Eliot
LightNews LightNews
banner
relliott.bsky.social
Eliot
@relliott.bsky.social
62 followers 49 following 61 posts
Lawyer. USMC Veteran. Fan of: Dogs/Justice/Equality/Law/Reds/Purdue/Colts/Pacers/FC|Cincinnati
Posts Replies Media Videos
relliott.bsky.social
What the fuck
November 16, 2025 at 10:52 PM
relliott.bsky.social
What a name for an ICEhole in 2025.
November 8, 2025 at 8:23 PM
relliott.bsky.social
Hey Fat Sally: fuck you
October 12, 2025 at 8:53 PM
relliott.bsky.social
I mean Purdue had just recovered a fumble at the ND 20 so I’m not sure how stoked Odom would be.
September 20, 2025 at 9:48 PM
relliott.bsky.social
👀👀
September 10, 2025 at 9:19 PM
Reposted by Eliot
moiradonegan.bsky.social
www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
Without proof, and without much plausibility, Ábrego has been alleged by the Trump administration to be the author of various crimes and malfeasances. They admit that deporting him was a mistake, but also want us to believe that he is the sort of person who should be deported – a human trafficker, in one fantasy; a gang leader, in another. That there is no proof for these allegations is beside the point: the point is that the Trump administration is claiming authority over reality itself, claiming the ability to decide what is true and what is false, and to reclassify every migrant – and in particular every Latino male – as a criminally dangerous threat that must be eliminated. Ábrego, then, must be guilty because the Trump administration arrested him, and because they can do no wrong. He must be guilty because he is a migrant, and innocence and immigration are mutually exclusive. He must be guilty, too, because his case made them do something that they did not want to do: admit a mistake, face public pressure, reverse an action, and – worst of all – show weakness. And he must be guilty because he has become a symbol of all the immigrants they plan to deport, all the Americans whose rights they plan to trample on, all the past and future victims of their program.
August 26, 2025 at 2:03 PM
relliott.bsky.social
a group of men are sitting around a table in a conference room .
ALT: a group of men are sitting around a table in a conference room .
media.tenor.com
August 22, 2025 at 12:52 AM
relliott.bsky.social
What possible problem can you have with this?
August 22, 2025 at 12:51 AM
Reposted by Eliot
annabower.bsky.social
“What is your basis for saying she puts roast beef in her pockets and in her pants?”

I don’t even know where to begin.

You just have to read these two pages.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Case 5:24-cv-00625-JSM-PRL Document 100 Q Exhibit 30 -- A She was upset. She was jealous. Exhibit 30 is your response to her; can you read that out loud to me? "Hey, Marjorie. Remember when you destroyed your family so you could have sex with a Zangief cosplayer? Tell me again how you and the Arby's in 2000 0337 your pants" -- yeah. That was widely reported. I 2 3 mean, that's why she got divorced. And that divorce records -- Q No. No. Read the tweet. A "Are representatives of the GOP. You couldn't even run your own family. Don't tell me how to run my free speech." 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 0338 Okay. So when you -- A But you're not showing the -- the screenshot. It's like intentionally blurred out. I don't know why you blurred it out. But it showed a document where somebody who she had an affair with showed text messages of her having an affair, and it was well-documented. It was in text messages. And it's the reason why she ended up getting divorced from her husband, Perry, who I know. 'Cause when -- at the time, during my campaign, they were married, and they came to my event. And it's well-known. And she's even admitted to it that they got divorced because of her marital infidelity. So -- • Right. Can you explain to me what it means -- Filed 07/31/25 Page 152 of 228 PagelD A But I don't understand why you blurred it out. It's blurred out. 3 4 Q Can you explain -- MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy. BY MS. BOLGER: Q Can you explain to me what it means to say 7 to her that "the Arby's in her pants"? A Well, Arby's -- 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 0339 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy. BY MS. BOLGER: Q Answer the question. A Arby's sells roast beef. Q Right. Can you tell me what -- why you were talking about "the Arby's in her pants"? Well, it's just a -- an expression. Q What is the expression trying to convey? It conveys the reason why she got a divorce by her own admission. Q Because she had roast beef in her pants? … 1| case 5.24-Cv-Os inGeM-PRL Document 2001 saying she put Arby's in her pants? 2 A I'm saying she literally -- it's so 3 ridiculous. I'm saying she literally put Arby's in 4 her pants. Yes. MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy. BY MS. BOLGER: Q You're not making a slur about her? 8 A No. 9 You're literally saying she put an Arby's 101 sandwich in her pants; is that right? 11 A Yes. That's correct. That's correct. 12 Why are you laughing? 13 Because I just think it's so funny. 14 Q What is your basis for saying she put Arby's 15 in her pants? 16 A I just think it's so funny. I just think 17 it's so funny. 18 Q What is your basis for saying she put Arby's 19 in her pants? 20 A She carries roast beef in her pockets. 21 What is your basis for saying she puts roast 22 beef in her pockets and in her pants? 0340 1 2 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy. Harassment. 3 THE WITNESS: Because I know she likes 4 roast beef. 5 BY MS. BOLGER: 6 Q So what is your basis for saying she had 7 Arby's in her pants? 8 A Because I know she likes to eat at Arby's. 9 Q And she likes to put it in her pants; you 10 know that? 11 Yeah. 12 She puts Arby's in her pants? 13 Yeah. She does. 14 Q 15 Okay. If I ask Marjorie Taylor Greene, she would tell you that she puts Arby's in her pants? 16 A I -- it's my best belief that she would tell 17 you that. Yes. 18 Q Okay. Are you making a derogatory comment 19 about her sex life by talking about Arby's in her 20 pants? 21 22 A No. I'm talking about Arby's, the sandwiches. I'm talking about Arby's. I would -- I'm 0341 3 8 a very direct person. If I was making a derogatory comment, I would have said it. I just think it's so funny because I -- I feel like you would understand it if you actually hadn't blurred the photo, but it's blurred. Q We didn't blur a photo. There may be have been some kind of copy editor, but we'll get you a better copy of it, if that's right. Filed 07/31/25 Page 153 of 228 PagelD
August 12, 2025 at 11:59 PM
relliott.bsky.social
Absolute joke of a league.
July 24, 2025 at 12:22 PM
relliott.bsky.social
July 17, 2025 at 1:29 PM
relliott.bsky.social
LMAO cmon! Not the Atlantic, not today! 😭
June 8, 2025 at 11:57 PM
relliott.bsky.social
Mike Johnson is a little bitch. I know it, you know it, Mike knows it. Many of his relatives are saying he’s been a little bitch since he learned to walk, at the latest.
June 8, 2025 at 11:45 PM
relliott.bsky.social
You mean the person quoting Shaq? You think Shaq doesn’t know?
June 8, 2025 at 11:40 PM
relliott.bsky.social
Riley Gaines is a man.
June 8, 2025 at 4:00 PM
relliott.bsky.social
That guy fucking rules.
June 8, 2025 at 3:59 PM