Ambassador Ken Fairfax
@portlandken.bsky.social
Retired former US Ambassador, NSC Director for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia, NSC Director for Nuclear Materials Security, and Deputy Exec. Dir. of the International Energy Agency
Nice words, and I agree that the prosecution of Comey was 100% political and 110% incompetent, but it is somewhat strange to hear the man who likely single-handedly gave Trump a win in 2016 by breaking every DOJ and FBI rule to publicly vilify Clinton based upon zero evidence talk about justice.
November 25, 2025 at 6:40 AM
Nice words, and I agree that the prosecution of Comey was 100% political and 110% incompetent, but it is somewhat strange to hear the man who likely single-handedly gave Trump a win in 2016 by breaking every DOJ and FBI rule to publicly vilify Clinton based upon zero evidence talk about justice.
It is always somewhat surprising when Kremlin mouthpieces actually admit the truth. It doesn't matter if they are appearing on Russian state TV or live from the White House, we just don't expect honesty from Putin's stooges.
November 25, 2025 at 6:36 AM
It is always somewhat surprising when Kremlin mouthpieces actually admit the truth. It doesn't matter if they are appearing on Russian state TV or live from the White House, we just don't expect honesty from Putin's stooges.
It's not just that Starbucks pays its CEO more than the TOTAL pay for a few thousand workers, it that they spend more on tax-free perks such as on-demand private jets for the CEO than they spend on the salaries for a few thousand workers.
November 25, 2025 at 3:00 AM
It's not just that Starbucks pays its CEO more than the TOTAL pay for a few thousand workers, it that they spend more on tax-free perks such as on-demand private jets for the CEO than they spend on the salaries for a few thousand workers.
For Trump, EVERYTHING is a grift. It is all about money.
November 25, 2025 at 2:58 AM
For Trump, EVERYTHING is a grift. It is all about money.
If only it were true. If some of these obscenely improper cases reach the Supreme Court, the hyper-partisan MAGA majority on SCOTUS is likely to side with Trump.
November 25, 2025 at 2:57 AM
If only it were true. If some of these obscenely improper cases reach the Supreme Court, the hyper-partisan MAGA majority on SCOTUS is likely to side with Trump.
Been there, more than once. Ugh.
The real PITA is that once the batter is dead, NOTHING works, not even the door locks! How can I jump start the engine if I can't get into the car to open the hood? Ugh...
The real PITA is that once the batter is dead, NOTHING works, not even the door locks! How can I jump start the engine if I can't get into the car to open the hood? Ugh...
November 25, 2025 at 2:53 AM
Been there, more than once. Ugh.
The real PITA is that once the batter is dead, NOTHING works, not even the door locks! How can I jump start the engine if I can't get into the car to open the hood? Ugh...
The real PITA is that once the batter is dead, NOTHING works, not even the door locks! How can I jump start the engine if I can't get into the car to open the hood? Ugh...
No, you are not. You are being a troll.
November 25, 2025 at 2:51 AM
No, you are not. You are being a troll.
The US Congress, under the (mis)leadership of MAGA Mike Johnson has completely abdicated its Constitutional role and instead is dedicated to facilitating an authoritarian takeover by a convicted felon.
November 25, 2025 at 2:46 AM
The US Congress, under the (mis)leadership of MAGA Mike Johnson has completely abdicated its Constitutional role and instead is dedicated to facilitating an authoritarian takeover by a convicted felon.
If you really cared, you could look up literally hundreds of example, but if you just want to sow false doubt you could follow Tucker Carlson's false example of "just asking questions."
November 25, 2025 at 2:43 AM
If you really cared, you could look up literally hundreds of example, but if you just want to sow false doubt you could follow Tucker Carlson's false example of "just asking questions."
Or maybe you mean someone like Dakota Myer, who refused an order to stay on his base and instead made five trips into an active fire zone to rescue US soldiers who were wounded and pinned down.
November 25, 2025 at 2:43 AM
Or maybe you mean someone like Dakota Myer, who refused an order to stay on his base and instead made five trips into an active fire zone to rescue US soldiers who were wounded and pinned down.
Or maybe you mean someone like Warrant Officer Thompson, who landed his aircraft between U.S. troops who were murdering civilians and the remaining Mi Lai villagers. He threatened to open fire on his own countrymen if they continued the massacre, and received a medal for heroism.
November 25, 2025 at 2:43 AM
Or maybe you mean someone like Warrant Officer Thompson, who landed his aircraft between U.S. troops who were murdering civilians and the remaining Mi Lai villagers. He threatened to open fire on his own countrymen if they continued the massacre, and received a medal for heroism.
You mean like the 18 soldiers who refused a dangerous mission to deliver fuel in Iraq, citing the trucks were unsafe and there was no armed escort? They were acquitted on the grounds the order was illegal.
November 25, 2025 at 2:43 AM
You mean like the 18 soldiers who refused a dangerous mission to deliver fuel in Iraq, citing the trucks were unsafe and there was no armed escort? They were acquitted on the grounds the order was illegal.
Jump forward to today and Trump is ordering US service members to kill civilians even when capturing and detaining them is entirely possible.
November 25, 2025 at 2:14 AM
Jump forward to today and Trump is ordering US service members to kill civilians even when capturing and detaining them is entirely possible.
Jumping forward a century, despite the fact that Lt. William Calley claimed he was following orders, he was convicted for his role in the massacre because the order to kill unarmed civilians was deemed "palpably illegal".
November 25, 2025 at 2:14 AM
Jumping forward a century, despite the fact that Lt. William Calley claimed he was following orders, he was convicted for his role in the massacre because the order to kill unarmed civilians was deemed "palpably illegal".
A few decades later, Captain Henry Wirz was executed for war crimes for killing civilians. His claim that he was "acting under direct orders" was rejected because no legal order could compel him to kill civilians.
November 25, 2025 at 2:14 AM
A few decades later, Captain Henry Wirz was executed for war crimes for killing civilians. His claim that he was "acting under direct orders" was rejected because no legal order could compel him to kill civilians.
The code has been tested many times. The earliest I recall is from 1851, when the Supreme Court ruled that an army officer who unlawfully seized goods during the Mexican-American War could not justify his acts by saying he was obeying orders.
November 25, 2025 at 2:14 AM
The code has been tested many times. The earliest I recall is from 1851, when the Supreme Court ruled that an army officer who unlawfully seized goods during the Mexican-American War could not justify his acts by saying he was obeying orders.
The far right has weaponized "both-sides-ism" and the media has helped them to do so. On issues ranging from climate change to health to economics, news outlets pit one person presenting the consensus of 99% of all experts to have a debate a quack, with the host presenting them as equally qualified.
November 24, 2025 at 7:44 PM
The far right has weaponized "both-sides-ism" and the media has helped them to do so. On issues ranging from climate change to health to economics, news outlets pit one person presenting the consensus of 99% of all experts to have a debate a quack, with the host presenting them as equally qualified.
While the dismissal of charges is both expected and welcome news, it nonetheless highlights a more serious problem: the Trump Administration continually violates the law, leaving the courts in the position of playing "whack a mole" and they can't hit them all.
November 24, 2025 at 7:38 PM
While the dismissal of charges is both expected and welcome news, it nonetheless highlights a more serious problem: the Trump Administration continually violates the law, leaving the courts in the position of playing "whack a mole" and they can't hit them all.
Just a reminder that fully ratified treaties are "the supreme law of the land" under the US Constitution. Here is the text of Article VI:
November 24, 2025 at 12:58 AM
Just a reminder that fully ratified treaties are "the supreme law of the land" under the US Constitution. Here is the text of Article VI: