] Rapidcreek -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I agree that Joe was listening to those constituents who wanted to keep their jobs. And, if the public would have given democrats more of a majority in the Senate he wouldn't have been an issue.

[–] idiomaddict 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So 25k people vs 3 million? That’s not called listening to your constituents. He had been a democrat until a few years before this and broke ranks because of the Iraq war, so his disagreement on this issue came as a surprise to many Connecticut voters.

[–] Rapidcreek -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's nonsense. There is no reason to continue here.

[–] idiomaddict 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That’s disappointing, as I haven’t said anything untrue, but it doesn’t seem to have an impact on you, so you’re probably correct that there’s no point in continuing. I would encourage you to read more about Joe Lieberman, though.

[–] Rapidcreek -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You seem to suppose an entire population has the same opinion you do. This is not the case. You are not logical but wish me to spend time in dialog. I'm going to block you due to persistent nonsense.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago

As of August, AIPAC has already spent over $100 million on lobbying breaking previous records. And the election isnt even over. They spent a significant amount of money to replace 2 Democratic congress members who were vocally pro Palestine to be replaced with pro Israel advocates. Biden has received more money than any other US senator from pro Israeli advocates. And now he is ignoring the voice of the majority in favor of these lobbyists. If you're going to sit there and tell me this is business as usual and this isn't a problem, then you're going to have to actually explain your reasoning here.

Then an independent Senator, Joe Libberman from New Hampshire without whose vote the bill could not proceed to the floor, killed it.

So in essence، a body of elected representatives ignored the voice of the majority of their constituents in favor of corporate interests. Do you not see how you just proved my original point?

[–] Carrolade 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This man is literally the dealer in an international poker game

No, actually, the US does not have the power to control all these world events. We have a lot of influence, but not that much. For instance, we would not be able to mind control Netanyahu and make him lift the restrictions of food aid entering into Gaza to relieve the famine.

Also, I'll remind you Biden withheld arms over Rafah, stemming a large scale Israeli attack into the region.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The US has a lot of power and sway with regards to their proxies like Israel, or should at least, but lately it feels like it's the other way around. The US also has a lot of soft power for other countries they can use when they feel like they need/want to and a lot of countries have respected that up until recently. For example, Iran's first attack on Israel a few months back was largely for show and they actually warned the US via back-channels before attacking. The latest one that happened last week was not the case. It was a message to the US and it's allies that said "If you don't do something and control this, we will.".

Also, I’ll remind you Biden withheld arms over Rafah, stemming a large scale Israeli attack into the region.

I remember. But like the sanction Biden imposed on a few Israeli settlers these actions are more symbolic than trying to actual pivot the flow of events. It's Biden's way of saying "See I'm doing something" and meanwhile Israel continues doing what it does best. Also, Israel still ended up attacking Rafah, which further invalidates that point.

[–] Carrolade 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps it feels like that because we don't actually have vassal-like proxies, we have allies, which allow free will and independent decisionmaking based on a simple cost/benefit calculation. Because this free-will aspect is retained, they have to be wooed, convinced, cajoled, pressured, bribed etc.

Israel dropped some bombs in Rafah but did not launch the large-scale offensive people were fearing. It was a case of US pressure actually accomplishing some harm reduction. Not harm negation, mind you, harm reduction.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps it feels like that because we don’t actually have vassal-like proxies, we have allies

I see where you're coming from and you're logic as well. But I would disagree. Israel get's a huge amount of funding from the US and in turn the US is able to exert it's influence on the region through Israel. To me, that's a proxy.

They still attacked Rafah, just in a smaller scale. It's not much of a comfort to the civilians killed because of it. I wouldn't actually count that as a win in my opinion.

[–] Carrolade 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Israel's budget ran around 125 billion/year, pre-war. If we wanted full control, I think it would cost a little more than what we give.

No, not a win, I agree on that one.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not saying all of Israel's money is coming from the US. I'm saying the main reason Israel still exists is because of the money and arms America sends to them. If it weren't for that I would seriously question Israel's ability to survive given how hated they are in the region. This level of support let's the US exert it's influence on Israel. My original point was that recent years have shifted the dynamic where the US can no longer control Israel and it feels as if is Israel is playing the US.

[–] Carrolade 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Having nukes goes a long way to ensuring survival. That said, we definitely have influence, no question. A lot of influence. But even a whole ton of influence is something different from complete obedience.

For instance, your boss has a lot of influence on you, because they are responsible for your paycheck. However, we would not call it complete obedience, even with your livelihood in their hands. Because of this very basic principle, I would argue the US has never had control over Israel, despite what certain propagandists would claim.

Hell, they've even attacked our navy ships before, decades ago.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No arguments on those points from me. What I'm just saying is that the amount of influence America was capable of exerting on Israel has diminished substantially.

[–] Carrolade 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I agree. Netanyahu is a very uncooperative fellow, just in general.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Netanyahu has been in power for a long time. Every other president in the past was able to handle him even though they didn't really like him. Biden's lack of control of the situation to me shows his lack of leadership and ability to take charge. Not a good quality for POTUS.

[–] MegaUltraChicken 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Netanyahu has been in power for a long time. Every other president in the past was able to handle him even though they didn't really like him.

I think Bibi being in imminent danger of prison the second he leaves office may have changed this calculus a bit.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

No doubt, it's still a huge failure on Biden to rein him though.

[–] sorval_the_eeter 1 points 2 months ago

He's crooked and just doesnt want to be seen doing it. He's alwas been crooked. They didnt call him the senator from MBNA for nothing.