Ben Shapiro Storms Out of BBC Interview: ‘I’m Popular and No One’s Ever Heard of You’
Facts did not care about Ben Shapiro’s feelings.

Right-wing commentator and “cool kid’s philosopher” Ben Shapiro stormed out of a contentious BBC interview on Thursday after accusing the conservative host of being a “leftist” and bragging about how popular he is.

During the pre-taped interview with BBC interviewer Andrew Neil promoting his new book, The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great, Shapiro quickly became perturbed when Neil—who is known for playing devil’s advocate in interviews—pressed him on recent attempts to roll back abortion rights, asking the editor-in-chief of clickbait rage factory The Daily Wire if those policies would take America back to the “Dark Ages.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/ben-shapir...er-heard-of-you

One of the Trumski propagandists.

The Worst Businessman in America
The revelations about Trump's taxes prove he was a grifter and a fraud, a braggart and a blowhard. In other words, he was the same man he is today.

Trump’s dazzling failure helps explain how he and the Republicans have given the nation an era of nearly $1 trillion in annual deficits, despite the buoyant economy.

The Times’ scoop is bracing, even if it comes too late to convince Trump loyalists that they have been hoodwinked by a fraud (if they ever were convincible). What it does suggest is that no coverup lasts forever—and that, sooner or later, Trump’s more recent tax returns will be made public.
https://newrepublic.com/article/153855/t...Hk1aGl7gIesnjdo

Zitat von Hans Bergman im Beitrag #6477

---

Eins muss man den USA lassen: ihre Politik ist wirklich auf Dauer und Nachhaltigkeit angelegt. Kompliment dafür.
(Ob man das auch Trump anrechnet?)
https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/a...-a-1266310.html

---

More cover up: White House twice asked Don McGahn to publicly say Trump hadn't obstructed justice
White House officials asked at least twice in the past month for the key witness against President Trump in the Mueller report, Donald F. McGahn II, to say publicly that he never believed the president obstructed justice, according to two people briefed on the requests.

Mr. McGahn, who was the president’s first White House counsel, declined, one of the people said. His reluctance angered Mr. Trump, who believed that Mr. McGahn showed disloyalty by telling investigators for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, about Mr. Trump’s attempts to maintain control over the Russia investigation. ...

In other words, once McGahn saw all the evidence Mueller had amassed, he knew he would look like a legal halfwit if he followed through with Trump’s "no obstruction" request.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1856818

This is how you handle Shapiro and his ilk.

https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews/videos/321465631853354/

Tug-of-Love: Immigrant Mom Loses Effort to Regain Son Given to US Parents
In a controversial case that involved the rights of illegal immigrants and their young children, a Guatemalan mother lost her effort today to get back the five-year old son who was taken away from her after her arrest on immigration charges and put up for adoption in Missouri despite her objections.
https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/immigrant...ory?id=16803067

Kinderraeuber und -haendler.

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #6476

---

Ben Shapiro Storms Out of BBC Interview: ‘I’m Popular and No One’s Ever Heard of You’
Facts did not care about Ben Shapiro’s feelings.

Right-wing commentator and “cool kid’s philosopher” Ben Shapiro stormed out of a contentious BBC interview on Thursday after accusing the conservative host of being a “leftist” and bragging about how popular he is.

During the pre-taped interview with BBC interviewer Andrew Neil promoting his new book, The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great, Shapiro quickly became perturbed when Neil—who is known for playing devil’s advocate in interviews—pressed him on recent attempts to roll back abortion rights, asking the editor-in-chief of clickbait rage factory The Daily Wire if those policies would take America back to the “Dark Ages.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/ben-shapir...er-heard-of-you

One of the Trumski propagandists.

---

Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro admits he was 'destroyed' after cutting short TV debate
American conservative commentator Ben Shapiro has admitted he was "destroyed" in a TV interview this week with British journalist Andrew Neil after being widely mocked for storming out of the debate and telling Neil: "I'm popular, and no one has ever heard of you."
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/11/us/ben-sh...intl/index.html

Ben Shapiro@benshapiro
.@afneil DESTROYS Ben Shapiro! So that's what that feels like ;)
Broke my own rule, and wasn't properly prepared. I've addressed every single issue he raised before; see below. Still, it's Neil 1, Shapiro 0.
9:57 AM - 10 May 2019

Charlotte Clymer @cmclymer
Replying to @benshapiro
Ben, these were questions about your book. And the abortion laws in the news. Very simple + straightforward. Neil wasn't playing "gotcha". He talked to you like an adult with nuance, and you refused to engage in good faith and then walked off the interview. You were childish.

Your problem wasn't that you weren't "prepared" on the issues, at least from your own flawed worldview. Your problem was that you weren't prepared for a grown adult to not treat you with the kid gloves to which you've become accustomed in your conservative media bubble.
And Neil--with whom I'm sure I disagree on quite a bit--is absolutely right about the state of America media and YOUR role in its disrepair. You treat the public discourse like a vehicle for your own cynical enrichment, and it shows.
And merciful lord, I can hardly imagine the cognitive dissonance required to rant against "safe spaces" on college campuses but believe the BBC shouldn't ask you tough questions. The fragility on display is tragic.
10:29 AM - 10 May 2019

Alice Evans@AliceEvansGruff
Brilliantly put, Charlotte. I almost peed my pants when he called Andrew Neil a 'leftie'. To be fair, I think Andrew Neil almost did too.
Talk about not doing your homework. I mean - a brief glance at Wikipedia would have sufficed.
12:46 PM - 10 May 2019

Jamie Severson‏@MusicForte1
Exacty...Ben said he’d never heard of Andrew and theorized he was a leftist by the nature of his questions (...back to the dark ages) so he was not prepared.
2:47 PM - 10 May 2019

Orlando Soto@3D_orlando
Nah... calling him a leftist was just what came out when he reached into his grab-bag of ad-hominems that typically play well with his audience. It's an instinctual reaction at this point for him.
4:24 PM - 10 May 2019

Orlando Soto@3D_orlando
The reason you thought he was a leftist was primarily due to ignorance.
You see, your brain is a pattern-recognizing machine. It takes patters you don't even realize are happening and makes speculative leaps to fill in the gaps.
Reason helps us keep track of those leaps.
With reason we are able to say "I see my brain wants to make a leap and assume a conclusion without the appropriate amount of evidence"
Unfortunately, many humans that have "connected" their minds to media content have lost that capability.
This is because the media's use of repetition (which is usually a propaganda technique for this very reason) reinforces and creates a pattern (factual or not) to bait the pattern recognizing software we all run in our minds to arrive at the desired conclusion.

In this case, you fell for the bait, and arrived at a conclusion without the need (or even desire) for the appropriate necessary evidence.
In this particular case your assumption is flawed and indicative of mental programming to some degree for two reasons:
1) He wasn't expressing his own opinions in the questions. He made it clear to Ben that he was setting up a "Devil's Advocate" line of question representative of what "the other side" would come at him with. He literally indicated that his questions would be 180° if Ben was a lib
2) the dark ages comment was not associated to the abortion concept. It was associated to the Woman's rights concept of jailing women for even planning to go out-of-state to do an abortion. It was associated to the idea of control and punishment of women's behavior.

But none of this registered in your mind because your mind was pre-programmed to immediately jump to "leftist" the second it was even possible to begin drawing a link between the concepts of "not killing babies" to "regression".
We think we are in control of our minds.
In reality, our minds are in control of us.
Our minds run faulty calculations in pursuit of expediency. This is natural and an artifact of our brain's evolution
But if we care to be accurate and truthful, we have to be aware and careful
3:51 AM - 12 May 2019

Cody Johnston@drmistercody
"I'm popular and no one has ever heard of you," the humble man shouted before sending a tweet implying that he's never lost a debate after making the Trumpian and responsible claim that the BBC has leftist bias because they challenged him.
11:18 AM - 10 May 2019

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/1...ickname-1317460

Haha, Alfred E. Neumann. Immerhin gehen Trump die Spitznamen für seine Opponenten nicht aus. (Und ich dachte, Philip Amthor wäre Alfred E. Neumann.)

“He’ll be great representing us against President Xi of China. That’ll be great. I want to be in that room, I wanna watch that one." So do I.

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #6484

---

Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro admits he was 'destroyed' after cutting short TV debate
American conservative commentator Ben Shapiro has admitted he was "destroyed" in a TV interview this week with British journalist Andrew Neil after being widely mocked for storming out of the debate and telling Neil: "I'm popular, and no one has ever heard of you."
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/11/us/ben-sh...intl/index.html

Ben Shapiro@benshapiro
.@afneil DESTROYS Ben Shapiro! So that's what that feels like ;)
Broke my own rule, and wasn't properly prepared. I've addressed every single issue he raised before; see below. Still, it's Neil 1, Shapiro 0.
9:57 AM - 10 May 2019

Charlotte Clymer @cmclymer
Replying to @benshapiro
Ben, these were questions about your book. And the abortion laws in the news. Very simple + straightforward. Neil wasn't playing "gotcha". He talked to you like an adult with nuance, and you refused to engage in good faith and then walked off the interview. You were childish.

Your problem wasn't that you weren't "prepared" on the issues, at least from your own flawed worldview. Your problem was that you weren't prepared for a grown adult to not treat you with the kid gloves to which you've become accustomed in your conservative media bubble.
And Neil--with whom I'm sure I disagree on quite a bit--is absolutely right about the state of America media and YOUR role in its disrepair. You treat the public discourse like a vehicle for your own cynical enrichment, and it shows.
And merciful lord, I can hardly imagine the cognitive dissonance required to rant against "safe spaces" on college campuses but believe the BBC shouldn't ask you tough questions. The fragility on display is tragic.
10:29 AM - 10 May 2019

Alice Evans@AliceEvansGruff
Brilliantly put, Charlotte. I almost peed my pants when he called Andrew Neil a 'leftie'. To be fair, I think Andrew Neil almost did too.
Talk about not doing your homework. I mean - a brief glance at Wikipedia would have sufficed.
12:46 PM - 10 May 2019

Jamie Severson‏@MusicForte1
Exacty...Ben said he’d never heard of Andrew and theorized he was a leftist by the nature of his questions (...back to the dark ages) so he was not prepared.
2:47 PM - 10 May 2019

Orlando Soto@3D_orlando
Nah... calling him a leftist was just what came out when he reached into his grab-bag of ad-hominems that typically play well with his audience. It's an instinctual reaction at this point for him.
4:24 PM - 10 May 2019

Orlando Soto@3D_orlando
The reason you thought he was a leftist was primarily due to ignorance.
You see, your brain is a pattern-recognizing machine. It takes patters you don't even realize are happening and makes speculative leaps to fill in the gaps.
Reason helps us keep track of those leaps.
With reason we are able to say "I see my brain wants to make a leap and assume a conclusion without the appropriate amount of evidence"
Unfortunately, many humans that have "connected" their minds to media content have lost that capability.
This is because the media's use of repetition (which is usually a propaganda technique for this very reason) reinforces and creates a pattern (factual or not) to bait the pattern recognizing software we all run in our minds to arrive at the desired conclusion.

In this case, you fell for the bait, and arrived at a conclusion without the need (or even desire) for the appropriate necessary evidence.
In this particular case your assumption is flawed and indicative of mental programming to some degree for two reasons:
1) He wasn't expressing his own opinions in the questions. He made it clear to Ben that he was setting up a "Devil's Advocate" line of question representative of what "the other side" would come at him with. He literally indicated that his questions would be 180° if Ben was a lib
2) the dark ages comment was not associated to the abortion concept. It was associated to the Woman's rights concept of jailing women for even planning to go out-of-state to do an abortion. It was associated to the idea of control and punishment of women's behavior.

But none of this registered in your mind because your mind was pre-programmed to immediately jump to "leftist" the second it was even possible to begin drawing a link between the concepts of "not killing babies" to "regression".
We think we are in control of our minds.
In reality, our minds are in control of us.
Our minds run faulty calculations in pursuit of expediency. This is natural and an artifact of our brain's evolution
But if we care to be accurate and truthful, we have to be aware and careful
3:51 AM - 12 May 2019

Cody Johnston@drmistercody
"I'm popular and no one has ever heard of you," the humble man shouted before sending a tweet implying that he's never lost a debate after making the Trumpian and responsible claim that the BBC has leftist bias because they challenged him.
11:18 AM - 10 May 2019

---

Ben Shapiro@benshapiro
Just pre-taped an interview with BBC’s @afneil. As I’m not familiar with him or his work, I misinterpreted his antagonism as political Leftism (he termed the pro-life position in America “barbaric”) – and that was apparently inaccurate. For that, I apologize.
11:55 AM - 9 May 2019

Ben Norton@BenjaminNorton
BBC's Andrew Neil is a right-wing fanatic who staunchly supported the Iraq War and was oligarch Rupert Murdoch's right-hand man in the UK media.
The fact that braindead Ben Shapiro thought he was a leftist just shows how insanely far-right the US right is.
10:10 AM - 10 May 2019

Andrew Neil@afneil
So now I’m an evil Leftist AND a right-wing fanatic. Who knew what drivel Twitter can descend to. Especially since I have not expressed a position on any matter of public debate for over a decade now, as befits a BBC presenter.Andrew Neil added,
2:07 PM - 11 May 2019


Jo H 🇬🇧 Leave means Leave@jojojoheeley
You Andrew are one of the few commentators that I trust to be honest and not take sides. I thank you for that. You are a rare breed these days
2:25 PM - 11 May 2019

EdScribbles‏ @EdScribbles
You’re one of only a tiny handful of broadcast journo’s who know how to hold interviewees to account, whatever side of the debate they are on. Wish the BBC had ten of you.
2:20 PM - 11 May 2019

Steve 🇬🇧 🇪🇺@stevepalmer
A quick note to compliment you on the Shapiro interview. Journalism at its finest, putting the opposing view and challenging beliefs. It was excellent and informative. Thank you.
2:00 PM - 11 May 2019

And from the GOP master wordsmith:
Frank Luntz@FrankLuntz
Every candidate for public office should be required to do an interview with @AFNeil.
1:25 PM - 10 May 2019

on the practical side:
Andy Parkin@Loinerscum
Replying to @FrankLuntz @afneil
Perhaps the BBC should line up a slot with @afneil during the Trump State Visit. Just tell him it will be a ratings sensation.
1:43 PM - 10 May 2019

😄

Can Wharton Revoke Trump’s Economics Degree Now?
His ideas are dumb and destructive.

Despite all the success enjoyed by 19th century industrial magnate Joseph Wharton, the 21st century has not been kind to his family’s legacy. His great-great-great grandson, Josh Rosen, was ignominiously canned as quarterback by the Arizona Cardinals and sold off for peanuts to the Miami Dolphins. But even worse, the family name he gave to the business school he founded at the University of Pennsylvania has been irreversibly damaged by one of that school’s graduates, the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump.

Admittedly, even though the Wharton School took money from the Trump family and admitted his children Ivanka and Don, Jr., it never bragged that much about its association with Trump given his checkered business past. Every Ivy League school has had its share of sleazy, vulgar, business-destroying alums they’d rather not discuss. It’s just that most of them don’t end up being president.

Now, Trump’s Wharton education is yet again under the spotlight because Trump is daily demonstrating just how little he learned about economics while studying there. Or while running businesses. Or ever.

Just this Friday morning, the world was treated to a Trumpian Twitterstorm about his ill-considered, mismanaged trade war with China that was so profoundly dumb that it would surely have earned anyone who submitted it as a paper an F in an intro-to-economics course.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/can-wharto...mics-degree-now

White House adviser Larry Kudlow contradicts Trump on who pays tariffs
White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow admitted to Fox News' Chris Wallace on Sunday that the Chinese do not directly pay tariffs on goods coming into the U.S., but argued that China will suffer GDP losses as a result of a diminishing export markets.

Why it matters: President Trump has repeatedly claimed, incorrectly, that tariffs are forcing China is paying billions of dollars to the U.S. Treasury. The tariffs are paid by U.S. importers of affected Chinese goods, not by China's government or by Chinese companies. Importers then either raise costs on consumers, lower their own profit margins or both.
https://www.axios.com/china-trump-trade-...acc91e89d3.html

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #6488

---

Can Wharton Revoke Trump’s Economics Degree Now?
His ideas are dumb and destructive.

Despite all the success enjoyed by 19th century industrial magnate Joseph Wharton, the 21st century has not been kind to his family’s legacy. His great-great-great grandson, Josh Rosen, was ignominiously canned as quarterback by the Arizona Cardinals and sold off for peanuts to the Miami Dolphins. But even worse, the family name he gave to the business school he founded at the University of Pennsylvania has been irreversibly damaged by one of that school’s graduates, the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump.

Admittedly, even though the Wharton School took money from the Trump family and admitted his children Ivanka and Don, Jr., it never bragged that much about its association with Trump given his checkered business past. Every Ivy League school has had its share of sleazy, vulgar, business-destroying alums they’d rather not discuss. It’s just that most of them don’t end up being president.

Now, Trump’s Wharton education is yet again under the spotlight because Trump is daily demonstrating just how little he learned about economics while studying there. Or while running businesses. Or ever.

Just this Friday morning, the world was treated to a Trumpian Twitterstorm about his ill-considered, mismanaged trade war with China that was so profoundly dumb that it would surely have earned anyone who submitted it as a paper an F in an intro-to-economics course.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/can-wharto...mics-degree-now

---

Während wir über einen konservativen Publizisten diskutieren, der ein Interview abbricht (was sein Recht ist), sickert tröpfchenweise die Wahrheit durch...



Former Intel Officer Tony Shaffer On Spying On Trump Campaign: No Way Obama Was Not Told
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/...s_not_told.html

Zur Erinnerung: Ein US-Präsident musste wegen des Ausspionierens seiner politischen Gegner seinen Rücktritt erklären und von seinem Nachfolger begnadigt werden...

Jordan Weissmann@JHWeissmann
Lol. So, Shapiro tries to wiggle out of a question about abortion by citing ‘science’ and accusing his interviewer, Andrew Neil, of being on ‘the left.’
Neil is chairman of The Spectator, one of Britain’s leading conservative magazines. He just laughs.

If a wedgie could talk, I imagine it would sound a lot like Ben Shapiro.
6:44 AM - 10 May 2019

Suddenly conservative lawyers are condemning Trump for abuses of power
Washington seems to be barreling toward a constitutional crisis.

Democrats are barraging President Trump with demands for witnesses and documents. Trump has answered by stonewalling, vowing to fight “all the subpoenas.”
As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned, Trump seems to be goading the Democratic-controlled House toward impeachment, perhaps because it’s a battle he thinks he can win.
Politicians on both sides are repairing to their tribal corners.

Is there anyone who can serve as honest referees in this partisan standoff?

One answer — don’t laugh — is lawyers. Specifically, Republican lawyers.
Even as Republicans in Congress have fallen in line to defend Trump at every turn, a surprising number of conservative lawyers have broken ranks and are condemning the president for abuses of power and denouncing his blanket claims of executive privilege.

“The president’s conduct demonstrates a flagrant disregard for the rule of law— a disregard that is in direct conflict with his constitutional responsibilities,” 11 conservative lawyers wrote last month. They urged the House to continue its investigations, but stopped short of endorsing impeachment.
“This president is undermining the basic principle of checks and balances,” one of the 11, former Deputy Atty. Gen. Donald B. Ayer, told me. “It’s really kind of tyrannical. It’s un-American. It’s the sort of expansion of government power you would expect Republicans to worry about.”
In addition, more than 800 former federal prosecutors, many of them Republicans, signed a statement declaring that the report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, far from exonerating Trump, showed that he deserved to be indicted for obstruction of justice.

The president seems to think government lawyers are duty-bound to defend his every whim, and that Republican judges are duty-bound to decide cases in his favor.
These GOP lawyers are reminding their colleagues — justices as well as attorneys — that their real duty lies elsewhere.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-p...0512-story.html

The cost of Trump’s tariffs has fallen ‘entirely’ on US businesses and households: Goldman
Goldman Sachs said the cost of tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump last year against Chinese goods has fallen “entirely” on American businesses and households, with a greater impact on consumer prices than previously expected.

The bank said in a note that consumer prices are higher partly because Chinese exporters have not lowered their prices to better compete in the US market.

Trump has repeatedly — and inaccurately — claimed that China will pay for tariffs imposed by the U.S.

“One might have expected that Chinese exporters of tariff-affected goods would have to lower their prices somewhat to compete in the US market, sharing in the cost of the tariffs,” Goldman said.
“However, analysis at the extremely detailed item level in the two new studies shows no decline in the prices (exclusive of tariffs) of imported goods from China that faced tariffs.”

In addition, US producers have “opportunistically” hiked prices in response to protection from Chinese competitors, the bank said.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/12/goldman-...QHcI2e1OBdGBNxk

Dazu dann der 'stable genius' heute:
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
The unexpectedly good first quarter 3.2% GDP was greatly helped by Tariffs from China. Some people just don’t get it!
4:02 AM - 13 May 2019

China Announces Tariff Retaliation to Take Effect on June 1
China announced that it will increase tariffs imposed on about $60 billion of U.S. goods in retaliation for President Donald Trump’s latest escalation of the trade war.

The tariffs will take effect on June 1, according to a statement on the Ministry of Finance’s website on Monday. The charges will thereby be raised on most of the goods listed on a previous retaliation list effective last September.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...ffect-on-june-1


Dazu der 'stable genius' heute:
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
Their is no reason for the U.S. Consumer to pay the Tariffs, which take effect on China today. This has been proven recently when only 4 points were paid by the U.S., 21 points by China because China subsidizes product to such a large degree. Also, the Tariffs can be.....
....completely avoided if you by from a non-Tariffed Country, or you buy the product inside the USA (the best idea). That’s Zero Tariffs. Many Tariffed companies will be leaving China for Vietnam and other such countries in Asia. That’s why China wants to make a deal so badly!...
..There will be nobody left in China to do business with. Very bad for China, very good for USA! But China has taken so advantage of the U.S. for so many years, that they are way ahead (Our Presidents did not do the job). Therefore, China should not retaliate-will only get worse!
3:40 AM - 13 May 2019

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6c96VLXkAAC38h.jpg

Trump tariffs on China intensify pain for US soyabean farmers
Plan to ship surplus to ‘starving countries’ pushes further into uncharted territory

The new US tariffs are “going to extend this trade war,” said Bill Gordon, who farms corn and soyabeans on 2,000 acres in southern Minnesota. “We’re already bleeding. It’s going to prolong that haemorrhage and not a lot of us are going to be able to make it.”
https://www.ft.com/content/72996408-74fa...7d-6d846537acab

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/trum...E1lGx5vJVXqwqKM

"Für viele Deutsche klingt es unglaublich: In den USA wächst die Zustimmung zu Donald Trump. Er liegt jetzt über 45 Prozent, sein bester Wert seit zwei Jahren und nahe an den 46 Prozent, die 2016 für den Sieg gegen Hillary Clinton reichten. In Deutschland dagegen verfinstert sich sein Bild. Er geht rücksichtslos vor, gilt als Kriegstreiber. Wie ist die konträre Wahrnehmung zu erklären?"

Was, wenn er Erfolg hätte? Die Horrorvorstellung für jeden aufrechten Gutmenschen und Progressiven. Was, wenn der Leibhaftige sogar mehr Erfolg hätte als der Messias, der versprach, die Ozeane zu senken und den Planeten zu heilen.

Ich freue mich schon auf die bedröppelten Gesichter im deutschen Fernsehen, wenn wieder 2020 Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Michigan und Wisconsin an Trump gehen und Trump zu den Klängen von Air Force One (oder dann Hail to the Chief) die Bühne betritt.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl...uns_140289.html

Zitat von Maga-neu im Beitrag #6497

---

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/trumps-aussenpolitik-und-was-wenn-er-erfolg-hat/24335642.html?fbclid=IwAR2ZGUW7YVP0VzkXkJ27KwJ_euTMs-M-euwxHn5AJ7aCE1lGx5vJVXqwqKM

"Für viele Deutsche klingt es unglaublich: In den USA wächst die Zustimmung zu Donald Trump. Er liegt jetzt über 45 Prozent, sein bester Wert seit zwei Jahren und nahe an den 46 Prozent, die 2016 für den Sieg gegen Hillary Clinton reichten. In Deutschland dagegen verfinstert sich sein Bild. Er geht rücksichtslos vor, gilt als Kriegstreiber. Wie ist die konträre Wahrnehmung zu erklären?"

Was, wenn er Erfolg hätte? Die Horrorvorstellung für jeden aufrechten Gutmenschen und Progressiven. Was, wenn der Leibhaftige sogar mehr Erfolg hätte als der Messias, der versprach, die Ozeane zu senken und den Planeten zu heilen.

Ich freue mich schon auf die bedröppelten Gesichter im deutschen Fernsehen, wenn wieder 2020 Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Michigan und Wisconsin an Trump gehen und Trump zu den Klängen von Air Force One (oder dann Hail to the Chief) die Bühne betritt.

---

Escalating US-China trade war sends stocks plunging
The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged more than 600 points Monday as investors sought shelter from an escalating trade war between the U.S. and China.

The selling was widespread and heavy, handing the benchmark S&P 500 index its biggest loss since January. The Dow and the S&P 500 each fell more than 2% as investors sold trade-sensitive shares. The sell-off extended the market’s slide into a second week. The losses so far in May have now erased the market’s gains from April.

Technology companies, which do a lot of business with China, led the way lower. Chipmakers were among the biggest decliners. Apple also took heavy losses, tumbling 5.8%. Farming equipment maker Deere drove losses in the industrial sector, reflecting worries about the impact of tariffs on U.S. farmers.
https://apnews.com/b124fea93b964c25b01e9..._source=Twitter