If Trump Were Hitler and Democrats Really Were the Resistance

Donald Trump is a horrible president for many reasons. So why are Democrats insisting upon promoting their bizarre conspiracy theory that he colluded with Russia to tip the 2016 election instead of trying to oust him for one of those legitimate reasons?

14 thoughts on “If Trump Were Hitler and Democrats Really Were the Resistance

  1. We’re already discussing DastardlyRussiansGate on another article, so I won’t bother commenting on Ted’s obsession on this one.

    But the answer is that scandal has legs, whereas everything else on Ted’s list has been practiced by former presidents without problem. People ‘just don’t care’ about mass murder unless white people were targeted.

    Pew Research says 72% of Americans believe that Russia was behind the hacking. I don’t know whether that counts as ‘caring’ – but it does count as something.

    • The Russia fables seem to be heavily flogged by the boss media, which explains why it continues to get public attention, as does Kim Kardashian’s butt and other items of public importance.

      So one must ask why (some of) the ruling class are ordering that this particular mythology be flogged by their servitors. I believe it is because of a factional war. Not sure why el Trumpo can’t patch things up with the neocons. He certainly doesn’t object to killing people any more than they do.

      • «Not sure why el Trumpo can’t patch things up with the neocons. He certainly doesn’t object to killing people any more than they do.» My guess is that Mr Trump et consortes view China as the greater threat to global US hegemony than the neocons’/neolibs’ preferred enemy Russia, and moreover want to dismantle the institutions that the US – e g, GATT/WTO – set up after WW II….

        Henri

  2. World War II ended 70 years ago and leftists are still fighting it. Time to abandon this mythology that Trump is Hitler, ICE is the SS, and you guys are a resistance. United States citizens are in no peril from their government. In that respect, we are the safest people on earth.

    • > United States citizens are in no peril from their government.

      Is this meant as sarcasm? I ask because it follows a statement which is obviosuly meant as sarcasm, so I’m not sure how to respond.

      • Nice evasion, in lieu of an answer I’ll assume my original interpretation is correct. It’s one of my favorite bits of RW silliness. “I love my country but I fear my government”

        You want a government with the power to sterilize you, to execute you without trial, or torture you without repercussions. You want a government to tell you who you can love, how you can love, and who you can marry. A government which has more power over a woman’s uterus than she herself has. A government that can dictate your sexual preferences and religious beliefs. What you can smoke, where you can live, who you can associate with … even where you can pee.

        In short, you want a government which owns you body, mind, and soul. Liberals do, indeed, fear an authoritarian dictatorship. Righties embrace it wholeheartedly, never realizing that the powers they grant will one day be used against them. (At which point, they’ll blame the lefties)

      • No evasion. I fear I’m just to allusive for you. You need someone more literal and concrete with whom you can argue.

      • > You need someone more literal and concrete with whom you can argue.

        Please sir, if you would be so kind, I most respectfully and considerately request that you literally and concretely confirm or deny each of my observations about the governmental powers that Conservatives would bestow.

        I most humbly apologize if this places too onerous a burden upon your esteemed self. I beg your forgiveness for even mentioning this, but if I am not enlightened by your own words, then I have no choice but to form my own conclusions.

      • @Gym Teacher

        Here I was polite and courteous and everything, and you snubbed me. My feelings are hurt 🙁

        Heh. Not really.

        You can’t argue something when you won’t admit what you’re arguing about. You obviously have an agenda … why won’t you tell us what it is? Could it possibly be that you know darned good and well that your agenda is abhorrent?

        You’d get slightly more respect if you grew a pair and admitted what you were up to rather than beating around the bush.

        However, as an expert in rhetoric, I’m sure you’re familiar with the old adage, qui tacet consentire videtur IOW: you just admitted that my assessment above is correct.

        WOO HOO! I win again!

  3. Nailed it once again, Ted. Why bother about Mr Trump’s bombings in, e g, Syria or the manner in which families are being dealt with at the southern border of the US, when one can blame those dastardly Russians – led by the devil incarnate, Gospodin Putin – for all the world’s evil (that is, that portion which is not committed by the equally dastardly Chinese, from whose efforts, however, great profits can be made) ?…

    US politics never fail to fascinate, not least the current version of McCarthyism so prevalent in the corporate media (at least such representatives as the New York Times, which I read daily). The country is fortunate that it has people like yourself who are willing and able to call bullshit when they smell the fragrance….

    Henri

  4. Where was “the resistance” when Obumma, ignoring a very pointed campaign theme, if NOT promise, suggested that nothing would be done about the Bush II admin’s criminal wars based on fraudulent “intelligence that fit the policy.”

    This lead to to a central pillar of “the Obumma legacy”: We will not look back to dwell on past atrocities because in our future there are so many new atrocities to plan, execute and hail as truly exceptional.

    • > Where was “the resistance” when Obumma,

      I remember there was some outrage – here on Rallblog, for instance – but nowhere near as much as it deserved.

      Americans have a long history of looking the other way. This is not a good thing, as it just leads to bigger abuses later on. If we’d prosecuted Reagan and Nixon, maybe – just maybe – Bush wouldn’t have tried The Big Lie; or O’bomber would have adhered to the Constitution.

      Now we have Trump. Who’s next?

  5. “So why are Democrats insisting upon promoting their bizarre conspiracy theory that he colluded with Russia to tip the 2016 election instead of trying to oust him for one of those legitimate reasons?”

    Because these people can’t see that the electoral system is profoundly broken and that a guy who didn’t think he would win was put in the White House by idiots who could not see his actions for what they were – deliberately offensive, over-the-top theater. So Russia had to be to blame, not the black-money-filled US elections.

Leave a Reply