To the liberal defeatists who keep yelling “Sadly, Trump will never go to prison no matter what” – what is wrong with you? First of all, you’re factually wrong; the New York proceedings make that clear. And no real activist spends all day predicting doom. Log off and get therapy.
You’re entitled to skepticism or pessimism (though neither helps you in politics). But outright defeatism, where you spend every day loudly insisting your side will lose, and harassing those on your own side who are trying to fight and win, is some kind of psychological disorder.
If you think I’m overstating the problem, or these types are just fake bots, I’m telling you that’s not the case. Spend some time in my replies, especially when I tweet about the NY criminal case against Trump, and you’ll see the militant defeatist types come out of the woodwork.
We can all discuss and debate in good faith how the indictment process is going, what trial will look like, if Trump will even last that long, etc.

But yelling “he’ll get away with it all no matter what” is a sign of a brain that can’t even process any of the facts involved.
What’s disturbing is how many of you go out of your way to make excuses for these broken-brained defeatists. They’re the most dangerous enemy you’re facing, yet you want to coddle them and/or pretend they don’t exist. Wake up and admit this psychotic defeatism problem exists.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Palmer Report

Palmer Report 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 @PalmerReport

18 Jun
The facts: Weisselberg’s crimes, for which conviction will be nearly automatic given the evidence, have a sentencing guideline of about 3-7 years. He’s 73. He will die in prison unless he flips on Trump.

The defeatists love to call me “hyperbolic” when I state facts. Fuck em 🙂
One defeatist, who is insistent that Trump will get away with it all, just angrily accused me of overstating Weisselberg’s criminal liability. I tried explaining the facts. So she called me a “Republican” and unfollowed me.

This level of defeatism is a psychological order.
And again, the defeatists are people who HATE Trump. But they’re so addicted to outrage, they want Trump to destroy them, just so their rage can be vindicated. They react angrily, and often insanely, to anything that suggests Trump will go down instead of defeating them.
Read 9 tweets
17 Jun
Now that Allen Weisselberg is about to be indicted in New York, MSNBC is suddenly pushing the theoretical notion that Donald Trump himself might not be indicted. But this is just baseless fear mongering to scare you into staying tuned in, to boost ratings.
First of all, this isn't a regular grand jury. It's a special grand jury, empaneled for more days a week than usual, and lasting longer than usual. You don't do that just to indict some underlings. This grand jury has clearly been empaneled specifically to indict Donald Trump.
Second, the entire point of squeezing Weisselberg like this, and indicting him on crimes he committed in relation to Donald Trump, is to get him to flip on Trump. The notion that Trump isn't being targeted is laugh out loud absurd.
Read 7 tweets
17 Jun
It's possible Schumer is holding the preliminary HR1 vote next week, expecting it to fail, in order to ratchet up outrage and pressure on Manchin to cave on the filibuster after recess. If so, it's a solid strategy. But the defeatists will become even more psychotic than usual.
Manchin is already tentatively supporting a revised HR1. And he's already down to 55 filibuster votes. But we'd probably need him to come down to 51 before any version of HR1 can pass. Will that happen next week? I don't know. If so, Schumer is even better at this than I thought.
Again, while we MUST pass voting rights legislation, there is NO urgency. The 2022 election is not being held tomorrow. This a long game. Manchin is clearly on a path to caving. It'll happen. Just maybe not next week.
Read 5 tweets
16 Jun
As I predicted, Joe Manchin now says he’s potentially willing to support a revised version of HR1. He clearly wants off the ledge. Now is the time to ramp up the pressure on him. Call him. Email him. Tweet him. Pressure him to support HR1 with as few revisions as possible.
…and keep in mind that whatever revisions Manchin currently says he wants to HR1, that’s just a starting point to the negotiations. The more you stand with Schumer, and the more you pressure Manchin, the less leverage he’ll have – and the “revisions” will end up being minimal.
Once Manchin backed himself into a no-win corner and became a target, he was always going to end up trying to find a way to cave while saving face: “I told you I’d never vote for HR1, which is why I only voted for a revised HR1.” But again, you have to keep pushing him to cave.
Read 4 tweets
16 Jun
In something like the Biden-Putin summit, neither side has a magic wand. “Winning” is a matter of degrees. But separate press conferences, at a time when Biden has legitimacy in the eyes of the world, and Putin doesn’t, and Biden refuses to give him any, feels like a Biden win.
Of course the American media (on the left and right) has been up Putin’s ass all week, because it’s good for ratings. But this summit is about how the world perceives it. Putin would have benefited from standing next Biden at this press conference, and Biden was like “nah”
In any given situation, Biden loves to embrace everyone on all sides, except for the specific handful of people he thinks are the problem. It creates the appearance of “wow, Biden gets along with EVERYONE except [certain person], so that person must really suck.”
Read 5 tweets
16 Jun
Here's the question: who was the source for the story about Trump pressuring Rosen?

Was is Rosen? Donoghue? Some other DOJ official? Is that person still in the DOJ?

It matters because whoever leaked this story wants Trump to be held accountable for it – and they may leak more.
Who had access to emails between Rosen and Donoghue? Probably not that many people. Stuff like this doesn't get picked up by the wind and land on a reporter's desk by accident. There's always an inside source who decides, at that particular time, the public should know the truth.
I always like to say that whoever comes off as the hero of the story is usually the most likely source for the story. But there are multiple people who come off looking good, so who knows? The identity of the source will become important later though.
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!

:(