This article highlights the absurdity of Acela Corridor journalists who have the memory of a fruit fly repeating inane talking points about US policy towards Europe and allies. Follow me a moment 1/n
https://www.politico.eu/article/german-minister-to-macron-eus-dependence-on-us-is-sobering-facts/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Germany openly admits they absolutely must have the US security guarantee because other than a handful of boy scouts and launching stale Nutella at invading forces, they have absolutely no capabilities and will not be investing in their security any time soon. 2/n

Not only is it true which admit it, they have refused really since 1989 to do anything but free ride off of the American security guarantee. They insist on running extremely tight fiscal policy all while throwing temper tantrums when the US draws down forces. This isn't new 3/n

What makes this so galling is their ongoing and active work to undermine US security objectives. Nordstream? Huawei? Change through trade? Volkswagen in Xinjiang? Trading with Iran? The list of their active work to undermine US security objectives is long and ongoing 4/n

Germany is a sovereign country and can conduct their foreign and security policy how they see fit, however, the ongoing work to undermine US security objectives while demanding the US continue to subsidize German misadventures is contradictory, hypocritical, and appalling 5/n

The reason this matters to current events is the entire DC unthinking think tank talking point is peace love and unicorns with allies like Germany. Germany hasn't done anything to confront China and still angling for an investment deal. They refuse to work cooperatively on 6/n

Security threats from China to Iran, you name it. It will be very easy to sweep all this under the rug, issue a press release and ignore the obvious. The reality is Germany is not a good partner or ally and is simply a free rider undermining US interests and most every turn 7/n

There are valid criticisms of the public communication strategy of how to approach these issues but there is effectively no debate that the substance are deeply problematic and will not be changed with a different US president. Done.