In Monday's "Mark Suckerberg is disgusting," Kat wondered, regarding Suckerberg's MAGA transformation if Sheryl Sandberg had any comment? Still not but we maybe should expect her to comment. Beatrice Nolan (FORTUNE) reports:
Mark Zuckerberg is trying to shift the blame for Meta’s inclusive company policies onto his former chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, as he seeks to strengthen ties with President-elect Donald Trump, the New York Times reports.
In a meeting with Trump advisor Stephen Miller late last year, the Meta chief blamed Facebook’s former COO for an inclusivity initiative that encouraged staffers’ self-expression at work, the Times reported, citing a person with knowledge of the meeting. Sandberg served as the company’s chief operating officer for more than 14 years and later as a Meta board member, before her exit in May of last year.
He is so disgusting. When Trump is out of office and he attempts another political pivot, we all need to remember that he's trash, ugly faced trash. He's disgusting.
Caitlin Dewey (VANITY FAIR) adds:
The Times’ reporting sheds further light on Meta’s MAGAfication—and the larger, political realignment taking place inside Big Tech. While Silicon Valley has long served as a reliable stronghold for Democrats, many of its foremost leaders have lately cozied up to Trump and his administration. In addition to Zuckerberg, at least half a dozen prominent tech CEOs—including Apple’s Tim Cook, Google’s Sundar Pichai and OpenAI’s Sam Altman—will attend Trump’s inauguration on Monday, Axios reported. They join Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and TikTok CEO Shou Chew, who will sit on the inaugural dais alongside the Trump family, Elon Musk and a host of other notables.
"The snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Friday, January 17, 2025. Donald Chump's approvals at record low, Tulsi Gabbard is a threat to national security, Joe Biden commutes some sentences, and much more.
Monday, Convicted Felon Donald Chump is set to be inaugurated as President of the United States.
As Ben Meiselas (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) reports in the video above, as he's going into inauguration, the Chump has a hideous approval rating. Ben's working with an AP-NORC poll which found that Chump currently has a 41% favorable rating and a 55% unfavorable rating. The other four percent? Presumably, they refused to answer since Rahsida Tlaib and others told them not to vote in November. Earlier this week on MORNING EDITION (NPR), another poll was addressed:
LEILA FADEL, HOST:
Inauguration Day is Monday. And this morning, we have our first measure of how people feel about the policy priorities of the second Trump administration. A new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll finds reviews are mixed. NPR senior political editor and correspondent Domenico Montanaro has been digging into the numbers and joins me now. Good morning.
DOMENICO MONTANARO, BYLINE: Morning, Leila.
FADEL: So what does the poll show about how people feel about President-elect Trump?
MONTANARO: Well, not much has changed in views of him. I mean, despite winning in November, Trump continues to get more unfavorable than favorable ratings. Forty-four percent have a positive view of him. Forty-nine percent have a negative one. That's not unusual for Trump. He had a net-negative favorability in every single Marist poll since 2016. What might be important in the survey is how people feel about the things he wants to actually do, like mass deportations, pardoning people convicted for attacking the Capitol on January 6, which he's promised to do, and tariffs on goods from other countries.
FADEL: Well, how do people feel about those promises?
MONTANARO: Well, people are evenly divided on whether to deport all immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, so how that's done is going to be a real test. On pardoning people convicted for attacking the Capitol, respondents overwhelmingly were against it. Sixty-two percent said that they were opposed to Trump doing that. And on tariffs, 48% said that they think that they'll hurt the economy. Only 31% said that they think that they will help. Those are some real warning signs, I think, for Trump because he's claimed an unprecedented and powerful mandate. But in reality, presidents often overread their election mandates and wind up overreaching, which can really hurt them politically. So we'll see. The thing is, a big reason Trump obviously was elected was because of prices and inflation. And frankly, he's garnered more attention in the run-up to his inauguration, you know, for talking about Greenland annexing Canada or renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America.
In his video report, Ben provided some historical analysis for past presidents so we won't cover that; however, this is today. Right? So maybe Americans just hate all politicians?
After all, NEWSWEEK headlined a story this week with "Joe Biden's Approval Rating Hits Record Low." Hmm. It's left to Rhian Lubin (INDEPENDENT) to explain that the number is still higher than what Chump had, "The outgoing president’s final approval rating is 36 percent compared to Trump, who had a rating of 34 percent when he left the White House in 2021."
On Monday, Chump drags his hugely unpopular ass before the public to be sworn in.
And he's going to get a lot more unpopular for a number of reasons. Any intelligence failures, and you know they'll be some -- let's all hope it doesn't include a terrorist attack on US soil will be his fault. Nation come together? Hell no. He's proposed rank amateurs for his nominees. He just had the poster boy for "gay conversion" Mike Johnson dismiss Republican Mike Turner from the US House Intelligence Committee because Turner was not 'sufficiently' loyal to Chump -- something no one could ever accuse the ball licking Johnson of. Stephen Groves (AP) reports, "House Speaker Mike Johnson on Wednesday removed the GOP chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee, who was a vocal supporter of assistance for Ukraine and held other views that put him at odds with President-elect Donald Trump."
Andrew Solender (AXIOS) notes:
What they're saying: Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), a hawkish Intelligence Committee member, told reporters "we all have questions and concerns" and that Turner's removal "kind of came out of nowhere."
- "McCarthy spent a lot of political capital right-sizing and fixing that committee so that it would be what it needed to be. And Johnson, it's not really clear what his plan is," Crenshaw added.
- Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), another hawk, told Axios "it divides the conference, and I don't think that's good," adding that "most of us agree" with Turner on issues like Ukraine and intelligence collection.
- "I'm not happy with the decision. I think the vast majority of us are not happy with the decision," said another House Republican who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Zoom in: Despite Johnson's denials, several House Republicans pushed the theory that the right-wing House Freedom Caucus pressed President-elect Trump's team to demand Turner's ouster.
- The House Republican who spoke anonymously said the right-wing group, still smarting over a successful Turner-led push to reauthorize the federal government's spying capabilities, engineered the move.
- "The House Freedom Caucus remembered that, went down to Mar-a-Lago, extracted a pound of flesh from somebody they didn't like," they said. The right-wing group met with Trump at his Florida resort last weekend.
- Crenshaw called it a "very believable theory."
[. . .]
Democrats, meanwhile, are very public about their outrage towards Johnson's move.
- House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called Turner's removal "unjustified" and said it is "likely being applauded by our adversaries in Russia and China. Shameful."
- "It's very troubling, to put it mildly ... and it's foreboding that they are removing somebody as strong as that for apparently political reasons," said Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), an Intelligence Committee member.
What Chump is doing is highly disturbing. Kristi Noem is the nominee for Homeland Security. She really does not have experience in that area. She is an elected official (governor) and that could translate into a strong skill set that would make up for any flaws. But that would require that she be part of a team with others who are strong on security issues and intelligence issues.
Kristi could be an amazing Secretary of Homeland Security. I'm not attacking her. I am saying that others with experience need to be heading the related cabinets and posts.
But that's not what we're getting.
Instead, we're getting Trashy Garbage. As Trina noted Wednesday:
Janna Brancolini (Daily Beast) reports:
Donald Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence couldn’t clearly say what the director of national intelligence actually does, according to a new report in the Wall Street Journal.
Meeting with Senate Republicans ahead of her confirmation hearings, Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic representative turned MAGA loyalist, failed to articulate what the job she’d been nominated for entails. She also didn’t know the difference between key surveillance powers, according to the report.
The gaffes came in meetings with Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), according to two Republican Senate aides and an unnamed Trump transition official.
Rounds also read the statutory language for the role of director of national intelligence and asked how she could possibly meet that threshold. When he asked how she would handle specific elements of the job, she said she would have to just wait and see when she gets there.
Tulsi's stupid. She's not just inexperienced, she's flat out stupid. Her small skill set does not qualify her for the job. But she's also very stupid. As Trina notes, this nomination did not come yesterday or this week. This goes back to November 13th.
And yet two months after -- two months -- the nomination is announced, Tulsi, it turns out, hasn't even bothered to learn what the job entails.
Do we get how outrageous that is? How disrespectful that is? And how much danger that could put the country in?
People in the press are saying that this person or that person is a sure yes vote on Tulsi.
Really? As noted before, Senator John Cornyn's office -- Republican from Texas -- is hearing complaints about Tulsi. 62% of those contacting his office are objecting to Tulsi being confirmed. And there are a variety of reasons being given. But the main thing the Texas Republicans are objecting over is that Tulsi is a member of a cult. Guru Chris is her leader.
Guru Chris.
And that frightens a lot of people -- as it should. We've never knowingly had a member of cult in a cabinet position.
Matthew Chapman (RAW STORY) reports:
A "spiritual guru" behind a tiny religious group that former Hawaiian Rep. Tulsi Gabbard — Trump's pick for director of national intelligence — belonged to spewed hateful invective and slurs against LGBTQ people, The Daily Beast reported Thursday.
The guru, Chris Butler, headed up the Science of Identity Foundation, a self-described Hindu group in Hawaii and a splinter faction of the Hare Krishna movement.
"Butler, who has taken the name Jagad Guru Siddhaswarupananda Paramahamsa and is addressed as 'Jagad Guru,' is estimated by some former members to have as many as 10,000 followers," reported Daniel Bates and Emell Derra Adolphus. "'Jagad Guru' means 'teacher of the world' and also that he is the ultimate authority to his followers."
Grasp that. He is the ultimate authority. Let's stay with Republcians in Texas. Most, but probably not all, are Christians. And they can relate to God and Jesus being their ultimate authority. They can't relate to Tulsi's desire to make a human being her ultimate authority.
Her giving ultimate authority to some human being makes her a security risk.
Some BLUESKY reaction to Trashy Garbage.
Let's note this from the White House this morning:
Statement from President Joe Biden on Additional Clemency Actions
Today, I am commuting the sentences of nearly 2,500 people convicted of non-violent drug offenses who are serving disproportionately long sentences compared to the sentences they would receive today under current law, policy, and practice. With this action, I have now issued more individual pardons and commutations than any president in U.S. history.
Today’s clemency action provides relief for individuals who received lengthy sentences based on discredited distinctions between crack and powder cocaine, as well as outdated sentencing enhancements for drug crimes. As Congress recognized through the Fair Sentencing Act and the First Step Act, it is time that we equalize these sentencing disparities. This action is an important step toward righting historic wrongs, correcting sentencing disparities, and providing deserving individuals the opportunity to return to their families and communities after spending far too much time behind bars. I am proud of my record on clemency and will continue to review additional commutations and pardons.
###
Good for Joe.
To survive the next four years, we'll need our wits about us. That includes knowing who are friends and knowing who isn't a friend. At RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT (a misnomer if ever there was one), Trita Parsi launches yet another attack on Joe Biden. Let's not even bother with what it's about because it's just partisan b.s. Instead, let's note him. From WIKIPEDIA:
National Iranian American Council
[edit]In 2002, Parsi founded the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), whose stated purpose is "dedicated to strengthening the voice of Iranian-Americans and promoting greater understanding between the American and Iranian people. We accomplish our mission through expert research and analysis, civic and policy education, and community building."[9] At NIAC's founding, Parsi argued "Our community is educated, affluent, dynamic, and professionally successful. However, we have yet to harness our immense human potential into constructive engagement in American civil society."[10]
Through NIAC, Parsi supports engagement between the US and Iran, saying it "would enhance our [U.S.] national security by helping to stabilize the Middle East and bolster the moderates in Iran."[5]
In a 2011 talk sponsored by the Institute for Global Law and Policy at the Harvard Law School, Parsi argued that the conflict between Israel and Iran was not ideological but strategic and geopolitical.[11] In a 2012 article for Salon, Parsi accuses Israel of using "the threat of war to push the U.S. and EU into passing economic sanctions on Iran" and denounced those sanctions as "blind" and "indiscriminate."[12]
Lobbying controversy and defamation lawsuit
[edit]In 2007, Arizona-based Iranian-American blogger[13] Hassan Daioleslam began publicly asserting that NIAC was lobbying on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Daioleslam wrote in an internal email, "I strongly believe that Trita Parsi is the weakest part of the Iranian web because he is related to Siamak Namazi and Bob Ney... I believe that destroying him will be the start of attacking the whole web. This is an integral part of any attack on Clinton or Obama."[14][15]
In response, Parsi sued him for defamation. In September 2012, a U.S. federal judge John D. Bates threw out the libel suit against Daioleslam on the grounds that "NIAC and Parsi had failed to show evidence of actual malice, either that Daioeslam acted with knowledge the allegations he made were false or with reckless disregard about their accuracy." Bates also wrote, "Nothing in this opinion should be construed as a finding that defendant’s articles were true. Defendant did not move for summary judgment on that ground, and it has not been addressed here."[16]
"
