User avatar
By Boiler
#107095
Samanfur wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2026 12:28 pm Kelly has openly stated that in the unlikely event of Trump calling for a vote on war powers, he'd vote against for the quoted reason.
Why would Trump call for those powers, though? He does what he likes whilst Congress has proven that it's nothing more than somewhere to get free money in return for doing fuck all. If it disappeared, nobody would notice.
User avatar
By Samanfur
#107097
Agreed, but somebody (possibly NBC) asked him the question.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#107101
The Democrats reckon they have the votes to force Trump to ask for them, explicitly. He's likely just to ignore that, but it may not go down with some of MAGA.
User avatar
By Andy McDandy
#107105
Meanwhile, having posted pictures of Da Chief in his Shitsville-on-Sea 'situation room', the regime are being told that putting up pictures featuring multiple monitors, display boards, documents and other things showing probably highly classified information is overall not a very good idea.
User avatar
By Samanfur
#107107
I'm having flashbacks to Angela Merkel's face when seated next to Ivanka Trump at the UN, and wondering what facial expressions will be in the audience for this:

Melania Trump to lead UN security council session, White House says

Melania Trump is set to lead a session of the United Nations security council on Monday, coinciding with the US assuming the body’s rotating monthly presidency, the White House announced.

According to a statement, first cited by CNN, the first lady plans to spotlight education as a tool for fostering tolerance and promoting global peace at the global body, which has its headquarters in New York.

The session, titled Children, Technology, and Education in Conflict, will mark the first time the first lady to a sitting US president has presided over the 15-member council, and kicks off the first session to mark the United States’ latest stint presiding.

The White House said: “Mrs Trump’s leadership will mark the first time a sitting US first lady presides over the security council, as members consider education, technology, peace, and security.”
Typically, security council meetings are chaired by a nation’s UN ambassador or a senior cabinet official. While former first ladies such as Eleanor Roosevelt held influential positions within the UN – Roosevelt helped draft the universal declaration of human rights – none have presided over council meetings while serving as first lady.
Eleanor Roosevelt also had an IQ above room temperature, and could carry an argument in something other than a bucket; but Melania is a Trump, so has to cosplay as something that looks good on her meme coins or her latest coffee table book.
mattomac liked this
User avatar
By Yug
#107109
According to a statement, first cited by CNN, the first lady plans to spotlight education as a tool for fostering tolerance and promoting global peace at the global body, which has its headquarters in New York.
My irony meter just exploded
mattomac, Samanfur, Spoonman liked this
By Bones McCoy
#107115
Samanfur wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2026 3:05 pm I'm having flashbacks to Angela Merkel's face when seated next to Ivanka Trump at the UN, and wondering what facial expressions will be in the audience for this:

Melania Trump to lead UN security council session, White House says

Melania Trump is set to lead a session of the United Nations security council on Monday, coinciding with the US assuming the body’s rotating monthly presidency, the White House announced.

According to a statement, first cited by CNN, the first lady plans to spotlight education as a tool for fostering tolerance and promoting global peace at the global body, which has its headquarters in New York.

The session, titled Children, Technology, and Education in Conflict, will mark the first time the first lady to a sitting US president has presided over the 15-member council, and kicks off the first session to mark the United States’ latest stint presiding.

The White House said: “Mrs Trump’s leadership will mark the first time a sitting US first lady presides over the security council, as members consider education, technology, peace, and security.”
Typically, security council meetings are chaired by a nation’s UN ambassador or a senior cabinet official. While former first ladies such as Eleanor Roosevelt held influential positions within the UN – Roosevelt helped draft the universal declaration of human rights – none have presided over council meetings while serving as first lady.
Eleanor Roosevelt also had an IQ above room temperature, and could carry an argument in something other than a bucket; but Melania is a Trump, so has to cosplay as something that looks good on her meme coins or her latest coffee table book.
How dare you sir!
Melania is a proper movie star now.
Sales nearing double figures at some cinemas.
Samanfur liked this
By Bones McCoy
#107116
Yug wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2026 4:22 pm
According to a statement, first cited by CNN, the first lady plans to spotlight education as a tool for fostering tolerance and promoting global peace at the global body, which has its headquarters in New York.
My irony meter just exploded
Education, Tolerance and Peace?
Throw in Truth and you've the 4 horsemen of the MAGApocalypse.
Samanfur, Oboogie, Yug liked this
User avatar
By Andy McDandy
#107117
"I think peace is very important. If you don't agree, you're a meanie. Why can't everyone stop being nasty? If you make jokes or say mean things about me or my husband, you're a nasty bully. I like nice things. Let's have more nice things."

There, saved you some time.
By Bones McCoy
#107129
Oboogie wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2026 6:23 pm Any truth in the rumour that FIFA have commissioned a sculptor to design a War Prize?
About a decade ago, I created a fast playing (~15 minute duration) boardgame of global corruption and called it Blatterball.

It's time for a sequel: Infantinoball - corruption, trophies, wars.
Tubby Isaacs liked this
User avatar
By AOB
#107139
Come on China, join in, you lazy cunts. Nuke the fuck out of the US and Israel. Blow the world up. Let all the billionaires living in their underground bunkers fester there and fight it out among themselves who can rule the barren radioactive wasteland of Earth in the aftermath.
User avatar
By Abernathy
#107149
Christ, turning on the news is such a depressing experience at the moment. Practically the entire middle east seems to be on fucking fire, and god only knows what the future consequences, and their extent, will be for all of us.

And all because the fucking Americans decided to (re)elect as their president the very worst human being on the planet.

Fatalism, anyone ?
Bones McCoy liked this
User avatar
By Boiler
#107150
I find my mood is greatly helped by avoiding news media altogether at times like this and just distracting myself with fixing things - be it the car, the garden, hobby interests. If the bomb's gonna drop well, it'll be a spectacle worth watching.

Fifty years ago, my father said WW3 will start in the Middle East. I still hope he's wrong.

Anyway, we can hope the rash on its neck that's the subject of febrile speculation on the Internet is nothing trivial like say, eczema.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#107155
Abernathy wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2026 5:36 pm Christ, turning on the news is such a depressing experience at the moment. Practically the entire middle east seems to be on fucking fire, and god only knows what the future consequences, and their extent, will be for all of us.

And all because the fucking Americans decided to (re)elect as their president the very worst human being on the planet.

Fatalism, anyone ?
I just can't believe that the Right and lots of the media sees the conflagration and thinks the UK should have been fully involved in setting it all off. If lots of the public really are there too, then we might as well all give up. International war is now a subject for radio phone-in gobshitery, just like anything else, a pretext for launching stupid personal attacks on the Prime Minister.
User avatar
By The Weeping Angel
#107160
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2026 7:02 pm
Abernathy wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2026 5:36 pm Christ, turning on the news is such a depressing experience at the moment. Practically the entire middle east seems to be on fucking fire, and god only knows what the future consequences, and their extent, will be for all of us.

And all because the fucking Americans decided to (re)elect as their president the very worst human being on the planet.

Fatalism, anyone ?
I just can't believe that the Right and lots of the media sees the conflagration and thinks the UK should have been fully involved in setting it all off. If lots of the public really are there too, then we might as well all give up. International war is now a subject for radio phone-in gobshitery, just like anything else, a pretext for launching stupid personal attacks on the Prime Minister.
Public opinion seems to be on Starmer's side.

User avatar
By Spoonman
#107163
I don't particularly fawn over Churchill's legacy, but I'd be quietly confident that if he was around today he'd chew up and spit out Trump for breakfast.
By Bones McCoy
#107166
Boiler wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2026 5:51 pm I find my mood is greatly helped by avoiding news media altogether at times like this and just distracting myself with fixing things - be it the car, the garden, hobby interests. If the bomb's gonna drop well, it'll be a spectacle worth watching.

Fifty years ago, my father said WW3 will start in the Middle East. I still hope he's wrong.

Anyway, we can hope the rash on its neck that's the subject of febrile speculation on the Internet is nothing trivial like say, eczema.
Guillotine reference mark - if we're lucky.

Facebook reckons Syphilis - Facebook is famously the first port of call for medical professionals.
  • 1
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
Trump 2.0 Lunacy

Public opinion seems to be on Starmer's si[…]

The water investment is pretty extensive. Reservoi[…]

Reform Party

How many days till Tice invokes Forrin Office h[…]

Guardian

https://bsky.app/profile/benbradshaw.bsky.social[…]