We looked inside some of the tweets by @phi1_dale and found useful information for you.
Inside 100 Tweets
Between 2008 and 2011, there was a 5,000% increase in the number of employees at Twitter.
We've so enjoyed y'all's enthusiasm for these #giveaways for one signed hardcover copy of @DanRather's #WhatUnitesUs! Today's the final one: Retweet this by 11:59pm ET 11/13/20 to enter for a chance to win. US only, age 18+. RULES: https://t.co/MMqtO7lR3p 📷 from the Before Times https://t.co/w44AUIemHe
Well, here we are. It's the last day of the signed #WhatUnitesUs giveaway. Retweet this or the tweet from my publisher Algonquin below in order to enter. I'm humbled by your interest in the book. We're planning more events. Please follow @AlgonquinBooks to stay updated. https://t.co/EHDKzntHAy
Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history—until now. The 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death. We urge you to vote for health, science and Joe Biden for President. https://t.co/8TlH7shjFn
Trump refused to take the threat of the coronavirus seriously, now he won’t take responsibility as his administration has been totally unprepared for this crisis. https://t.co/Jdh1GY9HHS
Just because the President doesn’t specifically say “quid pro quo” doesn’t mean that there wasn’t one. A mob boss doesn’t say what he wants done, he either asks for a favor or asks if so and so could get rid of a problem for him. “Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?”
Absolutely, that’s why the Congress took so long before it decided there was enough evidence to start an impeachment. The right tries to portray it as a glib reaction, that no thought was put into it. But I will tell you one thing. I’m going to be watching or listening to it.