THREAD: CCP vs US Military, on home soil.

1. I watched the Executive Orders and I watched the media panic. I watched the MSM lies and I watched the treason. I watched the fake Russia narrative. I watched the calls for impeachment. I watched a stolen election, in full view.

THREAD: Exposure before Extraction

1. Many are screaming for the EXTRACTION of corrupt people. People are asking:

- Prosecutors will surely follow the rule of law, won’t they?
- Why can the people see the crimes, but nothing happens?
- Why are there no major arrests yet?

THREAD: Pence never mattered

1. Recall: None of the authorities or courts in disputed swing-states were interested in looking at the merits of the fraud allegations.

Recall: The swing-states rushed to certify the vote count, despite active court cases and mountains of evidence.

THREAD: Why Anon?

1. Most of the social media world saw what @LLinWood posted to twitter recently. His post has drawn out much anger and much celebration.

He asked for prayer. He talked of potential death. He asked for protection.

He spoke of Isaac Kappy, who dared to speak.

THREAD: Joy

1. Joy is the experience of pleasure. Joy is contentment and adoration for the experience of being alive.

Clearly, 2020 has been a tough year to sustain a sense of joy.

However, joy is a powerful weapon we can deploy at this time.

Let me unpack this idea.

2. Humanity finds itself in the middle of a grand shift into maturity. It will be bumpy, but it is happening.

This shift began years ago when we chose love and peace, over destruction. We hated war and we rejected the idea that our enemies were people from another country.

3. We understood that no one is above another. We understood the value of life. We began to love the earth.

Fast forward to today…

We find ourselves facing powerful fears and emotions that were always going to be exposed during this shift.

4. Every day, we hear of a new crisis, civil unrest and community sadness. All this stuff had come into the light.

We are learning that authority figures and people of influence have ignored some very serious crimes.

It even 'appears' that election robbery could go unpunished.

5. During such a time, all historic beliefs are challenged, removing us from our comfort zone. Such a significant challenge will always activate fear and uncertainty.

At times like this, finding our inner joy can become a tad illusive. Sometimes it is impossible.

As usual is maddening how easy this is to understand and how much everyone refuses to understand it. There are two things happening here, and they aren't super hard to understand. There's the asshole administration and the asshole reporter.

The court said asshole administration revoked asshole Jim Acosta's press pass without due process. WH deemed him press, gave him a press pass, then they kicked him out without even being able to say who made the decision or on what grounds.

We want hostile, combative reporters. We **want** that. **You** want that. We want that because the press secretary of every single administration is a liar. Even the ones you like. Lying is their job. They show up to avoid answering, but give the appearance of being answerable.

It shouldn't be easy for government to just refuse to be answerable. It should be hard to dodge. Hard to kick people out. Hard to control the narrative. That shouldn't be easy for the gov't. Not even your most favoritest president.

You, the American citizen, want the truth. Reporters should be there to get it. That means asking questions doggedly, demanding answers. This is not an obscure idea. It should be obvious to anyone who's experienced having a president you didn't vote for. Super rare right?

Pretending that voting for Trump or denying climate change or suggesting the solution to every problem is more guns is a legitimate point of view, worthy of respect is not "how America works." It is how it dies.

People in a free society are entitled to any point of view no matter how obviously wrong or outlandish or destructive provided they do not impose their views on others.

But suggesting that something ignorant or divorced from reality warrants the same kind of treatment in public debate as something based in fact or at least credible is absurd and when done on behalf of a society in public media or academic settings it is self-destructive.

We would not grant media coverage or much bandwidth at all to a group that argued that unicorns exist or that there was a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Yet views like denying climate change or basing policy decisions on sweeping, obvious lies, are just as unsound.

Somewhere, somehow, judgments must be made. Some behaviors are wrong and must be condemned. Someone must challenge lies and demand facts. Coddling people who embrace idiocies does not help them no matter how loudly they demand to be coddled.

I don't think that "Democrats were cowards and couldn't stand up to McConnell" is the correct framing. Dems clearly made a political calculation. Plenty to potentially criticize about that calculation, but it was informed by factors unrelated to generalized "fear of republicans"

What we largely know now:
-There would never have been enough GOP votes to convict
-GOP had the power to hold up *all* Senate business & that means COVID relief (Dems would have been blamed for this hold up)
-Witnesses were uncooperative & would have had to have been subpoenaed

So I think the correct framing is that Democrats made a political calculation that the benefit of adding witnesses (who would not change the outcome) was not worth the political & moral cost of holding up COVID relief, as well as important confirmations. . . .

This calculation can be criticized on its own merits, but it's categorically different than just being scared of McConnell & the GOP.

For my own part, I think an error Democrats made w/r/t witnesses was not calling cooperative police officers who had been attacked that day. Just a few personal narratives from the police would have deeply embarrassed the GOP. That's a missed opportunity, in my view.

So I've been reporting a story about how you'd fix the impeachment process. It doesn't work for removal, as currently designed. Impeachment was built for a political system without parties. It fails in a system with polarized parties.

The one time it functioned as intended, confusingly, was the time it didn't happen: Richard Nixon wasn't impeached! But the impeachment process, which came at the low ebb of party polarization in American history, convinced his party to force him to resign.

Would Republicans force Nixon to resign today?

Oh, you're cute. Thank you. I needed that.

The problem of impeachment is pretty simple: Presidents are leaders of parties. Parties are tied to the political fortunes of presidents. You're asking a party to basically wreck its immediate political future for the good of the system.

This doesn't just have the effect of making impeachment ineffective as a remedy. It's worse than that. It makes impeachment dangerous to the president's party, and gives them a reason to defend him and either normalize or minimize his crimes. As we are seeing right now.