Said something about this yesterday on BlueSky. Then proceeded to be lectured about how my complaint about Jeffries not condemning the pardon is helping the fascists to get elected. WTF? The Reps can be reprehensible *and* I still can push back on bad Dem leadership at the same time. 🤷🏻‍♂️

🎻

Can be debated whether or both they should share income wirh those who cretae the content but that’s a different conversation (as to how they would actually do that).

I’m pretty satisfied with the $0.11 or so that I give them per day I’m on their website (which is pretty much every day). I have been giving them $25/year for a while and think I bumped it up to $40 last year. Yes, they host and benefit from a lot of user-created content.

Because he’s a racist twat?

Got a copy ourselves. Love it, but it also seems rather opaque at the same time. Need to play it more, and with higher player counts too.

You assume a lot, i.e. that I think supporting the Greens would make any difference, because we’ve seen how third-parties have fucked things in recent elections. If you think that me talking about things I disagree with the Dem leadership is “sabotage”, then we really are fucked.

Every politician should be condemning this pardon. It’s cover for normalising the other pardons by this regime for corruption, bribery, fraud, etc. “Look, I don’t just pardon Republicans.” 😬 No, you pardon convicted fraudsters and bribe takers so you can keep your criming going.

Gotcha, so I’m not allowed to express my disapproval about anything anyone says. We already have one party that can’t express disapproval about anything its dear leader does. We don’t need another one where we have to support anything they say with unwavering loyalty.

I’ve tried contacting Indivisible to get on their “post card mailing” list but never got any response back. But have signed up via the link you provided and hope to get more info. I live in MD which are (mostly) reliably Democratic.

I’m just looking for @hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social to not support the corrupt use of the pardon power. How is that difficult to understand? 🤷‍♂️

Agreed. If the case was “thin” as suggested by @hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social then this should come out in the merits (or lack) of the evidence in a trial. And so should have gone to trial. No excuse that “the outcome was the right one”. The pardon is cover for other corrupt pardons.

Fundamentally I am not disagreeing with you. And we know this, so politicians (Dems in particular) should know this and act accordingly. Minimise opportunities for distortion by the media is what I’m saying. 🤷‍♂️. For the third time, if the case was “thin”, it would fail on the merits *at trial*.

Fair, but at this point politicians should know that we will typically only get sound bites. And the sound bites we get should be addressing the most salient points. If the case was “thin”, then it should be judged on those merits by a court and jury. Address the corrupt use of the pardon power.

Normalizing various types of corruption, so that the corruption of the Trump regime doesn’t look bad.

@hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social is such a disappointment. If the case was “thin”, then it would fail to reach conviction in court, yes? Jeffries should have used the opportunity to condemn the corrupt use of the pardon power. @hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social needs to be replaced!

Jess and Rob are both brilliant, witty, and insightful. And it’s fun seeing Rob getting embarrassed when they talk about some “naughty words”. 😉

I truly believe that some of them don’t mind getting screwed over, so long as the “others” (i.e. the ones not like them, typically the brown folks) get screwed over even more.