Yikes on bikes.
"Multiple European security officials told Insider that President Donald Trump appeared to have tacit support among US federal agencies responsible for securing the Capitol complex in Wednesday's coup
Yikes on bikes.
We know that:
1) Sund told Representatives that he had requested additional National Guard back-up. That did not happen.
2) National Guard was deployed for "traffic control" at...
3) Additional Guard support was delayed by Sec. of Army Ryan McCarthy, Sec. Def. Christopher Collins, and allegedly by Trump himself for 90 minutes.
5) Sund also told the FBI Capitol Police didn't need back-up when the Capitol perimeter was being breached.
Multiple people absolutely interfered.
Yup. And the stories about why it was absent don't add up.
I've attended protests in DC before. I can't imagine being allowed to march from the White House to the Capitol in large numbers without having any real crowd control.
Why they didn't direct traffic to the designated protest zone away from the Capitol...
More from Cate Eland
The right: *uses social media to plot violent overthrow of country*
Social media: *bans people plotting or encouraging violent overthrow of country*
The right: It's not fair! You're just attacking us because of our politics. You're being anti-democratic!
Everyone else:
The way Republicans and the right have responded to the Jan. 6 attack--explicitly by Trump supporters on Trump's behalf--has been an abusive tactic known as
DARVO is so effective because perpetrators of abuse twist reality so their victims look less believable and more aggressive.
Hence Republicans on the evening of the attack saying, "We're better than this. This is what Democrats do, not what we do."
Social media: *bans people plotting or encouraging violent overthrow of country*
The right: It's not fair! You're just attacking us because of our politics. You're being anti-democratic!
Everyone else:
The way Republicans and the right have responded to the Jan. 6 attack--explicitly by Trump supporters on Trump's behalf--has been an abusive tactic known as
DARVO: Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender: https://t.co/Q2ofRX13tl
— Olivia Waite (@O_Waite) January 9, 2021
DARVO is so effective because perpetrators of abuse twist reality so their victims look less believable and more aggressive.
Hence Republicans on the evening of the attack saying, "We're better than this. This is what Democrats do, not what we do."
I want to break down Lindsey's letter, because it is breathtakingly hypocritical and stoking division with every sentence, despite claiming to be concerned with healing.
1) "But now, in your first act as Majority Leader, rather than begin the national healing that the country so desperately yearns for, you seek vengeance and political retaliation instead."
Trump incited an attack on the Capitol, on Congress, and on a free & fair election.
Trump has yet to concede, to apologize, or to admit he was lying about the outcome of the election. He has done nothing that demonstrates he does not continue to present a danger to our nation.
Trump's supporters continue to conspire to overthrow the government--with Trump's implicit, and quite possibly explicit--support. At this very moment, over 20,000 troops are stationed in our nation's capital to ensure the inauguration of President-Elect Biden can be completed.
It is not "vengeance" or "political retaliation" to insist a man that has fomented and continues to inspire a violent insurrection against the government is unfit ever to hold office again.
This is, in fact, a bare minimum protection for our country against future harm by Trump.
My letter to Democratic Leader Schumer.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) January 17, 2021
The Senate should vote to dismiss the article of impeachment once it is received in the Senate. We will be delaying indefinitely, if not forever, the healing of this great Nation if we do otherwise. pic.twitter.com/fjVcf7iVPf
1) "But now, in your first act as Majority Leader, rather than begin the national healing that the country so desperately yearns for, you seek vengeance and political retaliation instead."
Trump incited an attack on the Capitol, on Congress, and on a free & fair election.
Trump has yet to concede, to apologize, or to admit he was lying about the outcome of the election. He has done nothing that demonstrates he does not continue to present a danger to our nation.
Trump's supporters continue to conspire to overthrow the government--with Trump's implicit, and quite possibly explicit--support. At this very moment, over 20,000 troops are stationed in our nation's capital to ensure the inauguration of President-Elect Biden can be completed.
It is not "vengeance" or "political retaliation" to insist a man that has fomented and continues to inspire a violent insurrection against the government is unfit ever to hold office again.
This is, in fact, a bare minimum protection for our country against future harm by Trump.
More from Politics
You May Also Like
These 10 threads will teach you more than reading 100 books
Five billionaires share their top lessons on startups, life and entrepreneurship (1/10)
10 competitive advantages that will trump talent (2/10)
Some harsh truths you probably don’t want to hear (3/10)
10 significant lies you’re told about the world (4/10)
Five billionaires share their top lessons on startups, life and entrepreneurship (1/10)
I interviewed 5 billionaires this week
— GREG ISENBERG (@gregisenberg) January 23, 2021
I asked them to share their lessons learned on startups, life and entrepreneurship:
Here's what they told me:
10 competitive advantages that will trump talent (2/10)
To outperform, you need serious competitive advantages.
— Sahil Bloom (@SahilBloom) March 20, 2021
But contrary to what you have been told, most of them don't require talent.
10 competitive advantages that you can start developing today:
Some harsh truths you probably don’t want to hear (3/10)
I\u2019ve gotten a lot of bad advice in my career and I see even more of it here on Twitter.
— Nick Huber (@sweatystartup) January 3, 2021
Time for a stiff drink and some truth you probably dont want to hear.
\U0001f447\U0001f447
10 significant lies you’re told about the world (4/10)
THREAD: 10 significant lies you're told about the world.
— Julian Shapiro (@Julian) January 9, 2021
On startups, writing, and your career:
I like this heuristic, and have a few which are similar in intent to it:
Hiring efficiency:
How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?
What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?
How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:
* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work
How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.
(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)
How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
Here's how I'd measure the health of any tech company:
— Jeff Atwood (@codinghorror) October 25, 2018
How long, as measured from the inception of idea to the modified software arriving in the user's hands, does it take to roll out a *1 word copy change* in your primary product?
Hiring efficiency:
How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?
What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?
How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:
* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work
How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.
(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)
How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
