In a clip on X, I read today that Polish MEP Dominik Tarczyński said Donald Tusk was Liberal Left. My understanding is that they are trying to fight against have EU dictate their form of currency and also to force the opening of their the borders to "refugees".
I admit I'm confused by it all,
but your article is helpful in understanding that both the sides may very well have have crossed constitutional lines.
It reminds me a bit of J6 and the confusion that was immediately spun surrounding that day, with the press putting the blame on Trump and ignoring the fact that in the days leading up to the confirmation of the vote Trump had told Nancy Pelosi he would call in the National Guard as a precaution. And she said no. Both sides were complicit, imo.
I'd like to understand what's going on in Poland better than I (obviously) do now.
Donald Tusk is unabashedly pro-EU. Make of that what you will.
Karol Nawrocki and the Law and Justice party are more nationalist and Eurosceptic. Make off
With France becoming increasingly ungovernable, and with Germany not far behind, Warsaw could find itself as a coming power in Europe, in what could be described as a return to Poland's heyday of continental influence as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
So there is in Warsaw a faction that seeks greater alignment with and obeisance to the Eurocrat bureaucracy in Brussels, and another that wants to keep Poland out of the EU's clutches as much as possible.
When it comes to control of the Constitutional Tribunal, neither side has perfectly clean hands. The question of the moment is which side has more popular support inside Poland. Like all constitutional crises, the resolution will be a political one.
In a clip on X, I read today that Polish MEP Dominik Tarczyński said Donald Tusk was Liberal Left. My understanding is that they are trying to fight against have EU dictate their form of currency and also to force the opening of their the borders to "refugees".
I admit I'm confused by it all,
but your article is helpful in understanding that both the sides may very well have have crossed constitutional lines.
It reminds me a bit of J6 and the confusion that was immediately spun surrounding that day, with the press putting the blame on Trump and ignoring the fact that in the days leading up to the confirmation of the vote Trump had told Nancy Pelosi he would call in the National Guard as a precaution. And she said no. Both sides were complicit, imo.
I'd like to understand what's going on in Poland better than I (obviously) do now.
Donald Tusk is unabashedly pro-EU. Make of that what you will.
Karol Nawrocki and the Law and Justice party are more nationalist and Eurosceptic. Make off
With France becoming increasingly ungovernable, and with Germany not far behind, Warsaw could find itself as a coming power in Europe, in what could be described as a return to Poland's heyday of continental influence as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
So there is in Warsaw a faction that seeks greater alignment with and obeisance to the Eurocrat bureaucracy in Brussels, and another that wants to keep Poland out of the EU's clutches as much as possible.
When it comes to control of the Constitutional Tribunal, neither side has perfectly clean hands. The question of the moment is which side has more popular support inside Poland. Like all constitutional crises, the resolution will be a political one.