sekharn
@sekharn.bsky.social
Bay Area Dad, Cal Alum #GoBears, Sports Fan, Electrical Engineer/Circuit Designer by training, he/him
Reposted by sekharn
6/ CNN confirms:
"The survivors were also waving at something in the air, the sources said Bradley told them, although it’s unclear whether they might have been surrendering or asking the US aircraft they had spotted for help."
By @natashabertrand.bsky.social
"The survivors were also waving at something in the air, the sources said Bradley told them, although it’s unclear whether they might have been surrendering or asking the US aircraft they had spotted for help."
By @natashabertrand.bsky.social
Exclusive: Boat at center of double-tap strike controversy was meeting vessel headed to Suriname, admiral told lawmakers | CNN Politics
The alleged drug traffickers killed by the US military in a strike on September 2 were heading to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname — a small South American country east ...
www.cnn.com
December 5, 2025 at 11:04 PM
6/ CNN confirms:
"The survivors were also waving at something in the air, the sources said Bradley told them, although it’s unclear whether they might have been surrendering or asking the US aircraft they had spotted for help."
By @natashabertrand.bsky.social
"The survivors were also waving at something in the air, the sources said Bradley told them, although it’s unclear whether they might have been surrendering or asking the US aircraft they had spotted for help."
By @natashabertrand.bsky.social
Reposted by sekharn
5/ source (Gift Link):
Video of Boat Strike Shows Survivors Waving Before Fatal Follow-Up Attack
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/u...
Video of Boat Strike Shows Survivors Waving Before Fatal Follow-Up Attack
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/u...
Video of Boat Strike Shows Survivors Waving Before Fatal Follow-Up Attack
www.nytimes.com
December 5, 2025 at 8:03 PM
5/ source (Gift Link):
Video of Boat Strike Shows Survivors Waving Before Fatal Follow-Up Attack
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/u...
Video of Boat Strike Shows Survivors Waving Before Fatal Follow-Up Attack
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/u...
Reposted by sekharn
4/ Even worse on these officials account, it seems if the third view is correct, that was a reason to kill the survivors.
You read that right, and I am not exaggerating.⤵️
A shipwrecked person beckoning others to come rescue them is a basis for killing them.
You read that right, and I am not exaggerating.⤵️
A shipwrecked person beckoning others to come rescue them is a basis for killing them.
December 5, 2025 at 7:58 PM
4/ Even worse on these officials account, it seems if the third view is correct, that was a reason to kill the survivors.
You read that right, and I am not exaggerating.⤵️
A shipwrecked person beckoning others to come rescue them is a basis for killing them.
You read that right, and I am not exaggerating.⤵️
A shipwrecked person beckoning others to come rescue them is a basis for killing them.
Reposted by sekharn
3/ "But some lawmakers viewing the video rejected that interpretation. There were no other unknown aircraft or boats in visual range, and no other boats involved in drug trafficking could have rescued them."
And even worse, if I am understanding this logic correctly, ...
And even worse, if I am understanding this logic correctly, ...
December 5, 2025 at 7:54 PM
3/ "But some lawmakers viewing the video rejected that interpretation. There were no other unknown aircraft or boats in visual range, and no other boats involved in drug trafficking could have rescued them."
And even worse, if I am understanding this logic correctly, ...
And even worse, if I am understanding this logic correctly, ...
Reposted by sekharn
2/ What Adm. Bradley and Gen. Caine told Congress raises credibility concerns.
"The military officers briefing Congress on Thursday said the survivors could have been trying to beckon to other alleged drug traffickers in a plane or boat to come get them...."
But ... get this ...
"The military officers briefing Congress on Thursday said the survivors could have been trying to beckon to other alleged drug traffickers in a plane or boat to come get them...."
But ... get this ...
December 5, 2025 at 7:54 PM
2/ What Adm. Bradley and Gen. Caine told Congress raises credibility concerns.
"The military officers briefing Congress on Thursday said the survivors could have been trying to beckon to other alleged drug traffickers in a plane or boat to come get them...."
But ... get this ...
"The military officers briefing Congress on Thursday said the survivors could have been trying to beckon to other alleged drug traffickers in a plane or boat to come get them...."
But ... get this ...
Reposted by sekharn
NEW info on shipwreck attack. It gets worse.
The 2 survivors climbed atop wreckage and waved to overhead.
"Some of the people viewing the video thought ... could have been an attempt to surrender"
Others "said the most logical explanation was ... signaling for a rescue."
1/
The 2 survivors climbed atop wreckage and waved to overhead.
"Some of the people viewing the video thought ... could have been an attempt to surrender"
Others "said the most logical explanation was ... signaling for a rescue."
1/
December 5, 2025 at 7:50 PM
NEW info on shipwreck attack. It gets worse.
The 2 survivors climbed atop wreckage and waved to overhead.
"Some of the people viewing the video thought ... could have been an attempt to surrender"
Others "said the most logical explanation was ... signaling for a rescue."
1/
The 2 survivors climbed atop wreckage and waved to overhead.
"Some of the people viewing the video thought ... could have been an attempt to surrender"
Others "said the most logical explanation was ... signaling for a rescue."
1/
Reposted by sekharn
I've said it before, I'll say it again--these sons of bitches on the Court piss me off w this 'presume the legislature acted in good faith and wasn't being racist' thing
why on Earth would I presume that?! what on Earth does it take to overcome that presumption?!
ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/supre...
why on Earth would I presume that?! what on Earth does it take to overcome that presumption?!
ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/supre...
December 4, 2025 at 11:30 PM
I've said it before, I'll say it again--these sons of bitches on the Court piss me off w this 'presume the legislature acted in good faith and wasn't being racist' thing
why on Earth would I presume that?! what on Earth does it take to overcome that presumption?!
ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/supre...
why on Earth would I presume that?! what on Earth does it take to overcome that presumption?!
ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/supre...
Reposted by sekharn
The 6 conservative Justices think we’re on the eve of an election that will take place 11 months from now. Utterly bankrupt of all intellectual integrity
In the weeds a bit but interesting that the court does not cite the Purcell precedent (barring meddling in election law too close to an election), as @rickhasen.bsky.social points out, but nevertheless seems to invoke it while citing a different case (left).
Kagan (right) responds:
Kagan (right) responds:
December 4, 2025 at 11:53 PM
The 6 conservative Justices think we’re on the eve of an election that will take place 11 months from now. Utterly bankrupt of all intellectual integrity
Reposted by sekharn
Texas clearly did a racial gerrymander, which is illegal.
A district court found that Texas did a racial gerrymander, rejecting the new map because it is illegal.
But the Supreme Court reversed it.
Because? Must assume the gerrymanderers were acting in good faith (despite the evidence otherwise).
A district court found that Texas did a racial gerrymander, rejecting the new map because it is illegal.
But the Supreme Court reversed it.
Because? Must assume the gerrymanderers were acting in good faith (despite the evidence otherwise).
December 4, 2025 at 11:18 PM
Texas clearly did a racial gerrymander, which is illegal.
A district court found that Texas did a racial gerrymander, rejecting the new map because it is illegal.
But the Supreme Court reversed it.
Because? Must assume the gerrymanderers were acting in good faith (despite the evidence otherwise).
A district court found that Texas did a racial gerrymander, rejecting the new map because it is illegal.
But the Supreme Court reversed it.
Because? Must assume the gerrymanderers were acting in good faith (despite the evidence otherwise).
Reposted by sekharn
literally 'the court responsible for fact-finding should have just assumed nicer things about the government instead!' 🥴
December 4, 2025 at 11:56 PM
literally 'the court responsible for fact-finding should have just assumed nicer things about the government instead!' 🥴
Reposted by sekharn
The dripping contempt the right wing SCOTUS majority holds for district judges is truly a sight to behold every time. When they deign to give actual reasons for their shadow docket holdings, it’s “look at the absolute idiots who keep getting everything wrong!”
December 4, 2025 at 11:31 PM
The dripping contempt the right wing SCOTUS majority holds for district judges is truly a sight to behold every time. When they deign to give actual reasons for their shadow docket holdings, it’s “look at the absolute idiots who keep getting everything wrong!”
Reposted by sekharn
Anyway, I'm no grand scholar of the judiciary, and all of this is just my own two cents and perhaps I'm overreading the extent to which the lower courts are going to be upset, but as someone who cares deeply about *facts,* I'm mostly just frustrated about the extent to which this Court doesn't.
December 4, 2025 at 11:22 PM
Anyway, I'm no grand scholar of the judiciary, and all of this is just my own two cents and perhaps I'm overreading the extent to which the lower courts are going to be upset, but as someone who cares deeply about *facts,* I'm mostly just frustrated about the extent to which this Court doesn't.
Reposted by sekharn
The reason the judiciary functions is because judges understand that despite everyone being human beings who hold grudges and have stupid opinions and peccadilloes and flaws, there is a sense that you have to justify what you're doing on more than "because I say so."
This Court is undermining that.
This Court is undermining that.
December 4, 2025 at 11:14 PM
The reason the judiciary functions is because judges understand that despite everyone being human beings who hold grudges and have stupid opinions and peccadilloes and flaws, there is a sense that you have to justify what you're doing on more than "because I say so."
This Court is undermining that.
This Court is undermining that.
Reposted by sekharn
It's not just liberal judges they're doing this to. They're doing this to plenty of conservative judges too; judges who actually spent weeks and weeks poring over the details and with their arms deep in the guts of thousands of pages of documents and days of testimony.
Those judges are pissed.
Those judges are pissed.
December 4, 2025 at 11:12 PM
It's not just liberal judges they're doing this to. They're doing this to plenty of conservative judges too; judges who actually spent weeks and weeks poring over the details and with their arms deep in the guts of thousands of pages of documents and days of testimony.
Those judges are pissed.
Those judges are pissed.
Reposted by sekharn
I don't think the Justices understand the extent to which they are playing with fire. The more they do this, the more District Courts will engage in open disrespect of the Supreme Court, because what other response is there to open disrespect directed at them? That's bad for the Judiciary, period.
December 4, 2025 at 11:11 PM
I don't think the Justices understand the extent to which they are playing with fire. The more they do this, the more District Courts will engage in open disrespect of the Supreme Court, because what other response is there to open disrespect directed at them? That's bad for the Judiciary, period.
Reposted by sekharn
The Supreme Court majority has decided that they are the fact-finders, and the facts are what they want them to be, and quite frankly if District Courts disagree, they can pound sand because they're not the ones in charge.
They're right about the last part. But the damage they're doing is longterm.
They're right about the last part. But the damage they're doing is longterm.
December 4, 2025 at 11:09 PM
The Supreme Court majority has decided that they are the fact-finders, and the facts are what they want them to be, and quite frankly if District Courts disagree, they can pound sand because they're not the ones in charge.
They're right about the last part. But the damage they're doing is longterm.
They're right about the last part. But the damage they're doing is longterm.
Reposted by sekharn
As Justice Kagan begins her dissent by pointing out, what is even the point of trial, of fact-finding, of clear error, of standards of review, when the Supreme Court simply ignores every single part of that and decides everything purely on the papers without any real consideration of the facts?
December 4, 2025 at 11:08 PM
As Justice Kagan begins her dissent by pointing out, what is even the point of trial, of fact-finding, of clear error, of standards of review, when the Supreme Court simply ignores every single part of that and decides everything purely on the papers without any real consideration of the facts?
Reposted by sekharn
They're not even trying to appear nonpartisan anymore.
December 4, 2025 at 11:05 PM
They're not even trying to appear nonpartisan anymore.
Reposted by sekharn
As Kagan notes, SCOTUS has given states a cheat code to enact illegally racist voting laws: just pass them close enough to an election that the Purcell principle will bar judicial review!
Under this logic, courts couldn’t block actual Jim Crow laws within a year of an election. It can’t be right.
Under this logic, courts couldn’t block actual Jim Crow laws within a year of an election. It can’t be right.
December 4, 2025 at 11:58 PM
As Kagan notes, SCOTUS has given states a cheat code to enact illegally racist voting laws: just pass them close enough to an election that the Purcell principle will bar judicial review!
Under this logic, courts couldn’t block actual Jim Crow laws within a year of an election. It can’t be right.
Under this logic, courts couldn’t block actual Jim Crow laws within a year of an election. It can’t be right.
Reposted by sekharn
Simply amazing that the Supreme Court declared an end to legal race discrimination in the affirmative action case two years ago and now allows overt racism in both immigration arrests and redistricting.
Using race to help minorities? Bad. Using it to discriminate against them? Very, very good.
Using race to help minorities? Bad. Using it to discriminate against them? Very, very good.
BREAKING: Supreme Court GRANTS Texas request to restore redistricting maps
apparent 6-3 ruling with the liberals in dissent @courthousenews.bsky.social
apparent 6-3 ruling with the liberals in dissent @courthousenews.bsky.social
December 4, 2025 at 11:52 PM
Simply amazing that the Supreme Court declared an end to legal race discrimination in the affirmative action case two years ago and now allows overt racism in both immigration arrests and redistricting.
Using race to help minorities? Bad. Using it to discriminate against them? Very, very good.
Using race to help minorities? Bad. Using it to discriminate against them? Very, very good.
Reposted by sekharn
Wow, Adm. Holsey didn't leave of his own accord, Hegseth pushed him out. What looked like the SOCOM head resigning rather than do war crimes now looks like SecDef canning him to facilitate war crimes.
Congress should have him testify, and would've already if war-crime-sympathetic GOP didn't run it.
Congress should have him testify, and would've already if war-crime-sympathetic GOP didn't run it.
Exclusive | Hegseth Asked Top Admiral to Resign After Months of Discord
The relationship between the Pentagon chief and Adm. Alvin Holsey had been rocky since Trump’s inauguration.
www.wsj.com
December 4, 2025 at 3:16 PM
Wow, Adm. Holsey didn't leave of his own accord, Hegseth pushed him out. What looked like the SOCOM head resigning rather than do war crimes now looks like SecDef canning him to facilitate war crimes.
Congress should have him testify, and would've already if war-crime-sympathetic GOP didn't run it.
Congress should have him testify, and would've already if war-crime-sympathetic GOP didn't run it.
Reposted by sekharn
“I keep thinking about Anne Frank, who was kept alive with her family by a good friend named Miep,” said the Rev. Jane Mauldin, a Unitarian minister who was one of the volunteers who raced to the North Kenner raid on the roofers … “I keep in my head saying, ‘What would Miep do?’”
I went to New Orleans to see what it looks like when a great American city comes under siege from the government, as masked goons of 'Catahoula Crunch' lie about nabbing bad guys before swarming Home Depot, roofing jobs for folks with brown skin
My special report www.inquirer.com/opinion/new-...
My special report www.inquirer.com/opinion/new-...
Life during wartime in New Orleans as feds terrorize Latinos who saved a city | Will Bunch
The first day of long-feared federal immigration raids across Greater New Orleans exposes the Big Lie of mass deportation.
www.inquirer.com
December 4, 2025 at 8:23 PM
“I keep thinking about Anne Frank, who was kept alive with her family by a good friend named Miep,” said the Rev. Jane Mauldin, a Unitarian minister who was one of the volunteers who raced to the North Kenner raid on the roofers … “I keep in my head saying, ‘What would Miep do?’”
Reposted by sekharn
At long last we have invented Gattaca, from the acclaimed 1997 movie "Wouldn't It Be Fucked Up If We Had Gattaca"
His “it’s not a eugenics company” tee is raising questions already answered by his shirt. www.cbsnews.com/news/nucleus...
![Sadeghi says this "genetic optimization" allows parents to minimize disease while maximizing traits they prefer. However, critics have drawn comparisons to a different term: "eugenics."
"[It's not eugenics] by any stretch, because it's fundamentally about empowering people with information that they can use to give their child the best start in life," he said. "And yes, if you want 2 inches taller for your child, 3 inches taller, right, if you want a couple IQ-point difference, absolutely, by all means, do that. But I'm saying, you're really asking me here, you're asking me, what is life about? That's what you're really getting at when you talk about height and IQ, right, they're abstractions of life."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:hakzua5btcgcfjye2yujlhos/bafkreifaqvbu6nccxgbeyhhxnijihbi33qd27xijof7fy4apsgbbnmbw64@jpeg)
December 4, 2025 at 6:31 PM
At long last we have invented Gattaca, from the acclaimed 1997 movie "Wouldn't It Be Fucked Up If We Had Gattaca"
Reposted by sekharn
His “it’s not a eugenics company” tee is raising questions already answered by his shirt. www.cbsnews.com/news/nucleus...
December 3, 2025 at 7:10 PM
His “it’s not a eugenics company” tee is raising questions already answered by his shirt. www.cbsnews.com/news/nucleus...
Reposted by sekharn
Yes. And lawyers in the admin, once informed of details, knew how fucking bad it was and told senior colleagues, and then the scapegoating began zeteo.com/p/trump-hegs...
December 4, 2025 at 8:00 PM
Yes. And lawyers in the admin, once informed of details, knew how fucking bad it was and told senior colleagues, and then the scapegoating began zeteo.com/p/trump-hegs...