I've been trying to put this into words for a while now:

I truly think Biden understands the presidency more than perhaps any President since JFK. He is very aware of this moment and his role.

At some point you should stop underestimating him.

In 2009, I studied the history of the FBI/CIA and also the Hitler regime (research for a book). I expected it to be a dull errand, not a horrific realization that the evil methods of operation of US agencies were often indistinguishable in their actions from the N regime. AND...

2) I found no evidence whatsoever that these abhorrent programs had stopped. Quite the opposite... I kept waiting for the books to get to the part where the programs ended, were properly disclosed/exposed, all went to prison, victims were compensated, and these agencies prevented

3) from ever conducting unethical operations against their own citizens and others ever again... But... no. That part of the books wasn't written. We can only conclude then, that the operations are still ongoing. Even programs that were supposedly forced to end have many signs

4) of simply changing the name of the program/operation and shifting things around to look like something else... nope, just a continuation of the same unlawful evil thing as before. Except, year after year, the tech capabilities rose, and the level of wickedness had to also rise

5) As society became progressive, there wasn't much left that society universally labels a "compromising position": activities rejected as unacceptable, unforgivable, unpardonable & if caught- jailed or fired. Blackmail doesn't work if all human activity is accepted and defended

We've been hearing this a lot: the House managers have successfully shown how horrible the January 6 insurrection was and also highlighted Donald Trump's vulgar comments. But they haven't really proven the connection between Trump's comments and the attack. This is nonsense. 1/

There is a criminal case to be made against Trump for his role in inciting the inspiration, and @CREWcrew has made that case in its criminal sedition complaint against Trump. But this is not a criminal case, and does not require that kind of proof.

On a basic level, this case is painfully obvious. Donald Trump spent weeks and months and years saying, falsely, the election would be fraudulent and then that it had been stolen. This primed his supporters to believe their democratic rights were being take away. 3/

Trump spent weeks and months and years fueling a sense of grievance among his supporters and hostility to any political opponents, as well as condoning violence or mildly condemning it with a clear wink and a nod obviously meant to encourage it. 4/

In the weeks after the election, he compounded his big lie that he had won with efforts to take bogus claims to courts and to pressure officials at every level of government to overturn the results. He portrayed the across the board rejections as further persecution. 5/

Is the European Union really being unreasonable over the City of London?

Or are we seeing an inevitable consequence of a Brexit that prioritised sovereignty over financial services?

A thread…🧵💵🏦🇬🇧🇪🇺

Andrew Bailey’s Mansion House speech this week showed clear signs of frustration about the EU’s foot dragging in granting “equivalence” to UK regulators on financial

The view among UK financial lobbyists and regulators is that the EU has various financial equivalence agreements already with a host of other third countries (even the US) so why not the UK, which is currently, of course, totally aligned?...3/

But the view in the EU is that the UK is different from those other countries because it’s so dominant in finance - and they fear outsourcing regulation to an authority outside the bloc when that regulated activity could potentially affect EU markets/business so profoundly ...4/

Andrew Bailey thinks the EU is gearing up to demand the UK be a simple “rule taker” in return for equivalence, unable to unilaterally change UK rules, which he says would be "intolerable"....5/