How much more evidence do Dems need that when you continuously call for violence, rile up violence, make everything ramped to 11 and hysterical, violence happens. In this case a highly likely Dem lunatic shooting two reps who they felt failed their purity test. Stop the violence.

Twitter

Source: Galaxy Research
Translation: Jinse Finance
Bitcoin's closing price in 2025 is expected to be roughly the same as the level at the beginning of the year.
The cryptocurrency market experienced a genuine bullish wave in the first ten months of this year. Regulatory reforms continued to advance, ETFs continued to attract funds, and on-chain activity became increasingly active. Bitcoin hit an all-time high of $126,080 on October 6th.
However, the market failed to deliver the expected breakout after the initial frenzy; instead, it experienced rotation, repricing, and rebalancing. This was driven by factors such as unmet macroeconomic expectations, a shift in investment narratives, leveraged liquidations, and the actions of whale...

Galaxy: 26 Predictions for the Crypto Market in 2026

Following the controversy surrounding Fundstrat's Bitcoin views, co-founder Tom Lee responded, stating that the "contradictory predictions" seen by outsiders were actually research conclusions from different positions and timelines, not internal disagreements. Previously, Sean Farrell, head of digital asset strategy at Fundstrat, suggested that Bitcoin might retrace to the $60,000-$65,000 range in the first half of 2026; while Tom Lee believed Bitcoin could reach new highs, even surging to $200,000 as early as the beginning of 2026. A Fundstrat...

Tom Lee responds to Fundstrat's "contradictory" views on Bitcoin: Different positions, different timelines, not internal disagreements.

While fixed-rate returns are higher, liquidity is a price crypto users are unwilling to pay.

Why do DeFi users reject fixed interest rates?

Violence = violent rhetoric. "Stop them at all costs, these people are evil incarnate, these are all hitlers in the crib, etc." This type of language is calling for violence indirectly under the guise of "well we never explicitly told people to go out and hurt others." It's a way to weasel out of responsibility. Some extreme people, literally explicitly call for it, but on the whole, when the media is blasting "they are evil. they must be stopped." 24/7, some crazies are going to see this and think "I have nothing to lose, I will be the one who steps up," and act on it. Ruining their own life, the lives of others, and the efficacy of their actual arguments and points they want others to hear.

"some crazies are going to see this and think "I have nothing to lose, I will be the one who steps up," and act on it."
And this is the hope of the rhetoric. This is its purpose. That some random psyopped soldiers will be activated.
That + in chaotic moments individuals can maneuver their own interests and jockey for power, or make money off of outrage/fear/hate engagement, which is why the news is always shocking rather than peaceful.

She's terrified and under extreme duress here. She voted what she felt was correct and she knew there would be consequences.

Final thought. Violence = bad. This is non-partisan. Any child with good parents can tell you this. Stop calling for violence.

Final piece of information:
You would think this was so on the nose that it had to be a staged/fake photo, but it is purportedly confirmed by Minnesota State Patrol.