And, again, note that he didn't address Trump's unconstitutional request of Mike Pence.
Oh huh. Trump's defense isn't going to address the impeachment case (and seems to ignore his demands of Mike Pence again).
And, again, note that he didn't address Trump's unconstitutional request of Mike Pence.
And lies about Hillary's claims about Russia.
Has this guy ever met Corey Lewandowski?
Again, Van Der Veen is not addressing the actual case.
And he's misrepresenting the requests from LE.
1) Anything before January 6
2) Anything involving Mike Pence
3) Why Trump didn't do anything ON January 6
There's your headline. They have no response to the facts.
Remember: they're playing this to avoid talking about why Trump ordered Mike Pence to do something unconstitutional, and spent 4 months setting up the riot.
Schoen doesn't believe defending the country is a constitutional imperative.
Democrats hate Trump so I won't address all the Trump supporters who said that Trump incited a riot.
They're simply ignoring all the other things that aren't speech, or aren't legal speech. He ordered Pence to do something unconstitutional. He did nothing while the Capitol was attacked.
Also, has he addressed the unconstitutional demand Trump made of Mike Pence?
Uh. Explain how it's on point? You're just gonna leave it there?
Van der Veen: But Raskin should be impeached for a single legal challenge.
A key one, though is that he did nothing as the Capitol was attacked by terrorists.
https://t.co/pSo4P2EV9a
Now they're going to claim there was no lead-up.
More from emptywheel
Since everyone is writing abt Julian Assange today, some posts:
The Growing WikiLeaks Conspiracy [Indictment]
https://t.co/i3dNE6lnl7
This talks about the superseding CFAA charge that Assange boosters are generally silent or worse about.
Three Inconvenient Truths about a Hypothetical Trump Pardon for Julian Assange
https://t.co/FDl2KMJV8x
1) It may not work
2) It would have to pardon other crimes
3) That would include Trump's own corruption
Rat-Fucker Rashomon: Getting the "Highest Level of Government" to Free Julian Assange
https://t.co/oNr8YgXbhk
On the pardon discussions with Trump that WikiLeaks doesn't want you to know about.
The Minh Quang Pham Precedent to the Julian Assange Extradition
https://t.co/1i7yErl0sC
The UK extradited a guy whose primary crime (at the time) was doing graphic design for AQAP.
Julian Assange's First Witness, Journalism Professor Mark Feldstein, Professes to Be Unfamiliar with the Public Record on Assange
https://t.co/sl0sasWgeu
WikiLeaks boosters are lying, cynically, abt what changed between 2013 and 2017.
The Growing WikiLeaks Conspiracy [Indictment]
https://t.co/i3dNE6lnl7
This talks about the superseding CFAA charge that Assange boosters are generally silent or worse about.
Three Inconvenient Truths about a Hypothetical Trump Pardon for Julian Assange
https://t.co/FDl2KMJV8x
1) It may not work
2) It would have to pardon other crimes
3) That would include Trump's own corruption
Rat-Fucker Rashomon: Getting the "Highest Level of Government" to Free Julian Assange
https://t.co/oNr8YgXbhk
On the pardon discussions with Trump that WikiLeaks doesn't want you to know about.
The Minh Quang Pham Precedent to the Julian Assange Extradition
https://t.co/1i7yErl0sC
The UK extradited a guy whose primary crime (at the time) was doing graphic design for AQAP.
Julian Assange's First Witness, Journalism Professor Mark Feldstein, Professes to Be Unfamiliar with the Public Record on Assange
https://t.co/sl0sasWgeu
WikiLeaks boosters are lying, cynically, abt what changed between 2013 and 2017.
Breaking: Not only does John Solomon continue to include more and more false claims in his propaganda, but after 4 years of "reporting" on FISA he still doesn't know what FBI Director signs to on FISA.
In reality, this is what John Solomon's "SMOKING GUN" says:
Steele was considered reliable (true!), his sources were in a position to report on what they reported on (true!), the reporting corroborated stuff in the report [that, btw, is mostly classified]
This paragraph, for example, includes 3 lies and one exaggeration: First, CIA informed FBI that until 2011, they asked Page questions about the RU intelligence officers trying to recruit him.
That does NOT cover the most alarming thing he did in 2015 or one RU intelligence officer that Page did not tell the CIA about while still an approved contact.
USG had gotten opinions about Steele that weren't entirely favorable (but unsurprising for operations officer), but this is before questions abt source network.
Smoking gun: Comey told Clapper FBI unable to \u2018sufficiently corroborate\u2019 Steele \u2014 then signed FISA, newly declassified memo shows. | Just The News https://t.co/agpMxMLORL
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) February 15, 2021
In reality, this is what John Solomon's "SMOKING GUN" says:
Steele was considered reliable (true!), his sources were in a position to report on what they reported on (true!), the reporting corroborated stuff in the report [that, btw, is mostly classified]
This paragraph, for example, includes 3 lies and one exaggeration: First, CIA informed FBI that until 2011, they asked Page questions about the RU intelligence officers trying to recruit him.
That does NOT cover the most alarming thing he did in 2015 or one RU intelligence officer that Page did not tell the CIA about while still an approved contact.
USG had gotten opinions about Steele that weren't entirely favorable (but unsurprising for operations officer), but this is before questions abt source network.
gonna live tweet this.
Mark Meadows explains at the beginning that Cleta is not attorney of record but she's been involved.
Trump (who lied abt his inauguration size) says he knows he won bc of rally size.
Trump starts by describing that current margin is what "everyone agrees on."
Trump repeatedly claims that people went to vote but weren't allowed to bc a ballot already cast.
Maybe ... they had already voted? I think he just narced out a bunch of people trying to double vote.
Trump accuses "Ruby Freeman" of being a vote hustler.
Mark Meadows explains at the beginning that Cleta is not attorney of record but she's been involved.
FOLKS: Full audio published here. Please retweet far and wide. https://t.co/QqIsaNw5pA
— Amy Gardner (@AmyEGardner) January 3, 2021
Trump (who lied abt his inauguration size) says he knows he won bc of rally size.
Trump starts by describing that current margin is what "everyone agrees on."
Trump repeatedly claims that people went to vote but weren't allowed to bc a ballot already cast.
Maybe ... they had already voted? I think he just narced out a bunch of people trying to double vote.
Trump accuses "Ruby Freeman" of being a vote hustler.
More from Trump
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
So friends here is the thread on the recommended pathway for new entrants in the stock market.
Here I will share what I believe are essentials for anybody who is interested in stock markets and the resources to learn them, its from my experience and by no means exhaustive..
First the very basic : The Dow theory, Everybody must have basic understanding of it and must learn to observe High Highs, Higher Lows, Lower Highs and Lowers lows on charts and their
Even those who are more inclined towards fundamental side can also benefit from Dow theory, as it can hint start & end of Bull/Bear runs thereby indication entry and exits.
Next basic is Wyckoff's Theory. It tells how accumulation and distribution happens with regularity and how the market actually
Dow theory is old but
Here I will share what I believe are essentials for anybody who is interested in stock markets and the resources to learn them, its from my experience and by no means exhaustive..
First the very basic : The Dow theory, Everybody must have basic understanding of it and must learn to observe High Highs, Higher Lows, Lower Highs and Lowers lows on charts and their
Even those who are more inclined towards fundamental side can also benefit from Dow theory, as it can hint start & end of Bull/Bear runs thereby indication entry and exits.
Next basic is Wyckoff's Theory. It tells how accumulation and distribution happens with regularity and how the market actually
Dow theory is old but
Old is Gold....
— Professor (@DillikiBiili) January 23, 2020
this Bharti Airtel chart is a true copy of the Wyckoff Pattern propounded in 1931....... pic.twitter.com/tQ1PNebq7d