Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
@baseballcrank
Aug 21, 2019 • 3 tweets • 1 min read • Read on X
"Professionalizing" ambassadors would mean they no longer work for the president - another chip away at our democracy in favor of the unelected administrative state. But from what I can see, Warren's actual plan is just generalities: medium.com/@teamwarren/re…
In the 19th century, ambassador was a hugely important position, requiring independent judgment to act on the ground (and gather intelligence) far from home. With modern communications, an ambassador's single most important qualification is the confidence of the president.
That's not to say that ignorant donors should be our representatives (there are less intrusive reforms one could pursue), but "professional" ambassadors who aren't on the same page as the POTUS would be worse than no ambassador at all.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @baseballcrank

Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
Dec 8
Sotomayor: "You're asking us to destroy the structure of government."
Sotomayor rambling on about why the current Court should think it is smarter than the "renowned" jurists who *dissented* in Myers v US
Kagan: Doesn't it invade the separation of powers to give presidents control over agencies when those agencies "do a LOT of legislating" and "a LOT of judging"?

Anyone who wants the executive agencies to go back to being executive in nature:
Read 38 tweets
Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
Jun 13
The Obama/Tucker/Vance/Tulsi crowd speaks.
More from that faction
Another in the same crowd
Read 16 tweets
Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
Mar 5
Democrats may say that gender is a social construct, but I don't see male Congressional Democrats wearing hot pink.
Now testing who's had enough shots to feel comfortable shaking hands with RFK.
Image
Read 19 tweets
Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
Dec 4, 2024
Both Thomas & Alito have already told the Solicitor General that they believe she's misleading the Court. Never heard Thomas do that. Roberts told her SCOTUS is not "best situated" to decide evolving medical treatment questions.
Alito arguing that Bostock involved "particular language in a particular statute," whereas this case is under the Equal Protection Clause. Clearly an argument aimed at Gorsuch.
Prelogar: Classifying by pregnancy is not a proxy for sex.

LOL.
Read 13 tweets
Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
Oct 2, 2024
"Why should a candidate for office think people tuned in to a debate to hear him rather than the moderators?"

There's a sense of entitlement here, but it's not Vance's.
Nobody remembers the moderators from the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Because they didn't have any.
As a rule, if you moderated a debate & people remember the moderation, you didn't do your job.
Read 4 tweets
Dan McLaughlin Profile picture
Aug 21, 2024
1. How ignorant & wrong is @stuartpstevens? Let us count the ways. To begin with, it's the law that defines crimes. It doesn't matter what the jury thinks of the facts if the judge & prosecutor are wrong about the law.
2. If he read the indictment, "statement of facts," bill of particulars, decisions by Acting Justice Merchan, & jury instructions, as I have (guess what: those are all in the public record), @stuartpstevens would know that the legal theory was bonkers as well as undisclosed in the indictment nationalreview.com/2024/02/its-no…
@stuartpstevens 3. If we're playing this game, @stuartpstevens, how many of the Section 175.05 & 175.10 cases have you read? I've done a ton of research on this, written up @NRO. The central element of the crime was never supported by evidence or even allegations nationalreview.com/corner/new-yor…
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(