So it’s only barely March and Trump is already basically bent over on the front steps of the Kremlin with his butt cheeks spread, shouting, “Take me daddy!”

I expected him to bend over for Putin, but even cynical as I am, I didn’t expect him to do it so completely so quickly.

I don’t pretend to know one way or the other.

He’s clearly working for the benefit of Russia, but “asset” implies an official, essentially employer/employee relationship, and there’s no knowing if that’s the case or not.

Not that it much matters really - whether he’s working for Russia’s benefit because they literally own him or working for Russia’s benefit because he’s a desperately insecure narcissist who idolizes Putin, it works out to pretty much the same thing in the long run.

Here’s the full text of what I said, including the part you inexplicably left out:

For the record, I do think that Putin manipulates Trump, and pretty brazenly at that, but I don’t think that he controls him. Trump’s ego is far too bloated for that.

And that’s specifically because, in point of fact, a bloated ego makes a person easier to manipulate, but not to “control.” They reflexively rebel against direct control, because it’s a threat to their ego, but they’re relatively easily manipulated, because all anyone has to do is frame things in a way that will appeal to their ego.

Did you really not grasp the distinction I was making there?

What the fuck are you on about?

For the record, I do think that Putin manipulates Trump, and pretty brazenly at that, but I don’t think that he controls him. Trump’s ego is far too bloated for that.

I meant pretty much exactly what my metaphor implies - Trump is weak and insecure and desperate for affirmation, and he idolizes Putin, so he wants his approval.

AND Trump is also greedy and self-absorbed and trying to please his greedy and self-absorbed cronies and patrons - that’s painfully obviously why he’s trying to swing this mineral rights deal alongside trying to effectively hand Ukraine to Putin.

It’s possible for more than one thing to be true at the same time.

The Toddler-in-chief hoping that daddy Putin will pat him on the head and tell him what a good boy he is.

Yeah - we hear that same tired song and dance over and over again.

Funny though that when Democrats held the majorities, they somehow couldn’t manage to accomplish much of anything, and blamed it all on the Republican “obstructionists.”

If the Republicans really could obstruct them then, then they could obstruct the Republicans now.

Or if they really can’t obstruct the Republicans now then the Republicans really couldn’t obstruct them then.

Either way, they’re liars.

One would think that a president using the authority of his office to exact vengeance on the people who investigated his past crimes would warrant at least some sort of response from the supposed opposition…

So I’m assuming that, like the rest of the broligarchy, what he actually means by “free speech” is right-wing authoritarianism exclusively and what he actually means by “free markets” is monopolistic corporate capitalism.

Behind closed doors, the consensus has been that other countries don’t want to get dragged into the current war in accordance with NATO mutual defense agreements.

But since Trump insists that he can end the war, that’s obviously not a consideration for him - by his claims, there will be nothing more standing in the way of Ukraine membership in NATO.

Which makes this announcement that much more significant - essentially what he’s saying is that even after the main obstacle to Ukraine membership has been eliminated, the US will oppose it.

Why?

Because… no, Trump is not Putin’s puppet. He’s something even worse - a cringing sycophant, desperate for affirmation from his strongman idol.

psychopath /sī′kə-păth″/

noun

1. A person who engages repeatedly in criminal and antisocial behavior without remorse or empathy for those victimized.

2. A person with a personality disorder indicated by a pattern of lying, cunning, manipulating, glibness, exploiting, heedlessness, arrogance, delusions of grandeur, sexual promiscuity, low self-control, disregard for morality, lack of acceptance of responsibility, callousness, and lack of empathy and remorse.

I’m curious what happened to the NYT.

They’ve had basically no integrity at all for years now, just kissing whichever ass they had to kiss to keep their access. Even as recently as the campaign, they kissed Trump’s ass until Harris got her initial groundswell, then they kissed her ass for a while, then when she faded they went back to kissing Trump’s ass.

But lately they’ve been more critical of Trump and Musk than almost any other legacy media outlet, and even lost their all-important access as a result and are still critical.

So what happened between then and now? Why did they finally grow a backbone at this late stage?

Just a guess, but maybe they found out that kissing Trump’s ass wasn’t enough by itself when he tried to strongarm $100 million out of them like he did with Zuckerberg, and they told him to fuck off?

I don’t know, but something sure changed, and not a moment too soon…

That’s what Daddy Putin wants, so that’s what Daddy Putin gets.

The Toddler-in-chief strikes again.

As always, I just wonder if it’s a pose or a delusion.

In much the same way that the Zionists have characterized any criticism of Israel as antisemitism, Democrats have characterized any criticism of themselves as “both sides.” And it’s for the same reason in both cases – so they can reject criticism out of hand rather than facing up to it.

For the professionals, it’s simple, if loathsome - they get to feed at the money trough as long as they can continue to essentially pose as leftists but not really accomplish anything (since anything truly leftist would be at odds with the desires of the people and corporations who are keeping the money trough full).

For the rest though - the rank and file that just repeat the cant they’re fed - what do they gain?

I’ve never been quite clear on that, but I assume it’s that their self-images are wrapped up in the labels they wear, and one of those labels is “Democrat,” and it only works as a boon to their self-images if it can’t be criticized.

I can’t see how that can be worth it though.

Good luck. You’re going to need it.

Being ineffective at stopping something isn’t the same thing as enabling.

Lol.

You’ve got your fingernails dug into a hair-thin crack here.

You might do well to stand back a bit and ask yourself why you’re so desperate to absolve the Democrats of blame.

The Toddler-in-chief.

It doesn’t get much more Musk than, "I polled the racists and they said racism is okay, so racism is okay "

This is a coup.

I sincerely expect future historians (if there are any) to have a specific name for this particular period in American history - something like “The idiot Age” or “The Faceplant Years.”