A Blue Flame

Melodic, retro-sounding songs - Bacharach meets The Divine Comedy, maybe: New Album- The Secret Breeze

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

Cool playlist from members of The Songwriting Academy. Have a listen and a share if you like x
https://t.co/18U8JxsErb

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@BigNewsMorgans6 @Frenchy_47 But you ‘allow’ school shootings every other week. Sort out your own mess of a country first, maybe.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@SexMattersOrg @DerryBanShee @joshxhowie ‘In the hope of work’ ? What nonsense!!!

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@JoeyMannarinoUS @HaQ_mAn Sort out your own country, W ⚓️

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@RupertLowe10 Mass deportation of racists? Great, I’ve got your ticket ready.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@stephkordaa @SkySportsPL Grace!

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@Brogtog @stepfanie You sound like a man who has no idea that your buddies are not the only type of man. You know, not all men are like you.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@RupertLowe10 OR Tax wealth. Not income, wealth, assets…

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@TRobinsonNewEra 134 rough sleepers in Dublin on the latest figures I could find. If you’re going to lie at least make it plausible, Stephen.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@DavidJPIatt @EssexPR Slippery slope there because some would then start to argue that some people shouldn’t reproduce (for whatever reason - race, religion, intelligence)
I understand how you feel as such crimes are beyond understanding but the death penalty isn’t the answer.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@TheNorfolkLion It was Eid. Coincidentally on the same day as Mother’s Day. Don’t see the problem.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@LozzaFox Oh to be so full of hate now that Spring is here. What I don’t understand is why you, or anyone else, should care so much. Why does it hurt you so much that someone is different?

[Brian Maxwell @Brian1247356379]

This is a constitutional crisis. The sitting President of the United States is publicly demanding the destruction of judicial independence, the elimination of legal constraints on his power, and the complete subjugation of the courts to his will. This is not political theater. This is the clearest, most direct call for authoritarian control over the judiciary in modern American history.

Trump’s demand to abolish nationwide judicial injunctions is nothing less than an attack on the fundamental structure of constitutional government. Nationwide injunctions are not “unlawful”—they are a critical check on executive overreach, used to block illegal, unconstitutional policies regardless of which party is in power. They have been upheld and used by Republican and Democratic-appointed judges alike for decades. But Trump does not want the courts to act as neutral arbiters of the law. He wants them to be obedient servants of his regime.

His rhetoric is unmistakably authoritarian. Calling judges “lunatics,” accusing them of trying to “assume the powers of the presidency,” and openly pressuring the Supreme Court to strip away its own authority is not just an abuse of power—it is an existential threat to the separation of powers itself. Trump is laying the groundwork for a judiciary that no longer has the ability to check executive action. Once that happens, legal opposition to his rule ceases to exist.

This is the beginning of one-man rule. If the judiciary loses its ability to issue nationwide injunctions, there will be nothing stopping Trump from unilaterally enacting policies by decree. Immigration bans, mass deportations, political prosecutions, military actions on U.S. soil—all of it would become law without any legal recourse to stop him. This is not a hypothetical. This is the exact process by which democracies fall into dictatorship.

And Trump is not asking for this. He is demanding it. His language is not one of debate—it is the language of an autocrat issuing an ultimatum. He is ordering the Supreme Court to “fix this IMMEDIATELY,” treating the judiciary as an obstacle to be crushed, not as an independent branch of government. This is a direct assault on the constitutional order, and if it is not stopped, it will end the rule of law in the United States.

There is no gray area anymore. This is the moment that determines whether America remains a democracy or succumbs to authoritarian rule. Every elected official, every judge, every legal institution, and every citizen must understand what is happening. Trump is openly dismantling constitutional checks and balances, and if he succeeds, the courts will no longer function as a safeguard against tyranny—they will become enforcers of it.

This is not a warning. This is the breaking point. Either this assault on the judiciary is stopped, or the United States ceases to be a constitutional democracy. The time to fight is now. There is no later.

[Gene Trevino @GenoVeno73]

Dear @realDonaldTrump

Article III Section 1 reads in part -
"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, AND IN SUCH INFERIOR COURTS ...."

Meaning, not only does the U.S. Supreme Court have the power to preside and rule in legal cases, so do all inferior courts.
According to the Federal Judicial Center, INFERIOR COURTS (known as Article III Courts) are comprised of:
- the Supreme Court of the United States
- the U.S. courts of appeals
- the U.S. DISTRICT COURTS
- the U.S. Court of International Trade

Article III Section 2 reads in part:
"The judicial Power shall extend TO ALL CASES, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States .... —to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party...."

Meaning, the judicial branch of government has the Constitutionally given right to make decisions and/or rulings involving ALL CASES and controversies that have the United States government as its plaintiff or defendant.

Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison (1803) set precedent giving the Court power to interpret laws and determine their constitutionality, effectively making it a co-equal branch of government.

Marbury v. Madison gave the Courts the power to declare laws passed by Congress - or as has been understood since it's ruling, the president - as invalid if it can be determined that such a law has violated the U.S. Constitution.
Chief justice John Marshall wrote that:
".... a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument."

Thereby, Marbury v. Madison, reaffirmed Article III Section 2 of the United States Constitution.

PLUS, @realDonaldTrump
Federal district courts, according to uscourts. gov - "are the primary trial courts of the federal court system. Federal district courts have jurisdiction to hear nearly all categories of federal civil and criminal cases."

According to the U.S. Department of Justice Offices of the United States Attorneys:
"The district courts are the general trial courts of the federal court system."
"Some [federal district] courts have nationwide jurisdiction for issues such as tax (United States Tax Court), claims against the federal government (United States Court of Federal Claims), and international trade (United States Court of International Trade)."
"The federal district court is the starting point for any case arising under federal statutes, the Constitution, or treaties. This type of jurisdiction is called 'original jurisdiction.'"

Under 28 USC §1331:
"The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

So, for all the MAGA cultists, the JUDICIAL BRANCH - ie, the Courts - has every legal right to block and/or rule against the President of the United States as long as it can be proven and/or determined that a presidential act violates our Constitution.

Problem is, since @realDonaldTrump nor Republicans DO NOT control the judicial branch of government, they will say ANYTHING to discredit it, to raise doubts in it, and to invalidate it just to make it SEEM as if the judicial branch is operating outside their Constitutionally given powers.

The Judicial branch is well within their Constitutional rights.

These people will fabricate lies, spread conspiracy theories, and call into question all these Judges and their rulings. But, mark my words, they will NOT have proof, evidence, nor facts of any wrong doing nor bias.

Three co-equal branches of government means that not one branch controls the other two, nor does one branch have more power than the other two. This is called separation of powers.

DO NOT FALL FOR THIS!!

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@implausibleblog Vile

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@elonmusk For a supposedly clever man you sure know how to make yourself look stupid.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@realDonaldTrump Putin’s poodle!

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@jimmy_1975 @Heather87270296 @JackieD86388657 Go on then. Educate me cos I’m clearly missing something. Show me any clue whatsoever that Starmer is a communist. Please, I’d love to see.

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@Joey7Barton Because he’s a convicted felon and rapist, maybe?

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@Heather87270296 @jimmy_1975 @JackieD86388657 What on Gods good earth makes you think Starmer is a communist?
No free elections? Where do you find this nonsense?

[A Blue Flame @ABlueFlame]

@bored_mindless @JackieD86388657 Would you though? Depends what you’re suggesting really, doesn’t it. People are arrested for hate crimes, like encouraging people to burn mosques or kill people. Is that the kind of thing you support?