• 0 Posts
  • 258 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle


  • The way I see it, either Trump is, and this guy and all his buddies in congress believe Trump is, and rationally should be way more serious about getting people prepared for potentially having to engaged in resistance to that, possibly to include armed resistance (Trump attempted a self-coup already, that would be a reasonable reaction).

    Or… Trump isn’t, or isn’t doing a good enough job for it to be a legitimate threat, and consequently Raskin et al are cynically blowing things out of proportion to benefit themselves in the election, while not actually taking seriously the call to action they are implying is necessary.

    In the first case, they are underreacting to an event that has the potential to end the American experiment in democracy; in the latter they delegitimizing their own position by failing to accurately explain why and how Trump’s plans are not threatening enough to rise to the level of serious resistance. In either case I do not think Democrats have properly handled the situation.




  • This is my immediate thought too. I have been under the impression that, after having their infrastructure partially nationalized during the Bolivarian revolution Chevron and the like viewed Venezuelan oil as too risky to invest the absolute shitloads of money they would need to to expand their production beyond where it already is. Maybe Chevron is uniquely positioned for this because of the extent of their preexisting infrastructure, but I’m curious to see if they just slow walk the deal until Trumps out, or something?

    I certainly think the possibility of Venezuelans throwing a wrench in the plans after anger with the theft of their sovereignty boils over is greater than zero, but, like, who knows what’s being said beyond public knowledge. Maybe the bad taste left by Maduro is enough where thats just not a risk? Maybe there’s some other assurances we aren’t privvy to? Maybe Chevron is just greedy enough to try regardless?



  • This statement is really weird, even for Trump because in the question asked immediately prior he clearly understands the question about whether he directed Bessant to intervene in the bond market stating.

    “Not at all. No, he’s a very capable man. He wanted to do it. He’s very good at it. He is a good touch. Very good natural touch for the bonds and interest.”

    Right? He understands ehats beung spoken about, or his answer at least makes it sound like he does.

    Then the reporter mentions that yields came back up and asks if Trump was going to direct Bessant to do “some other type of intervention”. At this point Trump suggests military intervention.

    He goes from “Bond market intervention” -> “Interest rates” (reasonable) to “Intervention” -> “I might direct the military to attack the bond market” (deranged) in, like 10 seconds. Is he just playing word association? Is he fucking with the reporter?