RP
@george73.bsky.social
Mark: The Texas Appeals Court decision was based on what remains of the VRA. But there’s a question on what SCOTUS may do with the remnants of the VRA. How do you think this may play out at SCOTUS ?
November 19, 2025 at 2:51 PM
Mark: The Texas Appeals Court decision was based on what remains of the VRA. But there’s a question on what SCOTUS may do with the remnants of the VRA. How do you think this may play out at SCOTUS ?
His name is “Blue” as well.
November 18, 2025 at 2:03 PM
His name is “Blue” as well.
The list has been released
November 17, 2025 at 2:58 AM
The list has been released
You’re not helping your case by citing fictional characters. You really need to stick to reality and stop indirectly helping out the fascist orange felon.
November 16, 2025 at 12:41 AM
You’re not helping your case by citing fictional characters. You really need to stick to reality and stop indirectly helping out the fascist orange felon.
Your attempts to equate today’s GOP with the Democratic Party constitute a massive equivalency, and it raises the question of who got to you recently.
November 15, 2025 at 10:36 PM
Your attempts to equate today’s GOP with the Democratic Party constitute a massive equivalency, and it raises the question of who got to you recently.
“Anonymous”, not the real one by the way, is now desperately attempting to split the anti-Trump movement with events that are 12 years old in an effort to normalize Trump. Has someone paid you off ?
November 15, 2025 at 7:44 PM
“Anonymous”, not the real one by the way, is now desperately attempting to split the anti-Trump movement with events that are 12 years old in an effort to normalize Trump. Has someone paid you off ?
Obama was still infinitely better than the current felon in office, seems that for whatever reason, your aim is to split the anti-Trump movement.
November 15, 2025 at 7:38 PM
Obama was still infinitely better than the current felon in office, seems that for whatever reason, your aim is to split the anti-Trump movement.
But even for what are deemed to be “official” acts, meaning he can’t be charged criminally, he can still be sued civilly by affected parties and individuals.
November 15, 2025 at 3:04 PM
But even for what are deemed to be “official” acts, meaning he can’t be charged criminally, he can still be sued civilly by affected parties and individuals.
No, I agree that those acts, as heinous as they are, would unfortunately be considered “official”. What I’m saying is that Trump has engaged in other corrupt acts which are clearly non-official and personal, and he could be punished for those after democrats win in 2028.
November 15, 2025 at 3:02 PM
No, I agree that those acts, as heinous as they are, would unfortunately be considered “official”. What I’m saying is that Trump has engaged in other corrupt acts which are clearly non-official and personal, and he could be punished for those after democrats win in 2028.
Yes, for what are deemed to be “official” acts.
November 15, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Yes, for what are deemed to be “official” acts.
The felon does not have blanket immunity from SCOTUS, it’s only for official acts, not from personal, non-official acts. And it only protects him criminally, not civilly.
November 15, 2025 at 2:39 PM
The felon does not have blanket immunity from SCOTUS, it’s only for official acts, not from personal, non-official acts. And it only protects him criminally, not civilly.
Nah, you’re “both-siding” things, what Obama may have done pales in comparison to the absolute corruption and fascist policies of Trump and his sycophants. You’re engaging in massive false equivalencies.
November 15, 2025 at 2:07 AM
Nah, you’re “both-siding” things, what Obama may have done pales in comparison to the absolute corruption and fascist policies of Trump and his sycophants. You’re engaging in massive false equivalencies.
It’s already amazing that the Cape Verde Islands team qualified.
November 13, 2025 at 10:11 PM
It’s already amazing that the Cape Verde Islands team qualified.