seasquirt99
LightNews LightNews
seasquirt99
@seasquirt99.bsky.social
210 followers 340 following 6 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by seasquirt99
filosia.bsky.social
Remember that Dutch guy that did a hilarious take on Trump & Hillary singing together during their debate?

Well, that guy came through again. This time unmasking Disney in all their sad ass-licking of Drumpf, the big leader.

You don't want to miss watching this one 👇🏼👌🏼😅
September 22, 2025 at 2:06 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
ohnoshetwitnt.bsky.social
If you think you’ve made poor life decisions, there is a woman who not only married Stephen Miller, she left him for Elon Musk.
May 29, 2025 at 10:12 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
nycsouthpaw.bsky.social
sitting here thinking about the effrontery required to declare yourself a duck dynasty with not even one authentic succession of duck power to a younger generation under your belt
May 26, 2025 at 2:53 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
owillis.bsky.social
Trump taps televangelist kook to run new White House 'faith' office www.dailykos.com/stories/2025...
Trump taps televangelist kook to run new White House 'faith' office
Christian nationalism is in full swing after Donald Trump’s Thursday announcement of a task force to “eradicate anti-Christian bias,” as well as a new White House Faith Office led by right-...
www.dailykos.com
February 6, 2025 at 7:39 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
rpsagainsttrump.bsky.social
Donald Trump: “We’re bringing back religion in this country.”

(Except when a bishop preaches compassion—I attack her as “the so-called bishop.”)
January 27, 2025 at 2:14 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
dominicervolina.com
I would like to report a murder

(this is deadmau5 calling out DJ 3lau for playing Trump's inauguration)
3lau deadmau5 Here's the best takeaway, not a single person in that entire dumbfuck administration has ever known who the fuck you were, cared about you, or even gives the remotest shit about you, and you certainly won't be remembered by any of em. But everyone in this business will remember that you stood behind nazis and convicted felons who would further marginalize the very people who gave you a platform. What very little respect I had for you is gone. So glad you got some drink tickets out of the deal, enjoy them, you nepo pissbaby. Reply View 32 previous replies subtronics 38m @deadmau5 i had to unblock this dude just to like this comment HAHAHHAILUFHAWEILFUHAILSED FUHADILSFUHDSF HOLY FUCK
January 25, 2025 at 1:51 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
ericcolumbus.bsky.social
“The dismissals appeared to violate federal law, which requires Congress to receive 30 days’ notice of any intent to fire the inspectors general.”
January 25, 2025 at 4:22 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
digruber.bsky.social
Some people have courage of conviction.

Other people are Mike Johnson.
January 24, 2025 at 3:33 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
adamserwer.bsky.social
Krugman says the editors at the Times editorial page were increasingly trying to water down his columns and arguments www.cjr.org/analysis/pau...
Paul Krugman on Leaving the New York Times
The paper wanted to take away his newsletter or make him write less frequently, he says.
www.cjr.org
January 24, 2025 at 3:31 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
stevevladeck.bsky.social
The same person who wrote the third paragraph also wrote the first two...

reason.com/volokh/2025/...
January 22, 2025 at 7:44 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
wendyorent.bsky.social
Isn’t it weird that I’m actually not upset by the reactionary, none-too-bright Marco Rubio’s confirmation as Secretary of State, because among the rogue’s gallery of witless fools, miscreants, and moral abominations that are the rest of Trump’s appointments, Rubio shines like a jewel?
January 23, 2025 at 8:26 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
kenwhite.bsky.social
Hegseth’s support seems to be (1) he’s the man on the teevee who praises me (Trump) (2) he’s a psycho reactionary and a test of loyalty (Trump advisors) (3) we are afraid of primaries and a few of us are psycho (Senate) and (4) ha ha own the libs (assorted media and social media dipshits).
January 25, 2025 at 2:53 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
pgourevitch.bsky.social
No foreign power has ever posed as massive and immediate a threat to the United States as the current administration.
January 25, 2025 at 3:52 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
nycsouthpaw.bsky.social
Former DC District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell’s disgusted response to DOJ’s January 6th dismissals and Trump’s EO is well worth reading. ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show...
II. DISCUSSION Courts have limited power when the federal government decides to stop prosecuting a criminal defendant. See, e.g., Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 607-08 (1985) (recognizing the government's broad prosecutorial discretion); United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 818 F.3d 733, 742 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (recognizing same prosecutorial discretion in "decisions to dismiss pending criminal charges"). At the same time, the Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit have both recognized that the "leave of court" requirement in Rule 48(a) "obviously vest[s] some discretion in the court." Rinaldi v. United States, 434 U.S. 22, 29 n.15 (1977); United States v. Ammidown, 497 F.2d 615, 620 (D.C. Cir. 1973) (noting that this rule "gives the court a role in dismissals following indictment"). This discretion is granted in part to "guard[] against abuse of prosecutorial discretion." Ammidown, 497 F.2d at 620. To ensure that the government's request for dismissal of criminal charges "sufficiently protects the public," the government may be required to submit "a statement of reasons and underlying factual basis," which must be "substantial" to justify the dismissal and not "a mere conclusory statement." Id. Here, the government's cursory motion provides no factual basis for dismissal. Instead, the single paragraph explanation included in the one-page dismissal motion cites "as the reason for this dismissal," only a presidential proclamation "dated January 20, 2025, Granting Pardons and Commutation of Sentences for Certain Offenses Relating to the Events at Or Near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021." Gov't's MTD at 1. This cited proclamation, inter alia, directs 4 the Attorney General "to pursue [the] dismissal with prejudice to the government of all pending indictments against individuals for their conduct related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021." See PROCLAMATION, (Jan. 20, 2025) (capitalization in original), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/granting-pardons-and- commutation-of-sentences-for-certain-offenses-relating-to-the-events-at-or-near-the-united- states-capitol-on-january-6-2021/. The only reason provided for this instruction, as set out in the Proclamation's introduction, is the assertion that this action "ends a grave national injustice that has been perpetrated upon the American people over the last four years and begins a process of national reconciliation." Id. No "national injustice" occurred here, just as no outcome-determinative election fraud occurred in the 2020 presidential election. No "process of national reconciliation" can begin when poor losers, whose preferred candidate loses an election, are glorified for disrupting a constitutionally mandated proceeding in Congress and doing so with impunity. That merely raises the dangerous specter of future lawless conduct by other poor losers and undermines the rule of law. Yet, this presidential pronouncement of a "national injustice" is the sole justification provided in the government's motion to dismiss the pending indictment. See Gov't's MTD. Having presided over scores of criminal cases charging defendants for their criminal conduct both outside and inside the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6, 2021, which charges were fully supported by evidence in the form of extensive videotapes and photographs, admissions by defendants in the course of plea hearings and in testimony at trials, and the testimony of law enforcement officers and congressional staff present at the Capitol on that day, this Court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement. The pr… 2021, present no injustice, but instead reflect the diligent work of conscientious public servants, including prosecutors and law enforcement officials, and dedicated defense attorneys, to defend our democracy and rights and preserve our long tradition of peaceful transfers of power-which, until January 6, 2021, served as a model to the world—all while affording those charged every protection guaranteed by our Constitution and the criminal justice system. As to these two defendants specifically, both admitted their criminal conduct under oath, after consultation with their attorneys, and pursuant to plea agreements to which they agreed. Bluntly put, the assertion offered in the presidential pronouncement for the pending motion to dismiss is flatly wrong. Still, the D.C. Circuit has cautioned that a district court judge has "no power" "to deny a prosecutor's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution's exercise of charging authority." Fokker, 818 F.3d at 742; id. at 737 ("It has long been settled that the Judiciary generally lacks authority to second-guess those Executive determinations, much less to impose its own charging preferences."). Despite finding that the sole reason relied upon by the government to dismiss the charges in this case—i.e., an incorrect assertion in the presidential proclamation-is neither substantial nor factually correct, the government's view of the public interest does not clearly fall within the types of reasons found to provide legitimate grounds to deny the government Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges. See United States v. Flynn, 507 F. Supp. 3d 116, 130-31 (D.D.C. 2020) (collecting examples where a government motion to dismiss should be denied as not serving "legitimate prosecutorial interests," because the motion "was a sham or deception," "was based on 'acceptance of a bribe, personal dislike of the victim, and dissatisfaction with the jury impaneled,'" or was meant to favor "politically well-… Nothing about the government's reasoning for dismissal warrants entry of dismissal with prejudice, however. Dismissal with prejudice is a complete adjudication of the matter and would bar any further prosecution of defendants for their offense conduct at issue. See Bd. of Trs. of the Hotel & Rest. Emps. Local 25 v. Madison Hotel, Inc., 97 F.3d 1479, 1489 n.20 (D.C. Cir. 1996); Brown v. Amtrak Corp., No. 03-7003, 2003 WL 22433755, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 27, 2023) (*A dismissal 'with prejudice' is a final judgment on the merits which bars further litigation between the same parties." (citing Madison Hotel, 97 F.3d at 1489 n.20)); Reed v. Farley, 512 U.S. 339, 368 (1994) (Blackmun, J., dissenting) ("The dismissal with prejudice of criminal charges is a remedy rarely seen in criminal law, even for constitutional violations."). This result would be improper here, particularly when defendants' own admissions of criminal conduct, including throwing smoke bombs at law enforcement officers who were trying valiantly to prevent rioters from entering the Capitol Building, provides ample basis for criminal prosecution. See also Thorp v. District of Columbia, 142 F. Supp. 3d 132, 145 (D.D.C. 2015) (noting that dismissal with prejudice "reflect[s] on the merits of the underlying action" (quoting Brown v. Carr, 503 A.2d 1241, 1245 (D.C. Cir. 1986), and citing Kenley v. District of Columbia, 83 F. Supp. 3d 20, 42 (D.D.C. 2015)). Instead, the government's reliance on a policy assertion made in the presidential proclamation that such prosecutions should not be continued warrants only "render[ing] the proceedings a nullity and leav[ing] the parties as if the action had never been brought," Magliore v. Brooks, 844 F. Supp. 2d 38, 46 (D.D.C. 2012) (quoting Thoubboron, 809 A.2d at 1210), which is achieved by granting the government's motion to dismiss without prejudice, see id.
January 22, 2025 at 7:08 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
kenwhite.bsky.social
A Bishop Called For Mercy And A Congressman Called For Her To Be Deported. Here’s Why Criticism Of The Congressman Is Bad For Free Speech And Civil Society. Today in WaPo by Megan McArdle
January 22, 2025 at 3:40 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
If ever you need someone to talk to, I’m here. Unfortunately, you're there.
December 21, 2024 at 11:30 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
BlueSky is a sanctuary platform. As long as you're here, you can't be deported to X.
January 2, 2025 at 7:30 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
As horrific as the fires in LA are, there's something else that's orange that's far more destructive.
January 9, 2025 at 3:08 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
We all know prayers are useless, but don't overlook the fact that thoughts are also useless.
January 9, 2025 at 12:52 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
You're a climate refugee in the making.
January 8, 2025 at 4:41 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
What will you miss most about Western civilization? Answer below.
January 11, 2025 at 7:28 AM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
Today's the day for you to get any last-minute democracy in.
January 19, 2025 at 5:34 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
madmanmundt.bsky.social
January 20, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Reposted by seasquirt99
skeetofgod.bsky.social
It begins.
January 20, 2025 at 5:00 PM