"Captain" "Ruck" "Cohlchez"
@captainruck.bsky.social
Ne, ne travaillez jamais
No, never work, that's what they say
Mais ne, ne, ne, nous n'arretons pas
No, don't let's stop until it's done
https://www.mediamagpies.com/author-archive/?i=30&uname=Captain+Nath
No, never work, that's what they say
Mais ne, ne, ne, nous n'arretons pas
No, don't let's stop until it's done
https://www.mediamagpies.com/author-archive/?i=30&uname=Captain+Nath
Rockets-Nuggets always pulls me in two a little
November 22, 2025 at 3:47 AM
Rockets-Nuggets always pulls me in two a little
run along, you little troll.
November 21, 2025 at 2:47 AM
run along, you little troll.
Clickbait has gotten out of hand
November 18, 2025 at 10:39 PM
Clickbait has gotten out of hand
"Sure, I supported your doxing, but I made shit up and put words in your mouth, which makes me the real victim here."
November 18, 2025 at 10:09 PM
"Sure, I supported your doxing, but I made shit up and put words in your mouth, which makes me the real victim here."
apparently it's just one specific one, since this one worked just fine. (GIF has no relevance except that I was using it to test this out, but who doesn't love remembering Arrested Development)
November 18, 2025 at 10:43 AM
apparently it's just one specific one, since this one worked just fine. (GIF has no relevance except that I was using it to test this out, but who doesn't love remembering Arrested Development)
from the 2020 campaign. also love how he thinks his supporters are all gross hogs who take huge disgusting dumps
November 18, 2025 at 12:33 AM
from the 2020 campaign. also love how he thinks his supporters are all gross hogs who take huge disgusting dumps
Hey Stan, just wondering what best journalistic practices would lead the Times to cover the Epstein emails in this fashion.
November 16, 2025 at 1:24 PM
Hey Stan, just wondering what best journalistic practices would lead the Times to cover the Epstein emails in this fashion.
Is it mansplaining to think this is a morally obscene way to cover the Epstein emails
November 16, 2025 at 1:23 PM
Is it mansplaining to think this is a morally obscene way to cover the Epstein emails
Since you understand the completely good-faith practices of the Times better than I do, maybe you can explain why their angle on the world's most notorious child sex trafficker's emails to his powerful clients is "wistful."
November 16, 2025 at 1:23 PM
Since you understand the completely good-faith practices of the Times better than I do, maybe you can explain why their angle on the world's most notorious child sex trafficker's emails to his powerful clients is "wistful."
Another killer headline from the Times, as always focused on what's important: nostalgia brought about by the emails of the world's most notorious child sex trafficker to his clients.
November 16, 2025 at 1:21 PM
Another killer headline from the Times, as always focused on what's important: nostalgia brought about by the emails of the world's most notorious child sex trafficker to his clients.
hey, here's what the NYT is doing today! are they correcting this "mistake," which would be easy to do if it was a mistake? nope! they're running a puff piece on a fake journalist with no ethics who sleeps with her sources and has never broken anything.
November 15, 2025 at 3:19 AM
hey, here's what the NYT is doing today! are they correcting this "mistake," which would be easy to do if it was a mistake? nope! they're running a puff piece on a fake journalist with no ethics who sleeps with her sources and has never broken anything.
as if we needed more evidence of that, here's what the NYT is doing today! a puff piece on a "reporter" who is the embodiment of ignoring ethics for access and has never broken anything relevant unless you consider gossip she heard from people she's fucking or trying to fuck relevant.
November 15, 2025 at 3:17 AM
as if we needed more evidence of that, here's what the NYT is doing today! a puff piece on a "reporter" who is the embodiment of ignoring ethics for access and has never broken anything relevant unless you consider gossip she heard from people she's fucking or trying to fuck relevant.
I don't think "mansplaining" hits the way you want it to when you're defending the practices of a newspaper that published both of these in the last three weeks.
November 14, 2025 at 3:03 PM
I don't think "mansplaining" hits the way you want it to when you're defending the practices of a newspaper that published both of these in the last three weeks.
"We also had to cover for a genocide and run this warm profile of a right-wing troll who watermarked and shared CSAM on social media. Don't worry, we still found time to smear a scary brown man, because we are fascist sympathizers who fundamentally like Trump and want him to succeed."
November 14, 2025 at 12:50 AM
"We also had to cover for a genocide and run this warm profile of a right-wing troll who watermarked and shared CSAM on social media. Don't worry, we still found time to smear a scary brown man, because we are fascist sympathizers who fundamentally like Trump and want him to succeed."
"We simply couldn't cover this story in the last decade. We had to run 20 stories a day about Hillary's emails, 4 stories a day about The Trans Menace, whatever racist mess Chris Rufo wanted us to push, our neo-Nazi friend's smear job on Mamdani, Bari Weiss and Ross Douthat, and profiles like these"
November 14, 2025 at 12:44 AM
"We simply couldn't cover this story in the last decade. We had to run 20 stories a day about Hillary's emails, 4 stories a day about The Trans Menace, whatever racist mess Chris Rufo wanted us to push, our neo-Nazi friend's smear job on Mamdani, Bari Weiss and Ross Douthat, and profiles like these"
I mean, any time any of his associates are asked for even one example of his scientific genius, they can't come up with anything.
November 12, 2025 at 9:46 PM
I mean, any time any of his associates are asked for even one example of his scientific genius, they can't come up with anything.
