In that case, it’s strange that you find her performance so interesting when she suggests that parts of the existing constitution are unconstitutional. I guess I understand the novelty to you; it’s sourceless opinion-dumping from an unqualified person.

I’ll be blocking your community on my instance. We have standards.

That feels like backpedaling to me. Can you explain why you find it interesting? Do you find articles critical of Trump’s administration interesting? Do you have any credentials or credibility or are you just lazy-thumbing propaganda at strangers hoping to ruffle feathers?

Further, what metrics are you using? Do you have any sources of information other than the journalistically bankrupt propaganda machine you cited?

Do you have anything of value to share, or is it all “just interesting” and nothing more?

If you don’t respond you’re admitting that your ideas don’t stand up to scrutiny.

Feels like a heavily subjective analysis. Are you just sharing articles you like and then giving your opinion about them?

What did she say and why did you share it? I’m not getting clickbaited.