No, Pelosi can’t just magically refuse to seat seditious republicans. Courts would overrule it, and she’d look toothless. There are NEVER any magic wands in politics, on either side. Stop listening to pundits who promote simplistic magic wand solutions as if they were real.

“But the 14th Amendment...” No. Amendments aren’t magic wands that can just be waved. The courts don’t interpret something a certain way just because you think they should. A childlike simplistic notion doesn’t become a realistic strategy just because it’s gone viral on Twitter.
Now if you want to push the 14th Amendment narrative as a way of educating the average American that the GOP committed sedition, go for it. But that’s not the same thing as expecting a magic wand solution to actually happen, or bashing Democrats for not waving a magic wand.
Why do so many liberal pundits push these kinds of childlike magic wand solutions as if they were real? Because they’d rather pander to you and go viral, than educate and empower you. Your job is to recognize when you’re being bullshitted with simplistic magic wand fantasies.
It gets even sicker when these same liberal pundits turn around and bash the Democratic Party for not having the “guts” to carry out the magic wand fantasies that the pundits have invented. They dishonestly turn you against your own party leaders, just so they can go viral.
“Why don’t you just name the names of these bad liberal pundits?” Because it’s most of them. Look around. Most political punditry on Twitter reads like bad fan fiction. The average eighth grader would see through these magic wand fantasies. But y’all get sucked into them.
Which is understandable. When most of the pundits on here are pushing the same conveniently simplistic solution, it’s easy to get sucked in. You have to step back quite a bit to realize how hilariously childlike some of these magic wand ideas sound, and why they’d obviously fail.
Put another way: if these magic wand ideas were viable, why would the Democrats in charge go so far out of their way to avoid adopting such winning strategies? They wouldn’t. These are just terrible kindergarten level ideas, that the Democrats reject for good reason.
It’s like when you tune in to football talk radio, and every caller has some magic wand idea that would instantly turn their team around. It always involves something idiotic like throwing a long pass on every play. Some coaches are better than others, but no coach is that dumb.
“But we need to hold the Democrats accountable.” Not by touting simplistic magic wand ideas that make you sound like a child, and then bashing the Democrats for refusing to use your childlike ideas.

You want to hold your leaders accountable? First learn how things actually work.
Pelosi is one of the savviest political minds of this era, and Schumer is also savvier than the average bear. But each day half my feed is people and pundits demanding to know why Pelosi and Schumer don’t have the guts to just wave a magic wand. It’s... not helpful.
“But Congressman Bill Pascrell said the 14th Amendment really is a magic wand for not seating people.” No he didn’t. He’s just trying to start the conversation, to give Pelosi cover for some REALISTIC response. Pascrell knows that magically not seating people is a child’s fantasy

More from Palmer Report

More from Government

The Government is making the same mistakes as it did in the first wave. Except with knowledge.

A thread.


The Government's strategy at the beginning of the pandemic was to 'cocoon' the vulnerable (e.g. those in care homes). This was a 'herd immunity' strategy. This interview is from


This strategy failed. It is impossible to 'cocoon' the vulnerable, as Covid is passed from younger people to older, more vulnerable people.

We can see this playing out through heatmaps. e.g. these heatmaps from the second


The Government then decided to change its strategy to 'preventing a second wave that overwhelms the NHS'. This was announced on 8 June in Parliament.

This is not the same as 'preventing a second wave'.

https://t.co/DPWiJbCKRm


The Academy of Medical Scientists published a report on 14 July 'Preparing for a Challenging Winter' commissioned by the Chief Scientific Adviser that set out what needed to be done in order to prevent a catastrophe over the winter
If you're curious what Trump's defense will look like, all you have to do is turn on Fox News. My latest at @mmfa

The tl;dr is that for years right-wing media have been excusing Trump's violent rhetoric by going, "Yes, but THE DEMOCRATS..." and then bending themselves into knots to pretend that Dems were calling for violence when they very, very clearly weren't.

And in fact, this predates Trump.

In 2008, Obama was talking about not backing down in the face of an ugly campaign. He said "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."

https://t.co/i5YaQJsKop


That quote was from the movie The Untouchables. And there's no way anybody reading that quote in good faith could conclude that he was talking about actual guns and knives. But it became a big talking point on the

In 2018, Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder was speaking to a group of Georgia Democrats about GOP voter suppression. He riffed on Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high" line from the 2016 DNC.

You May Also Like

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.