@olivertheinternet.bsky.social
Lmaooooooo what else needs to be said?
Failed mayoral candidate Ja'mal Green is once again claiming on social media that @thetriibe.com's story on how Paul Vallas’s campaign paid him is untrue. I edited that story; @tonia.thetriibe.com reported it.
So once again: here are the receipts. bit.ly/JaymalPaid
So once again: here are the receipts. bit.ly/JaymalPaid
December 5, 2025 at 8:38 PM
Lmaooooooo what else needs to be said?
I haven’t seen any emails yet that are from or to trump. Sooooo I assume that means someone has scrubbed them from this batch.
November 13, 2025 at 12:44 PM
I haven’t seen any emails yet that are from or to trump. Sooooo I assume that means someone has scrubbed them from this batch.
“Please sir may I have another”
-CPD officers being tear-gassed by ICE
-CPD officers being tear-gassed by ICE
October 14, 2025 at 6:35 PM
“Please sir may I have another”
-CPD officers being tear-gassed by ICE
-CPD officers being tear-gassed by ICE
If @mayorofchicago.bsky.social was serious about good politics, he’d eminent domain trump tower.
October 6, 2025 at 6:23 PM
If @mayorofchicago.bsky.social was serious about good politics, he’d eminent domain trump tower.
Other people dunking on the DOJ lawyer here, but this is an example of the norms-based control that courts/judges offer. The judge can’t force a lawyer or person to do anything, and the DOJ gets that. Undermining the norm has consequences, but the DOJ understands that power usually beats norms.
DOJ: CA NG is already federalized
Judge: You are an officer of the court. Do you think this is an appropriate way to deal with my order? Appropriate way of dealing with ruling you disagree with?
DOJ: Well, I'm not a policy maker
Judge: You're a lawyer
Judge: You are an officer of the court. Do you think this is an appropriate way to deal with my order? Appropriate way of dealing with ruling you disagree with?
DOJ: Well, I'm not a policy maker
Judge: You're a lawyer
October 6, 2025 at 2:00 PM
Other people dunking on the DOJ lawyer here, but this is an example of the norms-based control that courts/judges offer. The judge can’t force a lawyer or person to do anything, and the DOJ gets that. Undermining the norm has consequences, but the DOJ understands that power usually beats norms.
Reposted
So frustrating to see people praising this judge. This is exactly what cops and prosecutors do, except they don’t say “my bad.” When this happens, you can sue for monetary compensation, essentially nothing more, and the actual prosecutors and cops (functionally) have zero liability or consequence
Jeanine Pirro seems to have pissed off this judge
"We don't just charge people criminally and then say, 'Oops, my bad,'" [Judge Faruqui] said. "I'm at a loss how the U.S. Attorney's Office thought this was an appropriate charge in any court, let alone the federal court."
www.npr.org/2025/08/26/g...
"We don't just charge people criminally and then say, 'Oops, my bad,'" [Judge Faruqui] said. "I'm at a loss how the U.S. Attorney's Office thought this was an appropriate charge in any court, let alone the federal court."
www.npr.org/2025/08/26/g...
'The most illegal search': Judges push back against D.C. criminal charges
Inside the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C., on Monday, tensions over the potential for federal overreach broke into open court.
www.npr.org
August 26, 2025 at 8:06 PM
So frustrating to see people praising this judge. This is exactly what cops and prosecutors do, except they don’t say “my bad.” When this happens, you can sue for monetary compensation, essentially nothing more, and the actual prosecutors and cops (functionally) have zero liability or consequence
Is anyone talking about, in relation to AI, deep blue? Like, when the computer beat Kasparov in chess, someone said, it wasn’t the computer who beat him, it was a thousand engineers putting years of work in, and that’s what it took to beat Kasparov.
August 10, 2025 at 3:35 AM
Is anyone talking about, in relation to AI, deep blue? Like, when the computer beat Kasparov in chess, someone said, it wasn’t the computer who beat him, it was a thousand engineers putting years of work in, and that’s what it took to beat Kasparov.
This headline is correct that laws are not real beyond the paper they are written on. The paper is given power by people, but the law has no inherent power in itself. The law is not real and it cannot save anyone. People exercising power enact policies.
"To cover the Supreme Court these days is to catalogue its lawlessness." newrepublic.com/article/1980...
The Supreme Court Says Laws Aren’t Real
The Roberts court majority seems bound and determined to undermine the American constitutional order.
newrepublic.com
July 18, 2025 at 4:59 PM
This headline is correct that laws are not real beyond the paper they are written on. The paper is given power by people, but the law has no inherent power in itself. The law is not real and it cannot save anyone. People exercising power enact policies.
Wtf does it mean “Will the Supreme Court force compliance?” That’s not a real thing…. A court order is a piece of paper. The notion that it “forces” anyone to do anything is false. It is correct that “force” is the ultimate question here, so consider who does have the ability to “force” things.
I watched large portions of this segment and at one point @mattyglesias.bsky.social threw up this slide, said Dems are "making bad press on this issue" and moved on.
But the polling is wildly on Dem's side on this one! Opponents of what the Trump admin is doing with him outnumber supporters 2-1!
But the polling is wildly on Dem's side on this one! Opponents of what the Trump admin is doing with him outnumber supporters 2-1!
June 5, 2025 at 1:40 PM
Wtf does it mean “Will the Supreme Court force compliance?” That’s not a real thing…. A court order is a piece of paper. The notion that it “forces” anyone to do anything is false. It is correct that “force” is the ultimate question here, so consider who does have the ability to “force” things.
I predict Amazon takes the tariff line off in a day or two, and the whole thing was planned so that trump can get good press for driving them off of it.
April 29, 2025 at 2:31 PM
I predict Amazon takes the tariff line off in a day or two, and the whole thing was planned so that trump can get good press for driving them off of it.
I get that US citizens are afraid that the government might treat them like immigrants, but there’s so little power in focusing on the fascists’ future actions and almost ceding their current ones. If you want to protect yourself, fight like hell for immigrants, even ones with criminal records.
April 21, 2025 at 12:00 PM
I get that US citizens are afraid that the government might treat them like immigrants, but there’s so little power in focusing on the fascists’ future actions and almost ceding their current ones. If you want to protect yourself, fight like hell for immigrants, even ones with criminal records.
I’m trying to find a way to properly express the appropriate level of cynicism about everyone’s focus on “due process.” Like, when you’re talking about procedural due process, you’re just talking about wanting more laws, or wanting for people to follow the laws.
April 17, 2025 at 5:25 PM
I’m trying to find a way to properly express the appropriate level of cynicism about everyone’s focus on “due process.” Like, when you’re talking about procedural due process, you’re just talking about wanting more laws, or wanting for people to follow the laws.
The Abrego Garcia case is probably the worst possible set of facts for the government to litigate the constitutional/legal issue. They admitted themselves that factually they had no legal right to send him to El Salvador.
April 16, 2025 at 11:46 AM
The Abrego Garcia case is probably the worst possible set of facts for the government to litigate the constitutional/legal issue. They admitted themselves that factually they had no legal right to send him to El Salvador.
True, and also I’m sorry to say that the law is just a piece of paper and does not actually exist. It is a tool that people with power can choose to either use or not use, but it doesn’t have any power itself beyond what people are willing to give it.
Republicans have controlled the Supreme Court since before I’ve was born and conservatives have generally dominated the judiciary since Reagan, yet the “liberal” legal academy has been corrupting the judiciary the entire time? Delusional stuff.
They’re just mad that law exists at all.
They’re just mad that law exists at all.
April 2, 2025 at 12:01 PM
True, and also I’m sorry to say that the law is just a piece of paper and does not actually exist. It is a tool that people with power can choose to either use or not use, but it doesn’t have any power itself beyond what people are willing to give it.
Reposted
Now there is a speaker from a Somerville ICE watch network talking about how they have been organizing the community to know their rights, report federal agents at the following number:
617 370 5023
@luce_mass on IG
617 370 5023
@luce_mass on IG
March 26, 2025 at 9:48 PM
Now there is a speaker from a Somerville ICE watch network talking about how they have been organizing the community to know their rights, report federal agents at the following number:
617 370 5023
@luce_mass on IG
617 370 5023
@luce_mass on IG
This is the exact right take
March 26, 2025 at 11:51 PM
This is the exact right take
My theory about the big law firms yielding to the fascists is that they are themselves fascists. I mean, they’re rich as shit, all of their clients are giant corporations, what’s the confusion here?
March 26, 2025 at 11:41 PM
My theory about the big law firms yielding to the fascists is that they are themselves fascists. I mean, they’re rich as shit, all of their clients are giant corporations, what’s the confusion here?
Also, this fucking complicity from democrats is exactly why it wouldn’t have mattered if Kamala Harris had won this election. Democrats have had zero interest in stopping the rise of fascism and would have been actively complicit in helping it rise for these 4 years anyway.
March 15, 2025 at 3:41 PM
Also, this fucking complicity from democrats is exactly why it wouldn’t have mattered if Kamala Harris had won this election. Democrats have had zero interest in stopping the rise of fascism and would have been actively complicit in helping it rise for these 4 years anyway.
The fascists are literally like “ok the poem refers to coming for socialists, trade unionists and Jews, so we won’t come for them right away; we’ll come for immigrants and trans and disabled people first and the libs will never see it coming” and they are fucking right.
March 15, 2025 at 3:33 PM
The fascists are literally like “ok the poem refers to coming for socialists, trade unionists and Jews, so we won’t come for them right away; we’ll come for immigrants and trans and disabled people first and the libs will never see it coming” and they are fucking right.
I can’t stop thinking about Scott v. Sandford these days. In 1854 the US Supreme Court literally ruled that the founding fathers of this country were white supremacists, so much so that they didn’t intend for Black or Indigenous people to have any rights whatsoever.
January 30, 2025 at 2:23 PM
I can’t stop thinking about Scott v. Sandford these days. In 1854 the US Supreme Court literally ruled that the founding fathers of this country were white supremacists, so much so that they didn’t intend for Black or Indigenous people to have any rights whatsoever.