Scoop: FULL TEXT of @StateDept Dissent Cable I obtained, signed by over 100 officials: 1/many
1. On January 6, 2021, the United States witnessed an unprecedented effort by American citizens to violently subvert the democratic will of the American people...
Continuing....
The Department of State should explicitly denounce President Trump's role in this violent attack on the U.S. government. Just as we routinely denounce foreign leaders who use violence and intimidation to interfere in peaceful democratic...
Department press guidance describing this violent riot should include the following line: "President Trump's incitement of violence against the certification of the United States' free and fair elections...
Continuing...
This change in our guidance would be a first step towards repairing the damage these events have inflicted on our international credibility. It would allow the United States to remain a beacon of democracy...
NEW: Dozens of State Department officials filing formal dissent cable denouncing administration's handling of violence at Capitol Hill by pro-Trump mob
— Robbie Gramer (@RobbieGramer) January 8, 2021
My scoop with @columlynch https://t.co/DkTaZAQioX
More from Government
Caveat: This article is sourced from @Daily_Express !!!
"End of Sturgeon?"
Frankly, an appropriate response from @NicolaSturgeon might be to quote the infamous Mark Twain response to an erroneous 'obituary' known to all...
"The reports of my demise are greatly exaggerated."
https://t.co/Ce1xVVISR2
More accurately, the media have quoted:
"Ms Sturgeon said she had a “real job to do” and was focused on guiding Scotland through the Covid-19 pandemic."
It's very reassuring to hear that @scotgov and @ScotGovFM have prioritised safeguarding lives and Scotland, above all else.
"I’ll leave others to play games or politics. I have got a real job to do and people can decide themselves whether I am doing it well or not, but I am absolutely 100 per cent focused on leading this country through a pandemic."
💯% 😀👍
Making her priorities crystal clear!
“That’s what I’ve done since this time last year and it’s what I’m going to continue to do for absolutely as long as necessary.”
And again, making it absolutely crystal clear!
"End of Sturgeon?"
Frankly, an appropriate response from @NicolaSturgeon might be to quote the infamous Mark Twain response to an erroneous 'obituary' known to all...
"The reports of my demise are greatly exaggerated."
https://t.co/Ce1xVVISR2
More accurately, the media have quoted:
"Ms Sturgeon said she had a “real job to do” and was focused on guiding Scotland through the Covid-19 pandemic."
It's very reassuring to hear that @scotgov and @ScotGovFM have prioritised safeguarding lives and Scotland, above all else.
"I’ll leave others to play games or politics. I have got a real job to do and people can decide themselves whether I am doing it well or not, but I am absolutely 100 per cent focused on leading this country through a pandemic."
💯% 😀👍
Making her priorities crystal clear!
“That’s what I’ve done since this time last year and it’s what I’m going to continue to do for absolutely as long as necessary.”
And again, making it absolutely crystal clear!
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
1/\u201cWhat would need to be true for you to\u2026.X\u201d
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) December 4, 2018
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody: https://t.co/Yo6jHbSit9
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
