Michael Tracey's Thesis

Let me start by saying that I get that Trump is running for POTUS. I also get that America is still a globe spanning empire but that there are more things involved in being POTUS than just standing aside while the real rulers of America run forever wars. The POTUS can, in limited ways, still be a force for, well, improvement in our national life? I don’t wanna sound terribly naive, but I don’t have all day to try to come up with the right word. Boycotting politics still seems like the wrong choice to me, no matter how disillusioning. There are forces at work in the world that may yet bring the nation to a moment of self examination, and we need to prepare for that as best we can. Presuming Trump gets elected—and he has still to do elude many ruling class ploys and stratagems along the way—I won’t be holding my breath waiting for the Swamp to Drain this time around. Still …

With that in mind, here’s the short form of Michael Tracey’s thesis—which I believe is correct in its general outline.

Michael Tracey @mtracey

Biden, Trump, Schumer, Johnson, McConnell, and Jeffries are all gloriously united behind this gargantuan war funding bill, but partisan propagandists will spend the next seven months screeching that civilization itself hinges on whether Democrats or Republicans win the election

6:56 PM · Apr 19, 2024

I’m not sure exactly what Tracey’s angle is on this. My take would be that Trump is trying to reassure the Deep State that there will be no Swamp Draining, that they can find a way to get along together.

Now, here are some more thoughts from Tracey. The “code of silence” refers to people like MTG who Tracey says are pretending that Trump isn’t behind this:

The "code of silence" on Trump's behavior right now is astounding. He's personally facilitating the largest-ever disbursement of funds to Ukraine, underwriting this grotesque war for at least another 1-2 years, along with requiring Biden to transfer hugely escalatory weapons systems like long-range ATACMS. Try to find a right-wing "influencer" -- media figure, operative, or politician -- discussing any of this honestly today. They're all pretending it's not happening and/or lying to their audiences in one of the most egregious political hoaxes I have genuinely ever seen.

This is one of the few instances when "TDS" is actually warranted, because Trump has done something legitimately "deranged." The real "syndrome" is ignoring it. The crucial House vote on the war funding bill (introduced with Trump's blessing by "MAGA Mike Johnson," as Trump lovingly calls him) is literally happening tomorrow night! This is urgent.

I'm happy to have "TDS" on the occasions when Trump actually *is* the critical factor in something truly obscene happening. And I say this as someone who spent years being slimed as a secret nefarious Trump supporter for criticizing Russiagate -- a previous hoax that rivals this one in magnitude and severity.

8:48 AM · Apr 19, 2024

Why the code of silence? This isn’t a one size fits all thing. It’s more a mix and match thing.

Here are some reasons for the astounding "code of silence" on Trump expending his vast political capital to ensure the passage of this massive Ukraine funding bill:

- GOP media "influencers" are petrified of attacks from Trump, who now controls every lever of power in the GOP

- GOP media "influencers" are petrified of backlash from their own audience, as criticizing Trump would present a huge commercial and algorithmic liability

- GOP media "influencers" are just pure political operatives who don't care about the truth anyway

- GOP operatives want jobs in the next Trump administration, so are now sucking up full-time to Trump

- These people are genuinely brainwashed or in denial about Trump and his decisive role ushering through the Ukraine funding legislation. This in some ways is the most disturbing explanation

10:23 PM · Apr 19, 2024

Apparently being "red pilled" means convincing yourself that three-time GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump has no political influence, and that some random member of Congress has more political influence, because that person currently holds elected office and Trump doesn't

4:03 AM · Apr 20, 2024

Next, Tracey argues—reading between the lines—that Trump ordered Gaetz to dump Speaker Kev … for some reason or other. I still believe that the real reason for this money for Ukraine is to help Zhou. Trump is cunning and probably figures that Ukraine can’t make it through the summer anyway, so why not use his influence to pass the spending to reassure the Deep State? As for Gaetz, you can’t just keep going back to the vacation well as if that doesn’t change the political dynamics in a House that’s this divided. Johnson—and his backers—know that and called Gaetz’ bluff.

The vote on the massive war funding bill is happening within hours, and Matt Gaetz has not co-sponsored the "motion to vacate" against Mike Johnson, after having done so last year against Kevin McCarthy on what Gaetz insisted were legitimate, substantive grounds. So -- what were those legitimate, substantive grounds on which Gaetz claimed to be ousting McCarthy, and how do they not now apply tenfold to Johnson? Because at this point, Johnson has exceeded McCarthy's wildest dreams in terms of top-down legislative maneuvering that Gaetz claimed to be objecting to with McCarthy. Johnson is employing brash tactics that McCarthy never even dreamt of, such as recruiting Democrats to pass the Rule for the upcoming war funding vote.

In light of all this, what are we supposed to infer about the motives of Gaetz for moving to oust McCarthy, but not Johnson? 

6:31 AM · Apr 20, 2024

To underscore his close collaboration with Trump, Johnson has spent the past several days making the rounds on various conservative media, touting the inclusion of Trump's "loan concept" in the bill. "I stand with the Speaker," Trump infamously declared at his joint press conference with Johnson at Mar-a-Lago on April 13. Johnson is doing "a very good job," Trump said.

Alex Miller @AlexMil92241944 Apr 20

Replying to @mtracey

What is the political motivation for Trump to do this? Can someone explain it?

Michael Tracey @mtracey

Apr 20

Trump has ALWAYS supported arming Ukraine -- he started it! He openly brags about it, all the time! He also constantly brags about how he was the "toughest" president ever on Russia, and the most "pro-Israel" president ever. It's all on the record. What's the big mystery here???

Tracey, in his thread, goes on a toot quoting snippets of GOPers who supported the bill. I haven’t quoted them because I’m afraid that stupidity and deviousness are infectious, and I won’t endanger readers. In fairness, still, these GOPers are not the majority—although Tracey argues that even those who voted ‘No’ can’t be trusted. Well, what can I say?

WARNING:

Do NOT buy the sincerity of most Republican NO votes on the Ukraine funding bill that just passed. Remember, Speaker Mike Johnson voted NO on the May 2022 Ukraine funding bill -- but strictly on technical/partisan/procedural grounds, despite his support on principle for funding Ukraine. Today, Johnson ushered through the largest-ever appropriation of Ukraine funding. That's not because he "changed his mind" -- the only thing that changed was his personal political situation. The 2022 bill was already assured to pass without his vote, so he could afford to vote NO despite supporting the underlying substance of the policy.

Similarly, included among the NO votes today are some of the most hardcore pro-Ukraine hawks in the entire House, … [lots more]

Well, wait a minute. I just don’t believe in “hardcore pro-Ukraine hawks” in general. For most of these people it’s about the money, as Doug Macgregor. OTOH, Tracey is right about not trusting. He’s just too hung up on believing in war mongering as a substantive position. It’s about gaslighting the voters back home and, above all, the money. Sometimes you need to fool the folks, holding the “policy switch” in reserve. Donors know that.

OK, I’ll put fear aside and expose readers to some major leagues deviousness:

Nancy Pelosi "salutes" Speaker Mike Johnson (and by extension, Donald Trump) for making the war legislation possible. She says anyone who votes against Ukraine funding will have the blood of raped Ukrainian women on their hands. Real sicko stuff here -- but thoroughly bipartisan

Hakeem Jeffries commends "traditional conservatives led by Speaker Mike Johnson" for bringing the giant war funding bill. These same people will spend the rest of the year inundating us with propaganda about the allegedly unbridgeable differences between Democrats and Republicans

Well, contra Tracey, War Forever is THE Uniparty issue. There are still issues that divide Americans, which is why I won’t give up.

And again, here’s Tracey being stupid:

Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL) declares, "Israel's security is our security." Until you fully appreciate that these people genuinely see Israel as an extension of, and interchangeable with, the US -- not merely an "ally" -- you cannot grasp why the US acts as it does regarding Israel

Of COURSE Frankel doesn’t really believe that BS. She just wants YOU to believe it. She knows she’s gaslighting you. “Until you fully appreciate that …” for these people it’s all about Israel, which America exists to serve.

Michael Tracey @mtracey

Mike Johnson just defied standard practice again for a Speaker and personally voted YES on the Ukraine funding bill he collaborated with Donald Trump to design and pass. Typically the Speaker does not personally vote, but Johnson was clearly passionate about his Trump-backed bill

Erm … passionate about power?