lizbethann.bsky.social
527 posts
590 followers
119 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Yeah baby, my neighborhood has a group of over 80-year old white women who have been carpooling to the protests together, hoisting their handmade signs and making some good trouble. Some of my heroes!
comment in response to
post
Maybe Noem's beef with Padilla was that he didn't wear a better costume to the presser.
comment in response to
post
I am so tired of the "bending" and the "testing." Call it by its name.
comment in response to
post
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing a song of angry men?
It is the music of a people
Who will not be slaves again
comment in response to
post
Just. Thank you.
comment in response to
post
😆😆😆😆😆
comment in response to
post
I'm not sure that being detained for immigration violation gives you Miranda rights. Deportation is a civil, not criminal, procedure/remedy. If you're in Immigration Court .... maybe someone who knows the process could answer this.
comment in response to
post
This was my question. If Stephen Miller is (supposedly) an 'advisor,' does he have authority to issue orders? I mean, I get that he's the man behind the curtain and tells Trump what to sign and T signs it without reading/understanding, but is Miller now claiming he himself is issuing order to ICE?
comment in response to
post
Exactly!
comment in response to
post
Where is the LAPD when it comes to enforcing laws and protecting citizens?
Backing up unidentified Federal jack boosters endangering bystanders through reckless maneuvers, causing accidents, and threatening innocent people (citizens or not) isn’t that.
bsky.app/profile/acat...
comment in response to
post
I think he was actually saying, "so we're planning to go warfighter on this city."
comment in response to
post
Why is it ICE keeps looking for "the worst of the worst" at construction sites, restaurant kitchens, farm fields, schools and immigration hearings? It feels 'somewhat' unlikely those would be the best places to find the gang members and violent criminals they claim they're focused on.
comment in response to
post
Thank you. Needed.
comment in response to
post
I guess the judge just said the President can waste his time in a civil suit if he decides this is the best use of his time.
comment in response to
post
I 'hate' to break it to him, but (1) no one has admitted their reporting was untrue/a scam, and (2) the Court hasn't ruled on the actual merits of the case. Ruling today was just that the defendants can't get a stay of the lawsuit (tho' the President could if he were the defendant in a civil suit).
comment in response to
post
Trump isn't actually interested in the substance of the job of President. He doesn't take briefings; he "doesn't know" what's happening or what he's signing. He is interested in the TV "reality show" aspect of it. Accessibility isn't the same as governing. And not all "content" is content.
comment in response to
post
'kay, I did spit my coffee reading this
comment in response to
post
I needed this giggle/snort!
comment in response to
post
And lo, the enemies of your people shall become your only 'friends,' and you shall dwell in the House of Shameless Grift forever.
comment in response to
post
Or park it at Alcatraz.
comment in response to
post
And the point that the Library of Congress is not an Executive Branch agency, but falls under the Legislative branch: is this meaningless? The term of appointment (which, yes, is by the president, but for a term of 10 years) doesn't expire until 2026. How does DT fire the Librarian by email notice?
comment in response to
post
That's an unfortunate headline. Did they mean to say "In a clearly illegal and unconstitutional move..." and then forgot where they were headed with this thought?
comment in response to
post
Exactly, like this is "brokering a deal." The Faux News 'headline' is nauseating.
comment in response to
post
The court doesn't get to "decide to try to stop" anything. The issue has to be presented to them in the form of a lawsuit over which they have jurisdiction.
comment in response to
post
And these morons think the J6 insurrectionists DIDN'T receive due process? Pay attention.
comment in response to
post
Standing around talking to people = 'insurrection'???
And WTAF does 9/11 have to do with insurrection? Did he mean J6? Like scaling the walls and beating cops and vandalizing government property?
comment in response to
post
That is seriously effed up.
comment in response to
post
Confused. From the various appointments he has made I thought he preferred total novices and political hacks.
comment in response to
post
First they came for dolls. Next up: explaining to the kids that they don't really need all of those teeth, and that they'll be better for it.
comment in response to
post
There's a pair to cosy up to: Josh Hawley and Clarence Thomas.
comment in response to
post
Good to know. I thought in game theory it was called total chaos.
comment in response to
post
I thought it was "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech by those who agree with me."
comment in response to
post
Oh lord, just what we need: the "Look what you made me do" defense.
comment in response to
post
Oh they gave up on the DoJ being anything but DT's private law firm months ago. No independence? No problem.
comment in response to
post
I love this so much.
comment in response to
post
Gotta hate having to agree with him.....
comment in response to
post
But it can't be just an "issue," his authority exists only if there's a "national security threat" or an "emergency."
comment in response to
post
Sure, I realize all of that. Just saying, "when did movies constitute an emergency?"
comment in response to
post
Can't read the subtitles, you're suggesting?
comment in response to
post
"I am authorizing ...." Thank you for your attention to this matter. 😵💫
comment in response to
post
And, so now he's treating his 'Truth-y tweets' as if they are Executive Orders?
comment in response to
post
Umm, "and judges"??? WTF?
comment in response to
post
How in the f@ck is this a national security emergency???
comment in response to
post
"'Many' of his actions are legal" you say? Hard pressed to name three....
comment in response to
post
Well, if we're 'mathing' this: remember tariffs are on the wholesale price to the the importer. Low priced items with not much profit margin will see most of a 10% tariff as a retail price hike. Higher margin items might not, since the importer/dealer may 'cost share' some of that increase.
comment in response to
post
Doesn't matter if we like it.
comment in response to
post
We don't have time for this