SUSAN RICE wants revenge

who am i talking about and why does she want revenge? i will tell you

Meet Susan Rice. She has had her hands in American Domestic policy for the last 30 years. She isnt dumb, she pretends. Stanford grad and Oxford scholar, she started her ascent during the Clinton Admin, serving in key national security roles and eventually becoming Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs.

she probably hit the back burner for a few years during the Bush Admin, but no doubt that she was still involved in the dem political machine.

Then Obama gets elected.

Now he makes her the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, becoming one of the administration’s most visible foreign policy voices. Later, she decides she is bored with that and becomes a National Security Advisor and is officially shaping American foreign policy.

Trump gets elected in 2016 and she is back to the bench for a few years

Biden Admin happens and she returned to government as Director of the Domestic Policy Council — a pivot from foreign policy to issues like healthcare, immigration, and racial equity.

scandals happened

she went the full GInsberg on the Benghazi lie

she spied on trump transition officials communications while a part of the Obama admin

She wrote a weird CYA email in her last hours in office

those are just the ones i can remember off the top of my head. now fast forward to current day and we find Susan very upset that Trump has found his way back to the oval. she hates everything about him. she thinks about him all day. the first thing she thinks of in the morning when her eyes open…. Trump and how much she hates him. ok so i cant totally confirm that, but if her appearance on the Preet Bharara podcast clued me in that it might be the case.

Susan Rice sat down recently with former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara on his podcast, and one thing was clear: the tone coming from some Democrats is shifting from defense to offense.

Rice didn’t mince words about how she views institutions that she believes have aligned themselves with or accommodated the Trump movement. In the interview, she lumped together corporations, law firms, universities, and parts of the media as powerful institutions that, in her view, have “bent the knee” in the current political environment.

Her warning was blunt. Rice suggested that when political power inevitably swings again, the choices these organizations made will not simply be forgotten.

In other words: don’t expect a clean slate.

Rice framed this not necessarily as revenge, but as “accountability.” She argued that if Democrats regain control of Congress, they should be prepared to investigate decisions made by major institutions during this period. Companies and organizations that altered policies, cut ties with critics of Trump, or otherwise made political calculations could find themselves facing congressional scrutiny.

At one point she even suggested that institutions should preserve their records, noting that future oversight could involve subpoenas and investigations.

That line caught a lot of attention.

Rice also emphasized that consequences don’t always have to be legal to matter. Even if actions weren’t technically unlawful, she argued that political and reputational consequences could still follow.

In her telling, the message to powerful organizations is simple: the decisions you’re making right now are being noted—and they will be remembered.

Rice framed this approach as a response to what she described as a “bullying” political climate. Her view is that confronting that environment sometimes requires meeting it with equally tough tactics.

At one point she invoked the idea that “revenge is best served cold,” adding that when people spread smears or intimidation, it can be necessary to ensure they “pay a price.”

Still, she drew a distinction between political hardball and what she sees as abuses of government power. Rice said that while Democrats should pursue oversight and accountability, they should avoid replicating what critics accuse the Trump movement of doing—weaponizing regulatory agencies or using government power purely for retaliation.

Whether people view Rice’s comments as a call for legitimate oversight or as a signal of political payback probably depends on where they sit politically.

But one thing about the interview was unmistakable: the era of Democrats insisting on always “going high” while Republicans “go low” may be fading.

At least if Susan Rice has anything to say about it.