1. The Post didn't even mention this interaction in their initial piece (not sure if they've mentioned it at all, yet) but yet this reporter goes online to regurgitate the admin's GOP-'pounces' talking points.
2. Why would Zarif be astonished to hear about it? Why would he make it up off the record? When did the conversation happen? What else does he say about the Kerry interaction on the Iran International leaked tape? Seems like something a reporter might want to find out.
3. Then again, this reporter has yet to answer who confirmed the nonexistent bounty story for him.
It wasn't satire. Where is the evidence that it was satire. In the same year, Clarke invited a Holocaust-denying professor who offered the same theories. She praised him. In 2019 she signed a letter supporting another activist with the same ideas.
Stallone's best movie is Victory, in which he plays a scrappy American POW who escapes from a German camp; allows himself to be recaptured so he can help others escape; then stays & leads Allied "soccer" team in a heroic tie against Nazis; and then escapes anyway.
A sweaty Michael Caine runs around and keeps telling Pele what to do.
I'm not pro democracy, I am pro freedom. If democracy erodes freedom than it's not something to celebrate.
Of course many people use the term "democracy" interchangeably with freedom in good faith. But many people don't. To them, majoritarianism (you know, now that it's convenient) is what matters because it's another way to gain more power.
There is great value in self-determination, but if progressives destroy local control, grow centralized national government, and ignore individual rights, then the minority is stripped of control over their own lives.
House Democrats on FDR's court packing scheme in 1937:
"We recommend the rejection of this bill as a needless, futile, and utterly dangerous abandonment of constitutional principle."
"It is a proposal without precedent and without justification."
"It would subjugate the courts to the will of Congress and the President and thereby destroy the independence of the judiciary, the only certain shield of individual rights."
"It stands now before the country, acknowledged by its proponents as a plan to force judicial interpretation of the Constitution, a proposal that violates every sacred tradition of American democracy."
The funny thing about this talking -- which I don't actually believe -- is that hardly any money in the bill goes to fix it. Use some of the $500 billion we already spend every year on this, instead of solar panels and Amtrak.