green postdoc

Absolutely love Rachel's methodical dissection of news with a legal-political interface, scientific-political convergences, rights-related focus, and matters pertaining to international polemics. She has, however, developed a propensity for mixing reliable, verifiable facts with conjecture and speculation which undermines her credibility and leads to long-winded story-telling chock-full of repeating memes using 50-cent words. It has, and always will have, the tendency to obfuscate and potentially mislead. That was never more apparent than when Rachel seemed to believe earnestly, even enthusiastically, that Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate was going to be conducted fairly and finally result in consequences for Trump. That was never going to happen given the corruption and depravity to which GOP politics has stooped. She has since shaken that off and is now doggedly pursuing the massive trail of evidence left by the current law-violating, chaos-causing, democracy-dismantling president. Rachel has the analytical abilities and oratorical skills needed to engage in effective advocacy for the causes she's most passionate about and to potentially move onto positions of political leadership should she choose to do so. The under-appreciated art of brevity would be helpful as she continues her journey.