LightNews LightNews
oldcatlady49.bsky.social
@oldcatlady49.bsky.social
40 followers 12 following 0 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
November 6, 2025 at 4:01 PM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
Trump is not paying the East Wing demolition firm.
====================================
Nothing has changed.
-----------------------
November 6, 2025 at 4:03 PM
Reposted
krassenstein.bsky.social
Caught lying again.
November 6, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
October 22, 2025 at 9:46 AM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
October 22, 2025 at 10:13 AM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
October 22, 2025 at 10:15 AM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
October 22, 2025 at 10:29 AM
Reposted
boxerdogdad.bsky.social
Just a reminder…
#Ftrump #Fmaga
TO ANNOUNCE THAT THERE MUST BE NO CRITICISM OF THE PRESIDENT, OR THAT WE ARE TO STAND BY THE PRESIDENT, RIGHT OR WRONG, IS NOT ONLY UNPATRIOTIC AND SERVILE, BUT IS MORALLY TREASONABLE TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. PRESIDENT ~ THEODORE ROOSEVELT
March 7, 2025 at 4:31 PM
Reposted
vicjager.bsky.social
uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-ukrain...

This unprecedented move puts Ukrainians at risk of fast-track deportation.
Trump 'planning to revoke legal status of 240,000 Ukrainian refugees' - key Ukraine developments
The planned rollback of protections for Ukrainians was reportedly underway before Trump publicly feuded with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy last week.
uk.news.yahoo.com
March 6, 2025 at 3:18 PM
Reposted
krassenstein.bsky.social
March 6, 2025 at 7:37 PM
Reposted
democracyactionnet.bsky.social
The Republicans’ cult-like devotion to Trump
March 7, 2025 at 1:45 PM
Reposted
karaoke-god.bsky.social
March 7, 2025 at 11:50 AM
Reposted
krassenstein.bsky.social
March 7, 2025 at 1:02 PM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
March 7, 2025 at 4:05 PM
Reposted
katiewhittemore22.bsky.social
❌AMAZON BLACKOUT❌

If you’re not already boycotting Amazon, please start TODAY‼️

❌Boycott 3/7-14 (or forever!)❌

Remember WE hold the POWER with our wallets‼️ Let’s hit them where it hurts since💰is all they care about. 🤮

Art from @cwebbonline.com. 💙

#amazonblackout
March 7, 2025 at 2:58 PM
Reposted
jennifershin.bsky.social
To sum it up, the worst of us won. We are confronted every day by their never ending villainous behavior.
March 7, 2025 at 2:18 PM
Reposted
krassenstein.bsky.social
March 6, 2025 at 10:28 PM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
"In response to the US tariffs, Canada is seeing a surge of national pride, boycotting of American products, and an unfamiliar emotion: anger"
====================
www.cnn.com/2025/03/06/u...
Elbows up: How Canadians are fighting back against Trump’s tariffs | CNN
Replacing California tomatoes for Italian tomatoes. Ohio-made pepperoni for meats produced in Ontario and Quebec. Coca Cola for sparkling water, sweetened with Canadian maple syrup.
www.cnn.com
March 7, 2025 at 5:29 AM
Reposted
pino-fotus.bsky.social
March 6, 2025 at 10:12 PM
Reposted
krassenstein.bsky.social
London
March 7, 2025 at 1:04 AM
Reposted
democracyactionnet.bsky.social
Will Trump declare himself King
March 7, 2025 at 1:46 PM
Reposted
blueskyfanatic.bsky.social
March 7, 2025 at 4:07 PM
Reposted
fredbluevoter.bsky.social
BLUE boosters and influencers to follow 😀😍💙🌈💚🌊🌎🌹

@fredbluevoter.bsky.social
@mlindholm325,bsky.social 
@moedelawn.bsky.social  
@mrsquirrel.bsky.social  
@nagual4444.bsky.social  
@oligarchaverse.bsky.social 
@pattievotesblue.bsky.social  
@petrooka.bsky.social
March 7, 2025 at 5:51 PM
Reposted
joshuajfriedman.com
NEW from @courtneybuble.bsky.social: Trump pushes back against judicial injunctions by directing executive depts and agencies to ask judges to require plaintiffs to post bonds for the value of potential damages caused by wrongful injunctions
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES Subject: Ensuring the Enforcement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) In recent weeks, activist organizations fueled by hundreds of millions of dollars in donations and sometimes even Government grants have obtained sweeping injunctions far beyond the scope of relief contemplated by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, functionally inserting themselves into the executive policy making process and therefore undermining the democratic process. This anti-democratic takeover is orchestrated by forum-shopping organizations that repeatedly bring meritless suits, used for fundraising and political grandstanding, without any repercussions when they fail. Taxpayers are forced not only to cover the costs of their antics when funding and hiring decisions are enjoined, but must needlessly wait for Government policies they voted for. Moreover, this situation results in the Department of Justice, the Nation's chief law enforcement agency, dedicating substantial resources to fighting frivolous suits instead of defending public safety. The effective administration of justice in the Federal courts depends on mechanisms that deter frivolous litigation, protect parties from unwarranted costs, and streamline judicial processes. One key mechanism is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) (Rule 65(c)), which mandates that a party seeking a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order (injunction) provide security in an amount that the court considers proper to cover potential costs and damages to the enjoined or restrained party if the injunction is wrongly issued. Consistent enforcement of this rule is critical to ensuring that taxpayers do not foot the bill for costs or damages caused by wrongly issued preliminary relief by activist judges and to achieving the effective administration of justice. (Alt text continues with next image.) Therefore, it is the policy of the United States to demand that parties seeking injunctions against the Federal Government must cover the costs and damages incurred if the Government is ultimately found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained. Federal courts should hold litigants accountable for their misrepresentations and ill-granted injunctions. Consistent with applicable law, the heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies), in consultation with the Attorney General, are directed to ensure that their respective agencies properly request under Rule 65(c) that Federal district courts require plaintiffs to post security equal to the Federal Government's potential costs and damages from a wrongly issued injunction. The scope of this directive covers all lawsuits filed against the Federal Government seeking an injunction where agencies can show expected monetary damages or costs from the requested preliminary relief, unless extraordinary circumstances justify an exception. In requests for security under Rule 65(c), agencies shall include, among other things, that: (a) Rule 65(c) mandates the court to require, in all applicable cases, that a movant for an injunction post security in an amount that the court considers proper to cover potential costs and damages to the enjoined or restrained party; (b) the security amount the agency is requesting is based on a reasoned assessment of the potential harm to the enjoined or restrained party; and (c) failure of the party that moved for preliminary relief to comply with Rule 65(c) results in denial or dissolution of the requested injunctive relief. This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. DONALD J. TRUMP
March 6, 2025 at 10:11 PM