AOC and two other Squad members -- who spent months chanting "Defund the Police" -- had the power to stop this. They originally agreed to vote "no," but instead voted "present" at the last minute to avoid angering Pelosi. @AOC was particularly craven here:
The unleashing of a newly empowered law enforcement and "intelligence" agency now spreading to other states, commanded by Congress, has been enabled by one tactic: the weaponization and exaggeration of the events of January 6 and the supposed grave domestic threat it reflects.
Before Biden was even inaugurated, he made clear he intended to launch a new War on Terror -- this one domestic -- in the name of fighting "domestic extremism." This radically expanded Capitol Police force is the latest step in that war:
In response to my inquiry, the @ACLU sent me this statement condemning what it calls the "unnecessary expansion" of the Capitol Police to locations outside DC and becoming a new intelligence agency -- all enabled by @AOC's "present" vote on giving them $2 billion more.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Bolsonaro's escalating rhetoric about canceling the 2022 election is coinciding with polls showing Lula almost certain to defeat him. The latest today, from @folha, shows Lula with a 21-point lead. Lula would win in the run-off by 58%-31%.
1) He has a chance to not even make the run-off. If there's only one "third way" candidate - @cirogomes - he could eliminate Bolsonaro in the first round.
2) The % saying there's no chance they'd vote for him is up to 59%, far higher than anyone else's
Seems extremely clear that Bolsonaro knows he's highly likely to lose. The question is whether the Armed Forces would support his anti-democratic plotting. That's unknown, but some recent statements and actions are raising valid concerns about it.
The way liberal journalists just ignore what was, to me, one of the most repressive events of the Trump years -- Big Tech **censored** reporting on the Hunter Biden docs about Joe's business deals to help Dems -- is still stunning. 3 weeks before the election, they barred links.
Twitter literally prohibited all links to reports about the Biden docs, not just publicly but in DMs. FB announced -- through a life-long Dem operative -- it would algorithmically suppress the story pending a fact-check (which never came). It was brute censorship to elect Biden.
All of this was accomplished by an outright lie manufactured by the CIA: that the Biden family docs were "Russian disinformation." Media outlets, like the good little servants that they are, repeated this lie to justify Big Tech censorship and their own refusal to cover it.
This is American liberalism right here: in its purest expression.
One of MSNBC's most popular hosts - a former Bush/Cheney spokesperson - devotes a whole segment to defending NSA and lamenting distrust in it. She brings on 2 ex-FBI officials, who now work for MSNBC, to do it:
The political faction that is pro-FBI, pro-NSA, pro-CIA -- and whose media is delivered to them by a mix of security state officials, ex Bush/Cheney operatives, and neocons -- is American liberalism.
Just watch that clip to see the authoritarianism of this movement.
If having your newsrooms filled with ex-security state operatives, FBI agents, CIA officials, and Generals -- all of whom are paid employees -- to reflexively defend the FBI, CIA and NSA isn't "State TV," what is?
Pretty sure I'll be watching that montage in my 80s and enjoying it just as much as I did the first 100 times I saw it.
Remember when Rachel Maddow was so excited she got Avenatti to come on the air to talk about his secret client, Julie Swetnick, who had utterly unhinged and dubious allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, and Maddow treated it as an earth-shattering scoop?
Tucker Carlson adds more specifics and more reporting to corroborate his claim that the NSA was not just spying on his email communications but using them to leak to reporters. I'll be on tonight at 8 pm ET discussing these claims.
The media dynamic we're seeing here is the same as with the Julian Assange prosecution. You would expect journalists to lead the way in denouncing the prosecution of a journalist and wanting answers to whether the NSA spied on another journalist. But they don't do either.
One reason is they are petty hacks who can't see principle: they don't regard Assange or Carlson as one of them & thus don't care what's done to them.
But the real reason is they're authoritarians: they revere DOJ & NSA - the security state - and thus reflexively side with it.
Eu me pergunto se a pessoa que falsificou este documento foi a mesma que falsificou o documento bitcoin - pretendendo mostrar que paguei hackers russos - postado por o Pavão Misterioso porque muitos dos principais erros são exatamente os mesmos.
Depois que @Biakicis promoveu o documento bitcoin forjado do Pavão, eu postei este, onde você pode ver muitos dos mesmos erros do documento CPI falso com muita clareza: