Schoen is pretending courtroom "due process" must be followed--after meeting with some of the jurors to plan strategy last night.

Schoen accuses Democrats of editing videos and taking comments out of contexts, after showing edited videos of Democrats and taking their comments out of context. I guess he wanted us to know he knows what he's talking about.

Schoen is showing longer clips of Trump speeches. The additional footage doesn't help Trump's case, unless you're a racist insurrectionist.

Yeah? Well what about YOUR whataboutism?

Schoen REALLY doesn't like Senator Warren.

It's because Trumpists love attacking Senator Warren.

Gee, it's almost like he thinks Senator Warren is being impeached.

Interesting parapo meeting today, anger, lots of 'THEY' vs 'US'. The zoom meeting was well attended. People threatening fire, thunder, tagging those of us calling for calm "Traitors".

Then I asked, how many of your children were involved in the Ibadan killings today? SILENCE!

Then one of my "Comrade" himself and his wife are always jumping from @channelstv to @ARISEtv. I asked him, aside your television rounds, have you ever handled an AK47? Simple question, he called me a bastard.
I asked will your Ibadan radio station host 100 Eso's? SILENCE!

Then another one, he was Afenifere lackeys, during the Ajegunle crisis, the same one who chopped money meant for young Yoruba who were defending their streets, mane died needlessly. I asked when last he visited Eso zones across Yoruba land. SILENCE! He kept ranting Fulani bla bla

Then practical questions to another, do we have a list of our vulnerable settlements? Any attempt to activate our fighting organisations so that all manner of people don't go about attacking innocent non Yoruba. SILENCE!

That one pretended he had poor network. No answer!

Then another one, he said I had 'changed'. I told him, you cant have witnessed a wicked Yoruba ruling elite, hype up sons and daughters of the poor and personally attended the burial of many of those unsung heroes and not call for extreme caution and the need to truly be prepared

Keir Starmer who worked with Theresa May as DPP said '“Whether you agree with her or you don’t, this was a woman broken who had tried to genuinely deliver on what she thought she had to do … I can’t pretend I didn’t feel something.”: #StarmerOut https://t.co/0NzX7Ouv2a

Sir Keir Starmer was elected as an MP for Holborn and St Pancras in 2015. Before that he worked with May as director of public prosecutions when she was home secretary. #StarmerOut #LabourLeaks #Collusion #CONLAB

May was someone who was always straight with him, who always phoned him to ask whether she could use something he had said. “A lot of politicians didn’t do that. She never double dealt. She said what she would do and she did what she said.” #StarmerOut #LabourLeaks

At the end of his term as DPP in 2013, she invited Sir Starmer to dinner at an Italian restaurant in Westminster to say thank you.
“It was a difficult 90 minutes. Both of us were pleased to see the hour and a half was up.” #StarmerOut #LabourLeaks

''Keir Starmer credentials as a former director of public prosecutions (2008 to 2013) placed Starmer a cut above the rest of Labour's frontbench in the eyes of many Conservatives.''. He became acquainted with several senior Tories.

Some thoughts on the recently announced Critical Worker Benefit. Grab a coffee☕️ #ableg cause this is going to be a thread.🧵

First, let me say that I'm glad @jkenney is finally spending the money @JustinTrudeau sent AB. Overall, this is a good thing. But I have...questions
1/9

First, let's temper our praise here... The Fed Govt sent $$ to every province in MAY 2020 earmarked for critical workers.
This money was always destined for Albertans and Kenney sat on it while other provinces got it out to the workers that needed it.

Why do private sector employees have to rely on their employer to apply and distribute Gov't funds? That seems like a...strange...decision.

What if an employer doesn't know or doesn't bother? What if they don't distribute it properly? Is there any recourse? Just...strange. 3/9

Do employers have to deduct tax? CPP? EI?
What if somebody worked 300 hours during the qualifying period but no longer works for the employer?

Are payroll departments expected to set up a new earnings code just for a one time payment in Alberta? 4/9

What counts to the 300 hours worked between Oct-Jan? Vacation? Sick time? Disability? Leaves of absence?

Or is it strictly hours physically at work?

What if your employer reduced hours or even worse, laid people off? You're outta luck when you need it most? Neat! 5/9

We've been hearing this a lot: the House managers have successfully shown how horrible the January 6 insurrection was and also highlighted Donald Trump's vulgar comments. But they haven't really proven the connection between Trump's comments and the attack. This is nonsense. 1/

There is a criminal case to be made against Trump for his role in inciting the inspiration, and @CREWcrew has made that case in its criminal sedition complaint against Trump. But this is not a criminal case, and does not require that kind of proof.

On a basic level, this case is painfully obvious. Donald Trump spent weeks and months and years saying, falsely, the election would be fraudulent and then that it had been stolen. This primed his supporters to believe their democratic rights were being take away. 3/

Trump spent weeks and months and years fueling a sense of grievance among his supporters and hostility to any political opponents, as well as condoning violence or mildly condemning it with a clear wink and a nod obviously meant to encourage it. 4/

In the weeks after the election, he compounded his big lie that he had won with efforts to take bogus claims to courts and to pressure officials at every level of government to overturn the results. He portrayed the across the board rejections as further persecution. 5/

1/9

While debt-to-GDP ratios already have a limited but very misunderstood use, it seems economists are finding bright new ways of misunderstanding them. Now we say that when nominal interest rates are lower than nominal growth rates, the

2/9

downward pressure on the debt-to-GDP ratio makes rising government debt and larger government deficits more sustainable and more easily justified.

This is totally confused. When the nominal interest rate is lower than the nominal GDP growth rate, it only means that net...

3/9

borrowers are getting a disproportionate share of growth relative to net lenders. This in and of itself changes the comparability of the debt-to-GDP ratio, so the fact that the ratio may decline tells us nothing about its sustainability which, I'm glad to say, isn't...

4/9

a mistake Olivier Blanchard makes in this article.

At least three things matter. First, whether or not rising debt is sustainable depends almost wholly on underlying conditions in the real economy, and only trivially on the arithmetical relationship between...

5/9

the interest rate and the growth rate. Second, this approach simply assumes away financial distress costs, in which case debt capacity is infinite anyway and the interest rate becomes irrelevant. And third, it assumes that the nominal debt level matters independently...

“There will be blood in the streets” — USAG Loretta Lynch (D)

“Show me where it says that protests must be polite and peaceful.” — CNN's Chris Cuomo

“There needs to be unrest in the streets” — US Rep Ayanna Pressley (D)

“Protesters should not let up” — Sen. Kamala Harris (D)

“I just don't know why there aren't uprisings all over this country. Maybe there should be.” — US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D)

“You get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere!” — US Rep Maxine Waters (D)

“I will go and take Trump out tonight.” — US Rep Maxine Waters (D)

“When they go low, we kick 'em. That’s what this new Democratic Party is about.” — USAG Eric Holder (D)

“How do you resist the temptation to run up and wring her neck?” — MSNBC's Nicole Wallace on White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders

“I'd like to punch him in the face.” — Robert De Niro on President Trump

“If we were in high school I'd take him behind the gym and beat the hell of of him.” — Democrat Candidate Joe Biden on President Trump

What should have been enough for @GOP @LeaderMcConnell @LindseyGrahamSC @ChuckGrassley but seem to make up excuse after excuse

What should have been enough: Charlottesville should have been enough. Then Ukraine. Then Covid failure. Then Attack on our Capitol. If you don’t #LeaveTheGOP then you have no moral compass

What should have been enough
Federal civil rights VIOLATIONS at Trump properties

WHAT should have been enough
The Central Park Five should have been enough

What SHOULD have been enough
Birtherism should have been enough.

Dems are correct in not calling witnesses, which is obvious when you think this through. First, the case has been made. Any GOPr or delusional Trump fan who doesnt accept that - or care - never will. The country knows/sees what happened. 2nd, if dems called witnesses.../1

...it will add next to nothing. Statements are being admitted into the record from some witnesses. Third, & most important, the GQP is a monstrosity that only cares about power. Once the witness door opens, they'll turn the trial into a farce, calling anyone and everyone.../2

...to muddy up the case. Since their entire case is whataboutism, they will try to call Obama, Hillary Clinton, Holder, Waters, and on and on. If the presiding officer holds the testimony irrelevant before allowing it, there will be weeks of rage about cover-ups, etc. The.../3

...actual case - already strongly proven by the House Managers, even using the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt - will get buried as the days and weeks pass with hundreds of irrelevant witnesses are fought over. Finally, bringing those witnesses.../4

...could interfere with a possibly more important proceeding if it happens: The criminal prosecution of Trump by District of Columbia for inciting a riot, which is a crime in DC. As in the Oliver North case, the public Congressional testimony of North led a court to throw.../5

In light of GOP's evisceration of Impeachment, abdicating all responsibility, I did a thing:

An Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The elimination of impeachment of the Chief Executive and the establishment of the Office of Governor General as Chief Executive.

A brief review of the goings-on in #GOP #Indiana:

Our senators are too busy telling the #BigLie to tell the truth about the former president's attack on our democracy.

My rep isn't standing up for much of anything but wants Nancy Pelosi to answer for the breach of the Capitol.

The #GOP super majority in the #IN legislature is now

eliminating gun permits.

removing protections from our few remaining wetlands.

limiting charitable cash bail.

taking over the Indianapolis police force.

removing the few protections Indy tenants have from bad landlords

continuing to allow 'fun' coyote hunts for prizes.

limiting the governor's ability to deal with emergencies like COVID19 - because of course! Indiana only has 12000+ #COVID19 deaths so overreach is an issue.

trying to undo Indy referendum's to upgrade our bus routes.

while continuing efforts to limit women's access to reproductive healthcare, w/ a forced ultrasound law going into effect just a couple weeks ago.

And then there are the coal ash ponds.

@IndyStarSarah reports on our water quality being up for

from the article by @IndyStarSarah:

"Ash from Indiana's coal-burning power plants is contaminating groundwater across the state, rendering it unsafe to drink. But unlike some other states, Indiana is not requiring utility companies to remove the toxic ash from leaky pits."

Last month PTI government raised base power tariffs by Rs 1.95 per unit. This month NEPRA has determined tariff increases of Rs 1.53 per unit in Fuel Adjustment Charges for December and Rs 0.83 in Quarterly Adjustment for 4th quarter of 2020. 1/17

So your electric bills for February maybe higher by Rs 4.31 per unit. That’s a Tabdeeli we will feel in our monthly budgets.

The PTI govt takes no responsibility for anything and just blames PMLN’s previous govt. 2/17

For instance when the entire country suffered a blackout a minister blamed PMLN. But when asked exactly what happened he said he didn’t know. He just “knew” it was PMLN’s fault. Later it turned out that Einsteins in PTI forgot to carry out routine maintenance last summer.
3/17

So PTI blames increase in basic tariff (Rs 1.95 of Rs 4.31) on PMLN saying that this is due to higher fixed costs incurred as a result of PMLN setting up more power plants. But that is crazy. The higher fixed cost should now divided by an even higher number of units whose 4/17

generating capacity PMLN installed. And the total cost of all PMLN plants is lower than all previously set up plants. Of course we had to set up power plants. In 2013 we had 12 to 18 hours of load shedding in most of Pakistan. 5/17

Today, if Johnson bothers to show up for the impeachment trial, he’ll hear a flimsy defense of the indefensible. Then he faces an existential, character-defining choice: Country and Constitution, or party and personal power. We have a guess. But first, let’s review some clues.

Just a couple of days before the impeachment trial began, Ron Johnson said that there was “no reason” to hold the trial—and that barring Trump from ever holding federal public office again would “pre-emptively” disenfranchise people.

Ron Johnson knows something about disenfranchisement. In fact, he’s a big fan of it. He sought to disenfranchise millions of voters who chose Biden, spreading lies and fueling the fire of the January 6th insurrection.

He went on Fox News to claim there was voter fraud, that “millions of Americans have suspicions,” and made accusations about the validity of absentee

Johnson went on in that same interview to explicitly call for Congress to “delay accepting a particular state’s electors.” He announced that he was going to vote against accepting Arizona’s electors, feeding the fury of the Jan 6th insurrectionists.

For 25 years, the GOP has had almost exclusive control of the FL legislature & admin.

It fashioned every law it could to advantage Republicans, gerrymandered at a bionic level & stymied popular efforts to increase voter participation such as restoration of felon voting rights.

During that same time, the FL GOP poured MILLIONS into turning the state party into a sophisticated, permanent, well-funded voter contact machine.

This gave GOP candidates two massive advantages: 1) they didn’t have to spend on selling the GOP position, 2) all of

in-state messaging got backed up by the RNC, and most importantly, the constant drum beat of Fox News.

There is no biological way to overstate the advantage that Fox News gives to Republicans in red states. MSNBC is NOT the opposite of Fox News.

MSNBC does not structure its programming around whipping up white grievance and fear. Whereas Fox News is the propaganda arm of the RNC, MSNBC is the left leaning version of CNN, not the DNC.

So when I say that Fox News is a huge advantage for the GOP, I know of what I speak.

In FL, Dem candidates spend a inordinate amount of time debunking Fox News lies, even to died in the wool Dems.

Because GOP candidates at every level do not have to spend on messaging, and so not have to spend on attacking Dem policy, they spend almost exclusively on 2 things:

Spectator thread: Among the Scottish parliament’s many crucial roles, there is none more important than its ability to scrutinise government and hold it to account. The same is true of a free press. Both are at their best when they hold power to account on behalf of the public.

But neither can do this essential duty when crucial documents are withheld during important inquiries. The Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish Gov’s handling of the Alex Salmond affair decided last week that it would not publish crucial submissions, including Mr Salmond’s ....

... apparently because it would contravene reporting restrictions rightly introduced to protect the identity of complainants.
We have published a duly redacted version of Alex Salmond’s account on our website.

We felt that an overly-cautious interpretation of the court order by the committee was frustrating the due process of parliamentary inquiry — and the freedom of the press to publish matters of public interest and importance.

We were aware that the court never intended to obstruct parliamentary or public scrutiny; but because of how the committee had interpreted the issue, we today sought clarification from the High Court in Edinburgh.