chrisgarfield.bsky.social
Trying to restart this account. Focus will be history, law, and politics. Midwestern guy living in the desert. Love good food, history, politics, musical theater, and baseball. I’m married, we have two dogs. Lawyer by day.
406 posts
296 followers
85 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
This only makes sense if the rumors/speculation about teams of militia or bounty hunters being part of this are true. Infiltration might work then. There has been no actual evidence of this. Getting inside sources to talk some other way is more realistic, but far from easy.
comment in response to
post
The fact that he calls this a criticism of the service members and NOT of himself or the strategy is an incredible deflection attempt. No one is criticizing the troops; the site was known to be nearly impenetrable. Reporting facts is not criticism of anyone.
comment in response to
post
I’d include “Love, Simon” on this list. Not because it’s a “great” film from a critical perspective, but because I thought it was the perfect blend of coming out film with John Hughes style teen film.
comment in response to
post
Worst. Ventriloquist. Ever.
comment in response to
post
Good for her!
comment in response to
post
Or, perhaps, this is exposing a developing rift between DOJ and DHS? I realize this isn’t likely, but I’d say it is plausible. This could be legaleze for “We no longer trust DHS to work with us in good faith.”
comment in response to
post
*unworkable
comment in response to
post
If that’s the case, we may as well abolish all of the lower courts and just let the Supreme Court decide every case now. Of course that’s completely on workable but what’s the point of having the lower court anyway?
comment in response to
post
What does the bill say, Mike? It does not matter what any person says if it’s in the bill.
comment in response to
post
This error is too big for a clarification in the comments. This should be deleted and reposted with the correction.
comment in response to
post
This is the most infuriating thing I’ve read in a long time. And that is a high bar these days.
comment in response to
post
They’ll say that was intentional in order to keep the Iranians in the dark about the actual plan. It’s both the convenience and danger of Trumpism. Whatever he does is explained as genius.
comment in response to
post
If they were going to take a mercenary route like this, wouldn’t they also be more likely to find a way to use contractors like Blackrock?
comment in response to
post
Then why would WE enter any agreement with THEM? Do we want an agreement or not? Do we need 100% trust? No. Republicans once again ignore their hero, Reagan. “Trust, but verify”.
comment in response to
post
bsky.app/profile/chri...
comment in response to
post
He keeps ending his “truths” that way and I find in annoying and so unserious.
comment in response to
post
What he didn’t say is that it would only be color blind because only white people will be left.
comment in response to
post
Well, I think we need to consider The Godfather Part 3. Part 2 was arguably better than Part 1, but Part 3 is just awful.
comment in response to
post
It was worth reading the comments for this response. bsky.app/profile/atta...
comment in response to
post
As a DBacks fan, I’m pissed that Trump is causing me to be sympathetic to the Dodgers. 😂 In all seriousness, this is bigger than baseball.
comment in response to
post
bsky.app/profile/chri...
comment in response to
post
I wonder where they got that idea? bsky.app/profile/pete...
#ice #dodgerstadium #LosAngeles #immigration
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
bsky.app/profile/emce...
comment in response to
post
It’s the “well actually” that does the important work in this instance. It isn’t some minor point or an insignificant technicality. It also doesn’t mean that the person pointing it out agrees that is how it should work. 2/2
comment in response to
post
We can’t push for due process under the law and then ignore the law. On the flip side, when those pushing for “law and order” are not following the law, it’s important to point that out. Again, in order to do this, you first have to know the law. That’s why Aaron’s “well actually” matters. 1/2
comment in response to
post
I will acknowledge they can be on the right side for the wrong reasons. Still, Trump is working some miracle if I can agree with those three about anything.
comment in response to
post
Definitely false equivalence but also the reason I avoid even jokingly doing anything to buy into the Luigi as a hero discussion.
comment in response to
post
This was definitely one of those “great idea if you can pull it off” moments. And he pulled it off beautifully.