The piece repeatedly juxtaposes Murphy engaging in objectively indefensible conduct that is doing considerable damage to the public interest while quoting people who testify to her Great Personal Integritude
Citing 2000 as a precedent is laughable. Unlike in 2000, there is no actual uncertainty about the outcome. There is just a Republican effort to de-legitimize the election and handicap Biden, and Emily Murphy is one of the most important actors in this ratfucking op.
And towards the end of the piece, we are reminded that Murphy played a major role in changing the location of the new FBI building so Donald Trump could line his own pockets! Partisan hack is as partisan hack does.
Perhaps the most telling thing -- you will remember this from the James Comey saga -- is the implicit claim that "you will be criticized by Republicans if you do the right thing" is a good reason not to do it. It's not!
"But what about all the times she DIDN'T severely damage the public interest by being Donald Trump's boot polisher?"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I still don't understand why every piece about Murphy feels compelled to qualify the completely unambiguous evidence that she's a hack Trump boot polisher severely damaging the country with colleagues insisting based on nothing that she isn't
"She's not a bona fide Trump person and doesn't like people saying that, she just believes that she owes loyalty to Trump above loyalty to the country" uh OK
"But if I don't betray my public office by refusing to collaborate in Trump's election theft scheme I might lose my job 8 weeks before I lose it anyway" is not actually a real moral dilemma, unless you're the slavering lickspittle of an authoritarian president
Anyone who normalizes what Trump is doing is an active collaborator, and that definitely includes "but ACTUALLY Clinton did it too" bullshit lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/11/the-fa…
Clinton conceded before noon the day after Election Day and Obama fully cooperated with the transition. For a six-figure pundit to argue that there's any comparison is an object illustration of why we are where we are
Emily Murphy is still refusing to allow the transition to proceed. During a deadly pandemic. She is quite literally getting people killed to support Daddy Trump's election theft scheme. Do you know who Obama's GSA head even was? npr.org/sections/biden…
It's worth noting here that critical to Trump election theft scheme is the fact that three critical swing states are gerrymandered into permanent GOP control. If WI, MI and PA held democratic legislative elections this would all be moot.
And AFICT no Republican of any influence has any problem with this. And in one of the worst decisions ever issues by the United States Supreme Court the five most elite Republican lawyers said states not holding democratic elections is fine. scotusblog.com/case-files/cas…
The criticisms of a student jubilee that take the form of "here's a better plan that could be enacted in an alternate universe where Democratic majorities were allowed to govern" are just abjectly useless
If your proposal is better than student debt relief but it can't be enacted, it's irrelevant. If a student debt relief can be done without preventing any other good thing from happening, then it's still worth doing. Biden needs to use every stimulus lever he has
Comparing things that can be done to theoretically better things that can't be done to argue that you shouldn't do the former is a great way of proceeding, if you think the Carter administration was a smashing success
To summarize, Glenn believes that editors saying that his articles shouldn't have unsubstantiated claims in them is "authoritarianism," unlike anything related to the administration of Donald the Economically Populist Dove
Outraged at the number of times @megancarpentier has ruthlessly trampled on my sacred First Amendment right to have no editorial oversight whatsoever from media outlets that pay me to write for them TBH
Really, just awesome that someone who uses "scientific expertise" as a pejorative and very erroneously thinks that Plan B "destroy[s] an embryo after fertilization" is about to vote to eliminate the reproductive rights of American women. What a country.
And what we REALLY need now is for lawyers who think "expertise" is a punchline to kneecap our already inadequate COVID response. Just great.