Category: Courts / Laws / legal
‘I Look Like an Expert’: The Sexologist Testifying Against Trans Youth Care [WATCH]
This article is long but worth the read. This expert refuses to talk to trans people and has never treated a trans person. His knowledge is from what he believes to be true color by his biases, so he also ignores the views of the majority of medical societies opinions and views. The so called expert refuses to accept that anyone at any age felt they were trans without someone putting the idea in their head someway. To him it is not natural so it can’t exist. He thinks being gay is wanting to be the other sex, so a gay male wants to be female and he questions if they can be any happier as the other sex. And he is a gay man himself. This is who the anti-trans Christian haters hire to lie about trans issues so that they have cover to make bans on needed gender-affirming medical care. Plus he is a real prima donna wanting the center stage and being the star. Hugs
No. See? It’s not either one. The tiny fraction of repris- One in tens of thousands who, at this point, kind of essentially born gay, but so gay, they really are happier living as the other sex. Won’t know it until later in life, but they exist.
No 8-year-old ever said that. Eight-year-olds repeat what they’re told, and what they are getting told are from activists. It’s not credible to say that all of this existed, this was so extreme and obvious, and nobody ever noticed it, including the experts doing the research on it who could have gone either way. But everybody all of a sudden noticed it at exactly the same time when smartphones got invented and hit 15 percent. That’s just a coincidence that the demographic who is doing this the most are exactly the same demographic most given to other social contagion issues. Usually young adolescent females, the same group most likely to report suicidality. Not actual suicide, but suicidality. Most likely to report eating disorders. Most likely to dislike their bodies. All sheer coincidence!
But what about so there’s 8-year-olds can’t say that? Sure, I understand that argument. But there’s 14-year-olds, 17-year-olds, 25-year-olds, 40-year-olds. There are people of every single age.
JC:Find me one who didn’t get it from the website.
SM: Who didn’t get being transgender from a website?
JC: Ah ah ah.The “my rights, you’re hurting us,” the “suicide.” Verbatim they are all saying the same thing. None of these are their words. These are words that they’re repeating because of everybody else in their social group.
SM: I want to be clear, because I want to make sure we characterize everything accurately. Do you believe that all transgender people are trans due to social contagion?
JC: No.
SM:. So you believe a lot of people are born trans and feel that way from birth?
JC:
SM: But you said one in 10,000—
JC:We also have a cluster who, until they’re in their 40s or 50s, are just turned on by the idea of being female. They’re attracted to women. They’re not gay. They’re always men. So we have one in tens of thousands and one in tens of thousands. And then we have this 5% of the entire population which came out of nowhere when smartphones were invented. They are dominating the conversation. They, except for one in ten thousand, they are not trans. They just hate their own bodies and here’s a narrative that’s close enough that says, “It’s not me, it’s everybody else on the planet and somebody else, no effort to me, I just have to lie there, the doctor will come and fix me. It’s not that I have issues to work on because I hate my body.” Taking the easy way out.
———————————————————————————————————————————–
https://www.unclosetedmedia.com/p/i-look-like-an-expert-the-sexologist
James Cantor, who has never treated a trans kid, has testified in dozens of cases concerning gender-affirming care for minors in the U.S.
Thurgood Marshall, Lech Walensa, & Much More, In Peace & Justice History for 8/30
| August 30, 1963 A “hotline” telephone link was installed between the Kremlin in Moscow and the White House in Washington, D.C. The intention was to allow direct communication in the event of a crisis between the U.S. president and the leader of the Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.). It had been agreed to following the Cuban Missile Crisis. |
| August 30, 1964 The Democratic Party National Convention refused to seat any delegates from the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP). The Credentials Committee chose to seat the all-white delegation from Mississippi’s regular Democratic Party despite overwhelming evidence of the state party’s efforts to disenfranchise Mississippi’s Negro citizens. A proposed compromise of two non-voting guest delegates from MFDP was rejected by its leaders. The dispute, the political intrigue, and the long-term effects |
| August 30, 1967 The Senate confirmed the appointment of Thurgood Marshall as the first Supreme Court Justice of African-American descent. Marshall had been counsel to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and had been the lead attorney in the Brown v. Board of Education case. He was appointed to the Court by President Lyndon Johnson after having served as Solicitor General of the U.S. for two years, and on the U.S. Court of Appeals for four.  Thurgood Marshall Who was Thurgood Marshall? NAACP |
| August 30, 1971 Ten empty school busses were dynamited in Pontiac, Michigan, eight days before a school integration plan was to begin. Following Federal Judge Damon Keith’s finding that Pontiac’s school board had “intentionally” perpetuated segregation, a plan was developed by the board that included bussing of 8700 children.  The bombers were later identified as leaders and members of the Ku Klux Klan, arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned. |
| August 30, 1980 Striking Polish workers, their numbers approaching 150,000, won a sweeping victory in a battle with the Polish Communist government for the right to independent trade unions and the right to strike. Their lead negotiator was Lech Walesa, head of the union, Solidarnos´c´ (Solidarity).  Lech Walesa announces the deal to cheering crowds of shipyard workers. |
| August 30, 1999 Residents of East Timor voted for independence from Indonesia in a U.N.-sponsored election. More about the East Timor election |
https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryaugust.htm#august30
About The Foreign Aid Funding Case-
The D.C. Circuit’s realpolitik orders in the foreign aid funding case by Chris Geidner
What happened? Law Dork digs in. Read on Substack
A federal appeals court on Thursday evening took steps that Democratic appointees wrote could represent that best possible way of helping organizations funded by foreign aid payments to get money before a quickly approaching September 30 deadline.
It was the latest unusual sets of rulings in a case challenging the Trump administration’s efforts to cut foreign aid funding — raising the “impoundment” question about the president’s ability not to spend money that Congress has, with its control over appropriations, directed the federal government to spend — that has been up to the U.S. Supreme Court already twice this year.
On Thursday evening over the course of 30 minutes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit took seven actions that ultimately sent the case — technically, a pair of cases — back to the district court, where it is before U.S. District Judge Amir Ali.
It was a stark sign of where we’re at: Judges on the court generally thought of as second only to the Supreme Court taking strategic steps to try to protect people and organizations’ rights due to the ways other branches — and actors within their own branch — are failing to do so. (snip-go read the rest, if you’re interested. It’s very well-written.)
This is a thread on Bluesky. One doesn’t need an account to read there. It’s also an excellent explanation.
This was an extraordinarily shrewd *and* principled resolution by the en banc court, in a case in which the various arguments in the trial court and on appeal were *almost* hopelessly entangled and hard to parse. Of greatest importance are two things: [1]
[image or embed]— Marty Lederman (@martylederman.bsky.social) August 28, 2025 at 7:48 PM
And I got this all on Friday, but was out for a while, so here it is for Saturday mid-morning beverage. https://morningmemo.talkingpointsmemo.com/i/172269056/for-the-legal-nerds –A.
Catching Up With Clay Jones & Open Windows
We were out for a while yesterday, so I didn’t get as much done here. I have a trove, and here it is:
Dear Leader’s cabinet meeting by Ann Telnaes
A three hour marathon of flattery and groveling Read on Substack
I didn’t think the outright ass-kissing could get any worse than his first term’s cabinet meetings…
====================
Your Favorite Dictator by Clay Jones
Trump engages in dictator talk…again Read on Substack
Why would Donald Trump talk about becoming an American dictator…again?
NBC News reporter: Before signing a series of executive orders aimed at reducing crime in D.C. and across the nation, Trump referred to his critics bashing him for sending the National Guard to D.C., claiming that some people think they might “like a dictator.”
Referring to militarizing our cities, Trump said, “They say, ‘We don’t need him, freedom freedom. He’s a dictator. He’s a dictator.’ A lot of people are saying, ‘Maybe we like a dictator’…You send in troops, and instead of being praised they’re saying you’re trying to take over the republic. These people are sick.”
Before the election, Trump talked about “deleting” parts of the Constitution he doesn’t like. Then, he talked about becoming a dictator for one day. Now, he says some people in this country want a dictator, but to whom is he referring to that would be that dictator? I think we all know the answer. The dictator talk is so disturbing that everyone missed that part where he whines that he’s not being praised. (snip-MORE; go read it!)
Mass Mass Shooting by Clay Jones
And another school shooting Read on Substack
(The money graf: “Even the shooter offered “thoughts and prayers” to the intended victims. So, quite frankly, every single Republican’s answer to this isn’t any better than the shooter’s solution.”)
Another mass shooting and another opportunity for Republicans to give us empty thoughts and prayers instead of real solutions. You can’t find a solution when you can’t even identify the problem.
Today’s mass shooting just so happened to take place during a Mass.
An 8-year-old and a 10-year-old were killed while sitting in pews during a Mass at the Annunciation Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota. At least 17 people have been injured. The students were from the adjacent Annunciation Catholic School.
Robin Westman, a 23-year-old, has been identified as the shooter and shot through the windows from outside the church. Westman identified as a woman and had changed her name from Robert to Robin. The right-wing fucknuts are going to love this, but they’ll ignore the parts about the mental issues and racism.
The shooter left a manifesto that called for the destruction of Israel and included racist slurs. Westman flashed a white supremacy sign in a video that showed the shooter’s massive gun collection. The shooter admired those responsible for the massacres at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, and the mosque shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, among others. (snip-MORE, and it’s good info)
Assault Sandwich Ban by Clay Jones
Anything to avoid the truth. Read on Substack
There’s a saying in the legal system that a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. It’s a criticism of the prosecutorial system because a prosecutor has near-total control of the evidence presented to a grand jury, the defense is not present, and the jury only has to be convinced a crime was committed without a real burden of proof, and on the flimsiest charges.
On Tuesday, a grand jury in Washington, DC, refused to indict Sean Charles Dunn, who is accused of throwing a Subway sandwich at a Border Patrol agent. This is a huge loss for US Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who was hired only because Donald Trump liked the way she looked on Fox News. She’s very hateful and always outraged. This is also a failure for Attorney General Pam Bondi, who declared the sandwich attack was part of the “deep state.
I don’t think we have to worry about a “deep state” if the worst they can do is throw sandwiches at cops.
Anyone charged with a federal felony must be indicted by a grand jury. The problem for Trump’s regime is that the voters in Washington, DC, are some of the most intelligent, most educated, and most aware of the issues. These are not West Virginia voters. You would think that if you wanted to indict someone with a felony, you wouldn’t call a grand jury while the city is occupied by the military.
You would think that with the government’s reaction to the sandwich attack, the accused had used one of the weapons used to murder children at a Catholic Church in Minneapolis this week. The Trump regime and Republicans have more outrage over an assault by a sandwich than outrage over a school shooting. (snip-MORE if you can handle it)
Reblog Of A Reblog: Resist!
Two clips from The Majority Report on the democratic leadership.
The Breakfast Club’s Charlemagne Tha God delivers a devastating new nickname for Hakeem Jeffries. We explain why the Jeffries and the Democratic establishment are so afraid of being challenged from the left, especially on issues like Israel and the influence of AIPAC.
The 2025 Netroots conference is over and David Weigel joins to break down the key takeaways, from a surprising lack of donor support to the crucial debate over how politicians should communicate their message.
Bright Lights In The Dark
I read about this in a few places yesterday, then last night, Joyce Vance’s came in, so here it is. She’s expert and dependable. -A.
No Bill! by Joyce Vance
The Good News You Need Read on Substack
When a grand jury returns an indictment, it’s called a true bill. On those exceedingly rare occasions where they decline to sign off on an indictment prosecutors present to them, it’s called a no bill. In 25 years at DOJ, I never had a grand jury no bill one of my cases. And I can only recall a couple of instances where it happened in the entire district.
Donald Trump’s new U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia can’t say that. Former judge, Fox News host, and defendant in a defamation case where she is accused of spreading false information about voter fraud, Jeanine Pirro, recently received three no bills—all in the same case. The U.S. Attorney’s Office tried to charge Sydney Lori Reid with felony assault on three separate occasions this month, but the grand jury declined to do so. CNN reports that “In one case this month — related to an FBI agent and an immigration officer allegedly scrapping with a detainee — the federal grand jury in Washington voted ‘no’ three times.”
Proceedings inside of the grand jury are conducted in secret, so there is no way of knowing why the grand jury rejected the charge. Typically, if a grand jury expresses some hesitation over a case, prosecutors will bring in additional witnesses or offer counsel about relevant laws to help alleviate their concerns. To fail to indict not once, but three times, indicates a failure of both competence and judgment.
When asked about her failure, Pirro responded, “Sometimes a jury will buy it and sometimes they won’t. So be it, that’s the way the process works.” But that’s not true. The standard for obtaining an indictment is a low one: The prosecution need only persuade the grand jury that probable cause to proceed on the charges exists. That’s a far lower bar than the requirement that the government prove a crime was committed beyond a reasonable doubt before a trial jury can convict. Any prosecutor who doesn’t back off of a case where they can’t even convince grand jurors that probable cause exists, knowing that much more will be expected of them at trial, is wasting taxpayer resources. Prosecutors have plenty of cases. Move on and do a righteous one. But apparently, that’s not how the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office operates these days.
Prosecutors, who have 30 days following an arrest like Reid’s to obtain an indictment, told a judge they now plan to bring misdemeanor charges against Reid. Misdemeanor charges can be brought by prosecutors without the need to present them to a grand jury for approval. But we already know at least some of the facts in the case, because a statement of facts was filed in support of the arrest warrant.
The affidavit alleges that Reid assaulted FBI agent Eugenia Bates. Reid was video recording agents outside of the D.C. jail, where at least two individuals were being arrested as “known gang members” and transferred into ICE custody. Reid was directed to step back, and according to the affidavit, she “got in Officer Lang’s face.” He said she smelled of alcohol and tried to interfere with the transfer of custody. According to the government, an officer pushed her against a wall, but she continued to struggle after being told to stop.
Here’s the heart of the allegation against Reid: “Agent Bates came to Office[r] Lang’s assistance in trying to control REID. REID was flailing her arms and kicking and had to be pinned against a cement wall. During the struggle, REID forcefully pushed Agent Bates’s hand against the cement wall. This caused lacerations on the back side of Agent Bates’s left hand.”
To convict on the federal felony assault charge, the government would have to establish that Reid forcibly assaulted a federal agent. A “forcible assault” is an intentional threat or attempt to cause serious bodily injury by a person who has the apparent ability to do so, including any intentional display of force that would cause a reasonable person to expect immediate and serious bodily harm or death. The statement of facts alleges that Reid “intentionally and forcibly obstructed the transfer of suspects into FBI custody and made physical contact with FBI Agent Eugenia Bates and inflicted bodily injury in violation.” The grand jury didn’t buy, despite having three opportunities to do so, that there was probable cause, let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt, to believe that some or all of that happened.
The lacerations, which were pictured in the statement of facts and presumably shown to the grand jury, seem relatively minor. And it’s difficult to see, at least with this statement of the facts, how a grand jury could conclude, as it must, that Reid was the cause of those “lacerations” or even acting voluntarily when they happened. Assuming they could prove all of that, even small cuts like these could hypertechnically constitute assault. But it’s easy to imagine a grand jury viewing charging it as a felony as overreaching.
Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan will hold a hearing in the matter on Thursday morning at 11:30.
The grand jury process still works as a check and balance on prosecutors, as the Constitution intends. Trump may want you to think he’s all-powerful, but guardrails are still in place. His administration can’t bring felony charges without a grand jury’s approval, an important protection not just for Ms. Reid but for others, as DOJ’s portfolio of revenge investigations continues to grow.
We talked previously about a grand jury in Los Angeles that declined to indict. Now, it’s spread to D.C. And grand juries are only the first layer of guardrails in the criminal justice system, where they are joined by trial juries, judges, and the appellate process.
You’ve heard the line—the one that says prosecutors can indict a ham sandwich, that it’s just that easy. Next stop in D.C., seeing whether they can indict a Subway sandwich. They should think twice after their experience in Ms. Reid’s case with bringing marginal prosecutions to please the president. That’s not justice.
(snip)
We’re in this together,
Joyce
‘Gates of Hell’: Chris Smalls Describes Israeli Military’s Brutal, Racist Treatment
IL Gov. JB Pritzker Speaks For Many Of We The People
Kinda thinkin’ of moving to Chicago. I still have some relatives around there; not to live with, but that I know people who know me.
Video is embedded on the page, for those who prefer to watch/listen.
Full text of Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker’s speech at news conference on reported Trump military plan for Chicago
By CBS Chicago Team Updated on: August 26, 2025 / 9:16 AM CDT / CBS Chicago
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker spoke at a news conference Monday afternoon, addressing reports President Trump is planning to send the military to Chicago. Here is the full text of his remarks.
I want to speak plainly about the moment that we are in and the actual crisis, not the manufactured one, that we are facing in this city, and as a state, and as a country. If it sounds to you like I am alarmist, that is because I am ringing an alarm, one that I hope every person listening will heed, both here in Illinois and across the country.
Over the weekend, we learned from the media that Donald Trump has been planning, for quite a while now, to deploy armed military personnel to the streets of Chicago. This is exactly the type of overreach that our country’s founders warned against, and it’s the reason that they established a federal system with a separation of powers built on checks and balances.
What President Trump is doing is unprecedented and unwarranted. It is illegal. It is unconstitutional. It is un-American.
No one from the White House or the executive branch has reached out to me or to the mayor. No one has reached out to our staffs. No effort has been made to coordinate or to ask for our assistance in identifying any actions that might be helpful to us. Local law enforcement has not been contacted. We have made no requests for federal intervention. None.
We found out what Donald Trump was planning the same way that all of you did: We read a story in The Washington Post.
If this was really about fighting crime and making the streets safe, what possible justification could the White House have for planning such an exceptional action without any conversations or consultations with the governor, the mayor, or the police?
Let me answer that question: This is not about fighting crime. This is about Donald Trump searching for any justification to deploy the military in a blue city, in a blue state, to try and intimidate his political rivals.
This is about the president of the United States and his complicit lackey, Stephen Miller, searching for ways to lay the groundwork to circumvent our democracy, militarize our cities and end elections.
There is no emergency in Chicago that calls for armed military intervention. There is no inter- insurrection. There is no insurrection. Like every major American city in both blue and red states, we deal with crime in Chicago. Indeed, the violent crime rate is worse in red states and red cities.
Here in Chicago, our civilian police force and elected leaders work every day to combat crime and to improve public safety, and it’s working.
Not one person here today will claim we have solved all crime in Chicago, nor can that be said of any major American metro area. But calling the military into a U.S. city to invade our streets and neighborhoods and disrupt the lives of everyday people is an extraordinary action, and it should require extraordinary justification.
Look around you right now. Does this look like an emergency? Look at this. Go talk to the people of Chicago who are enjoying a gorgeous afternoon in this city. Ask the families buying ice cream on the Riverwalk. Go see the students who are at the beach after school. Talk to the workers that I just met taking the water taxi to get here. Find a family who’s enjoying today sitting on their front porch and ask if they want their neighborhoods turned into a war zone by a wannabe dictator. Ask if they’d like to pass through a checkpoint with unidentified officers in masks while taking their kids to school.
Crime is a reality we all face in this country. Public safety has been among our highest priorities since taking office. We have hired more police and given them more funding.
We banned assault weapons, ghost guns, bump stocks, and high-capacity magazines. We invested historic amounts into community violence intervention programs. We listened to our local communities, to the people who live and work in the places that are most affected by crime and asked them what they needed to help make their neighborhoods safer.
Those strategies have been working. Crime is dropping in Chicago. Murders are down 32% compared to last year and nearly cut in half since 2021.
Shootings are down 37% since last year, and 57% from four years ago. Robberies are down 34% year over year. Burglaries down 21%. Motor vehicle thefts down 26%.
So in case there was any doubt as to the motivation behind Trump’s military occupations, take note: 13 of the top 20 cities in homicide rate have Republican governors. None of these cities is Chicago.
Eight of the top 10 states with the highest homicide rates are led by Republicans. None of those states is Illinois.
Memphis, Tennessee; Hattiesburg, Mississippi have higher crime rates than Chicago, and yet Donald Trump is sending troops here and not there? Ask yourself why.
If Donald Trump was actually serious about fighting crime in cities like Chicago, he, along with his congressional Republicans, would not be cutting over $800 million in public safety and crime prevention grants nationally, including cutting $158 million in funding to Illinois for violence prevention programs that deploy trained outreach workers to deescalate conflict on our streets. Cutting $71 million in law enforcement grants to Illinois, direct money for police departments through programs like Project Safe Neighborhoods, the state and local Antiterrorism Training Program, and the Rural Violent Crime Reduction Initiative, cutting $137 million in child protection measures in Illinois that protect our kids against abuse and neglect.
Trump is defunding the police.
To the members of the press who are assembled here today, and listening across the country, I am asking for your courage to tell it like it is.
This is not a time to pretend here that there are two sides to this story. This is not a time to fall back into the reflexive crouch that I so often see, where the authoritarian creep by this administration is ignored in favor of some horse race piece on who will be helped politically by the president’s actions.
Donald Trump wants to use the military to occupy a U.S. city, punish his dissidence, and score political points. If this were happening in any other country, we would have no trouble calling it what it is: a dangerous power grab.
Look at the people assembled before you today, behind me. This is a full cross-section of Chicago’s leaders from the business world, the faith community, law enforcement, education, community organizations, and more. We sometimes disagree on how to effectively solve the many challenges that our state and our city face on a daily basis. But today, we are standing here united, in public, in front of the cameras, unafraid to tell the president that his proposed actions will make our jobs harder and the lives of our residents worse.
Earlier today in the Oval Office, Donald Trump looked at the assembled cameras and asked for me personally to say, “Mr. President, can you do us the honor of protecting our city?” Instead, I say, “Mr. President, do not come to Chicago.”
You are neither wanted here nor needed here. Your remarks about this effort over the last several weeks have betrayed a continuing slip in your mental faculties and are not fit for the auspicious office that you occupy.
Most alarming, you seem to lack any appropriate concern as our commander-in-chief for the members of the military that you would so callously deploy as pawns in your ever-more-alarming grabs for power.
As a governor, I’ve had to make the decision in the past to call up members of the National Guard into active service, and I think it’s worth taking a moment to reflect on how seriously I take that responsibility, and on the many things that I consider before asking these brave men and women to leave their homes and their communities to serve in any capacity for us.
As I’ve said many times in the past, members of the National Guard are not trained to serve as law enforcement. They are trained for the battlefield, and they’re good at it. They’re not trained to arrest people and read them their Miranda rights. They did not sign up for the National Guard to fight crime. And when we call them into service, we are reaching into local communities and taking people who have jobs and families away from their neighborhoods and the people who rely upon them.
It is insulting to their integrity and to the extraordinary sacrifices that they make to serve in the Guard to use them as a political prop, where they could be put in situations where they will be at odds with their local communities, the ones that they seek to serve.
I know Donald Trump doesn’t care about the well-being of the members of our military, but I do and so do all the people standing here.
So let me speak to all Illinoisans and to all Chicagoans right now. Hopefully the president will reconsider this dangerous and misguided encroachment upon our state and our city’s sovereignty. Hopefully rational voices, if there are any left inside the White House or the Pentagon, will prevail in the coming days. If not, we are going to face an unprecedented and difficult time ahead.
But I know you Chicago, and I know you are up to it. When you protest, do it peacefully. Be sure to continue Chicago’s long tradition of nonviolent resistance. Remember that the members of the military and the National Guard who will be asked to walk these streets are, for the most part, here unwillingly. And remember that they can be court martialed and their lives ruined if they resist deployment. Look to the members of the faith community standing behind me today for guidance on how to mobilize.
To my fellow governors across the nation who would consider pulling your National Guards from their duties at home to come into my state against the wishes of its elected representatives and its people, you would be failing your constituents and your country. Cooperation and coordination between our states is vital to the fabric of our nation and it benefits us all. Any action undercutting that and violating the sacred sovereignty of our state to cater to the ego of a dictator will be responded to.
The State of Illinois is ready to stand against this military deployment with every peaceful tool we have. We will see the Trump administration in court. We will use every lever at our disposal to protect the people of Illinois and their rights.
Finally, to the Trump administration officials who are complicit in this scheme, to the public servants who have forsaken their oath to the Constitution to serve the petty whims of an arrogant little man, to any federal official who would come to Chicago and try to incite my people into violence as a pretext for something darker and more dangerous: we are watching and we are taking names.
This country has survived darker periods than the one that we are going through right now, and eventually the pendulum will swing back, maybe even next year. Donald Trump has already shown himself to have little regard for the many acolytes that he has encouraged to commit crimes on his behalf.
You can delay justice for a time, but history shows you cannot prevent it from finding you eventually. If you hurt my people, nothing will stop me, not time or political circumstance, from making sure that you face justice under our constitutional rule of law.
As Dr. King once said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Humbly I would add, it doesn’t bend on its own. History tells us we often have to apply force needed to make sure that the arc gets where it needs to go. This is one of those times.
Scottie's Playtime 