Andrew Parker
@andrewparker.bsky.social
4.3K followers 150 following 11K posts
Formerly of the birdsite as Apark2453, but staking my claim to the full name! Lawyer, overanalyzer of godawful subcultures, always up to dunk on some chuds. If you’re into all of that too… I’m sorry, but welcome friend!
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
andrewparker.bsky.social
This could just be incredibly incompetent.

But given that so the worst that Trump admin lawyers have gotten for lying to courts is a tut-tutting I’m fully willing to believe the author is competent enough to know why this is bullshit and just doesn’t fear consequences.
annabower.bsky.social
Indictment alleges that James claimed the property as a 2nd home but used it as a rental investment property.

It says she rented the property out but conveniently doesn’t specify the timeframe or duration.

That’s notable bc you can rent out a 2nd home and the rider allows short-term rentals.

1/
On or about August 17, 2020, JAMES, as sole borrower, purchased the three (3) bedroom,
(1) bathroom property located at 3121 Peronne Avenue, Norfolk, Virginia 23509 (the
"Peronne Property"), for approximately $137,000, financed with a mortgage loan of approximately $109,600 (Loan #4430025978) backed by Fannie Mae.
6. The loan was originated by OVM Financial under a signed Second Home Rider, which required JAMES, as the sole borrower to occupy and use the property as her secondary residence, and prohibited its use as a timesharing or other shared ownership arrangement or agreement that requires her either to rent the property or give any other person any control over the occupancy or use of the property.
7. Despite these representations, the Peronne Property was not occupied or used by JAMES as a secondary residence and was instead used as a rental investment property, renting the property to a family of (3).
8. This misrepresentation allowed JAMES to obtain favorable loan terms not available for In addition to the covenants and agreements made in the security Instrument Borrower and Lender further covenant and agree that Sections 6 and 8 of the Security Instrument are deleted and are replaced by the following:
6. Occupancy, Borrower will occupy and use the Property as Borrower's second home. Borrower will maintain exclusive control over the occupancy of the Property, including short-term rentals, and will not subject the Property to any timesharing or other shared ownership arrangement or to any rental pool or agreement that requires Borrower either to rent the Property or give a management firm or any other person or entity any control over the occupancy or use of the Property. Borrower will keep the Property available primarily as a residence for Borrower's personal use and enjoyment for at least one year after the date of this Second Home Rider, unless Lender otherwise agrees in writing, which consent shall not be unreasonably with-held, or unless extenuating circumstances exist which are beyond Borrower's control.
8. Borrower's Loan Application. Borrower shall be in default it, during the Loan application process, Borrower or any persons or entities acting at the direction of Borrower or with Borrower's knowledge or consent gave materally false, mislead-ing, or inaccurate information or statements to Lender (or failed to provide Lender with material information) in connection with the Loan. Material representations include, but are not limited to, representations concerning Borrower's occupancy of the Property as Borrower's second home.
BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants
contained in this Second Home Rider.
andrewparker.bsky.social
“Nonono, those other divisive primaries were necessary because I didn’t like the frontrunner.”
convolutedname.bsky.social
I saw this 15 mins ago and I am still laughing
andrewparker.bsky.social
And if there’s anyone who knows about forging peace in the Middle East and deserving awards for it, it’s a former W. speechwriter.
johnsipher.bsky.social
Time to truly cancel your WaPo subscription (even though they still have some great reporters).

“Not only does Donald Trump deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, but there has arguably never been an American president who deserved it more.”

I just can’t.

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/202...
Opinion | Yes, Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize
His Gaza agreement, though still fragile, adds to an unprecedented peacemaking record.
www.washingtonpost.com
andrewparker.bsky.social
No, Bobby, it’s the fore*brain* that controls displaying and interpreting emotion.
justinbaragona.bsky.social
Besides linking Tylenol in pregnant women to autism, RFK Jr. now says circumcision is part of the reason why kids are autistic.

"Children who are circumcised early have double the rate of autism, and it's highly likely because they're given Tylenol. None of this is positive..."
andrewparker.bsky.social
To be fair to Hegseth’s racist bona fides, “geographic quotas” have long been one way racists try to dismantle affirmative action in the guise of diversity.
thetnholler.bsky.social
Wow — Harvard Crimson student newspaper busts Hegseth for having written a long policy brief touting diversity before he joined Trump’s war on DEI.

With receipts. Bravo, Crimson.
www.thecrimson.com/article/2025...
andrewparker.bsky.social
Does it count as a “fetish” when it’s something as broadly applicable as “being into fit members of the sex someone’s attracted to doing athletic things”?
andrewparker.bsky.social
She’s advocating the “value” of getting beaten (possibly to death) to provide “clarity”, which she clearly thinks is shown by the film.

That’s not the same thing as “I think it’s a good biopic you should watch”
andrewparker.bsky.social
A few days ago Newsom replied to a question about how the LGBTQ community felt abandoned by him agreeing with a bigot about them.

He replied “I'm sorry that people felt that way, I really do."

A good reminder that “I’m sorry I did that” is very different from “I’m sorry you felt bad about it”
lgbtqnation.com
Gavin Newsom vetoes gender education bill, declines to sign other trans protections - buff.ly/MTUAV85
andrewparker.bsky.social
And the part of the community guidelines in effect from May 2024 until (if I’m not mistaken) literally right now which gives instructions for providing off-platform evidence was… what?

Please straightforwardly explain why they gave instructions for submitting evidence they “don’t act on”
andrewparker.bsky.social
People ask why you *stopped* acting on off-platform evidence. Your guidelines explicitly included provisions for providing off-platform evidence.

For the vast majority of the time the bigot has been on the platform your guidelines said the opposite of “we don’t act on off-platform evidence”
aaron.bsky.team
People often ask why we don’t act on off-platform evidence when investigating reports. Here’s an example of how complex that can get. 1/9
andrewparker.bsky.social
Even if there were that direct a connection between “nonviolent protest suppressed with extreme violence” and success, if you’re not offering to get beaten to death to “make the brutality to plain as day”, you don’t get to demand that sacrifice the name of “clarify” from people in the streets.
asharangappa.bsky.social
We’re in a moment now where it would be worth people taking three hours to watch Gandhi, particularly the scene of the salt march. There is value to making the brutality of your opponent so plain as day that no one can argue with it. The clarity of that brought down an empire
andrewparker.bsky.social
“Don’t give them an excuse” is particularly useless advice in a media environment where they can simply make up an excuse and not worry much about whether it’s true.
mskellymhayes.bsky.social
Y'all who keep lecturing protesters to "not give them an excuse" need to pause for a minute. Imagine yourself telling a DV victim, "Be sure not to mouth off or make any mistakes so he won't hit you. Don't give him an excuse! It's what he wants!" That's what you fools sound like.
andrewparker.bsky.social
Christian eschatology is absolutely a threat to Jews.

A Jewish person describing it accurately is not a threat.

Suspending an account for weeks-old posts because the CEO got mad at her for having the gall to criticize the CEO is Elon-level bullshit.
erinbiba.bsky.social
Amanda shared already but here’s the post they suspended me for. It’s ~ two weeks old. And let’s be very clear: we don’t actually know why this happened. Was it a reporting brigade? A weird delayed automated mod AI action? The timing is definitely suspicious I can’t lie.
"All the Jews have to die or convert to trigger the rapture. Then our dead bodies surround Jerusalem and they climb over us to reach Jesus, who will bring them to heaven. It's why they're all Zionists obsessed with Israel.
Cause they need Jews to go there so we can die"
This post violates our Community Guidelines regarding violent or threatening speech. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Threats of violence or physical harm: This includes threats or encouragement of violence against individuals, groups, institutions, or the general public.
• Incitement of self-harm or suicide: Content that encourages self-harm or suicide.
• Wishes of harm: Expressions of a desire for harm directed at a specific person or group.
In addition, users may not use
Bluesky
I TO
break the law or cause harm to others. All users must be treated with respect.
As a result of these violations, your post has been taken down, and your account has been suspended for 24 hours.
andrewparker.bsky.social
You’d think dudes at the *zenith* of masculinity would be able to take responsibility for their mistakes rather than childishly deflect that they didn’t mean to.
rollingstone.com
“I voted for none of this."

Prominent influencers, including Theo Von, Joe Rogan, and Andrew Schulz, are starting to distance themselves from the president they helped propel to the White House.

Story: www.rollingstone.com/politics/pol...
andrewparker.bsky.social
That wouldn’t surprise me. If there’s one thing the mods have shown it’s that accuracy of a characterization doesn’t matter much.
andrewparker.bsky.social
I don’t even like Link, I’m pretty sure he called me a dogfucker because I didn’t agree any religion gets to control what gets sent to the moon.

But it’s two-faced to accept actual bigotry on the site then permaban for bad taste jokes and hypersensitivity to the euphemism “negative consequence”.
andrewparker.bsky.social
Fascinating to see that someone can be banned from this site for “promoting hateful content” while the CEO argues that ackshually banning notorious transphobic bigots would be wrong because of free speech.

I wonder the difference might be.
aliafonzy.blacksky.app
Unfortunate update: Link reached out to BlueSky and got email back now on reason.

His appeal is denied. He will remain permanently banned on BlueSky’s side.

Here are the screenshots he just sent me as of 8:22 AM EST(my time)
andrewparker.bsky.social
It’s wild that it doesn’t occur to him that the same people against soldiers called up by Trump to go armed into our cities were *also* against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
sharonk.bsky.social
area dort unaware of the fact that the founders didn't *want* soldiers in the streets
I never thought I’d live to see the day when some Americans would recoil at the sight of Soldiers guarding them.

All seemed to be well when the National Guard was in bareknuckle brawls during GWOT though.

Do you know how weird it was for us on active duty seeing them there? With us? Fighting?

I always wondered how we got to that point. Where the Guard of a state was fighting off ambushes in some foreign land.

Now they get to guard their own neighbors. Their own countrymen.

But those same Americans would shed a tear seeing those Guardsmen come home in caskets from a war nobody cared about.

Further proof that for some Americans and the media, they only love Soldiers when they’re dead.
andrewparker.bsky.social
Fascinating to see that someone can be banned from this site for “promoting hateful content” while the CEO argues that ackshually banning notorious transphobic bigots would be wrong because of free speech.

I wonder the difference might be.
aliafonzy.blacksky.app
Unfortunate update: Link reached out to BlueSky and got email back now on reason.

His appeal is denied. He will remain permanently banned on BlueSky’s side.

Here are the screenshots he just sent me as of 8:22 AM EST(my time)
A screenshot of an email from the Bluesky Moderation Team with the subject line “Bluesky Account Behavior” sent at 22:15. The email states that a Bluesky account controlled by the recipient, with the handle @spacelawshitpost.me, posted a reply with an image where the alt text reads: Charlie Kirk sitting in a white T-shirt that says “Freedom.” A negative consequence follows. The email indicates this post violates Community Guidelines regarding violent or threatening speech, specifically listing threats of violence or physical harm against individuals, groups, institutions, or the general public, and incitement of self-harm or suicide.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ A screenshot of an email continuation from the Bluesky Moderation Team displaying a bulleted list of Community Guidelines violations. The first bullet point describes threats of violence or physical harm as including threats or encouragement of violence against individuals, groups, institutions, or the general public. The second bullet point defines incitement of self-harm or suicide as content that encourages self-harm or suicide. The third bullet point explains wishes of harm as expressions of a desire for harm directed at a specific person or group. Below the bullets, a paragraph states that users may not use Bluesky to break the law or cause harm to others and that all users must be treated with respect. The next paragraph informs the recipient that as a result of these violations, your account has been taken down. A closing paragraph thanks the user for doing their part to keep Bluesky a welcoming and empowering place for all users and instructs them to email moderation@blueskyweb.xyz if they have questions or wish to appeal the decision. The email ends with the signature Bluesky Moderation Team.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ A screenshot of an email reply from a user with the initials AJ and profile picture to the Bluesky Moderation Team, sent at 08:01 with the subject line Re: Bluesky Account Behavior. The email states the user wants to appeal the decision, asserting there was no threatening or violent connotation behind their use of the image. The user explains that the Charlie Kirk post is not a threat but rather a reaction meme expressing disappointment, with no threat made and no incitement of violence. The user mentions they have attached multiple examples and explanations, specifically 12 images in total, demonstrating the use of the image as a reaction meme. Below this text is a blue hyperlink to a Bluesky post URL. At the bottom of the screenshot is an embedded image showing a Bluesky post from a user with the handle @britculpsapp.bsky.social with several emoji reactions and a repost indicator showing Bluesky Elder. The post text reads: how to explain: this has been used as a reaction image to spending $20 on doordashing wendy’s & isn’t a threat. The timestamp shows October 5, 2025 at 3:34 PM.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ A screenshot of an email from the Bluesky Moderation Team sent at 08:11 with the subject line Re: Bluesky Account Behavior addressed To: Hide My Email. The email reads:

Hi there,

Thank you for reaching out to appeal the takedown of your account on Bluesky. We have carefully reviewed your case, including the information you provided and the activity that led to the suspension of your account.

After investigating, we have determined that your account activity was in violation of our community guidelines, specifically promoting hateful content or being disruptive to other users. We take these guidelines seriously to ensure a safe and respectful environment for all our users.

As a result, we regret to inform you that your appeal has been denied, and your account will remain suspended. This decision is final and cannot be reversed. We understand that this may be disappointing news, but we must prioritize the well-being of our community and maintain a consistent enforcement of our policies. We encourage you to review our community guidelines to better understand the expectations we have for user behavior on our platform. Please do not create new accounts, since those will be taken down for ban evasion.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
andrewparker.bsky.social
Laughing about the frequency of posts about dead children is simply ghoulish.

What’s fascinating is that he describes people seeing dead Palestinian babies as a “disinformation campaign” but the only criticism he has is that it’s too *frequent* not that it’s *false* and there aren’t dead babies.
eliclifton.com
Van Jones repeats “dead Gaza baby” as a punch line. New York Times columnistThomas Friedman laughs along.
andrewparker.bsky.social
You’re giving short shrift to their stellar reporting on how a CGI actress is great because she’s a virgin.
andrewparker.bsky.social
It’s like watching the telecom bubble but stupider because at least the telecom bubble was in reaction to the then-emergent dot com bubble.

I can’t come up with any other infrastructure bubble that happened in anticipation of what that infrastructure would be used for.
andrewparker.bsky.social
For all of right-wing bluster about states’ rights, it’s always been “I want XYZ, if I can control the federal government that works. If I can’t get the federal government to do it, I want the federal government out of the picture so the states can do it”
andrewparker.bsky.social
I, for one, have desperately needed the deep insights gleaned from the training that Blue Origin also gave to some YouTuber who went up on the same flight

This is going to be the next wave of “advice from Everest climber” who just paid to be carried up, I guess
andrewparker.bsky.social
Because the question of whether she’s claiming chatbots currently feel and can experience cruelty is central to whether she’s describing a viable (though debatably sound) categorical imperative, or a hypothetical imperative.

That distinction is pretty basic Kantian ethics.