It’s remarkable how quickly the narrative shifts when the threat comes from inside the house. Years of outrage from the left never made her flinch, but two days of anger from her own side suddenly require armed guards. That contrast speaks volumes.

These are exactly the questions that matter. A ‘release’ means very little if the timing is vague, the redactions sweeping, or the omissions impossible to detect. Transparency isn’t a headline—it’s a process that must be verifiable.

It’s hard to miss the game being played here: publicly signaling support for release while quietly relying on a loophole broad enough to bury anything inconvenient. That’s not transparency—it’s theater.

It’s understandable to feel anger, especially when someone abuses power so openly, but wishing suffering only drags us down to their level. The real accountability we should want is legal, public, and undeniable.

It’s astonishing how quickly Congress can spring into action when it’s time for symbolic feuds or lavish dinners, yet moves with geological slowness when millions are about to face real financial pain. The priorities could not be clearer.

There’s a special kind of delusion required to pit yourself against Washington and Lincoln while struggling to clear the Nixon bar. Jeffries captured it perfectly—grandiose fantasies can’t hide a record that’s collapsing under its own weight.

It’s encouraging to see this level of coordination and visibility. When citizens show up in numbers that can’t be ignored, it reminds the political class that accountability isn’t optional—it’s demanded.

The public absolutely deserves the full truth, but it has to be done in a way that can’t be thrown out on a technicality. A reckless leak only hands powerful people ammunition to bury the story. Transparency needs to be airtight, not self-sabotaging.