I'm always amazed at how people who temporarily have the moral high ground make silly errors and miss layups. Tweeting his name and number was a great way to abdicate any sense of righteousness RG's "side" may have had.
I'm always amazed at how people who temporarily have the moral high ground make silly errors and miss layups. Tweeting his name and number was a great way to abdicate any sense of righteousness RG's "side" may have had.
We’re talking about a government functionary who violated citizens’ constitutional rights. I see no reason why he should be entitled to have his name and work number kept private.
I'm always amazed at how people who temporarily have the moral high ground make silly errors and miss layups. Tweeting his name and number was a great way to abdicate any sense of righteousness RG's "side" may have had.
If she had tweeted his personal number, I would agree, at least in part. But she tweeted the number of the library: https://twitter.com/Riley_Gaines_/status/1693608550373728448?s=20
We’re talking about a government functionary who violated citizens’ constitutional rights. I see no reason why he should be entitled to have his name and work number kept private.
Ah that’s something I did not realize. It was the public number of the library. Fair enough I suppose.
This. It's not like members of the public showing up to protest SCOTUS judges AT THEIR HOUSES, when they may have young children at home.