Share this page!

Seth Abramson Profile picture
Twitter logo
31 Jan, 5 tweets, 1 min read
Yesterday I deliberately rented an action movie that is the second in a series and whose tagline includes "this time it's personal"

I'm not kidding
In other news, The Equalizer is actually a surprisingly decent movie

I love Denzel
The thing I don't understand is why it's never personal the *first* time

Also, why does it *always* seem personal to me, but then the filmmakers inform me after the fact that it actually wasn't

I *love* Keanu, but will say The Equalizer was what I *wanted* the Wick series to be
I actually think The Equalizer is very well written and beautifully shot and maybe it's because I went into it with very low expectations but I cannot understand the 59% Rotten Tomatoes score

Like it's not changing the genre at all but it is a very very good example of the genre
All I'm saying is let's make every action movie "personal" the first time folks

• • •

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

Keep Current with Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson 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 @SethAbramson

Seth Abramson Profile picture
1 Feb
No.

Let's speak with clarity about what Trump wants, from a trial-strategy standpoint.

He wants his attorneys to argue that the insurrection was justified because the election was stolen from him. He wants to argue to Congress that the Biden administration should be overthrown.
(MORE) I understand the readership for the article below is necessarily going to be smaller because it's only for full subscribers to PROOF, but my recent essay is one example of a trial attorney outlining not just potential defenses but what they *mean*. sethabramson.substack.com/p/donald-trump…
(PS) My worry is that when we frame what Trump wants to do as a silly lark that's unserious, we gloss over the fact that he wants his lawyers to lie to Congress, that he wants to justify sedition, and that he wants to use his trial to foment insurrection. It's dangerous and sick.
Read 4 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
29 Jan
BREAKING: Trump's lawyer says Trump's defense during his second impeachment trial must be that the insurrection was "planned."

This confirms that the House impeachment managers will have to address the fact that the two men below—Bannon and Giuliani—helped plan the insurrection.
(PS) Giuliani says that Trump's trial must focus in part on the "organizers" of the events of January 6.

I couldn't agree more.

Fortunately, we know who the organizers were—and we know where they were the night before the insurrection. In Trump's private residence at his hotel.
(PS2) The House managers should establish that the January 6 insurrection was *all of the following*, as to Trump's inner circle:

◾️ Planned
◾️ Incited
◾️ Anticipated
◾️ Enabled
◾️ Benefitted From
◾️ Covered Up

The case needn't and shouldn't rest only on the incitement piece.
Read 5 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
28 Jan
(UPDATE) Another war council attendee has responded to PROOF. David Bossie contacted me and others to say he wasn't there; Tommy Tuberville has lied about attending; Charles Herbster won't answer questions; and now Daniel Beck is upset I repeated verbatim things he said publicly.
(PS) As readers who've read my three articles on the January 5, 2021 meeting at Trump's private residence at Trump International Hotel in D.C. know, there's no "connect the dots" here. I've relayed what is publicly known and confirmed, and outlined the information still required.
(PS2) If Daniel Beck wants to issue a statement detailing every person at the January 5 meeting; what was discussed there; why he was invited; why he attended Trump's speech but (against Trump's explicit request) not the march—et cetera et cetera—I'm happy to publish it at PROOF.
Read 4 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
27 Jan
BREAKING NEWS: The ALABAMA POLITICAL REPORTER picks up my Trump International Hotel report from PROOF and contacts Senator Tuberville (R-AL) for comment.

Tuberville now claims that what Charles Herbster put on social media is false.

Someone is lying. alreporter.com/2021/01/26/tru…
"APR sent questions to a Tuberville spokesperson asking if the senator attended a 1/5 meeting with Trump at his hotel and if so, why was he called to the meeting and what was discussed. The Tuberville spokeswoman replied 'the answers to your questions are No and Not Applicable.'"
The only way one of Tuberville—the Alabama senator—and Herbster (the 2022 Nebraska gubernatorial candidate) aren't lying is if Tuberville's office answered the APR query based on a technicality: i.e. that the no was to being at a TIH meeting "with Trump," not being at TIH at all.
Read 4 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
26 Jan
(CROWDSOURCING) America needs evidence of where Trump was on the night of January 5 (the night of the Georgia runoff). If you have such evidence—not mere rumor but something hard, like photographic evidence, testimonial evidence or a fully sourced major-media report—post it here.
(PS) So far, all we know is that Trump had no listed events on that day. Investigators will be trying to find out if Trump went to his hotel in D.C. on January 5, or if, from 8PM onward, he was in the residence making calls to unknown parties.
(PS2) @RktTck helps us see that Trump was with Pence at the White House for lunch on January 5. The timeframe we're looking for is the evening of January 5, however. m.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/…
Read 7 tweets
Seth Abramson Profile picture
26 Jan
BREAKING NEWS: Please RETWEET this major revelation about a secretive January 5 meeting at the Trump International Hotel that involved top advisers to the president and leading insurrectionists. I hope you'll consider subscribing to PROOF after reading it. sethabramson.substack.com/p/january-5-me…
1/ What the FBI must now determine—in addition to the items I listed in the article—is whether Trump himself was (1) present at the meeting in person, (2) on speakerphone during the meeting (his M.O. for meetings he doesn't want to be placed at) or (3) briefed about it afterward.
2/ Trump has a history of calling in to meetings by speakerphone that he considers it unwise to attend in person—I detail many such in my Proof books—but it may be that he was present at this meeting in the flesh. Otherwise he gave his sons access to his private residence for it.
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

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!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @SethAbramson has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @SethAbramson!

Read all threads by @SethAbramson