What it's actually a coup?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Pretty easy to make it wrong

Jared Kushner sold classified intel to Mohammed Bin Salman for $2 Billion.
Kushner and his allies blocked top-level U.S. government support for MBS’s cousin, former Saudi Crown Prince MBN—a long-time intelligence and counter-terrorist asset for the U.S.—when MBN attempted a legal coup d’état in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 2017.

MBN believed he had enough support from the so-called “Council of Ministers” to back him in a regime change. If successful, both King Salman and MBS (then deputy crown prince) would have been unseated and replaced by MBN.

Kushner and his allies in the White House got word to MBS of bin Nayef’s plans, and the plot was abruptly stopped.

According to three sources with knowledge, it#^&was#^&this meddling in Saudi royal affairs that caused U.S. intelligence officials to go “apoplectic” and prevent Kushner from getting a top-level security clearance.

Jared Kushner basically handed the Saudis this information, thereby giving MBS the opportunity to kneecap his rival and get rid of him.

MBN has not been heard from since his arrest in March 2020, when he was imprisoned somewhere in Saudi Arabia.

Nowhere near equal
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Non mathematical equivalence and false equivalence doesn't necessarily require the exact same amount or degree of what is being compared, merely the same types of things are being compared.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Non mathematical equivalence and false equivalence doesn't necessarily require the exact same amount or degree of what is being compared, merely the same types of things are being compared.

Need a reason to never trust the GOP again? How about the entire Republican Party knowing about 1/6, and not a single one of them warning the FBI.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Need a reason to never trust the GOP again? How about the entire Republican Party knowing about 1/6, and not a single one of them warning the FBI.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The "entire" Republican Party! Including all those in state governments? Even Liz Cheney? Well, I don't trust her anyway. Like her dad when he went against his promise to get rid of Obamacare with his infamous and dramatic thumbs down.

I don't trust either party, except to renege on a lot of promises. Nor do I trust the FBI. I think one of the reasons we have elections is that it would be foolish to trust politicians and parties.

Which is a major reason why I want Progressivism and the Progressive Party to be defeated. The Progressive agenda is to regulate us by unelected administrators.

I do, however, have a cynical trust in the Progressives to faithfully carry out that mission.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The "entire" Republican Party! Including all those in state governments? Even Liz Cheney? Well, I don't trust her anyway. Like her dad when he went against his promise to get rid of Obamacare with his infamous and dramatic thumbs down.

I don't trust either party, except to renege on a lot of promises. Nor do I trust the FBI. I think one of the reasons we have elections is that it would be foolish to trust politicians and parties.

Which is a major reason why I want Progressivism and the Progressive Party to be defeated. The Progressive agenda is to regulate us by unelected administrators.

I do, however, have a cynical trust in the Progressives to faithfully carry out that mission.

Right-wingers are obsessed with FA Hayek's 1944 *theory* that welfare states inevitably expand to become totalitarian. Is there *any* case in which this actually happened since 1944? Arguably, Pinochet's Chile, but this was an authoritarian effort to stop socialism.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Right-wingers are obsessed with FA Hayek's 1944 *theory* that welfare states inevitably expand to become totalitarian. Is there *any* case in which this actually happened since 1944? Arguably, Pinochet's Chile, but this was an authoritarian effort to stop socialism.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

China is a welfare state. Centralization of power may not inevitably become totalitarian. It already is at least authoritarian. Which is well on its way to becoming totalitarian, given human nature and the lust for power. A lust that is inherent in both despots and do-gooders.

There are variations of the so-called "welfare state." In my opinion, it is far better to have a state in which there are multiple centers of power that are more directly responsible to the will of their people, and in which the people can easily remove their elected leaders when they trespass what our constitutional system calls inalienable rights. If the people prefer the state's power over and determination of their welfare, then they have an optimistic view of the continued welfare and rights granted by authoritarians. I prefer to have the option to live in a state that protects inalienable rights than in one that grants what rights we have.