It’s currently operating totally outside of our constitutional rules. Habeas corpus , due process of law, equal protection, freedom of speech, 4th amendment protections against search and seizure, are all not being enforced in any common sense or meaningful way.

This is part of the reason why foreign intervention can make such a massive difference. If you're that soldier and you turn around to see 1,000 Russian paratroopers, you must assume that the regime is much more likely to survive. As a result, you're more likely to fire at protestors etc

Getting snarky are we?

So when authorities say “she tried to run over an officer,” that is not a neutral description. It is a claim of intent that can be used to justify lethal force after the fact.

When the state kills first and invents the threat afterward, it is not policing, it is death squad behavior. /end

Those indicators are the difference between “the vehicle moved” and “the vehicle was used as the weapon.” If they are not present, certainty about intent is not analysis, it is narrative management. 6/7

Across hundreds of cases, intentional VRAs have a "signature." A purposeful approach line toward a person. Commitment to that line. Steering corrections that track a target. Acceleration and follow through. All of these are absent in the videos of the incident I have seen thus far. 5/7

Perhaps the greatest irony of Putin's strategy of disrupting the rules-based global order to restore Russian greatness is that his successors are likely to discover that the disappearance of those rules leaves Russia more exposed to the opportunistic ambitions of stronger powers

Not quite my point. Tradeoffs aren't necessarily zero-sum - as with eg more growth vs more regulation - but there are winners and losers from almost any policy. Acknowledging them pre-election loses votes from the losers while denying tradeoffs creates grumpy electorate later

Basically governing is about tradeoffs, and winning elections is about denying tradeoffs because voters don't believe in them

As far as I can see, this nat sec strategy is far harsher on Europe than on Russia. There is no mention of a threat from Russia or of deterrence, only that "re-establishing strategic stability" is a priority. Europe is cast as a major threat to freedom. A radical, dangerous document.