Space Cadet
@who-is-this-is.bsky.social
Fly me to the moon. Let me play among the stars. Let me see what spring is like on a-Jupiter and Mars.
Renowned economist Ron Vara also says "In an age of AI when all the white collar jobs are going away pretty damn quick, I think maybe it's a good time for people to think about having good blue collar jobs ... give tariffs a chance, because they're working"
December 23, 2025 at 2:54 PM
Renowned economist Ron Vara also says "In an age of AI when all the white collar jobs are going away pretty damn quick, I think maybe it's a good time for people to think about having good blue collar jobs ... give tariffs a chance, because they're working"
Hiding under their desk.
December 21, 2025 at 6:29 PM
Hiding under their desk.
We're taking sides in a cartel war.
This is the last season of Ozark.
This is the last season of Ozark.
December 21, 2025 at 6:29 PM
We're taking sides in a cartel war.
This is the last season of Ozark.
This is the last season of Ozark.
Right, MJ didn't need to pay Epstein to get his hands on young children. He had fans just dropping their kids off at his compound for unsupervised overnight visits.
December 21, 2025 at 7:11 AM
Right, MJ didn't need to pay Epstein to get his hands on young children. He had fans just dropping their kids off at his compound for unsupervised overnight visits.
The discovery in a "Bubba" prosecution would be something else.
December 20, 2025 at 3:01 PM
The discovery in a "Bubba" prosecution would be something else.
Totally unrelated...
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
US launches airstrikes against dozens of Islamic State targets in Syria
Attacks come after two US soldiers and interpreter killed as Trump says US inflicting ‘very serious retaliation’
www.theguardian.com
December 20, 2025 at 1:23 PM
Totally unrelated...
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
"Democrat hoax."
December 20, 2025 at 1:11 PM
"Democrat hoax."
Omfg, putting words in my mouth AGAIN. 🤣
I never even brought up political parties, and I don't care.
I blame Garland for his own (in)actions.
It seems you bleed blue and are gonna defend him because he's a Dem, no matter how implausible your explanations are.
I won't give him a free pass.
I never even brought up political parties, and I don't care.
I blame Garland for his own (in)actions.
It seems you bleed blue and are gonna defend him because he's a Dem, no matter how implausible your explanations are.
I won't give him a free pass.
December 20, 2025 at 4:35 AM
Omfg, putting words in my mouth AGAIN. 🤣
I never even brought up political parties, and I don't care.
I blame Garland for his own (in)actions.
It seems you bleed blue and are gonna defend him because he's a Dem, no matter how implausible your explanations are.
I won't give him a free pass.
I never even brought up political parties, and I don't care.
I blame Garland for his own (in)actions.
It seems you bleed blue and are gonna defend him because he's a Dem, no matter how implausible your explanations are.
I won't give him a free pass.
"Career prosecutors proposed expanding the investigation to include Trump and his advisers in 2021, but these proposals were rejected by Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI leaders, partly due to concerns that such a move would appear too political."
December 20, 2025 at 4:24 AM
"Career prosecutors proposed expanding the investigation to include Trump and his advisers in 2021, but these proposals were rejected by Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI leaders, partly due to concerns that such a move would appear too political."
Not my timeline... THEE timeline.
And you're putting words in my mouth again.
I said Garland started looking at Trump at 15 months, and Smith was named closer to 20 months in. I didn't say it started with Smith.
Please share your source for your Sep '21 assertion.
Calling bs on that.
And you're putting words in my mouth again.
I said Garland started looking at Trump at 15 months, and Smith was named closer to 20 months in. I didn't say it started with Smith.
Please share your source for your Sep '21 assertion.
Calling bs on that.
December 20, 2025 at 4:24 AM
Not my timeline... THEE timeline.
And you're putting words in my mouth again.
I said Garland started looking at Trump at 15 months, and Smith was named closer to 20 months in. I didn't say it started with Smith.
Please share your source for your Sep '21 assertion.
Calling bs on that.
And you're putting words in my mouth again.
I said Garland started looking at Trump at 15 months, and Smith was named closer to 20 months in. I didn't say it started with Smith.
Please share your source for your Sep '21 assertion.
Calling bs on that.
Lol. Both of you keep trying to put words in my mouth that I just didn't say.
It's really fucking weird.
You keep dodging the facts and timeline I'm refering to, and instead respond to shit I didn't even say.
You can't refute the fact that Garland waited 15 months to investigate Trump.
It's really fucking weird.
You keep dodging the facts and timeline I'm refering to, and instead respond to shit I didn't even say.
You can't refute the fact that Garland waited 15 months to investigate Trump.
December 19, 2025 at 11:35 PM
Lol. Both of you keep trying to put words in my mouth that I just didn't say.
It's really fucking weird.
You keep dodging the facts and timeline I'm refering to, and instead respond to shit I didn't even say.
You can't refute the fact that Garland waited 15 months to investigate Trump.
It's really fucking weird.
You keep dodging the facts and timeline I'm refering to, and instead respond to shit I didn't even say.
You can't refute the fact that Garland waited 15 months to investigate Trump.
Maybe. But that is not an excuse for Garland's dereliction of duty.
What you guys don't want to admit/accept is that Garland is a part of the same apparatus that sheilds rich and powerful people from accountability, like Scotus.
Same apparatus that has kept Epstein files under wraps for decades.
What you guys don't want to admit/accept is that Garland is a part of the same apparatus that sheilds rich and powerful people from accountability, like Scotus.
Same apparatus that has kept Epstein files under wraps for decades.
December 19, 2025 at 9:10 PM
Maybe. But that is not an excuse for Garland's dereliction of duty.
What you guys don't want to admit/accept is that Garland is a part of the same apparatus that sheilds rich and powerful people from accountability, like Scotus.
Same apparatus that has kept Epstein files under wraps for decades.
What you guys don't want to admit/accept is that Garland is a part of the same apparatus that sheilds rich and powerful people from accountability, like Scotus.
Same apparatus that has kept Epstein files under wraps for decades.
Never went to trial, because...
1) Garland wasted 15 months befor even starting looking at Trump inner circle.
2)Scotus immunity decision.
3)Smith had to re-indict under new parameters of Scotus ruling.
4)By that time the clock had run out because Garland wasted 15 months on the front end.
1) Garland wasted 15 months befor even starting looking at Trump inner circle.
2)Scotus immunity decision.
3)Smith had to re-indict under new parameters of Scotus ruling.
4)By that time the clock had run out because Garland wasted 15 months on the front end.
December 19, 2025 at 9:03 PM
Never went to trial, because...
1) Garland wasted 15 months befor even starting looking at Trump inner circle.
2)Scotus immunity decision.
3)Smith had to re-indict under new parameters of Scotus ruling.
4)By that time the clock had run out because Garland wasted 15 months on the front end.
1) Garland wasted 15 months befor even starting looking at Trump inner circle.
2)Scotus immunity decision.
3)Smith had to re-indict under new parameters of Scotus ruling.
4)By that time the clock had run out because Garland wasted 15 months on the front end.
Release the flies!
December 19, 2025 at 3:11 PM
Release the flies!
"Democrat hoax."
December 19, 2025 at 3:09 PM
"Democrat hoax."
1)Of couse speed matters. "Justice delayed is justice denied."
2)Cannon had nothing to do with J6 case, it was Chutkin.
3)Smith didn't bring RICO case, it was Willis.
4)You've got cases garbled up in your head and are conflating things that are unrelated, or just factually inaccurate.
2)Cannon had nothing to do with J6 case, it was Chutkin.
3)Smith didn't bring RICO case, it was Willis.
4)You've got cases garbled up in your head and are conflating things that are unrelated, or just factually inaccurate.
December 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
1)Of couse speed matters. "Justice delayed is justice denied."
2)Cannon had nothing to do with J6 case, it was Chutkin.
3)Smith didn't bring RICO case, it was Willis.
4)You've got cases garbled up in your head and are conflating things that are unrelated, or just factually inaccurate.
2)Cannon had nothing to do with J6 case, it was Chutkin.
3)Smith didn't bring RICO case, it was Willis.
4)You've got cases garbled up in your head and are conflating things that are unrelated, or just factually inaccurate.
Name one witness that DOJ got testimony from BEFORE the J6 Committe.
December 19, 2025 at 7:57 AM
Name one witness that DOJ got testimony from BEFORE the J6 Committe.
I've shared multiple articles from multiple sources backing what I'm sharing. Did you read any?
But, what is factually inaccurate about The Nation article?
You say I don't understand the import of the facts, and The Nation are reflexively anti-establishment, but you're not disproving any facts.
But, what is factually inaccurate about The Nation article?
You say I don't understand the import of the facts, and The Nation are reflexively anti-establishment, but you're not disproving any facts.
December 19, 2025 at 7:54 AM
I've shared multiple articles from multiple sources backing what I'm sharing. Did you read any?
But, what is factually inaccurate about The Nation article?
You say I don't understand the import of the facts, and The Nation are reflexively anti-establishment, but you're not disproving any facts.
But, what is factually inaccurate about The Nation article?
You say I don't understand the import of the facts, and The Nation are reflexively anti-establishment, but you're not disproving any facts.