Republicans caused this to happen, because they wanted it to happen.

The president.
The Senators.
The Representatives.
And their voters.

An open show that they care about nothing but domination. That is their politics.

The American Fascist Party.

Yesterday was the deadliest in U.S. history, a situation created by Republican leadership, who continue to actively fight against any remedy, while our media covers the president's unlawful attempts to overturn an election as a "gambit"

I see the cause of our "political divide."

The idea astonishes, that there still exist opinion pieces suggesting those directly responsible for a rolling series of the deadliest days in U.S. history should face no consequence. The belief that a few people matter and the rest do not has never been more nakedly exposed.

Killing people because you want them dead is divisive.
Abandoning them to a virus when you could save them is divisive.
Making them die of cancer when you could give treatment is divisive.
Making them starve when you have food is divisive.

Yelling at the people doing it is not.

Lying is divisive.
Forcing people to live in your lie is divisive.
Convincing their friends and family that the lie is truth, until they no longer resemble themselves, is divisive.
Creating a media ecosystem to launder lies into truth is divisive.

Insisting on truth is not.

Corruption is divisive.
Profiting from your office is divisive
Breaking laws you still enforce upon others is divisive
Making law enforcement a profit center for the demolition of human lives is divisive

Seeking to punish corrupt actors and demolish corrupt institutions is not.

The Great American Forgetting Project starts today. They're going to simultaneously try to tell us the last four years were an aberration that is over, and that it never happened.

And it's natural to want to forget these awful years.

It's our moral duty not to.

Those who benefit from our country's malicious priorities will do everything they can now to get us to forget how incontrovertibly Trump exposed those priorities.

Many of us thought we were something better than we were, but now we know.

We've seen our nation's face.

And many among us knew the truth all along. Many of us always saw our nation unmasked, because they were the ones who suffered it.

They told us all along, and the rest of us didn't listen.

Now that they've been proven correct, we're going to be asked to not listen again.

We can't deny anymore, that there are people among us, everywhere, for whom no lie is so obvious they won't believe it, as long as they think it serves their ends.

They don't care about truth, and never did.

We should care about truth, and speak it plain.

This is us.

We've seen our national tolerance for open racism, for cruelty, for corruption, for false equivocation.

Not just the tolerance, but the enthusiasm.

Trump didn't create it. It was there. He exploited it.

We'll never become what we want to be if we don't admit what we are.

Every argument against raising the minimum wage involves pointing to some other part of our broken system as if it were a beloved cultural treasure to defend rather than just the next unacceptable thing that needs fixing.

“How is it fair to pay people making minimum wage $30k a year when high school teachers start at that?” as if stagnant wages for teachers were an unrelated matter; don’t worry, Bill, we’ll get to it.

Everyone should have the means to survive and thrive and if the current system doesn't provide for that then nuts to the current system; we shouldn't work for it, it should work for us.

This is (pretty obviously to me) the real reason our leaders are so resistant to giving people the relief money needed to combat Covid.

They can't risk exposing the truth that you can actually just give people the money they need and nothing will break.

Our leaders are working to protect a system, but they shouldn't work for the system, they should work for us. The survival and thriving of human beings is the goal. Any part of any system that doesn't work toward that goal can be jettisoned.

Is this obvious, it feels obvious.

1. SolarWinds - an IT monitoring company with the NSA, all five military branches of the Pentagon, and several major civilian agencies, had their software hacked by the Russian hacker group Cozy Bear yesterday, the same group responsible for the 2016 DNC hack.

2. SolarWinds uses a protocol called Orion Improvement Protocol (I believe this is a wrapper for RMON and SNMP calls), and this protocol was hacked at Treasury and NTIA, the National Telecommunication advisor agency.

3. As a veteran of hacking forensics, I always look at modus operandi by malicious groups and at human factor compromises as the first investigative avenues to pursue. My research partner Jen Moore discovered Pavel Yershov lead the 2016 attack for GRU also worked for Microsoft.

4. Interesting that Warren Flood also works for Microsoft Pro Services, and he was intimately involved in the 2016 DNC Microsoft GRU "Hack". Flood and his wife were instrumental in the Dominion Voting Machine purchases in Wayne County, Michigan and the State of Georgia,

5. Even more interesting that Warren Flood has worked for a long time for Joe Biden as has his wife.

Here's 100 confirmed conspiracies from the last 75 years. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Purpose: To indicate why we have a RIGHT to be skeptical and critical to our governments, corporations and other large institutions.

Charles Walker, Vice Chair of the 1922 Tory backbench committee in the Commons tells TWTW that he thinks the government knew it intended to “cancel” Christmas on Wednesday or Thursday but waited for Parliament to rise to do it. Says many of his colleagues find this “egregious.”

When put to Walker that Matt Hancock said this morning that wasn’t the case, it was the briefing on Friday which prompted the decision, Walker says: “Hmm yeah...well I’d have to disagree with the SoS on that.” So he’s either saying Hancock isn’t being truthful or is misinformed.

Walker: “Surely at some stage a senior government minister has say I’ve offered my resignation to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister has to say- very early I’ve had to accept this.”

Reminder- Charles Walker is Vice Chair of the Tory backbench committee.

Walker heavily implies it’s Matt Hancock he wants to see resign: “I’m not asking for the government to collapse. I’m asking for a Secretary of State to take some responsibility.”

The Charles Walker interview is extraordinary in what he is inferring. A senior Conservative MP is essentially accusing his govt and ministers of deceit about what they knew about the new strain and when and by implication the timing of the new lockdown.

THREAD: British people are so thick that they will watch the government make exactly the same mistake for a fourth time, and carry on cheering. Ok, yes, you're being lied to in the press. But the opposite of "opening up as quickly" is not "lockdown forever". Here's why: 1/

In fact, opening up as quickly as we can will lead to more lockdowns, and worse restrictions over the course of the next year. Or to put it another way an extra week of lockdown now saves us from an extra month of lockdown in the Summer or Autumn.

How does that work? Right 2/

now the number of infections is declining quite fast. But the number of cases is still quite high. If they are still quite high (or even medium) when we lift restrictions this will lead very quickly to a massive spike in cases, and then we will have to lock down again, 3/

probably for a long time.

Sounds familiar doesn't it. It's exactly what we did in November through to now. First we went into lockdown, then we released it too early (at the beginning of December). As a result, cases spiked. By the end of December there was an enormous wave 4/

of infection, which killed tens of thousands of people. In the first weeks of January the government put in the current lockdown restrictions. They didn't really have a choice: about 80% of the British public supported restrictions. But here's the thing: after six weeks of 5/

X : Thoughts on private companies being on the boards of ICS (integrated care systems).
Me : Conflict of interest question? Supplier determining needs?
X : Yes
Me : It's ok, as long as
a) you have effective spend control
b) those private companies are JVs which Gov owns 51% of.

X : What if they are not 51% owned JVs?
Me : Ah, that's a bad idea. You really want your boards to have your interests at heart.
X : What about experience, partnership?
Me : Those are advisors and you take it with a pinch of salt and as much as possible use critical friends.

Suppliers will always tell you that they want to be your partners, to build a relationship, to be your friends, to find the win/win in much the same way a second hand car salesperson wants to be your buddy ... but their interests are not yours and never can be.

X : Critical friends?
Me : Occassionaly you can find critical friends. People that we willing to tell you the truth as they see it regardless of the consequences. They are not very common and it normally requires a deep sense of duty that exceeds any loyalty to others.

X : Can the relationship be symbiotic?
Me : Rarely but that depends. If the organisation has a core overiding principle of focusing on the customer need and I don't mean lip service to this but absolutely embedded into its very core then yes i.e. places like Amazon, Alibaba etc.