Amanda Carpenter

And so as he goes into his second term with all of these plans to expand his power and stamp out independence at federal agencies, that immunity does not apply to everyone at the Department of Justice, to everyone at the Department of Homeland Security, at the Department of Defense.

And so as he goes into his second term with all of these plans to expand his power and stamp out independence at federal agencies, that immunity does not apply to everyone at the Department of Justice, to everyone at the Department of Homeland Security, at the Department of Defense.

And so as he goes into his second term with all of these plans to expand his power and stamp out independence at federal agencies, that immunity does not apply to everyone at the Department of Justice, to everyone at the Department of Homeland Security, at the Department of Defense.

And we should be very clear about that and make that distinction known to everyone who is entering that administration.

And we should be very clear about that and make that distinction known to everyone who is entering that administration.

And we should be very clear about that and make that distinction known to everyone who is entering that administration.

I am inclined to think and I'm saying think because I don't have enough information to fully believe this is true. And maybe it's just kind of what I'm hoping. is that recognizing the fact that these judges are political actors, are they essentially sort of hiding behind Justice Barrett and allowing her to take the hit?

I am inclined to think and I'm saying think because I don't have enough information to fully believe this is true. And maybe it's just kind of what I'm hoping. is that recognizing the fact that these judges are political actors, are they essentially sort of hiding behind Justice Barrett and allowing her to take the hit?

I am inclined to think and I'm saying think because I don't have enough information to fully believe this is true. And maybe it's just kind of what I'm hoping. is that recognizing the fact that these judges are political actors, are they essentially sort of hiding behind Justice Barrett and allowing her to take the hit?

And I don't believe this extends really to Justice Thomas, but she forecasts that she believed in drawing this distinction earlier on. And so did they just have a pretty good understanding that Roberts and Coney Barrett will take the hit on this and they will make sure that it was a 5-4 decision. And we can essentially vote no and get all the kudos from MAGA from it that accrues, right?

And I don't believe this extends really to Justice Thomas, but she forecasts that she believed in drawing this distinction earlier on. And so did they just have a pretty good understanding that Roberts and Coney Barrett will take the hit on this and they will make sure that it was a 5-4 decision. And we can essentially vote no and get all the kudos from MAGA from it that accrues, right?

And I don't believe this extends really to Justice Thomas, but she forecasts that she believed in drawing this distinction earlier on. And so did they just have a pretty good understanding that Roberts and Coney Barrett will take the hit on this and they will make sure that it was a 5-4 decision. And we can essentially vote no and get all the kudos from MAGA from it that accrues, right?

Like this is like kind of, you know, voting no is always the safest thing if you can get other people to actually do the policy work that you know is better for the country. I'm wondering if, maybe I'm hoping, if that is actually true. part of the dynamic on the Supreme court, you know, there's a lot of five, four decisions that allow people to take the easy way out.

Like this is like kind of, you know, voting no is always the safest thing if you can get other people to actually do the policy work that you know is better for the country. I'm wondering if, maybe I'm hoping, if that is actually true. part of the dynamic on the Supreme court, you know, there's a lot of five, four decisions that allow people to take the easy way out.

Like this is like kind of, you know, voting no is always the safest thing if you can get other people to actually do the policy work that you know is better for the country. I'm wondering if, maybe I'm hoping, if that is actually true. part of the dynamic on the Supreme court, you know, there's a lot of five, four decisions that allow people to take the easy way out.

I mean, it's just that it's just hard to hear. Right. It's hard to sit with this stuff and find encouragement and motivation to keep going. But that is what we have to do. And I want to be clear, when I'm drawing these distinctions about the path that we can fight on going forward, I am certainly not happy that the path has become so narrow.

I mean, it's just that it's just hard to hear. Right. It's hard to sit with this stuff and find encouragement and motivation to keep going. But that is what we have to do. And I want to be clear, when I'm drawing these distinctions about the path that we can fight on going forward, I am certainly not happy that the path has become so narrow.

I mean, it's just that it's just hard to hear. Right. It's hard to sit with this stuff and find encouragement and motivation to keep going. But that is what we have to do. And I want to be clear, when I'm drawing these distinctions about the path that we can fight on going forward, I am certainly not happy that the path has become so narrow.

But I think we should be realistic about that is what it is. And we do have some footing to go forward on.

But I think we should be realistic about that is what it is. And we do have some footing to go forward on.