I guess what I would say to the Senate Democrats is that much of America wonders why they even speak to Mitch McConnell anymore. When a negotiating partner has an unbroken record of bad faith dating back not just years but decades, at some point wisdom dictates a disengagement.
The only proper course of engagement with Mr. McConnell is to defeat him utterly at the polls alongside every member of his caucus, then to do the same thing 2 years after that, and the same thing 2 years after that, and the same thing 2 years after that. And so on in perpetuity.
I don't think a Democrat should so much as even look at McConnell ever again, let alone speak to him. I think even the candidate running against him shouldn't look at him in a debate. I think he should be a permanent pariah.
And I think Democrats are cowards for not seeing that.
So when Senate Democrats ask their voters to be upset at something Mitch McConnell has done, it's like asking us to be upset at something an infamous villain whose role in history is sealed has done: we're just amazed at being asked to reopen a *closed book* in the first place.
No adult of good sense allows evil to take root in their life. Democrats have made a conscious decision to keep evil inside their circle of discourse, and implicitly ask us with tweets like this to condone the mistake. I do not.
The only thing to do with McConnell is defeat him.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you've read Bob Woodward's PERIL—an appetizer for understanding January 6—and now want the 5-course meal version, there are 100 articles at PROOF that will take you inside the insurrection in a way no other source does. It's $5 to access the whole site. Sethabramson.substack.com
1/ I think what many people will find confusing about Woodward’s PERIL is that so much lacks context even as other content is over-prescribed because its source is a Trumpworld malfeasor trying to clear their name. The best example of this is actually the beginning of the book.
2/ If I didn't know what I know and hadn't published what I'd published at PROOF, I'd be wholly mystified by why so many people feared that Donald Trump would launch a military strike after January 6—and why the fear was particularly great in Russia, Iran, and especially China.
Yet again, one of the co-defendants is represented by a corrupt Trump attorney (Jay Sekulow). I’ve written in my books and at PROOF about how Trump regularly uses shared lawyers to find out what’s going on inside criminal cases that could blow back on him. abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS…
(PS) No honest attorney would represent a co-defendant in a case where one of the key witnesses is another client.
This strikes me, and I'm sure many criminal defense attorneys, as the longtime Trump M.O. of using lawyers to help create—and then cover up—larger bribery schemes.
(PS2) To simplify this for folks: Trump is a historically persistent witness tamperer/obstructor of justice. He's set up a scheme where he can communicate with Wead and claim the middleman—Sekulow—can’t say what was communicated due to attorney-client privilege with both parties.
(Q&A) I'll be popping in and out of this day-long Q&A all day today (Monday, September 20). Anyone can read the Q&A; PROOF subscribers can ask questions. See the note at the link for more details.
(PS) Just to clarify: please ask any questions in the comments over at PROOF. I'll answer them there.
(UPDATE) Still answering questions over at PROOF. Any topic. See the link atop this thread. Open to the public for viewing, to PROOF subscribers for question-asking.
(PS) I'll admit to not being much of a Who fan, and having listened to none of Roger Daltrey's solo work before preparing for this article. I think "Giving It All Away" is a really interesting find—along with the "enhanced" version of one of Olivia Newton-John's very first songs.
(PS2) Okay, I have an excuse for that typo! (Now fixed.) Kaleidoscope (UK) is one of my favorite sixties bands, and it's led by Peter Daltrey. So I may be one of the few music fans who hears "Daltrey" and immediately thinks "Peter," not "Roger."
(🔓) PROOF UNLOCKED: America’s Video Game Scandal Continues: More Evidence of Deception By Grading Company WATA
I thought I was done reporting on this—but apparently it wasn’t done with me. I found a video from a few days ago that required I write this. sethabramson.substack.com/p/americas-vid…
1/ In the video—which I was watching because it was an interview with an independent journalist who’s done some great video game journalism, @karljobstgaming—the interviewer admits, during prep before the interview starts, to being friends with the head of WATA. And it matters.
2/ The problem was that I recognized this guy from an episode of Pawn Stars in which he appeared alongside the WATA head, Deniz Kahn. The two men showed no indication of knowing one another. I’d seen WATA a pull a stunt like this before, so I decided to investigate a little bit.
What a bizarre misreading this is. I wrote a NYT bestseller establishing that an Alfa Bank advisory board member helped write Trump's pro-Russia foreign policy in April 2016—a richly supported, still-unrefuted allegation. I wrote almost nothing on "pings." news.yahoo.com/remembering-jo…
(PS) The other remarkable thing about far-right takes on Alfa Bank: does everyone understand that (a) the pings did happen, (b) no one *ever* said they knew what they were, and (c) the FBI investigation was inconclusive? This is simply an unsettled issue that'll never be settled.
(PS2) There's nothing sadder, in all of US media, that a far-right Trump-Russia victory lap. *None* of these laps are ever based in any substantive refutation of either federal investigations or actual past journalism—it's all tilting at windmills that the right built themselves.