@dajohns77.bsky.social
Well apparently the White House has taken over the Department of Justice twitter feed since the files have started being released so I'm guessing that was Stephen Cheung.
December 24, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Well apparently the White House has taken over the Department of Justice twitter feed since the files have started being released so I'm guessing that was Stephen Cheung.
I think they know this and they know they would lose in court but even a short term canceling of transportation money before a court would reinstate the money could cause a little pain. That's the whole point.
December 23, 2025 at 4:22 PM
I think they know this and they know they would lose in court but even a short term canceling of transportation money before a court would reinstate the money could cause a little pain. That's the whole point.
Yeah and the funny thing is Weiss could have let this run last night and, with it being Christmas week and all, may not have garnered much attention. Now it's exploded!
December 23, 2025 at 2:21 AM
Yeah and the funny thing is Weiss could have let this run last night and, with it being Christmas week and all, may not have garnered much attention. Now it's exploded!
The journalist already said they tried to get the White House, State Department, and DHS on the record about it and they all refused. So her excuse for killing the story is because 60 minutes didn't say pretty please about getting the Administration on record?
December 22, 2025 at 3:45 PM
The journalist already said they tried to get the White House, State Department, and DHS on the record about it and they all refused. So her excuse for killing the story is because 60 minutes didn't say pretty please about getting the Administration on record?
Reposted
It looks like it's been scrubbed from every official 60 Minutes page now.
It's only a 30-second promo but here it is if you didn't get a chance to see it.
It's only a 30-second promo but here it is if you didn't get a chance to see it.
December 22, 2025 at 1:33 AM
It looks like it's been scrubbed from every official 60 Minutes page now.
It's only a 30-second promo but here it is if you didn't get a chance to see it.
It's only a 30-second promo but here it is if you didn't get a chance to see it.
This. Is. ILLEGAL.!! You can't change the name without an act of Congress.
December 19, 2025 at 6:46 PM
This. Is. ILLEGAL.!! You can't change the name without an act of Congress.
Also you need Congress to actually rename it.
December 19, 2025 at 3:46 AM
Also you need Congress to actually rename it.
Why is the Secretary of Defense commenting about the White House Chief of Staff anyways? What does it have to do with the Pentagon?
December 16, 2025 at 7:06 PM
Why is the Secretary of Defense commenting about the White House Chief of Staff anyways? What does it have to do with the Pentagon?
All of the above!
December 12, 2025 at 8:25 PM
All of the above!
It's really quite a talent how she is able to lie so easily.
December 9, 2025 at 6:14 PM
It's really quite a talent how she is able to lie so easily.
Exactly. There is nothing more clear in the text then 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States." Otherwise they would have only specified, "former slaves born in the United States."
December 7, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Exactly. There is nothing more clear in the text then 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States." Otherwise they would have only specified, "former slaves born in the United States."
Maybe to lionize the field goal kicker.😉
December 6, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Maybe to lionize the field goal kicker.😉
Seems to be really going out on a limb that the Conservative Justices even care anymore about being seen as impartial or not being seen as Trump's lackeys. I would like to think so,but its extending credit to them not really borne out by their attitude, especially towards the district courts.
December 5, 2025 at 11:18 PM
Seems to be really going out on a limb that the Conservative Justices even care anymore about being seen as impartial or not being seen as Trump's lackeys. I would like to think so,but its extending credit to them not really borne out by their attitude, especially towards the district courts.
They won't slap down California. They basically are giving the green light for States to gerrymander away and they aren't going to get involved because they are gonna gut the Voting rights act dealing with racial gerrymandering by saying its all legal because it's partisan not racial.
December 5, 2025 at 6:31 PM
They won't slap down California. They basically are giving the green light for States to gerrymander away and they aren't going to get involved because they are gonna gut the Voting rights act dealing with racial gerrymandering by saying its all legal because it's partisan not racial.
"California's redistricting is unconstitutional because it made Republicans feel bad." By Sam Alito.
December 5, 2025 at 1:57 AM
"California's redistricting is unconstitutional because it made Republicans feel bad." By Sam Alito.
Oh they'll probably now try to find a way to say that California's new maps are somehow unconstitutional but Texas's are fine.
December 5, 2025 at 12:44 AM
Oh they'll probably now try to find a way to say that California's new maps are somehow unconstitutional but Texas's are fine.
He looks like he just stumbled out of bed and didn't have time for a comb.
December 3, 2025 at 9:18 PM
He looks like he just stumbled out of bed and didn't have time for a comb.
Not likely. And honestly Biden set a terrible precedent when he preemptively pardoned people like Milley and Fauci and I would argue that preemptive pardons aren't even Constitutional. Besides look how incompetent they are in trying to go after Comey and James. It wasn't needed.
November 29, 2025 at 7:55 AM
Not likely. And honestly Biden set a terrible precedent when he preemptively pardoned people like Milley and Fauci and I would argue that preemptive pardons aren't even Constitutional. Besides look how incompetent they are in trying to go after Comey and James. It wasn't needed.
The point is moot anyways because we are not at war. As the article quotes, it would simply be a war crime for doing that if we we're at war. Since we aren't, its just murder!
November 29, 2025 at 1:36 AM
The point is moot anyways because we are not at war. As the article quotes, it would simply be a war crime for doing that if we we're at war. Since we aren't, its just murder!
Yeah I think Donitz wasn't eventually convicted of that because he gave a credible defense that some Allied ships did the same thing. Like I said this goes beyond that.
November 29, 2025 at 12:30 AM
Yeah I think Donitz wasn't eventually convicted of that because he gave a credible defense that some Allied ships did the same thing. Like I said this goes beyond that.