Brian Jacobs

5.1K posts

Brian Jacobs banner
Brian Jacobs

Brian Jacobs

@brianjacobsvc

Founder of @MoaiCapital & @EmergenceCapital, Lecturer @StanfordGSB, inventor, wanderer, stone carver, student, dreamer, concerned citizen, still hopeful

Wakanda Katılım Nisan 2009
333 Takip Edilen5.6K Takipçiler
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Michael McFaul
Michael McFaul@McFaul·
On the night he launched his war against Iran, Trump called for a revolution to finally free the Iranian people from the despotic regime that has killed, repressed, and terrorized them for 4 decades. Since then, Trump has said almost nothing about helping the Iranian people.
English
146
405
1.8K
29.7K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Governor Gavin Newsom
Governor Gavin Newsom@CAgovernor·
California is the nation's LARGEST donor state — sending $275 BILLION more in taxes to Washington than we get back. Donald Trump can lie all he wants about the Golden State, but we're the ones paying his bills and keeping the U.S. economy afloat.
English
2.9K
2.5K
11.3K
298.7K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Heath Mayo
Heath Mayo@HeathMayo·
Inflation was coming down in the United States—and then Trump’s tariffs happened.
Heath Mayo tweet media
English
260
4.5K
11.8K
541.7K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Tymofiy Mylovanov
Tymofiy Mylovanov@Mylovanov·
McFaul: Trump doesn't get it. NATO is a defensive alliance. NATO didn't fight in Vietnam with us, with the French in Algeria, with the Portuguese in Angola and Mozambique, or with the UK in the Falklands. The only time they fought together was after Sep 11.
English
452
4.3K
16.9K
361.8K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Grok
Grok@grok·
@mjfree Yeah, looks real. Candid party shot—consistent lighting, natural poses, no AI glitches on faces/hands. What’s the story behind it?
English
126
489
4.5K
1M
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Governor Newsom Press Office (parody)
NATO IS NEVER THERE WHEN WE NEED THEM. TRUMP WANTED TO STEAL GREENLAND, DID NATO HELP? NO! TRUMP WANTED TO WIPE OUT AN ENTIRE CIVILIZATION, DID NATO HELP? NO! TRUMP DECLARED WAR ON BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN, DID NATO HELP? NO! IF NATO DOESN'T PAY ITS SHARE FOR THE BALLROOM, IT'S OVER.
Governor Newsom Press Office (parody) tweet media
English
454
5.1K
27.8K
411.9K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
cginisty
cginisty@cginisty·
🔴 Le New York Times vient de publier le récit le plus accablant sur Trump depuis le début de la guerre. Et c'est une bombe. Jonathan Swan et Maggie Haberman, deux journalistes de la Maison Blanche, révèlent comment Trump a pris la décision d'entrer en guerre contre l'Iran. Ce qu'ils décrivent est exactement ce que j'analyse dans Le Pantin de la Maison Blanche. Voici les faits. Netanyahu a vendu un rêve. Le 11 février, dans la Situation Room, le Premier ministre israélien a présenté un scénario en quatre actes : tuer le Guide Suprême, détruire l'armée iranienne, déclencher une révolution populaire, installer un nouveau régime. Il a même montré une vidéo de montage avec les "futurs dirigeants" de l'Iran. Trump a répondu : "Sounds good to me." En une phrase, il venait de sceller le destin de la région. Le lendemain, la CIA a dit que c'était du vent. Les parties 3 et 4 du pitch de Netanyahu, la révolution populaire et le changement de régime, ont été qualifiées de "farce" par Ratcliffe lui-même. Rubio a traduit : "In other words, it's bullshit." Le général Caine a ajouté : "C'est la procédure standard des Israéliens. Ils survendent, et leurs plans ne sont pas toujours bien développés." Trump a entendu. Et il a quand même dit oui. Vance a tout vu. Le vice-président était le seul dans la pièce à s'opposer frontalement, avertissant que la guerre pourrait "détruire la coalition politique de Trump", que le Détroit d'Ormuz était le vrai point de vulnérabilité, que personne ne pouvait prédire les représailles iraniennes quand la survie d'un régime était en jeu. Il a dit : "Tu sais que je pense que c'est une mauvaise idée. Mais si tu veux le faire, je te soutiendrai." Ce n'est pas du courage politique. C'est de la déférence. Susie Wiles a regardé. La cheffe de cabinet, qui avait des inquiétudes, a estimé que ce n'était "pas son rôle" de s'exprimer sur une décision militaire devant les autres. Elle a "encouragé les conseillers à partager leurs vues." Elle s'est tue. Le général Caine n'a jamais dit non. Il a exposé les risques : diminution des stocks de munitions, Détroit d'Ormuz, pas de voie claire vers la victoire. Puis il a dit : "Si vous ordonnez l'opération, l'armée exécutera." Trump, lui, "entendait seulement ce qu'il voulait entendre." Et Trump a signé à bord d'Air Force One, 22 minutes avant la deadline fixée par son propre général : "Operation Epic Fury is approved. No aborts. Good luck." Voilà comment on entre en guerre au XXIe siècle. Pas avec une délibération solennelle. Pas avec un vote du Congrès. Pas avec une stratégie de sortie. Avec un slide show de Netanyahu, un "sounds good to me", et une note envoyée depuis un avion. Dans Le Pantin de la Maison Blanche, j'écris que les vrais décideurs sont ceux qui préparent les présentations que Trump regarde. Netanyahu l'a compris mieux que quiconque. Il a mis en scène une heure de spectacle visuel dans la Situation Room avec Mossad en fond d'écran, des vidéos de "futurs dirigeants", une promesse de victoire rapide et propre. Et Trump a dit oui. Pendant que Vance, Rubio, Wiles et Caine regardaient. Voici l'article du New-York Times : nytimes.com/2026/04/07/us/… 📖 Le Pantin de la Maison Blanche → amazon.fr/dp/B0GPCCMS68/
cginisty tweet media
Français
650
16.8K
35.7K
3.1M
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Grok
Grok@grok·
Documented mail-in ballot fraud in US elections is extremely rare. Analyses of the Heritage Foundation's database show roughly 143 convictions for absentee/mail ballot fraud over the past 20+ years—about 0.00006% of total votes cast. Brookings Institution's review of 2016–2022 elections found an average rate of 0.000043% (4 cases per 10 million mail ballots). The American Statistical Association's 2020 study found no evidence that vote-by-mail increases fraud risk, even in states shifting to universal systems. News21's 2000–2012 investigation identified 491 absentee fraud cases amid billions of votes. Sources: electionfraud.heritage.org, brookings.edu/articles/mail-…, amstat.org/docs/default-s….
English
3
37
73
10.5K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Jason Bassler
Jason Bassler@JasonBassler1·
Call me crazy but... Maybe the guy who was Jeffrey Epstein's business partner and preaches about the return of the "antichrist" shouldn't be controlling all military intelligence, national security systems, ICE ops, HHS/NHS/FDA data, IRS fraud detection, predictive policing, CDC analytics, & 30+ government agencies? I know, I'm just a conspiracy theorist, right?
Jason Bassler tweet media
English
796
11.1K
33.9K
633.2K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Chris Murphy 🟧
Chris Murphy 🟧@ChrisMurphyCT·
If I were in Trump's Cabinet, I would spend Easter calling constitutional lawyers about the 25th Amendment. This is completely, utterly unhinged. He's already killed thousands. He's going to kill thousands more.
Chris Murphy 🟧 tweet media
English
9K
14.5K
57.8K
3.1M
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Michael McFaul
Michael McFaul@McFaul·
Soldiers from NATO countries died next to American soldiers in Afghanistan even though no other NATO country was attacked by Al Qaeda or the Taliban. That is not my definition of “freeloading.” That is my definition of sacrifice in defense of common values.
Melissa Chen@MsMelChen

Let’s be real here. Europe has spent decades freeloading on American security. Even now, with every NATO member finally hitting the 2% GDP target in 2025. But beyond the financial contributions, the real rupture is philosophical and the Iran crisis has shown a spotlight on it. Europe worships process. Endless committees, consultations, and “predictability.” Macron actually calls it a virtue. For Trump, this is paralysis as his style is to articulate a threat, fix a target, and act. The Americans are men of conviction and purpose. Europe on the other hand lives by bureaucratic liturgy and in high-minded abstractions. Sure, Americans might make mistakes when acting. But Europe never considers what the costs of not acting actually are. Just look at how their nations are doing on various fronts, especially on the border crisis, and you see the same cancerous rot that undergirds their foreign policy approach play out domestically. It's the same problem on a different scale. Iran is currently holding the Strait of Hormuz hostage, choking 20% of global oil and spiking prices past $100 a barrel. Meanwhile, the regime is bleeding from strikes, its nuclear ambitions are still alive despite degraded capability, and its proxies are firing missiles at allies and oil tankers. If this isn’t a clear and present danger to the global economy - of which Europe is a part - then I don’t know what is. Yet when Washington asked to use European bases to finish the job - bases the US has defended for generations, the response was hesitation and hand-wringing. The US did strike from RAF Fairford, but only after warnings that British soil could become a “legitimate target.” If you cannot agree that a theocratic regime with eschatological ambitions who have shown no restraint in hitting out at Gulf countries and threatening the world’s energy jugular is an enemy worth confronting, then what, exactly, are we allies about? Europe loves to preen about being tough on Russia. They issue condemnations and speeches and slap sanctions that hardly work to cripple the Russian economy. Now here was a chance to do something concrete: let the Americans use the bases they already pay for, help clear the Strait, and actually degrade the Iranian war machine that arms Moscow’s proxies. Turmp didn’t ask for boots on the ground or any kind of more offensive action. All he wanted was permission to operate from the infrastructure America has underwritten for decades. They couldn’t even manage that. So can you blame the Americans for seeing NATO for what it is? A paper-tiger alliance that expects Washington to bleed and pay while Brussels and London convenes and deliberates. If Europe refuses to treat Iran as the threat it is while happily letting American power keep the Strait open and the lights on, then the alliance is already dead. Trump is simply stating the obvious and the Americans are becoming very reluctant to subsidize the European delusion any longer.

English
144
697
3.1K
62.9K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Michael McFaul
Michael McFaul@McFaul·
This new Trump & team argument that NATO is failing the US by not supporting the US war of choice in Iran is ahistorical. NATO is a defensive alliance. NATO traditionally has never followed a NATO ally into wars of choice, including: US war in Iraq. UK war in the Falklands France's war with Algeria Portugal's wars in Angola/Mozambique US war in Vietnam Turkey's war/occupation in Cyprus I could go on.
English
155
678
2.5K
68.3K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Michael McFaul
Michael McFaul@McFaul·
Trump’s comments last night about “Obama’s Iran deal” were simply wrong. It wasn’t perfect, but it capped uranium enrichment at 3.67%. Since Trump scrapped it, Iran has enriched to 60%—much closer to weapons-grade. And that stockpile still hasn’t been eliminated.
English
1.2K
4.9K
14.2K
682.6K
Brian Jacobs retweetledi
Michael McFaul
Michael McFaul@McFaul·
Iran has more uranium at higher levels of enrichment because Trump tore up the 2015 nuclear agreement! Had we stayed in the JCPOA, they would not have it today.
English
638
1.3K
4.5K
413.7K