Trevor Aaronson is so desperate to be a good regime gimp, and yet still concedes:
"I think it’s worth noting that there’s a reason for the cultural stickiness of the claim by Revolver and Carlson. It might be a conspiracy theory, but it’s not exactly “baseless,” "
"That’s because there are genuine concerns that the sting tactics used over the past two decades against impressionable Muslims will be used against equally impressionable Americans with right-wing ideologies."
You don't say!
"In the supposed plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, for example, FBI agents and an informant played significant roles, raising the same question...Would this plot have happened were it not for the FBI?"
Trevor, no one was talking about Michigan re: 1/6 before Revolver piece
"In addition, there is evidence the FBI is assigning informants to infiltrate groups based solely on right-wing ideology. And the increase in right-wing violence in recent years has prompted calls for new anti-terorrism laws that would give the FBI even more power."
"I think the FBI’s investigation of potential right-wing threats, and the degree to which the bureau replicates its abusive post-9/11 tactics, will be a critically important story in the coming years. How news organizations report on it will be a significant test."
Yeah, Trevor, and no one has covered the above better than Revolver and Tucker --- the two organs you feel compelled to criticize for Regime approval
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Two of the video clips are from stationary cameras where released clips begin and end with the suspect already in the middle of the frame.
One tape you released is of a stationary camera outside DNC Headquarters, which has the suspect directly in frame sitting on the park bench near where the pipe bomb was allegedly planted.
Italy (G7 country) signed up for Belt and Road in 2019 then got bullied by NATO to back out because of NATO fear of massive Chinese footprint in 3rd largest economy in europe
NATO has been looking for a massive response to BRI for a long, long time, and it wasn't possible under Trump administration because the only commonality economically to make this happen is the electric energy transition
Secondly, Damon smuggles in a version of Strauss that Velkley explicitly and implicitly critiques in his work
Velkley is not defending Strauss the moralist at all.
According to the aporetic interpretation of Strauss rather than the more childish "moralist" account...
it is just as problematic to defend any one moral position over the other. Or, at least, the aporetic Strauss is not primarily concerned with morals in a sense that would give Damon's critique here real bite