Here's the thing: we were never going to get a bipartisan commission on the Capitol attack.
We can't model this after the 9/11 commission. Republicans were fine with a 9/11 commission because they weren't the ones who fucking flew the planes into the towers.
Look, the 9/11 commission did great work and gave insight into our intel failures. But for the sake of political consensus, it both-sidesed Bush & Clinton's roles in security in a way that isn't 100% accurate.
That isn't possible with a 1/6 commission because IT WAS ALL THE GOP.
Any chance of there being a bipartisan commission died the second Republican leaders realized there's no way to write a report remotely resembling reality that doesn't squarely blame their party for spreading lies and conspiracy theories that inflamed violent paramilitary groups.
There was a window when GOP leaders thought they might be able to do it if they just put it all on Trump. But that died when they realized 1) Trump still has the party support, and 2) their policy goals on things like voting rights are explicitly underwritten by Trump's big lie.
So I say, fuck it. Stop pretending Republicans are doing anything in good faith. Create a House select committee that puts the entire Republican Party on trial for 1/6.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is an utterly ridiculous argument. Statues are not how we record history, they're how we pick specific people and events from history to *valorize*.
If @mtgreenee simply wants her kids to know about Hitler, there are thousands of books about him and what he did. There are museums that show clips of his rallies, the cattle cars he shipped Jews in, and recreations of the gas chambers.
A statue provides none of that context.
And if she wants her kids to know about Satan... well, he's in the single bestselling book ever written. And further, he's not even a historical figure, he's a religious and metaphorical construct, so there isn't even any history to record there, let alone valorize.
In L.A. this weekend, I was blown away by how much development has occurred along the rail lines in the last 6 years.
I got on the E train at 7th & Flower and the moment the track went above ground, there were rows of huge skyscrapers I had never seen before lining the way.
It's already the second biggest city in the U.S. and not a particularly fast growing place so I really wasn't expecting things to be that different, but there was so much I didn't recognize from before. Century City's built up so much it looks like a whole ass other downtown.
This really enforces for me how important it is for cities to build out their public transit. Good rail and rapid bus routes encourage sustainable density, even in cities that have been sprawling and unsustainable for decades.
Here's what I'd do if I were in charge of the U.S. response to the Israeli conflict.
I would offer Israel full support and military aid to defeat Hamas and restore Palestinian Authority control in Gaza, in return for the following:
1. A full commitment to talks with the Palestinian Authority, with U.S. included.
2. Repeal of the Nation-State Bill.
3. A total end to illegal settlements in the West Bank.
4. Full access to IDF intelligence to verify they are taking all measures to avoid civilian casualties.
Assuming that Israel agrees to these terms and enters talks, I would then offer Palestine an easing of Israeli movement restrictions and boosted foreign aid in return for holding free elections, though with extremist leaders banned from running.
Come to think of it, I would be fascinated to see an electoral map one census after the Yellowstone supervolcano.
My prediction: Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, and Utah would all be down to 3 electors, and the eastern seaboard would pick up a bunch.
Depending on the direction of the wind, California could get hammered too, and that would REALLY fuck us.
I don't think a lot of people realize just how much of our food is grown in California. Entire classes of fruit and nut production would be near wiped out.
Okay, let me tell y'all about the Kafkaesque nightmare I'm trapped in trying to get a critical prescription refill.
So some background.
This medication is controlled, but I've taken it for 15 years with zero problems. I've also been off it for about a month due to travel and being off it this long affects my ability to be productive in my job. So I need it filled ASAP.
I had my doctor's appointment with @renownhealth on Friday. My doctor had me sign the controlled substances waiver (no big deal, that's standard). But then I call Walgreens and they say, @UHC is holding it up and requiring a prior authorization.
This is what confounds me about liberals who refuse to give Liz Cheney credit.
The whole point is she rejects her party's position that democracy is a partisan issue. That *anything* can morally or intellectually outweigh its preservation in American society.
Liberals profess to believe this too. But if liberals say, "well, Liz Cheney's other beliefs are so horrible I don't want to give her a platform," ...then aren't we siding with Trump over her? That democracy *is* up for debate, and *can* be outweighed by partisan considerations?
I mean, if you want to fault Cheney for not taking her pro-democracy stand to its logical conclusion — calling out voter suppression, backing HR1/S1 — that's another issue. But to fundamentally reject the idea her stand is worthy of praise seems at odds with liberal principles.