Please stop asking me what happens if Mike Pence calls for a "ten day window" or whatever. NOTHING happens. Nothing a fucking thing. He doesn't have that ability. It would be like me calling for giraffes to grow wings. Please stop asking me about obviously imaginary things.

It's trendy to suggest that Trump's attempt at stealing the election has finished off what was left of our democracy. But after everything we've been through in the past four years, I just don't buy that his endgame has been any more harmful than the rest of what he's done to us.

First of all, Trump DID manage to rig the 2016 election. The media largely swept that inconvenient fact under the rug when the evidence started to emerge shortly after he "won" because they were too excited at the ratings that a Trump presidency would give them.

But the reality is that Trump's successful theft of the 2016 election was obviously more harmful to the sanctity of our democracy than his failed theft of the 2020 election. It's just that the media now wants to get ratings out of his failed 2020 attempt.

Trump has spent four years systematically chewing at the fabric of every aspect of our democracy. We don't even know what our democracy is going to look like after this. His tantrum about losing, and zero-chance attempt at overturning it, is just a footnote at the end.

We've all known for four years now that if Trump lost the 2020 election, he'd try to overturn it by any illegal means possible. If you were paying attention, you also knew that if he got blown out, he would have zero chance of overturning it. This isn't some gasp-worthy surprise.

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.

No, Mike Pence can't magically do anything on January 6th. No, Louie Gohment can't force the courts to give Pence magic powers. Trump has literally zero chance of magically overturning the election. Stop panicking over imaginary things. This is getting incredibly boring.

There won’t be a civil war. No one will pull off a coup. There won’t be martial law. None of these things are real.

It’s over. But the more clear it becomes that it’s over, the fantasizers on Trump’s side, and the panickers on our side, become more hallucinatory about it.

We have a pandemic, people dying, an economic crisis, people starving, and a runoff election that’s for all the marbles. Yet you’re going to focus on IMAGINARY doomsday scenarios? None of what’s going on is real enough for you? You have to go invent more bad things? Come on.

Those of us who have fought so hard for four years, deserve better than to have our agenda derailed by the doomsday panickers on our side. They don’t care about winning, they’re just addicted to the adrenaline rush of telling themselves they’re going to lose.

In fact the panickers on our side, and the fantasizers on Trump’s side, deserve each other. Both completely removed from reality. Neither interested in helping their own side. Just a shared interest in hallucinating over laugh out loud imaginary scenarios. And of no use to anyone

What do the Atlantic, Business Insider, Vox, Salon, Slate, BuzzFeed, Washington Post, New York Times have in common? They've all knowingly published lies about me over the past four years. There's zero honesty or accountability in journalism. We're going to change that in 2021.

I'm in a unique position to know just how dishonest the mainstream media is, because I've read lies about myself in so many major news outlets. I know who the bullshitters are, on the left and right, because they've all targeted me to try to score cheap points.

I have a hard time trusting anything that's reported the mainstream political media, because I've read lies about myself most of the major publications publications, thus forcing me to question what all else they might be lying about. It's a really creepy position to be in.

What's even more disturbing is how few people truly know how dishonest the mainstream political media is. If it's from a big name publication, they just believe it. That's because they haven't read lies about themselves in those news outlets, like I have. It's eye opening.

I'm not even talking about misinformation. I'm talking about outright and intentional lies that major publications made up about me for competitive reasons, because they were worried Palmer Report was getting too big, and didn't want the competition. Truly evil tactics.

1) If you want a better understanding of how to fight and win on the left, look no further than Rep. Bill Pascrell. He knows Speaker Pelosi can't just magically refuse to seat 126 House Republicans and pull it off – but that's the entire point. This is all about leverage.

2) There are no magic wand solutions in politics. There just aren't. Pascrell is a fearless flame thrower, but he understands that. He's calling for Pelosi to refuse to seat these Republicans, because it gets the discussion going about what should be done to these Republicans.

3) By calling for an extreme and impossible action (the 14th Amendment isn't a magic wand the Speaker can just wave), Pascrell is laying the groundwork to give Pelosi cover to be able to take some kind of more realistic action against the 126 House Republicans.

4) By the time Pelosi ends up taking whatever realistic action she was planning to take against them, it ends up looking reasonable in the eyes of voters in the middle, in comparison to the more extreme (and again, impossible) course of action that Pascrell put on the table.

5) So the Democratic Party will get a savvy win out of this. They'll ding the 126 House Republicans in some way, and it'll resonate with voters in the middle. But most liberal activists will end up throwing a fit about it, because they didn't get the magic wand solution.

Strange things are afoot at the Circle K. Let’s sort it out.

[THREAD]

1/ Two nights ago, Rupert Murdoch called on Mitch McConnell, after hours. Since then, two Fox News-related Twitter accounts have not tweeted.

2/ Trump fired Sessions on Wednesday, replacing him with human dildo/Putin collaborator Matt Whitaker. Sessions had asked to stay until Friday and was told to leave immediately. So there was clearly some urgency to install the dildo...er, puppet.

3/ The Democrats won the SHIT out of the Midterms. Come January, the House check on Trump will leave him so hobbled, he’ll be like the dude from Misery.

4/ Trump went to Paris, ostensibly for an Armistice Day centennial event. He skipped the event, and much of the dinner tonight, because of “weather,” which everyone seems to agree is a bullshit excuse.

Election Litigation Update - Gohmert.

Reply brief is in. Let's have a look. They are, mercifully, underlength. They had 50 pages available, the PDF is 43 and some of that is cover page, signatures,

Interesting table of contents. Looks like they're packing a lot in, until you realize that much of the material that's important - like their response to the "you sued the wrong person" material and "injury in fact" take up very little space.

Looks like they decided to skip the table of authorities. Presumably GoogleDocWord ate it too bad for them to fix. This will certainly further endear them to the judge.

This is going to be interesting - leading off a reply brief with a "here's what our cause is about" is certainly a strategy. It's even a bold strategy.

Shall we dig deeper, Cotton?

"We live in a democratic republic in which the Vice President, who will more often than not be a candidate in the election, has the sole and unchallengeable power to decide who wins the election" is a hellofa take.

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.

Andy Ngo thinks Antifa are on a level with the Nazis in terms of wanton violence. Furthermore, he says that 'even the Nazis knew to cover their tracks' and that we didn't know about the Holocaust until afterwards.

Wrong, and offensive on almost every level.

Violence had been building for years prior to the Nazis assuming power, and much of it was instigated by the SA.

In 1932 for example, 105 people died in clashes between SA and opposing groups in Prussia alone - that's one region.

SA activity - marching through 'red' neighbourhoods and fighting those who opposed them was a deliberate strategy. The spectacle of violence and the implied 'restoral of order' was the point.

Just think of how Horst Wessel was remembered following his death in 1930. He was turned into a martyr who fell 'bravely in battle' against the Bolsheviks. Violence was inherent to the message - a clash between forces for the future of Germany.

During his time as SA leader in Berlin, Goebbels worked on a strategy of provocation that almost always ended in violence, a form of trolling that would always provide the opportunity for a brawl and the implication that a menace had been dealt with.