If Republican leaders are actually interested in "unity" rather than using its rhetoric to avoid accountability, here's something they could do. It doesn't involve much in the way of consequences, but it does feature truth-telling, apologies and requests for reconciliation.

To be clear, I don't think any of this would actually happen, but it would be nice (if insufficient) if it did.
Ronna McDaniel, Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, Ted Cruz, and Josh Hawley could issue a joint statement and do a press conference in which they acknowledged that Joe Biden is president-elect and that he won a free and fair election by a sizable margin.
They could say that there is no evidence of meaningful election fraud and that judges, including ones appointed by Trump, have rejected much of what the president and his allies have been complaining about.
They could apologize for misleading their supporters over the past months and say that they understand why Democrats may think their claims fueled last week's violence and are horrified if that is the case.
They could denounce Trump's behavior on Wednesday as inappropriate and inflammatory and pledge support for a full investigation into what happened.
They could acknowledge that Democrats are being reasonable in seeking Trump's removal, even as they believe that it isn't a good idea because it risks more violence from his supporters.
They could pledge to turn down the temperature in their rhetoric, admitting that the GOP's election messaging has too often stressed that Democratic victories would lead to physical danger for its voters and the destruction of the republic.
They could ask for forgiveness from their colleagues for putting their lives in danger, their supporters for lying to them, and the country for having failed to be honest in the first place.
Again, I don't think any of this will happen, but it would be a tangible effort by Republican leaders to promote unity. Right now, we're getting a lot of this: https://t.co/YicYH3j62K

More from Government

🔷 Rev. Raphael Warnock has become the first Democrat to win a Georgia Senate race in 20 years

The politician spoke to voters via MSNBC this morning

https://t.co/T9oJN2fjmo


Warnock is a pastor at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta where civil rights leader Martin Luther King once preached.

He will become Georgia's first Black senator


This blue victory gives the Democrats the chance to regain control of the Senate for at least the first two years of the Biden presidency


"With Biden proposing to reverse President Donald Trump's tax cut, increase the minimum wage, and strengthen oversight on various industries, some might argue that his agenda is not particularly market-friendly," says Vasu Menon, investment strategy director at OCBC Bank
If you're curious what Trump's defense will look like, all you have to do is turn on Fox News. My latest at @mmfa

The tl;dr is that for years right-wing media have been excusing Trump's violent rhetoric by going, "Yes, but THE DEMOCRATS..." and then bending themselves into knots to pretend that Dems were calling for violence when they very, very clearly weren't.

And in fact, this predates Trump.

In 2008, Obama was talking about not backing down in the face of an ugly campaign. He said "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."

https://t.co/i5YaQJsKop


That quote was from the movie The Untouchables. And there's no way anybody reading that quote in good faith could conclude that he was talking about actual guns and knives. But it became a big talking point on the

In 2018, Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder was speaking to a group of Georgia Democrats about GOP voter suppression. He riffed on Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high" line from the 2016 DNC.
Typically excellent piece from @dsquareddigest The exponential insight is especially neat. Think of it a little like fishing...today you can’t export oysters to the EU (because you simply aren’t allowed to), tomorrow you don’t have a fish exporting business (to the EU).


The extremely small minority of people who known anything about this who think that Brexit will be good for the City make a number of arguments which I shall address in turn...

1. They need us more than we need them. This is a variant of the German carmakers argument. And we know how that went...Business will follow the profit opportunity and if that has moved then so will the business...

And what do we mean by us / we. We’re not talking about massed ranks of Euro investing / trading etc blue blooded British institutions.

Au contraire. We’re talking about the London based subs of US, Asian and indeed European capital markets players...As soon as they think the profit opportunity has moved then so will they...it’s a market innit...

You May Also Like

One of the most successful stock trader with special focus on cash stocks and who has a very creative mind to look out for opportunities in dark times

Covering one of the most unique set ups: Extended moves & Reversal plays

Time for a 🧵 to learn the above from @iManasArora

What qualifies for an extended move?

30-40% move in just 5-6 days is one example of extended move

How Manas used this info to book


Post that the plight of the


Example 2: Booking profits when the stock is extended from 10WMA

10WMA =


Another hack to identify extended move in a stock:

Too many green days!

Read
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?