Hunter Dunn
@hunterisntdunn.bsky.social
50501 National Press Coordinator | Pointing out when the Emperor Has No Clothes | WFP
I love that Bill held onto his conservative philosophy so hard that the material circumstances turned him into the median Working Families Party member
December 7, 2025 at 9:55 PM
I love that Bill held onto his conservative philosophy so hard that the material circumstances turned him into the median Working Families Party member
I mean, we did help get >7 million people into the streets at the same time on 10/18.
It’s not much, but it’s a start. We’re slowly strengthening the American protest muscle.
It’s not much, but it’s a start. We’re slowly strengthening the American protest muscle.
December 7, 2025 at 8:20 AM
I mean, we did help get >7 million people into the streets at the same time on 10/18.
It’s not much, but it’s a start. We’re slowly strengthening the American protest muscle.
It’s not much, but it’s a start. We’re slowly strengthening the American protest muscle.
It will be morally obligated for every American to engage in Civil Disobedience against the defiled corpse of our country & bring the oligarchy to its knees immediately.
The end of the 14th Amendment is as great a sin as invoking the Insurrection Act. Everyone involved will face the next Nuremberg.
The end of the 14th Amendment is as great a sin as invoking the Insurrection Act. Everyone involved will face the next Nuremberg.
December 7, 2025 at 7:57 AM
It will be morally obligated for every American to engage in Civil Disobedience against the defiled corpse of our country & bring the oligarchy to its knees immediately.
The end of the 14th Amendment is as great a sin as invoking the Insurrection Act. Everyone involved will face the next Nuremberg.
The end of the 14th Amendment is as great a sin as invoking the Insurrection Act. Everyone involved will face the next Nuremberg.
It is a declaration of war against the American people.
Good luck enforcing the law after you gutted it in the public square.
If the 14th Amendment is struck down, we would no longer have a duty to disobey only unjust laws.
We would have a duty to disobey the law, full stop.
Good luck enforcing the law after you gutted it in the public square.
If the 14th Amendment is struck down, we would no longer have a duty to disobey only unjust laws.
We would have a duty to disobey the law, full stop.
December 7, 2025 at 7:57 AM
It is a declaration of war against the American people.
Good luck enforcing the law after you gutted it in the public square.
If the 14th Amendment is struck down, we would no longer have a duty to disobey only unjust laws.
We would have a duty to disobey the law, full stop.
Good luck enforcing the law after you gutted it in the public square.
If the 14th Amendment is struck down, we would no longer have a duty to disobey only unjust laws.
We would have a duty to disobey the law, full stop.
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment is one of the foundational pillars of our country’s legal system.
An attack or repeal of any part of it, is not just a violation of our rights.
It is an attempt to revive the Dred Scott decision and to declare the Confederacy as the winner of the Civil War.
An attack or repeal of any part of it, is not just a violation of our rights.
It is an attempt to revive the Dred Scott decision and to declare the Confederacy as the winner of the Civil War.
December 7, 2025 at 7:57 AM
Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment is one of the foundational pillars of our country’s legal system.
An attack or repeal of any part of it, is not just a violation of our rights.
It is an attempt to revive the Dred Scott decision and to declare the Confederacy as the winner of the Civil War.
An attack or repeal of any part of it, is not just a violation of our rights.
It is an attempt to revive the Dred Scott decision and to declare the Confederacy as the winner of the Civil War.
Reposted by Hunter Dunn
That this SCOTUS used it to justify striking affirmative action bc it discriminated against WHITE people and now thinks their might be a colorable argument about the birthright part shows only that they are confused about whether the good team won the Civil War. (2/3)
December 5, 2025 at 10:57 PM
That this SCOTUS used it to justify striking affirmative action bc it discriminated against WHITE people and now thinks their might be a colorable argument about the birthright part shows only that they are confused about whether the good team won the Civil War. (2/3)