Stretchdad vs the Dicktocracy
banner
stretchdad.bsky.social
Stretchdad vs the Dicktocracy
@stretchdad.bsky.social
Dyed-in-the-wool liberal in a red corner of Colorado. Friendly geek with a modicum of social skills. Software development, aviation, biking, dogs, Grateful Dead and their offshoots. Not afraid of big words or big ideas.
If RFK Jr was born with almost any other name, he'd be a complete nobody.
November 25, 2025 at 7:14 PM
Reposted by Stretchdad vs the Dicktocracy
...John Kerry, proving again that when cowardice meets politics it always tries to destroy the perception of integrity rather than accept responsibility.
November 25, 2025 at 4:38 PM
Everything seems to be working against him right now. His obvious physical and mental decline, the economy, ICE/CBP backlash, Epstein, etc. I'm loving the moment and warily hoping for more.
November 25, 2025 at 4:59 AM
Remarkably good quality for both its age and the newness of the technology.

Also good to know that more than a century later, we're still just as male-gazey as we were back then. /s
November 25, 2025 at 4:40 AM
Efficient != Effective. I like to edit all my written communications until I'm satisfied with them. You do you.
November 24, 2025 at 9:47 PM
What is this "in-flight service" of which you speak?
November 24, 2025 at 9:42 PM
November 24, 2025 at 9:38 PM
The questions of improper procedure, e.g. not getting approval for the two-count indictment from the entire grand jury, are still pending and may result in dismissal with prejudice.
November 24, 2025 at 6:39 PM
I will do the same here. I will invalidate the ultra vires acts performed by Ms. Halligan and dismiss the indictment without prejudice, returning Ms. James to the status she occupied before being indicted.

(end)
November 24, 2025 at 6:37 PM
... and restored the affected party to the position the party occupied before being subjected to those invalid acts.
November 24, 2025 at 6:37 PM
Ultimately, I believe the Supreme Court’s Appointments Clause jurisprudence provides the answer to the with-or-without-prejudice question. In both Ryder and Lucia, the Court essentially unwound the actions taken by the unconstitutionally appointed officer ...
November 24, 2025 at 6:37 PM
From the decision (thread):

Having found that Ms. Halligan’s appointment violated 28 U.S.C. § 546 and the Appointments Clause and that dismissal of Ms. James’s indictment is warranted, the remaining issue is whether dismissal should be with or without prejudice.
November 24, 2025 at 6:37 PM
TBF, it's really hard to come up with coherent blather about wildly incoherent economic policies.
November 23, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Right. But only because we already know about Kid Rock.
November 23, 2025 at 12:52 AM
Perhaps the Honorable Secretary of the Treasury has overlooked the fact that flies can... you know... fly.
November 20, 2025 at 7:01 PM
He's right, Tr*mp is not violent. He merely calls for violence and lets others do the dirty work for him.
November 20, 2025 at 6:24 PM
One very sad lesson of the Tr*mp era: a large majority of elected officials -- of both parties -- seem to care more about keeping their jobs than upholding the principles they espouse.
November 20, 2025 at 5:56 PM