Nancy Rogers

111.4K posts

Nancy Rogers banner
Nancy Rogers

Nancy Rogers

@NancyRedPA

Ex-GOP since May 2016. Conservative who hasn't changed her values. Truth matters. Character still counts.

Pittsburgh Katılım Şubat 2022
532 Takip Edilen1.3K Takipçiler
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Rep. Jim McGovern
Rep. Jim McGovern@RepMcGovern·
Understand the difference. Those who peacefully protest Trump today love America. We hate what he is doing to America. When you love something, you fight for it. No kings. Not today. Not ever 🇺🇸
English
2.1K
1.8K
8K
82.2K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
JanTheStitchWitch
JanTheStitchWitch@pictureladyjan·
This man is extraordinary. He's not sitting back and waiting for help. He's out there selling what Ukraine can offer to those who need it, in exchange for what his country needs. All the while ensuring that Ukraine and Ukrainians are respected.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський@ZelenskyyUa

As a result of the war we are going through, and because our enemy is extensively using the Iranian “Shahed” drone technology, we have developed our own system. And today, we are sharing what we have developed with countries in the Middle East. Ukraine is highly regarded for this. We have shifted the geopolitical landscape. Everyone understands that Russia is sharing intelligence with Iran. And everyone understands that, in terms of expertise, no one today can help the way Ukraine can. We are discussing several areas to ensure mutually beneficial cooperation. The first area is weapons, production, exchange of experience, and the exchange of resources that may not be available in one country or another. The second track concerns long-term energy cooperation. We're talking about ten-year partnerships. We have already signed a relevant agreement with Saudi Arabia, and we have also signed a ten-year agreement with Qatar. Over these ten years, we will focus on co-production, building manufacturing facilities—production lines in Ukraine and in these countries. We will also address, for example, how to supply a country with diesel in the event of shortages and major global challenges. Yesterday, I reached an agreement on diesel supplies for at least one year. From there, it becomes a matter for our companies and the local companies. From my conversation with journalists (1/3).

English
1
23
161
1.9K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
The Iranian regime wants things because it believes things. At the top of its list: survival. But not necessarily survival of any single individual, but regime survival. Not far below survival is all of that Islamic Revolutionary eschatological nutbaggery we’re so familiar with: a Shiite-flavored caliphate unifying the Muslim world, the destruction of Israel, seizing Mecca and Medina, beating up girls for showing too much forehead or ankle, hanging gay dudes, etc. The regime’s leaders also want Iran to be a regional hegemon, to have nuclear weapons. At least in the minds of the mullahs, these are not conflicting priorities. It’s a question of sequencing: You can’t get all of that sweet caliphate rizz without military dominance.  - Jonah Goldberg
English
0
3
7
195
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
One of the cardinal sins in intelligence, war, and foreign policy is called “mirroring” or “mirror imaging.” It’s when you assume that your opponent has the same motives, values, and decision-making processes as you do.  This gets at the main reason I have such contempt for the cartoonish version of “realism” that pervades a lot of left-wing, isolationist, and libertarian foreign policy. It’s systemic, reified mirroring.  Many so-called realists think “self-interest” has a universal definition that spans all borders and cultures. This form of realism always had a vulgar Marxist twang to me, because many Marxists assume everyone everywhere is driven by their “class interests” in the same way that realists have a universal definition of “national interests.” Jihadi suicide bombers do not blow themselves up to further the class interests of the proletariat. Vladimir Putin is not sending hundreds of thousands of Russians to their death in Ukraine purely out of some “realist” definition of “national interest.” In international relations theory, the people who believe otherwise are called “suckers.” Nations care about honor. Some are driven by cultural, theological, or ideological commitments that defy one-dimensional, largely economic definitions of the national interest.  What is true of nations is often true of people, too.  In other words, mirroring isn’t just a problem in foreign policy. I still chuckle about a conversation I once had with the political consultant Dick Morris, who couldn’t grasp that I didn’t have—or want—some shady side hustle or grift that would allow me to more lucratively monetize my journalism career. Morris’ understanding of self-interest was just very different than mine. - Jonah Goldberg
English
2
4
10
154
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
I agree entirely that as a military endeavor, the war has been remarkably successful. But the key words in “stunning success of this war so far” is “so far.” I do not simply mean that militarily this could suddenly go horribly wrong—which of course is possible—or that we might end up losing militarily—which is damn near impossible. We haven’t lost a war militarily in decades. We lose wars when we lose the will to finish them. The importance of the “so far” point is that it constrains the category of the analysis to the purely military.  The actual success of any war is determined when the fighting stops. And when the fighting stops, the criteria we apply include more than tallies of ships, planes, or tanks destroyed and enemies killed. It also weighs whether the larger strategic aims of the war were achieved. The Tet Offensive was a military disaster for the Viet Cong, and a strategic coup. Indeed, Vietnam is an excellent example of winning by not losing. The enemy hung on, and we lost our will. The Iraq war was a military tour de force, and a strategic mess.  This gets at Abe’s point. The only way to convince people this war was worth it is by winning—really winning—it. Conceptually, that realization requires knowing what victory is. I don’t think victory is possible without regime change, for the reasons I alluded to above. Leave the regime in place and the clock restarts on the mullahs' eschatological agenda. And instead of a vaunted ballistic missile program as its first line of deterrence, Iran could have the Strait of Hormuz as its primary tripwire. “Try anything like that again, and we’ll really destroy the global economy” is politically and strategically at least as effective a deterrence as a ballistic missile or drone program. And that economic force field could then give Iran the space to reconstitute its military and nuclear programs. That’s certainly what the Israelis believe, which is why support for the war in Israel is so high.  - Jonah Goldberg
English
1
4
12
291
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Judd Legum
Judd Legum@JuddLegum·
Look how aggressively we are sanitizing Kushner's conflicts. The NYT described Kushner as "having business interests" in the Middle East. KUSHNER IS BEING DIRECTLY PAID TENS OF MILLIONS ANNUALLY BY MIDDLE EASTERN GOVERNMENTS
Judd Legum tweet media
English
47
1.8K
4.3K
47.4K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Tom Hoefling
Tom Hoefling@TomHoefling·
From the political weaponizing of the vast riches of billionaire oligarchs, to the takeover of every possible media organ, to the plundering of the state, to the castration of the legislative and judicial branches of government, Trump is utilizing the Putinist playbook.
English
2
16
31
460
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
All of Trump’s talk this week about how a great deal to end the war is just around the corner strikes me as a similar tactic to his “two weeks” schtick. It’s just something to say to buy time. I think it’s probably not a complete lie that the Iranians are talking, but it’s certainly an exaggeration that they’re “begging to make a deal.” And whether you believe it or not, the fact is the regime knows the truth of it. If it’s a lie, then the regime’s leaders are not crazy for thinking they’re winning, because Trump has signaled that he wants out of the war more than they do. He loves to say he won’t tell the enemy what he’s going to do. Fair enough. But when he says the war will be over soon, he’s telling the regime something far more useful than revealing some target package. Maybe it will work, but I can’t envision a scenario in which Trump declares victory and gives up only for the Iranians to respond by blowing up a tanker, oil facility, or some American soft target. The cliché about the Middle East is that you win by not losing. For the Iranians, simply declaring that they took the worst the big and little Satans could dish out and are still standing is a strategic win. Claiming sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and turning it into an Iranian maritime toll booth would be a massive strategic victory for the Islamic Republic. And, so far, I don’t see the exit strategy that prevents that from happening—other than an actual victory.  - Jonah Goldberg
English
0
5
21
371
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський
We want to prepare drone deals for partners who are helping us, and be prepared for any challenges. A drone deal includes drones, electronic warfare systems, and, most significantly, the complete system of defense. We might not have enough “Patriots”, but we do have a system capable of integrating any defensive lines or layers. And this is the most valuable asset Ukraine possesses today: the experience of our military. If we want Ukraine to be treated at a high level, it is more than only drones; it is our specialists and our military. The combination of experienced military personnel with private and public sectors in one system is exactly what we should offer as a long-term export model—so that the private sector, the state, and our military all benefit. Today, we have started such steps with three countries. From my conversation with journalists (2/3).
English
178
724
4.5K
125.1K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Tatarigami_UA
Tatarigami_UA@Tatarigami_UA·
You don’t need to take Volodymyr Zelenskyy or Marco Rubio at their word to find out that Rubio is bluntly lying. Just look at Provision 21 of Trump’s 28-point peace plan: “Ukrainian forces will withdraw from the part of Donetsk Oblast that they currently control, and this withdrawal zone will be considered a neutral demilitarized buffer zone, internationally recognized as territory belonging to the Russian Federation. Russian forces will not enter this demilitarized zone.”
English
38
433
2.3K
68.5K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
But putting the cranks aside, I think the larger problem with the Iran war debate on the right is that people are talking past each other. The “why can’t you see we’re winning” folks want to focus on the military scorekeeping. That’s defensible, but that narrow prism blinds them to some degree, not just to the strategic challenges, like Iran’s asymmetric advantages in the Strait of Hormuz, but also to the entirely legitimate concerns of a public that wasn’t consulted or prepared for yet another massive Trumpian ego trip. Preparing the public for a war of choice isn’t just a matter of good manners or constitutional hygiene, it’s an essential necessity for strategic success. Why? For starters, you need public opinion on your side. But doing things the right way also helps the administration see its blind spots. Does anyone doubt that the war would be going better if the administration had held a hearing where it had to answer what its plan for the Strait of Hormuz was? Trump is now threatening the existence of NATO because he’s so “disappointed” allies he said he didn’t need aren’t now racing to help out there. I think NATO should help. But it’s as if Trump doesn’t understand that our NATO allies are democracies and their leaders are elected politicians, answerable to publics that detest Trump—for understandable reasons. - Jonah Goldberg
English
0
5
13
310
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Tymofiy Mylovanov
Tymofiy Mylovanov@Mylovanov·
Zelenskyy: If Ukraine is in NATO, the war is over. We are in a strong union. I would think that I did everything then. Am I ready to step aside? I'm ready. Absolutely. History is stronger than the emotions of two or three people. History is simply stronger.
English
19
245
1.6K
37.7K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Scott Lincicome
Scott Lincicome@scottlincicome·
The Trump administration's new biofuels bailout means higher US gas and food prices and worse environmental outcomes. But at least farmers will get another $3-4B from the government. share.google/EGlElRioRuG8wo…
Scott Lincicome tweet mediaScott Lincicome tweet media
English
12
101
206
22.6K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
Donald Trump has a similar challenge understanding the Iranians because he thinks everyone eventually just wants a “deal.” That assumption worked out for him pretty well—so far—in Venezuela, because the Maduro regime was basically just a bunch of mobsters pretending to be socialists. But the Iranians want different things because they believe different things. And they are willing to watch a lot of the world burn to get them. In fact, they’re willing to light the matches. These are the bastards, after all, who used thousands of children to clear minefields and soak up enemy fire in the Iran-Iraq war. Indeed, just this week, the regime lowered the age for “war supporting” roles to 12. If you’re that determined, or simply that evil, closing the Strait of Hormuz and blowing up your neighbor’s oil and gas facilities is hardly a moral or strategic red line. Listening to Trump, he clearly believes that if you kill the fanatic(s) at the top, you’ll eventually find someone who wants to cut a deal. I don’t think this is logically preposterous. It’s certainly possible that you can liquidate enough Iranian leaders until you find that person. But the regime isn’t organized in a way to make that easy, particularly only striking from the air. Yes, Iran has someone called a “supreme leader” but under him are layers upon layers of true believers who are convinced this war is an existential battle, not a mere negotiation. Trump’s view of “leadership” is entirely personalized, which is one reason he rejected the idea of building support for the war in advance. It’s also why he thinks other leaders can just cut a deal, the way he thinks he can. - Jonah Goldberg
English
2
11
35
690
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
The argument over the war in my corner of the world reminds me of a lot of domestic partisan fights. If one side favors a policy, it tends to dismiss complaints about how the policy was implemented as so much fastidious fussery about formalities. When Democrats control the White House and the Congress, a lot of progressives will declare the filibuster to be an outrageous impediment to democracy, and a lot of conservatives will insist the filibuster is a vital bulwark against majoritarian steamrolling.  When the teams switch from offense to defense, the teams trade arguments like players in a softball game swapping gloves. Suddenly, right-wingers think the filibuster needs to go and left-wingers are scandalized by the idea. The same dynamic often applies to judicial appointments, various executive orders, legislative reconciliation brouhahas, etc.  - Jonah Goldberg
English
2
4
11
418
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Non-Hyphenated American
Non-Hyphenated American@NHAunleashed·
Argumento ad Trump Derangement Syndrome follows a similar dynamic to the partisan hypocrisy I attributed to fights about the filibuster and the like. When Trump does something people like, those people dismiss complaints about it as so much TDS. When Trump does something they don’t like, they put his actions in the same bucket of outrages that stem from his ignorance and deformed character. But it’s the same guy in both situations, and just because you like what he’s doing in this instance doesn’t mean he’s not doing it with the same mix of egoism and incompetence he displayed when he did something you didn’t like.  Just to repeat myself from last week, the people claiming Trump has betrayed MAGA are merely getting the just deserts of their apologias for the lawless, crude, or bullying things they approved of. He is the same guy he’s always been. Feeling betrayed by the bull in the China shop when it breaks the one thing you wanted to save is unserious. None of this means the war isn’t worth winning, and none of it means the mullahs didn’t have it coming. But assuming that just because you’ve long supported regime change in Iran doesn’t mean that, this time, Trump is doing it the right way, for the right reasons, or that it will end well. Nor does it mean that complaints that he didn’t do things the right way are just so much fastidiousness. - Jonah Goldberg
English
1
6
23
435
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Sarah Longwell
Sarah Longwell@SarahLongwell25·
Important to note, the FCC Chairman himself is stating that CBS’s new ownership is “Trump winning.” That should deeply embarrass and offend CBS’s leadership. When the FCC Chair brags that you’re state TV for the Trump administration, a reassessment of one’s values is in order.
Acyn@Acyn

FCC Chair: Trump is winning. Look at the results—PBS and NPR defunded. Joy Reid, Sleepy-Eyed Chuck Todd, Jim Acosta, John Dickerson are gone. Colbert is leaving. CBS is under new ownership, and soon enough CNN will have new ownership as well.

English
159
1.7K
5.4K
188.7K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
TheSteadyState
TheSteadyState@steadystate2025·
Bragging that every “single man or woman…who had anything to do with” the criminal investigations of President Trump at DOJ and the FBI has been fired, resigned, or pushed into early retirement is something Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche now boasts about publicly. That is a bizarre thing for the country’s second‑ranking law enforcement official to celebrate. He is either admitting that he does not understand that his job is to safeguard an impartial Justice Department, or he is consciously and proudly telling the country that he is serving as a corrupt political tool of the president. zurl.co/zGHUK
English
135
1.4K
2.3K
44.3K
Nancy Rogers retweetledi
Derek Thompson
Derek Thompson@DKThomp·
The Trump FCC sees its job quite explicitly as the destruction of all opposition. There’s no principle or virtue here. What’s being celebrated is the destruction of any liberal principle or shared value. MAGA folks can say “well we kind of feel like you did this to us, or want to do this to us” but notice that’s not a principle. “We’re violating this rule bc we think you did” is the opposite of virtue. It’s a justification for why you can violate a virtue that you still believe should apply when the shoe is on the other foot. Virtue signaling can be annoying. But it’s being replaced with the open celebration of vice and authoritarianism. Which is so much worse.
Derek Thompson tweet mediaDerek Thompson tweet media
English
28
356
1.5K
52.7K