111/ “President Trump plans to issue a wave of pardons today,” reported @jonathanvswan on Friday Dec 18th but it never happened.
Swan said later that something came up so it sopped the pardons.
Cool way to defend your sourcing even when the source knew little and made stuff up.
112/ @maggieNYT is “confirming what @JDiamond1 saw that Sidney Powell was” at the WH.
Diamond saw it. Dod Maggie check his eyeballs feed to confirm that he saw what he says he saw? Odd.
Also, why did none of Maggie’s Trump/WH sources tip her off about this in advance?
113/ Here, @kaitlancollins has a quote from a “senior” WH official not happy with Trump folding on the $2K relief request.
It’s a narrative-confirming quote that changes nothing and makes sense to reflect the opinion of some WH staff so this quote is as good as being made up.
114/ @maggieNYT quotes someone close to the WH that Trump feels “gutted” by recent action.
This quote can be any of dozens of people and it can be made up by the source and/or there is no source since the item is common sense to have happened (and makes no diff even if true).
A day after @maggieNYT reported that Trump feels gutted this is how Trump appeared in his first in-person comments since the #ShutItDown event of last week which turned deadly.
“Gutted”? Please.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A reminder that if you parrot the narrative pushed by most news outlets on any given topic, you are a mindless zombie; not a righteous hero that is principled. You are a useful idiot for those who have political and rights-crushing agendas that may bite you some day.
Moron.
The point is not that you should be a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. But you are not that sophisticated when you parrot @Morning_Joe and his wannabe guests (99% of DC Journos).
Stick to brick breaker, beer and Bitcoin.
When you can’t explain your political/policy position on merit you need to resort to self-righteous sounding buzzwords like “country over party” and “principles.” But self-righteous claims for sake of country is a tool by dicdators to crush people; not a way 2 run a free country.
2020 would end even better for the GOP if not for the non-Trump wing of the GOP undermining and undercutting their party the last 4 years just to own Trump.
A week ago, @ForecasterEnten wrote that no POTUS since Hoover went from having all 3 (WH, House, Senate) to losing all 3 of them in one term.
This makes Trump sound a historic electoral failure when in fact he is among the winners; especially on the GOP side. For example:
The righteous cons who piled onto Trump for wanting to ascertain the integrity of the election did not lose their mimd to this “attack-on-democracy and incitement” by Hillary weeks before the 2020 election to the cheers of @jmpalmieri (former Obama WH Comms Director).
Some people in the conservative movement put hate of Trump over country which is why when Hillary Clinton openly called for Biden to undermine the election results, Cons did not flip out because the victim of such an “attack on democracy and sedition” would be Trump had he won.
@ForecasterEnten The GOP lost the popular vote in 7 or of the last 8 presidential elections which means it’s not a Trump issue, but Trump at least won the WH; McCain/Romney did not. Bush/Obama left their parties with less seats in the House/Senate than did Trump.
.@ForecasterEnten Trump is indeed the first incumbent since GOP Hoover to lose WH/House/Senate in one term, but you ignore that GOP Eisenhower lost the House/Senate in 2 years; GOPs Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr. never had the House, and W left his party with less seats than Trump.
GOP Senate seats after Nov elections:
52 Trump 2020
53 Trump 2016
45 Romney 2012
41 McCain
55 Bush 2004
50 Bush 2000
55 Dole 1996
43 Bush 1992
45 Bush 1988
53 Reagan 1984
53 Regan 1980
Trump’s numbers meets/beats most of the recent GOP numbers.
The more popular your current political/policy issue is, the bigger the chance that history will see it as wrong. Hence the need to wait for history which sees things diff than what was accepted at the time.
If 80% media noise PR your view, U R likely on wrong side of history.
The term “history will judge so and so” is reserved for people whose current voice is drowned out in the noise of the majorry so they can only wait for history to judge it with a clear eye.
But if the Big Noise is on your side then you are probably on the wrong side of history.
As you can see, history remembers positively the person who refuses to go along with what everyone is doing at the time. If you see yourself on the same side of broad media narratives regarding rights/freedoms then you are probably going to be on the wrong side of history, moron.
Thanks @RepKenBuck@RepThomasMassie@chiproytx. Pelosi’s effort are incitement to some and seeks to overturn the 2016 election. The terms ends next week so let it run its course.
Only 40% polled by Ipsos trust Pelosi to safeguard America’s democracy. Any @HouseGOP’er that goes along with a new impeachment effort is watching too much CNN/MSNBC.
If you are newer to politics you now have a live lesson as to why Nixon resigned and why Clinton survived. Republicans tend to pull to its party Stockholm Syndrome sufferers and push overs; generation to generation.