Профиль

Boutose: Sorry. I didn't mean it. Let's move on. McNally: Nah, that ain't gonna cut it.

Excellent piece, Julie. I've developed a headache over the exchanges that I've had on this app with "progressive" men over this topic. E.g., bsky.app/profile/prom...

No self-respecting non-white lawyer would be caught dead joining this civil rights division.

You either don't understand or you're being obtuse. The penalty in this context is not serving in the U.S. Senate. Again, this is an election, not a criminal trial. Why is this concept so hard for you?

So you're also conflating a U.S. Senate election with a criminal proceeding, while mansplaining how SA victims should react to their assault. Hint: There is no constitutional right to serve in the Senate. If Platner wants his day in court, he's free to sue his accusers for defamation.

It's one of a million examples of why women decline to pursue criminal charges against men who assault them. You appear to be ignorant of that reality. As for Platner, he was running to serve as a U.S. Senator, not facing a criminal trial. Learn the difference.

Pathetic. Educate yourself. bsky.app/profile/muel...

Your statement presents a false dichotomy as a gotcha. The NYT reports that she originally "declined to share further details of that encounter on the record." Google what that means.

100% hubris.

In other words, Hegseth was either lying or stupid when he said in April: "Epic Fury decimated Iran’s military and rendered it combat ineffective for years."

As the post-judgment interest at 11% continues to accrue.

No, because I know the difference between joining the military as a service member subject to the UCMJ (e.g., Duckworth, Gallego, Crow, Moulton), and joining the successor to a war crimes company as a merc during Trump I; but you apparently don't, while taking campaign talking points at face value.

"He didn't work for the war crimes company, he worked for the war crimes company's successor because he was bored" is a very convincing campaign talking point.

Also, your characterization of Jenny Racicot's prior statements to the NYT is offensive and inaccurate. www.nytimes.com/2026/07/06/u...

Prior to the 2016 election, Trump faced numerous charges of sexual assault & misconduct, none of which had been adjudicated in court at that time, while his accusers were disparaged and dismissed. Under your standard, it was appropriate for voters to ignore those allegations.

bsky.app/profile/prom...

It's clear that there is even stronger evidence of express micromanagement by the White House.

Clear case of "why not both?" here.

Indeed. Self-oppo research isn't complicated these days. At a minimum, the public social media paper trail and his Blackwater employment should have been sufficient disqualifying factors from day 1 of even considering supporting him.

Please. You're making the same arguments made by Trump's apologists. This isn't a criminal trial. A candidate for U.S. senator can be patently disqualified for office without being convicted of criminal charges based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.