In 2018, when @AOC was running against Joe Crowley, I interviewed her and asked whether she thought Nancy Pelosi (and Steny Hoyer) should continue in their leadership roles or be replaced, and whether she'd agitate for replacements. Here's what she said:
I never criticized her for quickly voting for Pelosi because she had a cogent rationale: the alternative (Tim Ryan or whoever) was worse. The problem is this is her reward for supporting Pelosi is losing a key Committee seat to a rival who opposed Pelosi:

As I told @jimmy_dore last month, I also have more empathy for the dilemmas faced by those who choose to play the "inside" role within a corrupt institution, as a result of my husband @davidmirandario's work in Congress. I daily see the conflicts: they're genuine and hard:
Ultimately, the Dem Party will ignore you and take you for granted if you play the good soldier and lend your support unconditionally. You only have power and leverage if you show you're willing to subvert them. And DC/DNC structures reward the corrupt:

In sum: 1) @jimmy_dore performed a great service with this critique: AOC should be accountable like anyone; 2) @AOC deserves much credit for engaging: she should, but most don't; 3) Sometimes too many expectations are placed on AOC: no one person can destroy the DC establishment.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Glenn Greenwald

Glenn Greenwald 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 @ggreenwald

19 Dec
Noam Chomsky on censorship and the left. Please listen:
Here's the second part of Chomsky's answer.

He's absolutely right: censorship & "cancel culture" have long been weapons used by the establishment against the left, and nobody cared until the left did it.

But he's also right that it's profoundly wrong on principle & strategy.
The Right is good at objecting to censorship when they're the targets. But it's often used against the left as well.

It's easy to defend free speech when it comes to ideas you like. But it only matters if you do it universally, especially for views you hate. It's a principle.
Read 5 tweets
17 Dec
Instagram is Using False “Fact-Checking” to Protect Joe Biden’s Crime Record From Criticisms

greenwald.substack.com/p/instagram-is…
"The Facebook-owned platform’s denunciation of a well-established view about Biden" -- a view voiced by Cory Booker, Bill Clinton, Kamala Harris and many others -- "shows the dangers of internet censorship and the fraudulent use of 'fact-checking.'”
The only thing that is demonstrably “false” here is Instagram’s Biden-shielding assertion that there is a “fact-checking” consensus that this criticism of Biden’s 1994 crime bill is false. Don't trust Silicon Valley giants to police our discourse:

greenwald.substack.com/p/instagram-is…
Read 4 tweets
17 Dec
I know it doesn't matter. I know it's wrong to ask the question. I know asking the question raises grave doubts about one's loyalties and patriotism.

But has there been *any* evidence publicly presented, let alone dispositive proof, that Russia is responsible for this hack?
Of course Russia, like the US and every other major power, engages in cyber-warfare. But given that Democrats like Dick Durbin are calling this a "virtual act of war," shouldn't we see some evidence Russia did it? Yes, Russia could have done it. But that's not proof they did.
I read at least 20 articles in mainstream papers over the last 24 hours about this hack -- mostly NYT & WPost. They assert definitively -- no caveats -- that Russia did it. None has evidence. This is the only thing I could find:

washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
Read 5 tweets
16 Dec
3 facts about WikiLeaks which those who want Assange to rot in jail have buried:

1) WL redacted documents when publishing Iraq & Afghanistan War Logs & diplomatic cables to protect the innocent; 2) WL requested Hillary's State Dept to help in redacting: they refused; 3) This:
The chances are very high that if Trump doesn't pardon Assange and put a stop to the insane attempt to extradite him to the US, then he will die in a UK prison, convicted of nothing, with a very dangerous precedent pending.

That arouses liberals, but it's profoundly unjust.
NBC News: "Release WikiLeaks' Julian Assange, say current and former world leaders"

Signatories of an open letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson included the president of Argentina and two former presidents of Brazil.

nbcnews.com/news/world/rel…
Read 4 tweets
16 Dec
Good @washingtonpost article on how and why the popularity of Bolsonaro -- despite insane levels of ineptitude and corruption -- is remaining reasonably stable. Among other things, he tried to stop or limit direct payments, but then took credit for them when they passed.
Most of Brazil's corporate media is 100% unified against Bolsonaro, denouncing him in increasingly virulent ways. But it doesn't matter. Once the establishment loses the population's trust, they'll support anyone they view as its enemy. This lesson needs to be learned everywhere.
As I've written before, we personally know many who are gay, black/brown, from favelas, etc. who voted for Bolsonaro. They did it not because of but despite his ugly rhetoric. They lost all faith in the ruling class & turned to someone promising to destroy it. A powerful formula.
Read 5 tweets
16 Dec
That we're on Day 5 of the astoundingly moronic Dr. Jill Biden debate seems to indicate that Orange Hitler has been defeated, fascism vanquished, the second Civil War finally diffused, and freedom and democracy restored to the American Republic, so that's good news at least
I started to write an article on how Yale's @TimothyDSnyder has been the most consistently and embarrassingly wrong prominent intellectual in the Trump era - endless predictions of coups, tyranny, and civil war -- but his analysis is so superficial and facile I couldn't bother.
Reading Snyder's writings -- sorry, Dr. Snyder's -- is like listening to any random MSNBC panel of Dem strategists talking about Trump, but with a pompous, inch-deep veneer of scholarship. If you want to see why credentials are irrelevant & meritocracy a fraud, start with him.
Read 4 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

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

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!