Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Reposted by Partisan

Kingsgrave @kingsgrave.bsky.social · 5h

this stuff just feels like a return of the drug addiction discourse where pointing to the drug addiction for why someone became a pos is somehow insulting to those who use the drugs who aren't.

fetterman might've always been a bad guy in some respect but his brain issues absolutely made it worse.

1 1 8

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 4h

TIL Penn Jillette no longer identifies as a libertarian.

Good for him.

In 2020, Jillette distanced himself from aspects of libertarianism, particularly surrounding COVID-19. In an interview with Big Think, he stated, "[A] lot of the illusions that I held dear, rugged individualism, individual freedoms, are coming back to bite us in the ass." He went on to elaborate, "[I]t seems like getting rid of the gatekeepers gave us Trump as president, and in the same breath, in the same wind, gave us not wearing masks, and maybe gave us a huge unpleasant amount of overt racism."[57]

In a 2024 interview, he said he renounced his libertarianism as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic after a libertarian group asked him to speak at an anti-mask rally. "The fact they sent me this email is something I need to be very ashamed of, and I need to change" adding "Many times when I identified as Libertarian, people said to me, 'It's just rich white guys that don't want to be told what to do,' and I had a zillion answers to that — and now that seems 100 percent accurate."[58]

2

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 4h

If SCOTUS is going to rule in such a way as to treat the Constitution as illegitimate while still claiming to be "strictly following the constitution as originally written," then lower courts can feel free to rule that SCOTUS is illegitimate while claiming to be "strictly following SCOTUS precedent"

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 4h

Lower courts have been ruling the exact opposite way of the "Literal Truth Standard" set in Bronston v US for years. They just do so while *claiming to be following precedent,* because the law only exists *as it is enforced and upheld.*

1

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 4h

Yeah, and to a certain point, federal judges should stop treating certain rulings of the Supreme Court as legally binding. They do it all the fucking time.

Patrick Chovanec @prchovanec.bsky.social · 7h

When you say "the Supreme Court is no longer legitimate" it doesn't mean "I think they've seriously compromised their moral authority and credibility". It means "I don't believe their rulings are legally binding".

1

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 5h

"He tried to accelerate the case to try a leading presidential candidate before the 2024 election" is an absolutely DERANGED thing to type considering the 2024 election turned out to be a LITERAL deadline for holding Trump accountable, as proven by... the very incidence of this article's creation.

Anna Bower @annabower.bsky.social · 7h

You’ve gotta be kidding me.

This WaPo editorial presents a misleading revisionist history of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s criminal cases against Trump.

Then it has the gall to compare that to Trump’s overt targeting of his perceived enemies.

Really embarrassing stuff.

But the mere fact that a legal tool might be available does not mean it should be used. The
current rage over Grassley's revelation shows why. Smith showed little restraint in his pursuit of a former president. He charged Trump for official acts he took as president. He sought a gag order to limit Trump's ability to criticize the prosecution. He tried to accelerate the case to try a leading presidential candidate before the 2024 election.

1 2

Reposted by Partisan

Nathan Goldwag @goldwagnathan.bsky.social · 7h

Once you're at the point where there's a consensus that "trying to overthrow the government" shouldn't be held against a politician or his movement, I don't really see how the country comes back from that.

Anna Bower @annabower.bsky.social · 7h

You’ve gotta be kidding me.

This WaPo editorial presents a misleading revisionist history of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s criminal cases against Trump.

Then it has the gall to compare that to Trump’s overt targeting of his perceived enemies.

Really embarrassing stuff.

7 14 110

Reposted by Partisan

♨ naïve dumbass @atticusgf.bsky.social · 5h

Trump vs. US was the final straw imo. You cannot read that ruling and continue believing they have legitimacy. It is not only against the plain text of the constitution, it is anathema to the national ethos. It is offensively, insultingly un-American and they ceded legitimacy by committing that sin.

Patrick Chovanec @prchovanec.bsky.social · 8h

I think people seriously underestimate what it means to say that the Supreme Court is “illegitimate”, and what the consequences of saying it (and meaning it) are.

16 130 660

Reposted by Partisan

Joshua G. Schraiber @jgschraiber.bsky.social · 9h

BUT HER EMAILS

Sean O’Kane @seanokane.bsky.social · 10h

WSJ is reporting that the Truth Social post where Trump told Pam Bondi to prosecute Comey *really was supposed to be a private message*

www.wsj.com/politics/pol...

Inside the Justice Department Where the President Calls the Shots

The president has executed a wholesale transformation of the Justice Department, taking control in ways he could have only dreamed of in his first term.

www.wsj.com

2 6

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 7h

Yeah, so, time and causality are universal constants. Which means that "I got a ceasefire signed (two years into it, with all of the prior red lines long-since crossed)" is not ~quite~ the flex they're gonna try to portray it as. And in spite of all that, happy to see a ceasefire,

Matthew Downhour @matthewdownhour.bsky.social · 7h

I am relieved at the chance for peace in Gaza, and credit where it's due - Trump likely sped that up out of sheer frustration with Netanyahu's intransigence.

But the end result of the last two years seems like a massive Israeli victory, with them emerging as a mostly unchallenged hegemon

1 1 2

Reposted by Partisan

Olivia Messer @oliviamesser.bsky.social · 8h

I’m so damn spooked by this headline

www.reuters.com/legal/govern...

National Guard poised to enter Chicago as Trump calls for jailing Democratic leaders

12 110 470

Reposted by Partisan

Vaquera Elisa @boxelderdust.bsky.social · 10h

Listening to even liberal Europeans talk about immigration is enough to make even the most accommodationist Democrat go pale

politiBOO! @politiburb.bsky.social · 14h

MAKE IT STOP

8 34 150

Reposted by Partisan

Sharon @sharonk.bsky.social · 16h

Garfield as Barron: "Huh. I wonder who that's for."

1 15 150

Reposted by Partisan

❀°。Der Siebenschläfer *.ﾟ✿ ⋆ @sababausa.bsky.social · 15h

The “renaming stuff by fiat” test should be so easy to not fail. And yet.

Jon Passantino @passantino.bsky.social · 16h

CNN is now using the Trump preferred “Department of War” name in its official statements

4 25 190

Reposted by Partisan

Stan Oklobdzija @stano.bsky.social · 15h

This is what Democratic mayors should be doing to the streets in front of ICE facilities. Can't have a facility if no one can bring a car into it!

Will Stancil @whstancil.bsky.social · 18h

Just openly cheering the destruction of any representation of gay people in public space. They think their power is totally unrestricted, and the entire country will support them rolling back society to the 1950s, or maybe the 1850s

4 30 180

Reposted by Partisan

Nick (derogatory) ✨ @slothropsmap.bsky.social · 15h

More than anything, Pritzker seems like a great guy with firmly-held convictions. It’s hard to ask for more than that.

Aaron Rupar @atrupar.com · 16h

Pritzker: "This guy is unhinged. He's insecure. He's a wannabe dictator. And there's one thing I really want to say to Donald Trump. If you come for my people, you come through me. So come and get me."

4 10 140

Reposted by Partisan

Jonathan V. Last @jvl.bsky.social · 15h

This is capitulation. It is not the "Department of War." If CNN concedes on this point, they'll concede on any point.

Jon Passantino @passantino.bsky.social · 16h

CNN is now using the Trump preferred “Department of War” name in its official statements

130 540 2.6K

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 18h

This is the model of ALL conservative movements: be witness to the progress of liberalism, appropriate a recent cultural movement, then claim that actually this new reactionary-synthesis you've pulled from your hat is your "ancient unbroken tradition."

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 18h

And the Orthodox Reactionaries furthered their political movement to maintain coercive, binding Rabbinical authority over its segregated shtetls by appropriating a nascent populist, revisionist movement in Chasidism, subsuming an originally radical movement into its shrewd power play.

1

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 18h

*puttin muh Jew hat on*

May I remind you that Orthodox Judaism is younger than Reform Judaism, and was founded as a reactionary pushback against the Maskilim's assertion that Rabbinic authority ought be subordinate to the authority of Liberal, egalitarian, universal law and rights.

1

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 18h

OP is spittin'. People discount that the founding concept of the enlightenment/liberalism itself was the assertion that there is a justice/law above religious sectarian nonsense.

It's not the "root" in some mere sense of a common underlying theme. No, it's literally the origin of conservatism.

ellie lockhart (she/they) @eleanor.lockhart.contact · 1d

the belief that a parent's religion exempts a child from human rights protections is the single toxic root of all conservatism. regardless of if you're LGBT or not, ending the idea that parents have the right to indoctrinate their children is essential to preserving your human rights

Nick @boylan.xyz · 1d

Supreme Court poised to rule that religious beliefs allow for child abuse over the states interest in preventing child abuse.

1 7 18

Reposted by Partisan

ellie lockhart (she/they) @eleanor.lockhart.contact · 1d

the belief that a parent's religion exempts a child from human rights protections is the single toxic root of all conservatism. regardless of if you're LGBT or not, ending the idea that parents have the right to indoctrinate their children is essential to preserving your human rights

Nick @boylan.xyz · 1d

Supreme Court poised to rule that religious beliefs allow for child abuse over the states interest in preventing child abuse.

Kyle Clark @kylec.bsky.social · 1d

NYT: Justices Seem Set to Rule Against Colorado’s Ban on Conversion Therapy www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10...

3 52 210

Reposted by Partisan

Nick @boylan.xyz · 1d

Supreme Court poised to rule that religious beliefs allow for child abuse over the states interest in preventing child abuse.

Kyle Clark @kylec.bsky.social · 1d

NYT: Justices Seem Set to Rule Against Colorado’s Ban on Conversion Therapy www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10...

Supreme Court Live Updates: Justices Seem Set to Rule Against Colorado’s Ban on Conversion Therapy

www.nytimes.com

2 34 120

Reposted by Partisan

JB stan account @johnbrownstan.bsky.social · 4d

Protesting Biden over Israel was cool, protesting Trump is what their moms do (yuck)

Sick Hunt, Dracones @scalehelix.net · 4d

idk man i'm in very much a blame-the-democrats mood right but the reason people aren't protesting right now is because they don't fucking *care*

they protested gaza because their phones told them to

Jake Grumbach @jakemgrumbach.bsky.social · 4d

Pretty incredible own goal by liberal institutions and many Democratic electeds to crush the exact type of protests in 2024 that would’ve been the most effective way to slow or stop ICE incursions into American cities in 2025

3 12 95

Partisan @partpartisan.bsky.social · 1d

Appropriating the language of the Intellectually Curious, myopic Lawyer-Brained nat-cons started arguing that if Liberalism cannot create a bulletproof Aristotelian definition of "fact" and "lie" with universal consensus, then it must have zero business ever distinguishing one from the other.

2