On US governance:

"I don't think this administration has the discipline, the coherence, the judgment to avoid that kind of misstep at all."

This from a man who just moved here on a visa.

When Joshi talks about British military failures, the language changes completely. "Mismanaged." "In a bad place."

Sympathetic. Structural. Budgetary. No moral indictment. No "malevolent." No "predatory." No "quite illegal."

Despite Joshi being an Indian national, when he's addressing European audiences about America, he says : "We Europeans."

An Indian national saying "we Europeans" — in context after context where the subject is American foreign policy — to position himself inside the community he's telling to fear the United States.

It gets better. When France conducts military signaling AGAINST the United States near Greenland — a NATO ally running operations aimed at America — Joshi calls it admirable:

"France has chosen to conduct military diplomacy that is directed in part at a European partner against the United States."

CONCLUSION:

So let's put the full picture together.

The Economist's new Washington Bureau Chief:

- 16-year record of escalating anti-American military commentary
- Calls US operations "malevolent," "predatory," "quite illegal and contrary to international law"
- Calls himself "we Europeans" — as an Indian national — consistently when criticizing America
- RUSI advisory board (EU Commission, State Dept, BAE funding) — no COI disclosure identified in any reviewed publication
- Two months in the country on a visa

Again, why do we allow people like him to stay here on a work visa?

THREAD END.

Going to CAIR Georgia's website shows these sponsors. I guarantee that there is foreign support behind some of those.

https://x.com/i/status/2063474462205546876
Loving this new miltwit trend.

The old guard does not deserve any dignified response.

Support "ratio" wherever you see this.

https://x.com/i/status/2063799852660900300
I didn't think it was possible to ratio Hunter Biden, who's been riding his astroturfed social media high. But you delivered. Boom.

Let the record show: Mike Lee is not a bridge-burner.

He has worked every channel to pass a bill with 75% public support. He has kept relationships intact. He has cooperated with the same institutions that are paid hundreds of millions of dollars to promote election integrity abroad, and asked them only to apply the same standard at home.

There is a hypocrisy in treating voter ID as an obstacle to democracy rather than a feature of it. The National Democratic Institute, the Democratic Party's own international arm, has spent decades and billions helping far less developed countries implement voter ID far stricter than SAVE America Act, all under advancing "democracy."

What Democrats (and Republicans) fund in African countries, they fight in Washington.

Mike Lee has played the institutionalist. He has been patient, procedural, and cooperative. But if the SAVE Act cannot pass a Senate his party controls 53–47, that patience will have been proven pointless...

And the Mike Lee who emerges from that failure will not be the one the Senate been negotiating with.

Hello Mr. Platner,

Ratio.

That's it. That's the whole rebuttal.

You are someone who, by the virtue of his Reddit posts, manages to be simultaneously a filthy-literal-Communist and anti-Semite. That in itself is an egregious sin, because literal, card-carrying Communists are fundamentally at odds with America's norms.

But if that weren't enough, you have voluminous Reddit posts defending the Nazi Totenkopf symbol. You clearly knew the tattoo you got and you defended it publicly. There's no either/or way about it.

Scum attracts scum. Which is why you can comfortably swim in both literal-Communist and literal-antisemitic far-right circles.

I am no fan of Sue Collins. But the fact you are running against her, that you have even the smallest chance of defeating her --

you, as someone who is a self-admitted Communist, someone who has Nazi sympathies -- not to mention all the horrific, personal-life stuff --

You are the worst candidate in history, right AND left. You are the authoritarian evil that every "democracy" group speaks about, yet they will hypocritically not say a word against because they believe that being anti-Trump is more important than allying with Communists or Nazis.

You are not "populist." On the contrary:

You are the perfected example of how liberal democracy has rotted so far that they'd rather stay silent about you, hoping you'll win against the most moderate Republican in the Senate, than to hand Trump the possibility of retaining the Senate.