Categories Politics

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
Let's do a Friday afternoon check-in on what's going on in pro-Trump social media

One of the most dominant themes is paranoia. Anyone who talks about a rally, protest, march, or other action gets accused quickly of being part of the FBI/antifa/deep state 1/


That said, this is not quite right because… 2/


…the Virginia Citizens Defense League is organizing a caravan for Lobby Day on the 18th. Their event was armed last year (photos from 2020) and they explain how to show up armed this year, even though they don't have permits to hold an official event
https://t.co/AwqEVrsPwp 3/


That's not to say they are showing up to try to overturn the election, but still, it IS a conservative group holding an optionally-armed "bunch of people showing up in the same place but not calling it a rally event". FWIW, some think the Deep State is setting them up too 4/

Still, I'm not seeing any big organizing of events on open pro-Trump social media. Smaller groups may get together, but I don't see anything happening at scale among average MAGA supporters 5/
He wouldn't be the first to follow along that path. Eric Goldman was seen as Dad's successor as WH professor-in-residence; @JeffShesol joined Clinton's staff after his book on RFK & LBJ caught the president's eye.


Meacham would also follow an even richer history of former journalists writing for presidents. Raymond Moley wrote for FDR even as he edited the magazine that became Newsweek (which Meacham himself later led). 2/

FDR's call for "bold persistent experimentation" came from a reporter's writing a speech for him in 1932 basically on a dare. 3/

Emmet Hughes helped Eisenhower while still a Time/Life employee. 4/

Ray Price and Pat Buchanan both came from newspaper backgrounds, as editorial writers. 5/
Scientifically, there should be a single consistent standard.

As long as that is true, it's fine.

Cuomo's standard was neither consistent nor scientific. That is a clear first amendment violation.


Gorsuch is SCIENTIFICALLY RIGHT HERE.

If people can't admit that, then they are allowing their biases to


This on the other hand is 100% BS.

Not a single scientist I know supports this double standard. The best ones know that the type ofvenue is irrelevant... Only the size and # of people


In short, it is the LEFT here using religious bias to promote an antiscientific standard and allowing the State to violate Rights.

The Liberals and CJJR should be ashamed.

Another good thread here.

A consistent standard would have passed constitutional muster.