🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
LightNews LightNews
banner
doctorjonesjr.bsky.social
🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
@doctorjonesjr.bsky.social
400 followers 1.1K following 45 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
cwebbonline.com
Remember her name: Aliya Rahman

Her testimony is everything and it deserves to be heard, by everyone. Decide for yourself.

It’s powerful. It’s gut-wrenching. And no one should have to survive what she did.

ICE MUST GO‼️
February 3, 2026 at 10:10 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
atrupar.com
BHATTACHARYA: We have to reestablish trust in public health. If you just double down on the same, we're not gonna change it

CASSIDY: Now we have a measles outbreak among those who did not trust. To further cast doubt upon the vaccines for no scientific reason - that's not gonna increase trust
February 3, 2026 at 4:53 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
bencollins.bsky.social
lol there it is!
jonseidel.bsky.social Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 9h
The feds respond.They say they're concerned about the release of evidence in the Broadview conspiracy case because "given the current climate, it will be very difficult to pick an unbiased jury."

(Defendants say they've already agreed not to release info that would identify agents.)
February 3, 2026 at 11:37 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
kyledcheney.bsky.social
NEW: A federal judge said uses of force against peaceful protesters and journalists appeared to be escalating in Portland. He ordered sharp restrictions to DHS agents' use of force and chemical munitions.

w/ @joshgerstein.bsky.social @natsfert.bsky.social

www.politico.com/news/2026/02...
February 3, 2026 at 11:59 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
adamparkhomenko.bsky.social
Trump is mentioned in the Epstein files more than Jesus is mentioned in the Bible!
February 4, 2026 at 12:04 AM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
iwillnotbesilenced.bsky.social
ICE official confirms authenticity of leaked video showing 50 people held in single cells with concrete floors at Baltimore federal holding facility.
An ICE official confirms this leaked video from inside ICE detention is "100% real."
February 3, 2026 at 6:08 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
gtconway.bsky.social
Jeffrey Epstein: "I have met some very bad people. None as bad as Trump. Not one decent cell in his body."
February 3, 2026 at 5:49 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
carlquintanilla.bsky.social
“.. Not a single Republican member of Congress showed up to the public forum .. on the violence inflicted by federal immigration agents, featuring testimony from the brothers of Renee Good ..”

@newrepublic.com
newrepublic.com/post/206100/...
February 3, 2026 at 11:09 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
jonseidel.bsky.social
Chicago's Broadview conspiracy defendants give Judge April Perry an update on negotiations over an order governing evidence in their case:

They say the feds want "to summarily prohibit all Defendants and Defendants' counsel from using, discussing, or disseminating any and all" info from the case.
DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION ON PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING DISCOVERY PRODUCED BY THE GOVERNMENT On January 28, 2026 the Court heard argument from the parties about proposed terms of a Protective Order governing the discovery produced by the government in this case. After hearing from the parties, the Court directed the parties to confer with each other to see if an agreement could be reached as to the terms of a Protective Order. The parties did confer, through counsel, and exchanged draft protective orders, but were unable to agree to all terms. Defendants hereby submit the attached draft Protective Order Governing Discovery to the Court (Ex. A, hereto) which they sent to the government on January 30, 2026.1 The Defendants’ proposed Protective Order fully addresses the lone substantive concern articulated by the government: that is, Defendants will agree not to publicly disseminate personal identifying information of the federal and local law enforcement personnel involved in this matter obtained in discovery from the government (absent further Order of Court). During the meet-and-confer, however, the government indicated it wants to summarily prohibit all Defendants and Defendants’ counsel from using, discussing, or disseminating any and all information contained in the discovery it provides to the Defense. (See Ex. B, paras. 1-6 of Govt’s Proposed Prot. Order). The additional term(s) suggested by the government are neither necessary nor appropriate here. This case concerns matters of great public interest, including that most fundamental interest: the relationship between the people and their government under our Constitution. There is no reason to unnecessarily mute the discussion of such matters; and there is no danger posed to anyone in such discussion – particularly in light of the agreement from Defendants not to publicly disseminate personal identifying information in the government’s discovery about law enforcement personnel involved in the events at issue. Moreover, a great deal of information about this case is already in the public square – no small amount due to public statements made by the government and others in the current administration.2 There is, therefore, a real concern that if the contested terms in the government’s proposed Protective Order were accepted (described above), Defendants and/or Defendants’ 2 The DOJ and others in the administration have already made multiple public statements about this case and certain of the individual Defendants, both formally and informally. See, e.g.: 1. Post by Abigail Jackson, White House Office of the Press Secretary (@ATJackson47), available at: https://x.com/atjackson47/status/1969062022466744425?s=10 (last visited February 3, 2026); 2. DOJ Press Release, including statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, available at: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/federal-grand-jury-chicago-indicts-six- individuals-charges-impeding-federal-agent (last visited February 3, 2026); 3. Laura Loomer, Sept. 19, 2025, X, “I love watching communists get body slammed … counsel will be forced to defend themselves from specious claims they violated the Protective Order when, in reality, a plethora of information about the events of September 26, 2025 outside the Broadview ICE facility are already public and/or otherwise accessible. The public interest is surely and substantially served by transparency, not government-controlled opacity, in this already very public dispute between citizens exercising their First Amendment rights, on the one hand, and the government in the conduct of its substantial criminal law enforcement apparatus against such citizens, on the other. Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter the attached Proposed Protective Order Governing Discovery. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Terence H. Campbell An Attorney for Defendant Andre Martin On behalf of All Defendants
February 3, 2026 at 10:39 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
jonseidel.bsky.social
The feds respond.They say they're concerned about the release of evidence in the Broadview conspiracy case because "given the current climate, it will be very difficult to pick an unbiased jury."

(Defendants say they've already agreed not to release info that would identify agents.)
GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING DISCOVERY Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d) and 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a), the United States of America, by ANDREW S. BOUTROS, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, moves for the entry of a protective order, and in support thereof states as follows: 1. The indictment in this case charges defendants with conspiracy to prevent by force, intimidation, and threat a United States law enforcement officer from discharging the duties of his office, and to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, and while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, and to injure his property so as to interrupt, hinder, and impede him in the discharge of his official duties, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 372 (Count 1), and for forcibly impeding, intimidating, and interfering with an officer of the United States while engaged in or on account of the performance of his official duties, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 111(a)(1) and 2 (Counts 2 -7). 2. The discovery to be provided by the government in this case includes sensitive information, whose unrestricted dissemination could adversely affect law enforcement interests and the privacy interests of third parties, as well as the right to trial before a fair and unbiased jury. 3. The government produced initial discovery without a protective order, because most of that discovery was in the public domain and the government redacted personal information of the victim. The next wave of discovery includes body cam videos from Broadview Police Officers that are not public, as well as reports naming law enforcement officers and agents, with personal identifiers. The Broadview Police Officers are mere witnesses in this case. 4. The government seeks a protective order going forward to prevent unrestricted dissemination of non-public discovery. The government is concerned that unrestricted dissemination could taint the jury pool. Given the current climate, it will be very difficult to pick an unbiased jury. Defendants seek a trial in the near future, and public dissemination of all discovery will only increase the difficulty of selecting unbiased jurors. 5. The government is also concerned about doxing law enforcement agents. There is no reason that the Broadview Police Officers, mere witnesses, should have their body camera footage with their faces and name tags circulated on the internet. or featured in press conferences or campaign commercials. 6. The government and defense counsel have traded proposed Protective Orders and met and conferred, but have not come to an agreement. The main area of disagreement is that defense counsel has proposed a Protective Order that allows unrestricted use and dissemination of the discovery material outside the purpose of the case, except for restricted dissemination of personal identifiers of the law enforcement agents and witnesses. The government believes that discovery should be used only for the case, and has proposed the attached revised protective order that takes into account the comments at the January 28, 2026 status, and has been used in hundreds of criminal cases. 7. Defendants’ argue in their motion that all discovery should be public, because this case is a matter of public interest. There have been many cases that have generated far more public interest than a group of demonstrators impeding law enforcement where nobody got hurt – for instance, public corruption cases and police misconduct cases. And, in those cases, discovery is not public or used for any purpose outside the actual case. At the hearing on January 28, 2026, defense counsel told the Court that this case is about politics and campaigns, and that all discovery should be public. The government reiterates that it seeks to try the case in the courtroom before an unbiased jury and not in the public, where potential jurors will be tainted.1 8. The attached proposed revised Protective Order is a pared down, standard protective order which would allow defendants to use discovery freely for what it is meant to be used, which is litigating this case. For instance, although 1 Defendants’ submission demonstrates in n.2 the perils of trying this case in the media and not the courtroom. Defendants argue that the press generated to date has been generated by the government. That is disingenuous. At the time of charging, the government put out a press release, like it does for most cases, but that was only after defendants held a rally and press conference about the case in conjunction with their initial appearance. Moreover, for this proposition, defendants cite in support at n.2 a posting from September 19, 2025, a week prior to the date of the incident underlying the complaint, by an internet user who is not a gover… defendants initially proposed to the government that any personal identifiers, including names of law enforcement agents, would be “for attorneys’ eyes only,” in light of defense counsels’ reversal on their initial proposal and the Court’s comments, the government has removed that provision; instead, the government added paragraphs 8 and 9 of the proposed revised Protective Order to address Personal Identifiers, which mirror paragraphs 2 and 3 of defendants’ proposed order. 9. The proposed revised Protective Order provides that the order does not apply to any material that is in or subsequently enters the public domain. WHEREFORE, the government respectfully moves this Court to enter the proposed revised protective order.
February 3, 2026 at 11:32 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
schumer.senate.gov
The SAVE Act would impose Jim Crow style restrictions on voting. It will be dead on arrival in the Senate.

My statement:
February 2, 2026 at 5:56 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
rbreich.bsky.social
ICE is now claiming it can arrest people without a warrant.

This comes after another internal memo asserting ICE agents can forcibly enter homes without a judicial warrant.

Hello? Democrats cannot let these blatantly unconstitutional actions continue. Not another penny for ICE.
February 2, 2026 at 7:01 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
Horrifying and unnerving. DHS sent an administrative subpoena to Google for this retiree's records and even sent armed agents out to his house for the "offense" of writing the following completely anodyne email to a federal prosecutor using an email address he found via Google.
He had decided that the America he believed in would not make it if people like him didn’t speak up, so on a cool, rainy morning in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Jon, 67 and recently retired, marched up to his study and began to type. He had just read about the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s case against an Afghan it was trying to deport. The immigrant, identified in The Washington Post’s Oct. 30 investigation as H, had begged federal officials to reconsider, telling them the Taliban would kill him if he was returned to Afghanistan. “Unconscionable,” Jon thought as he found an email address online for the lead prosecutor, Joseph Dernbach, who was named in the story. Peering through metal-rimmed glasses, Jon opened Gmail on his computer monitor. “Mr. Dernbach, don’t play Russian roulette with H’s life,” he wrote. “Err on the side of caution. There’s a reason the US government along with many other governments don’t recognise the Taliban. Apply principles of common sense and decency.” That was it. In five minutes, Jon said, he finished the note, signed his first and last name, pressed send and hoped his plea would make a difference.
February 3, 2026 at 5:48 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
andycraig.bsky.social
More specifically, he's lying that the SAVE Act is "voter ID." It creates a requirement at the time of *registration* to vote which is deliberately calculated to make traditional voter registration drives impossible. It is not what people usually think of and many states have, ID check at the polls.
atrupar.com Aaron Rupar @atrupar.com · 13h
Mike Johnson lies that voter ID "is an 80 or 90 percent issue on the polling nationwide"
February 3, 2026 at 7:32 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
yuriandmalcolm.bsky.social
Former owner of Portland cidery wins lawsuit against members of right-wing group Patriot Prayer

The community rallied around us and showed these far-right extremists that they cannot attack Portland and get away with it.
owner Abram Goldman-Armstrong awarded $760,000
www.opb.org/news/article...
6 Men Indicted For Cider Riot! Brawl In Portland
According to a $1 million lawsuit filed after the brawl, at least five of the men now indicted were connected with Patriot Prayer, a far right group that attracts white supremacists and has engaged in...
www.opb.org
February 3, 2026 at 9:25 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
therickydavila.bsky.social
The murder of VA ICU Nurse Alex Pretti has been officially ruled as a homicide.

Good because that’s exactly what it is. Now let’s do the same for Renee Good’s murder.
February 3, 2026 at 4:42 AM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
thelibbojack.bsky.social
MAGA Supporter Attempts To Defend Donald Trump By Questioning Why It's Wrong To Sexually Harm Children:

"Why Is It Wrong?! Is That Too Hard Of A Question?"
February 3, 2026 at 11:56 AM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
andrewqmr.bsky.social
Post by Internet Hippo that says: Oh my god you want me to find "evidence" before putting someone in jail? Every time?? Do you have any idea how long that would take
February 3, 2026 at 6:22 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
mrsbettybowers.bsky.social
Puritanical Pixie Mike Johnson: "Well, golly gosh darn it! Can you imagine if those meanies in the judiciary made our secret police follow that due process hooey in the dang Constitution? What an OUTRAGEOUS suggestion! Convenience over Constitution!"
factpostnews.bsky.social FactPost @factpostnews.bsky.social · 16h
Mike Johnson speaks out against the use of judicial warrants in immigration cases:

"Imagine if we had to go through the process of getting a judicial warrant"
February 3, 2026 at 6:42 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
andrewjweinstein.com
This is the authoritarian tell:

If a judge rules against your preferred outcome, declare the judge illegitimate.

If that mindset takes hold, courts stop being guardrails and become targets.

Democracy cannot survive a government that believes the law only counts when it wins.
February 3, 2026 at 2:56 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
sastitcher.bsky.social
There’s a place in fiery hell for Todd.
February 3, 2026 at 2:15 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
bishopcharles.bsky.social
DHS’s account of two Venezuelans shot by border patrol falls apart in court: ‘A smear campaign’ - The Guardian apple.news/AeMvL-19yS1S...
DHS’s account of two Venezuelans shot by border patrol falls apart in court: ‘A smear campaign’ — Guardian US
Immigration officials said agent shot two ‘vicious gang members’ in Portland, but records obtained by the Guardian reveal US prosecutor contradicted claims
apple.news
February 3, 2026 at 6:00 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
Yup; Lewandowski runs DHS for Noem, it’s widely known.
February 3, 2026 at 7:29 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
thetnholler.bsky.social
“Imagine if we had to follow the law”
February 3, 2026 at 5:16 PM
Reposted by 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🇺🇦
nycsouthpaw.bsky.social
Putting on my suit and tie and going on America Erwache to describe a 234 year old basic requirement of the constitution for lawful searches and seizures as a “nonstarter.”
atrupar.com Aaron Rupar @atrupar.com · 19h
Rep. Mark Harris: "Some of these things are nonstarters. Having judicial warrants? To me, hat's a nonstarter. Being able to make off their mask, putting them at risk? That's a nonstarter. I would say anything that's going to hamstring the work of ICE, that's just not going to go anywhere."
February 3, 2026 at 1:26 PM