@chi-87.bsky.social
Interested in conversations.
Not a fan of DMs unless we’ve already connected publicly.
Not a fan of DMs unless we’ve already connected publicly.
It’s about time.
Those retiring have nothing to lose. They should be speaking out about a lot more illegal and unethical behavior by this (and other) administration(s).
Those retiring have nothing to lose. They should be speaking out about a lot more illegal and unethical behavior by this (and other) administration(s).
December 7, 2025 at 1:59 PM
It’s about time.
Those retiring have nothing to lose. They should be speaking out about a lot more illegal and unethical behavior by this (and other) administration(s).
Those retiring have nothing to lose. They should be speaking out about a lot more illegal and unethical behavior by this (and other) administration(s).
Different leadership at the time.
More honorable people.
More honorable people.
December 7, 2025 at 1:55 PM
Different leadership at the time.
More honorable people.
More honorable people.
Reposted
AND per the Budapest Accords, the United States agreed to help Ukraine if Russia went back on their word.
Ukraine was honorable and gave up their nuclears.
Russia was not honorable and invaded anyway.
America isn't honorable under trump, who wants to "renegotiate" to get rare earth minerals.
Ukraine was honorable and gave up their nuclears.
Russia was not honorable and invaded anyway.
America isn't honorable under trump, who wants to "renegotiate" to get rare earth minerals.
December 1, 2025 at 1:21 PM
AND per the Budapest Accords, the United States agreed to help Ukraine if Russia went back on their word.
Ukraine was honorable and gave up their nuclears.
Russia was not honorable and invaded anyway.
America isn't honorable under trump, who wants to "renegotiate" to get rare earth minerals.
Ukraine was honorable and gave up their nuclears.
Russia was not honorable and invaded anyway.
America isn't honorable under trump, who wants to "renegotiate" to get rare earth minerals.
My response usually includes a reference to a “cunning plan.”
Everyone just nods and moves on.
Everyone just nods and moves on.
December 7, 2025 at 1:12 PM
My response usually includes a reference to a “cunning plan.”
Everyone just nods and moves on.
Everyone just nods and moves on.
We have to be able to impeach and convict.
He’s already been impeached twice. He has to be convicted and removed.
He’s already been impeached twice. He has to be convicted and removed.
December 6, 2025 at 3:43 PM
We have to be able to impeach and convict.
He’s already been impeached twice. He has to be convicted and removed.
He’s already been impeached twice. He has to be convicted and removed.
Sadly, SCOTUS ruled in 2015-ish that political gerrymandering is constitutional.
It seems very un democratic, non representational, and counter to a republic, but isn’t against the constitution.
Interestingly, only racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional.
It seems very un democratic, non representational, and counter to a republic, but isn’t against the constitution.
Interestingly, only racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional.
December 5, 2025 at 4:22 AM
Sadly, SCOTUS ruled in 2015-ish that political gerrymandering is constitutional.
It seems very un democratic, non representational, and counter to a republic, but isn’t against the constitution.
Interestingly, only racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional.
It seems very un democratic, non representational, and counter to a republic, but isn’t against the constitution.
Interestingly, only racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional.