Hatfort

Okay, but that's different from receiving money for your own YouTube channel from the Russian government itself, the law says you have to register as a foreign agent at least. Russia Today may not be that different from NYT or Washington Post, journalists work and get diffusion where they can or are allowed to. Could they have more integrity and create their own little platform and try? Many do, now it's possible thanks to YouTube and similars mostly, but the traditional mediums are still alive and have a weight. I'm curious to know. What are some examples of US leftists working for RT?

It's always right-wingers getting paid though, via corporations or foreign powerful countries. If you are a leftist commentator or content creator, you've better have a Patreon or some audience to sustain yourself. It sucks to be a leftist. Putin was in relation with many ultra-right political movements in Europe, at least before the war. Some stabbed him in the back when the war started, even calling him Communist, resurfacing the Red Scare of the USSR era, crazy but true, that's the level of politics in Spain at least. It was harmful for them in their country's public eye to support Putin, so they turned their back on him. In a sense, that's what he deserves, if you have relations with shitty groups, that's what you get. I'm not pro-Putin, but this war could have been avoided via diplomacy, NATO keeps getting Ukraine deeper and deeper into the hole. Biden had a decent domestic policy, and internationally he started well by ending the forever war in Afghanistan, Trump has a big mouth, but he did nothing about that. In Palestine and Ukraine, Biden has been awful. Both wars come from before his term, but they exploded in his time, and the money and weapons for both come from him, so what's happening is on him, stupid old man. If Kamala wins, we can't be sure what she will do. I think there are chances she has a more diplomatic and less warmongering approach. I hope she doesn't fall into the need to overcompensate the accusations of being weak for being a woman by trying to be tough or some shit like that. They will tell that about her anyway. There's nothing she can do about Ukraine now, that war is lost. Israel is not in a good place either, Hamas can't be defeated, Palestinian survivors will be willing to fight their murderers back, like it's normal and any other group of people would do, and Israel's economy is in the mud now. At this point, they'd better ask to be annexed to the US, which the facto are, but that would mean they would have to accept all their citizens are equal under the constitution, so on second thought, they won't want that. I'm rumbling.

Consistency in time is something I value too, TYT has it. Hasan has already about 8 years of media career, it's okay for his age, he is not a baby. Forget about his livestream viewers, he has quite a bigger audience on his official channel only, talking about politics. He's quite big and is having more impact than most leftist online channels, including TYT. Not only teenagers, although a considerable fraction of his audience are, and quite a younger average for sure. But that's the future too, I wouldn't dismiss it.

Nope, only Hasan's official YouTube videos have a bigger reach than TYT, and if we count the nonofficial channel views, even bigger. Then there are his live-streaming daily viewers, which are thousands. Hasan is quite bigger than TYT.

Okay, maybe not intellectually. He is more successful in reaching a bigger audience, and making more money as a result, maybe because of his more entertaining style. I think the left needed someone in the media a bit less serious than the usual pamphlet distributor with the hammer and sickle t-shirt giving lectures on leftism purity. Anyway, he is not stupid either, apart from being quite fluent and articulate, he has some brain too.

A few right-winger commentators caught being paid by Russia, Tim Pool and Dave Ruvin, among others. I think the law says they have to register as foreign agents, or something like that. That's what Scott Ritter says, whose home has been raided by the FBI and all his documents and electronic devices taken. In his case, he categorically denies the accusations of being paid by the Russian government in any way, he presents himself as an American patriot, but not antagonistic to Russia, and favorable to its position in the Ukrainian war. He cooperated with the FBI, he says they will find nothing incriminating, and I think he is being truthful about it.

It's pretty remarkable if you think about it. A man his age and origin, from a less developed country, who migrated to the USA, has quite progressive ideas. He must have had a journey himself to reach where he is, from deep blue to green, going through a successful orange business endeavor. Also remarkable that his nephew surpassed him!

Engineer or not, a politician should have an understanding of economy and sociology, which should go hand in hand, in public administration at least. Also some diplomacy skills, to deal with people, businesses, and adversary parties, and even international actors, in the highest spheres. No shame in consulting and hiring experts in different fields, doctors, engineers, educators, militars, etc... A true public service vocation and good public speaking and communication skills.

Nah, maybe a few leftist anitvax loonies, but a very insignificant number. Trump is a good repellent for most leftists, the loss for the left is that RFK was eating from Trump's base, and now is not.

It would have been better for the Democrats if RFK continued as a third party, as he was taking more from the right base. At least he is less stupid than Cornel West on this move. Trump evades a significant loss of votes, and RFK gets a position in his cabinet, if he wins. Like it or not, it's fair game. A ceasefire in Gaza could help Kamala, but Biden and his administration have been stupid on this. Netanyahu doesn't want it, personally, to avoid his corruption charges thanks to times of war, and politically, his objectives of destroying and depopulating Gaza as much as he can, so it's not happening. Netanyahu has Biden in his pocket, but he still prefers Trump. Democrats should have pushed a ceasefire much before, if not for Gaza, for themselves, by not aiding with infinite money and weapons. Now the dog is unleashed, catch it if you can. At this point in the race, you can't, or not as fast as you need to. The race is on though, nobody wins until November. The next president will have two hot potatoes at least. One, to deal with Russia's victory over Ukraine, and Putin is not going to negotiate shit after the Kursk invasion, this may mean a total bye of Ukraine from the world map. Two, the Middle East, a pressure cooker about to explode at any time.

The DNC was very successful, the party is united behind Kamala. Republicans call it a soft cue, the truth is that they preferred a match against old Biden, who wouldn't. Biden left, it was quite late for a primary and those kinds of disputes. Kamala was already second in command, so what happened makes sense. Would she have won a primary if Biden had stepped down earlier? Maybe not. But the Democrat Party gains nothing contemplating those ifs. Things happened as they did, Biden's age-related issues caught up, and something had to be done, and has been done. She has some flaws, but she also has her own professional career behind her, has been VP, and nailed choosing her VP too. Will she lead well and focus on America and Americans more instead of NATO wars, like Biden? That would be good. She first has to win against Trump and then show her colors.

I think this 'believe all women' approach came from a real problem that may not have any good solution. Sometimes women couldn't provide proof of their mistreatment by partners or other men to the police, so nothing was done to help them, and that would backfire on them when their partners found out they were being denounced, so that would lead to more mistreatment and sometimes even death. This was and is a real problem. Some of these new approaches would seek to protect the women who denounced to the police, even without enough proof, with things like restraining orders. But some women can lie, and use those systems to screw their partners, who may be innocent. Things get more complicated when there are children in those marriages or partnerships. That's why I don't think there's any absolute good solution. One way you can screw women who really need protection, the other you can screw innocent men. Which bad is worse?

After years of exile, lies fabricated about him, and torturous isolated imprisonment, the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange has been released from prison and will fly to his homeland Australia now. The news is good, his life was in danger and he deserves freedom after so long. But there's a bad part. They have crushed his existence until he had no other choice but to take the deal of pleading guilty to espionage, which is absurd. He is a journalist who was sent information of crimes committed by the USA and its army, a country that isn't even his. That's the precedent we are setting? So if a journalist finds out about crimes in any country, is this country allowed to imprison this journalist as a spy? That's crazy, and more so coming from a country that constantly claims the importance of freedom of speech and press as a high value, which it is. But they don't believe it. Seems like a warning to journalists in general. Don't publish our secret crimes if you find out about them, or we'll go after you.

Good question. The answer is no. Yeah, Putin is pissed now. He gave an offer recently, and I understand Ukraine had the right to reject it, but what's to negotiate now? Russia seems capable of stopping those attacks on the border and continuing the expansion in Ukraine.

This was the title of Matt Walsh's documentary. I've seen some clips, one of his interviewees tried to explain to him the distinction between biological sex, and gender as a social construct or identity, but he totally ignored it. He wasn't willing to even listen to anything that would explain the nature of trans people. This a pretty good one-line short answer anyway.

A 17-year-old guy committed a horrible crime, the system should get him and punish him for it, which I don't doubt will do. He is a direct descendant of immigrants, although born and raised there. In any case, I don't see why the whole immigrant population should be blamed for what he did. A lot of racism and xenophobia emerged last days, targeting innocent people for the color of their skin or origin. But I was glad to see counter manifestations against those attitudes in all cities. Most English people are tolerant.

I don't know the process she went through. She says she is happy about it though, she doesn't regret it. You are anticipating some negative results that haven't happened and may not happen, and not considering the positive ones, she's living a more authentic and fulfilling life. Your intuitive feelings mean nothing, you are not in her head. Trans people are not pushed as much as it's said they are. If it felt better for her to live her life as, let's say a man with some feminine traits, that is what she would do, like many men do, and with less social repercussion in their lives for that. But that's not what she has opted to do. Are you in her head to say she is wrong? No. Just, let her be. You have no base to say what you say.

Even if he has a strongly different position about transitioning, it's still his child, saying publicly he is dead is crazy, Musk is awful. She is not dead, I'll call her she, and is living her life as it feels good and authentic to her. She is fine, doesn't regret transitioning, doesn't want to live as a man, let her be.

Walz is a hype for Democrats, and compensates for some of Kamala Harris's flaws. He is natural, approachable, speaks well, and defends his positions strongly, not defensively. Rogan endorsed RFK, that will deduct from Trump more than from Harris. But the race has to be run, a good campaign is crucial.

Yeah, this is true. But it shouldn't be a surprise that they yet oppose this domination, which is too often violent. They only want to exist with their good and bad things as we do, and they have the right to do so. We of course can criticize what we don't like from our point of view, but yet we shouldn't impose our ways on them, that's not acceptable. Also, this sometimes causes them, or anyone, to double down as a defense mechanism. What's fair for the West is to defend ourselves if we were attacked, and even counterattack. But we are not attacked, they are, by our governments and armies.

It's not that much about the imperfections or the development level of Arabs. It's about the warmongering actions of the West over them that cause literal deaths and destruction they suffer. We rightfully get angry about the terrorist attacks that happen within our borders, but our armies attack them in much higher frequency, and put sanctions on them when they do not do what they are told to. They respond to the harm that's caused to them like we would do. They're level of development, sexism, and other considerations are another interesting discussion, but that's not what's happening here. In the case of Israel, it's literal colonization, ethnic cleansing, violent population replacement over decades, sometimes slower, sometimes faster, and the current genocide in Gaza is another step in Netanyahu's and Zionists' agenda. They pushed as much as they could so Hamas would eventually attack, which they funded initially, then get the pretext to do what they are doing. What's disappointing is the weak international support for those being butchered, and worse the actual support, mostly from the Biden administration. But I think there is a dissonance between most people in the West, who oppose this, and the more powerful spheres. However, Hamas is resisting, Israel doesn't have control over Gaza yet. If their soldiers stay, they will continue being killed. It's not on them when Israel deliberately shoots at children or bombs civilians gathering in schools or whatever refuge they can find after their homes have been destroyed, as it's on Hamas the civilians that they killed in October last year, although the ones that Israel killed with the Hannibal directive not. Each side has to own its actions. But, again, when you dig enough, what you find is that Israel started this, and the West was interested in having a piece of this land that was inhabited and invested in it.

Nah, this good versus bad guys doesn't work in the real world. Accords have to be made between different powers, and respect mutual coexistance. One big power ruling the rest of the world doesn't work anymore, for the US, those times are gone.

Ukraine has its rights for an army, but they are part of an international context, and joining NATO is breaking a minimum neutrality Russia, NATO and themselves agreed in the past, which other countries like Poland, Estonia, Letonia, and Lituania broke in the past, and Russia said not this time. Some of Russian's actions are justified, NATO has to stop messing in neutral countries. In LOTR I cheered for the human, elf, dwarf, hobbit, alliance, like everyone else. If anyone is trying to control the rest of the world like Sauron with the rings, that would be the US empire and NATO. About this book of Tolkien, George RR Martin gave some interesting thoughts. What did King Aragorn do with all this ugly orcs, goblins, and trolls after winning the war against Sauron? Did he give them equal rights like everyone else in the middle Earth? Did he inprison them in Mordor? Who knows...

No, it's not correct at all, those are not my words. Go up in the thread and you will read what I said clearly, in more than one line, obviously. I don't have a personal agenda for either side. I can acknowledge both sides have their fair claims, that happens in most conflicts in history. But NATO is the one pushing the war in this case, this didn't need to happen, because they want hegemony, and the ones doing the dying part are Ukrainians, which they don't give a fuck for.

The war wouldn't have happened if NATO wasn't arming the Azov battalions to the teeth. Russia wasn't asking for the Donbass to be Russia then, that wasn't in the Minsk Accords, it was asking for Ukraine to remain neutral, meaning no undercover NATO training the Azov battalions, and respect for their cultural brothers. But Ukraine and NATO were doing the opposite of what they signed. They thought any threat of Russia attacking would be a bluff, and that if they did, that could collapse Putin, Russia, their military power, and their economy. They were wrong in everything. Now it's just stupidity, and the US military-industrial lobby pushing forward, the only ones benefiting from this war short term. In the long term Russia will get an expansion, which is good, but with a big human soldier cost. Ukraine has that cost too, but they will lose the East and perhaps the whole connection to the sea if Russia decides to invade Odessa too. This defeat will harm NATO too, it was perceived as unbeatable before, but now it's not. The EU is getting a bad deal too, it lost its gas source from Russia, now they have to get it more expensive, and that increases the prices of everything. China and India got stronger from this. By the way, you know who is not losing their independent country status or territorial integrity? Belarus. Yeah, they have accords and dependency with Russia, but they are surviving as a nation 100%. If you tell me they are not really independent for this, no country in the world is completely independent then. With all the flaws their regime has, which I won't object, but there they are.