"He's not just unprepared -- he's temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability and immense responsibility."

- @HillaryClinton, 2016

Four years ago this country failed itself, bigly.

We got everything wrong.

All of it.

1/

We are where we are today because of the mistakes we made then. Period.

It could have and would have- gone so very differently.

This is true whether you believe Trump actually won fairly, or, that he and Russia stole the election in 2016.

We fucked up either way.

2/
"We cannot put the safety of our children and grandchildren in Donald Trump's hands. We cannot let him roll the dice with America."

- @HillaryClinton, 2016.

She sounds like a prophet now. She told us out loud every single day of that campaign who Donald Trump was.

3/
Many of us were screaming with her from the sidelines, but out front it was pretty much just Hillary.

Everyone else was too busy trying to tear her apart to hold him accountable for anything.

Even the left.

The fucking left

It was shit storm and it rained everyday.

4/

.
All kinds of fun stuff happened during that time. Things that should have made everyone sit up straight and pay attention.

In Dec 2015 Jill Stein ate dinner in Russia with her, ahem, good friends Michael Flynn and Vladimir Putin.

Then...

5/

https://t.co/FTCX9ooDYw
Michael Flynn has notoriously since been pardoned for his crimes,by the man he committed many of them for, but Stein has never had to answer for hers.

But they will always have Russia....

6/
"Making Donald Trump our commander-in-chief would be a historic mistake."

- @HillaryClinton, 2016.

Everyone had played their own parts in tearing Clinton down and it became more convenient for them to treat quotes like this as polemic.

7/
She called it as she saw it and was exactly right.

She was (and continues to be) exactly right quite often actually. Way more than most of the people she served with or those who critique her from either side.

And that is, I think, what pisses people off most.

8/
Because nothing pisses people off more, particularly men in power, than when a woman is right.

Worse when one beats them.

Even worse when one beats them at their own game.

Hillary Clinton does that often and well

And they hate her for it; truly, madly, deeply.

9/
They say a picture is worth more than a thousand words, and they are not wrong. I think you can understand the hatred so many have for Clinton by studying just a handful of stills.

Here she is with @TGowdySC after her grueling 15 hours of BenServerEmailGhazi testimony.
They were supposed to destroy her. They'd practically promised they would.

Smoking gun and what not.

After 15 hours Gowdy was not only sweating, he was nearly in tears. He had begun to understand about midway in that she was beating him.

By the end, he was all puddle.

11/
By every logical metric Clinton decimated Trump all three times they debated. But the final debate was the most conclusive. It was the most everything.

Here they are at the end of that debate.

His face hides nothing here.
He knew she had beaten him. So did everyone else.

12/

More from Politics

You May Also Like

IMPORTANCE, ADVANTAGES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF BHAGWAT PURAN

It was Ved Vyas who edited the eighteen thousand shlokas of Bhagwat. This book destroys all your sins. It has twelve parts which are like kalpvraksh.

In the first skandh, the importance of Vedvyas


and characters of Pandavas are described by the dialogues between Suutji and Shaunakji. Then there is the story of Parikshit.
Next there is a Brahm Narad dialogue describing the avtaar of Bhagwan. Then the characteristics of Puraan are mentioned.

It also discusses the evolution of universe.(
https://t.co/2aK1AZSC79 )

Next is the portrayal of Vidur and his dialogue with Maitreyji. Then there is a mention of Creation of universe by Brahma and the preachings of Sankhya by Kapil Muni.


In the next section we find the portrayal of Sati, Dhruv, Pruthu, and the story of ancient King, Bahirshi.
In the next section we find the character of King Priyavrat and his sons, different types of loks in this universe, and description of Narak. ( https://t.co/gmDTkLktKS )


In the sixth part we find the portrayal of Ajaamil ( https://t.co/LdVSSNspa2 ), Daksh and the birth of Marudgans( https://t.co/tecNidVckj )

In the seventh section we find the story of Prahlad and the description of Varnashram dharma. This section is based on karma vaasna.
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x