PJA
@pja.bsky.social
Reposted by PJA
This lady was the Steve Jobs of the Online Death Threat Industry for like 10 years. Not to be a dick, but fucking spare me.
Marjorie Taylor Greene claims she shared with Trump death threat she received that he incited, and his response was "extremely unkind"
December 8, 2025 at 3:26 AM
This lady was the Steve Jobs of the Online Death Threat Industry for like 10 years. Not to be a dick, but fucking spare me.
Reposted by PJA
The normalization of ending birthright citizenship has really kicked into overdrive. My god.
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 7:29 PM
The normalization of ending birthright citizenship has really kicked into overdrive. My god.
Reposted by PJA
"I think we have to assume that actually sunlight has a normalizing effect. "
www.the-reframe.com/boiling-water/
@juliusgoat.bsky.social
www.the-reframe.com/boiling-water/
@juliusgoat.bsky.social
Boiling Water
The corrosive damage caused by forcing people to defend their own lives by debating ideas that have already been defeated.
www.the-reframe.com
December 8, 2025 at 12:51 AM
"I think we have to assume that actually sunlight has a normalizing effect. "
www.the-reframe.com/boiling-water/
@juliusgoat.bsky.social
www.the-reframe.com/boiling-water/
@juliusgoat.bsky.social
Reposted by PJA
Pretty crazy that nearly all of the EU Commission is still on X even as Elon Musk is literally talking about destroying the EU.
You can leave X. It's really not that difficult.
You can leave X. It's really not that difficult.
So what's the outcome?
2️⃣5️⃣ of the 27 Commissioners have posted in the last week
2️⃣4️⃣ of the 27 generally post every week (Albuquerque has never been on X, Ribera is sporadic, McGrath has somehow stopped)
0️⃣ have stopped as a result of what Twitter has become since the Musk takeover
2️⃣5️⃣ of the 27 Commissioners have posted in the last week
2️⃣4️⃣ of the 27 generally post every week (Albuquerque has never been on X, Ribera is sporadic, McGrath has somehow stopped)
0️⃣ have stopped as a result of what Twitter has become since the Musk takeover
December 7, 2025 at 10:13 PM
Pretty crazy that nearly all of the EU Commission is still on X even as Elon Musk is literally talking about destroying the EU.
You can leave X. It's really not that difficult.
You can leave X. It's really not that difficult.
Reposted by PJA
when you're a size 8 but the 10 was on sale
December 7, 2025 at 7:39 PM
when you're a size 8 but the 10 was on sale
Reposted by PJA
Twitter Is Making You Dumber: Example 3,204
it’s been pretty funny to see Polis’ addiction to posting completely end any discussion of him as a potential 2028 candidate
December 7, 2025 at 10:31 PM
Twitter Is Making You Dumber: Example 3,204
Reposted by PJA
Whoa … this is really strange.
Federal law enforcement managed to confiscate almost two tons of cocaine, and arrest 3 suspects, without blowing the boat out of the water or killing anyone.
🎁 link ⤵️
www.miamiherald.com/news/local/c...
Federal law enforcement managed to confiscate almost two tons of cocaine, and arrest 3 suspects, without blowing the boat out of the water or killing anyone.
🎁 link ⤵️
www.miamiherald.com/news/local/c...
$28 million of cocaine seized off Miami Beach. Three men charged
Coast Guard and CBP seized about 3,715 pounds of cocaine worth $28 million from a 65-foot vessel near Government Cut off Miami Beach; three men were arrested.
www.miamiherald.com
December 7, 2025 at 8:05 PM
Whoa … this is really strange.
Federal law enforcement managed to confiscate almost two tons of cocaine, and arrest 3 suspects, without blowing the boat out of the water or killing anyone.
🎁 link ⤵️
www.miamiherald.com/news/local/c...
Federal law enforcement managed to confiscate almost two tons of cocaine, and arrest 3 suspects, without blowing the boat out of the water or killing anyone.
🎁 link ⤵️
www.miamiherald.com/news/local/c...
Reposted by PJA
American media outlets refuse to report the relative cost of government programs so that they can fulfill their primary mission of keeping people uninformed.... I guess this is a nefarious one.
I really would like to hear a non-nefarious reason why reporters at places like the NYT, WaPo, or NPR can't take 10 second to tell us that the $100 billion we spend on SNAP is 1.3% of the budget or the $6 billion that went to the AIDS program in Africa was 0.9% of the budget. Love to hear a reason.
seriously, can anyone give me a reason why reporters refuse to express huge budget numbers, that they know are meaningless to their audience, in a context that makes them understandable -- such as a percentage of the budget? I NEVER get an answer to this question.
December 7, 2025 at 8:19 PM
American media outlets refuse to report the relative cost of government programs so that they can fulfill their primary mission of keeping people uninformed.... I guess this is a nefarious one.
Reposted by PJA
In a more just society, Wurman and Barnett would be fired for this. Providing a bullshit legal justification to strip millions of people of their citizenship is well beyond the scope of “academic freedom.”
December 7, 2025 at 8:40 PM
In a more just society, Wurman and Barnett would be fired for this. Providing a bullshit legal justification to strip millions of people of their citizenship is well beyond the scope of “academic freedom.”
Reposted by PJA
this gets to the fundamental lawlessness. the difference between law as a game and law as a tool of government.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
also, let’s say wurman is right. well, we have had nearly 160 years of unlimited birthright citizenship that has been affirmed again and again by generations of Americans. whatever the original intent, that is what the birthright clause *means*.
December 7, 2025 at 7:40 PM
this gets to the fundamental lawlessness. the difference between law as a game and law as a tool of government.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
birthright citizenship is the law. nothing has changed. the documents are the same. if that can change based on *nothing*, you don't have a real constitution in the first place.
Reposted by PJA
What's most galling is Wurman and Barnett aren't stupid. They both know exactly how dishonest this is. Whatever their motives, and I don't really care, they're not doing scholarship in any of this. They're willful liars abusing their credentials in an aid of a lawless attack on fundamental rights.
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 8:28 PM
What's most galling is Wurman and Barnett aren't stupid. They both know exactly how dishonest this is. Whatever their motives, and I don't really care, they're not doing scholarship in any of this. They're willful liars abusing their credentials in an aid of a lawless attack on fundamental rights.
Reposted by PJA
so much of the conservative legal revolution seems to outright reject the idea that democratic publics legitimately constituted can fix the meaning of the constitution without formal amendment.
December 7, 2025 at 7:23 PM
so much of the conservative legal revolution seems to outright reject the idea that democratic publics legitimately constituted can fix the meaning of the constitution without formal amendment.
Reposted by PJA
also, let’s say wurman is right. well, we have had nearly 160 years of unlimited birthright citizenship that has been affirmed again and again by generations of Americans. whatever the original intent, that is what the birthright clause *means*.
December 7, 2025 at 7:18 PM
also, let’s say wurman is right. well, we have had nearly 160 years of unlimited birthright citizenship that has been affirmed again and again by generations of Americans. whatever the original intent, that is what the birthright clause *means*.
Reposted by PJA
and as @evanbernick.bsky.social correctly points out, at no point has the worm man ever actually defended the trump EO on the merits
December 7, 2025 at 7:13 PM
and as @evanbernick.bsky.social correctly points out, at no point has the worm man ever actually defended the trump EO on the merits
Reposted by PJA
bad actors like wurman are why i think it is important to place the birthright clause in the full context of section 1 and section 1 in the context of both dred scott and the two decades of antislavery and abolitionist agitation and political thinking that proceeded it
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 7:09 PM
bad actors like wurman are why i think it is important to place the birthright clause in the full context of section 1 and section 1 in the context of both dred scott and the two decades of antislavery and abolitionist agitation and political thinking that proceeded it
Reposted by PJA
the idea that a handful of conservative legal scholars have an understanding that should supersede a settlement affirmed my generations of american is astoundingly arrogant, and the idea that trump — or any president — can unilaterally overturn that settlement is just despotism
December 7, 2025 at 7:18 PM
the idea that a handful of conservative legal scholars have an understanding that should supersede a settlement affirmed my generations of american is astoundingly arrogant, and the idea that trump — or any president — can unilaterally overturn that settlement is just despotism
Reposted by PJA
lol this is so perfect
Freudian slip from Tom Cotton: "I think President Bush has every power under the Constitution to strike boats in international waters"
December 7, 2025 at 8:07 PM
lol this is so perfect
Reposted by PJA
apropos of nothing why is Tom Cotton turning into a small child wearing his father's suit
Freudian slip from Tom Cotton: "I think President Bush has every power under the Constitution to strike boats in international waters"
December 7, 2025 at 8:30 PM
apropos of nothing why is Tom Cotton turning into a small child wearing his father's suit
Reposted by PJA
This is the easiest question of Constitutional interpretation imaginable, and Wurman and Barnett are trying to lawyer brain ethnic cleansing into existence
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 8:30 PM
This is the easiest question of Constitutional interpretation imaginable, and Wurman and Barnett are trying to lawyer brain ethnic cleansing into existence
Reposted by PJA
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 6:56 PM
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
Reposted by PJA
I'm just a bumpkin at an under-funded teaching college who spent 16 years in a book doing this thing Wurman et al suddenly discovered. Silly me.
Since I traced migration & citizenship from the colonial period through 1888, yeah, pretty clear the 14th Amendment is intended to repudiate Dred Scott.
Since I traced migration & citizenship from the colonial period through 1888, yeah, pretty clear the 14th Amendment is intended to repudiate Dred Scott.
bad actors like wurman are why i think it is important to place the birthright clause in the full context of section 1 and section 1 in the context of both dred scott and the two decades of antislavery and abolitionist agitation and political thinking that proceeded it
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 7:48 PM
I'm just a bumpkin at an under-funded teaching college who spent 16 years in a book doing this thing Wurman et al suddenly discovered. Silly me.
Since I traced migration & citizenship from the colonial period through 1888, yeah, pretty clear the 14th Amendment is intended to repudiate Dred Scott.
Since I traced migration & citizenship from the colonial period through 1888, yeah, pretty clear the 14th Amendment is intended to repudiate Dred Scott.
Reposted by PJA
Republicans use the "I'm not familiar with that" dodge several times a day now, and if a reporters or anchor isn't ready and willing to shut them down as soon as they try it, that means they're either incompetent at their job or a willing accomplice to the lies.
Either way, never trust them again.
Either way, never trust them again.
If they pretend they haven’t heard about the story of the day, end the interview right there.
“I’m sorry, Senator, we wanted to get your perspective on this story, but it seems you’re not fully aware of what’s going on.”
“I’m sorry, Senator, we wanted to get your perspective on this story, but it seems you’re not fully aware of what’s going on.”
December 7, 2025 at 5:57 PM
Republicans use the "I'm not familiar with that" dodge several times a day now, and if a reporters or anchor isn't ready and willing to shut them down as soon as they try it, that means they're either incompetent at their job or a willing accomplice to the lies.
Either way, never trust them again.
Either way, never trust them again.
Reposted by PJA
This respect and deference only goes one way, of course, as per the pre-established rules of Washington only Democrats may have their honor impugned or their motives maligned.
December 7, 2025 at 5:56 PM
This respect and deference only goes one way, of course, as per the pre-established rules of Washington only Democrats may have their honor impugned or their motives maligned.
Reposted by PJA
don't worry, john roberts says this is a legitimate exercise of presidential power and if we did anything to curb it, we would be robbing the executive of the energy he needs to do his job
Trump rages that Henry Cuellar didn’t pay him back for a pardon by switching parties, blasting Cuellar for a “lack of LOYALTY.”
In other words, Trump admits he was trying to use his pardon power to buy Republicans a House seat.
In other words, Trump admits he was trying to use his pardon power to buy Republicans a House seat.
December 7, 2025 at 3:32 PM
don't worry, john roberts says this is a legitimate exercise of presidential power and if we did anything to curb it, we would be robbing the executive of the energy he needs to do his job
Reposted by PJA
That's right
December 7, 2025 at 5:20 PM
That's right