Sharon Chisholm @theogsharonc

09.10.2025 11:40 — 👍 26838 🔁 7983 💬 1659 📌 522

TIER ONE: Americans who Donald Trump pedophiled with: They get shielded from prosecution for the crimes they did commit.

TIER TWO: Americans who brought Donald to justice for the crimes he did commit, they get prosecuted as revenge even if they committed no crimes whatsoever.

10.10.2025 01:53 — 👍 2105 🔁 685 💬 47 📌 27

Oh god

10.10.2025 01:40 — 👍 3249 🔁 625 💬 276 📌 35

The Trump administration is testing the limits of its power. We’ve yet to see the edge.

10.10.2025 03:47 — 👍 688 🔁 208 💬 21 📌 3

Sometimes we need a moment, but if you tune out completely, they win. Fascism doesn’t need your support, just your silence.

10.10.2025 02:31 — 👍 13497 🔁 5032 💬 397 📌 227

10.10.2025 03:44 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

Donald Trump is not a king — and his administration is not above the law.

Today, the court confirmed what we all know: there is no credible evidence of a rebellion in the state of Illinois.

And no place for the National Guard in the streets of American cities like Chicago.

09.10.2025 22:42 — 👍 14127 🔁 3464 💬 258 📌 65

So there’s really no excuse as to why the Dems can’t find a judge to take her oath of office.

10.10.2025 01:58 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

We’re watching an entire political party actively protect the single most infamous sex-trafficking operation of our time.

This isn’t just silence—it’s complicity at the highest level.

09.10.2025 17:35 — 👍 6861 🔁 2188 💬 195 📌 118

This is good, from Hakeem Jeffries. More of this please, in every conceivable forum:

"Sycophants who aid and abet the President’s vengeful schemes will not be able to hide from the serious legal consequences of their behavior. They will be held accountable."

09.10.2025 22:52 — 👍 9798 🔁 2897 💬 386 📌 201

The following is REAL footage from Portland, 2025. Viewer discretion is advised.

09.10.2025 20:23 — 👍 48362 🔁 19731 💬 1618 📌 1817

US anti-fascism expert blocked from flying to Spain at airport Rutgers University professor who published book on antifa was informed at boarding gate that his trip was cancelled

10.10.2025 01:28 — 👍 29 🔁 16 💬 0 📌 6

I knew Fox News was theater. I just didn't realize it was a repertory theater that recycles actors for different roles.

You'd think a company that had to pay $787,000,000 for deceiving its viewers would be a little more careful about blatantly continuing the practice.

09.10.2025 19:26 — 👍 20754 🔁 8208 💬 1241 📌 426

State Department Fires Diplomat, Citing Relationship With Chinese National The foreign service officer failed to disclose his contact with the woman, the daughter of a Chinese Communist Party official, the State Department said.

The State Department has fired a U.S. diplomat who officials said concealed a romantic relationship with the daughter of a Chinese Communist Party official.

10.10.2025 01:30 — 👍 66 🔁 25 💬 15 📌 2

Oath of Office | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”— U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3Oaths of office and allegiance have been features of government for centuries. When the United States were colonies of Great Britain, officials swore allegiance to the king. Colonial and state legislatures also created oaths that required members to swear allegiance to the state and often profess a belief in God as well. Today, Members of the House take an oath to uphold the Constitution in a group swearing-in on the House Floor on the opening day of a new Congress. Often, they pose for ceremonial photos individually with the Speaker following the official swearing-in. Constitutional FramingWhen the subject of an oath arose during the Federal Constitutional Convention, the founders were divided. Should an oath be required in a free country at all? And, should state officials swear allegiance to the federal Constitution or should federal officials swear to uphold state constitutions as well as the U.S. Constitution?Delegate James Wilson of Pennsylvania viewed oaths as “left handed security only” and that “a good government did not need them and a bad one could not or ought not to be supported.” The lexicographer and political writer Noah Webster called oaths “instruments of slavery” and a “badge of folly, borrowed from the dark ages of bigotry.” Both Wilson and Webster argued that people would be naturally inclined to support just governments so oaths were unnecessary. Many others thought such concerns were overwrought. In his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote that requiring oaths for government officials “would seem to be a proposition too clear to render any reasoning necessary in support of it.”Federalism also factored into early debates on the nature of oaths of office. Anti-Federalists were concerned about state officials having to swear to uphold the federal constitution while federal officials were not required to respect state constitutions. In Federalist 44, James Madison of Virginia argued that federal officials lacked the power to uphold state constitutions but that state officials played an important role upholding the U.S. Constitution. In particular, Madison said the administration of elections to federal offices, namely the President and Senate, depended on state legislatures.The Form of the OathThe founders decided to require an oath for federal and state officials—absent a religious test—in the Constitution, but the specifics—such as the wording of the oath—were left to the First Congress (1789–1791). In its first act, Congress specified the wording: “I, A.B. do solemnly swear or affirm (as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” This oath was used for all federal officials except the President, whose oath was prescribed specifically in the Constitution (Article II, section 1, clause 8). The form of the oath has changed several times since that first act of Congress. During the Civil War, Congress mandated that the oath bar from office anyone who had been disloyal to the Union. Eventually, those elements of the “iron-clad” oath were dropped during revisions in 1868, 1871, and 1884. The oath used today has not changed since 1966 and is prescribed in Title 5, Section 3331 of the United States Code. It reads: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” In contrast to the presidential oath, where it’s used only by tradition, the phrase “so help me God” has been part of the official oath of office for non-presidential offices since 1862.Current PracticeRepresentatives usually take their oath during the first day of a new Congress, when the House organizes itself. After the Speaker is elected, the Member with the longest continuous service (the Dean of the House) administers the oath to the Speaker. This tradition originated in the British House of Commons, and has been the practice in the U.S. House since at least the 1820s (the Oath Act of 1789 did not mandate it). The Speaker, in turn, administers the oath to the rest of the Members en masse. The Speaker or Speaker Pro Tempore must swear in members who miss the mass swearing-in ceremony on the first day afterward; on rare occasions, the House has authorized other Members or local judges to swear-in absent Representatives.The current practice for swearing-in Members is an innovation of Speaker Nicholas Longworth of Ohio, who abandoned the practice of Members taking the oath by state delegations in 1929. Longworth altered the practice because he hoped the mass swearing-in would better “comport with the dignity and solemnity” of the ceremony and, according to some historical accounts, to avoid a potential attempt to challenge the seating of Oscar De Priest of Illinois, the first African American elected to Congress in the 20th century. While subsequent Speakers went back to the original method, in 1937 Speaker William B. Bankhead chose to return to the en masse swearing-in and this has remained the practice. Since the 80th Congress (1947–1949), Members have also been required to sign an oath, which is held by the Clerk of the House.For Further Reading5 U.S.C. §33312 U.S.C. §25“Article 6, Clause 3,” The Founders’ Constitution, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a6_3.html (accessed 13 April 2012).Bickford, Charlene Bangs, Kenneth R. Bowling, Helen E. Veit, eds. Debates in the House of Representatives: First Session April–May 1789. Volume X. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992).Bickford, Charlene Bangs, Helen E. Veit, eds. Legislative Histories. Volume VI. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992). Deschler’s Precedents of the House of Representatives of the United States. Chapter 2. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1976–1977). Hinds’ Precedents of the House of Representatives of the United States. Chapter V. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1907–1908).Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay. The Federalist Papers. (New York: Penguin Books, 1987).

I don’t know. “The Speaker or Speaker Pro Tempore must swear in members who miss the mass swearing-in ceremony on the first day afterward; on rare occasions, the House has authorized other Members or local judges to swear-in absent Representatives.” history.house.gov/Institution/...

10.10.2025 01:52 — 👍 0 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0

There is a special place in Hell waiting for BS Barbie. And “Hell” is not necessarily limited to nether-regions.

10.10.2025 01:45 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

09.10.2025 11:16 — 👍 5008 🔁 1223 💬 149 📌 34

Apart from helping Comey's selective prosecution defense, this also means the president of the United States uses direct messages on Truth Social to communicate with cabinet officials.

I didn't know that, but we can be sure intelligence agencies all over the planet already did.

09.10.2025 11:15 — 👍 11861 🔁 4481 💬 523 📌 226

It’s my understanding that she can submit her oath in writing to the Clerk of the House and that would make her “official.”

10.10.2025 01:41 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

She can be sworn in by a federal judge.
It's outside of the norms for that to happen. 🙄

Dem leadership needs to stop worrying about norms, b/c the other side abandoned them a while back.

09.10.2025 03:23 — 👍 34 🔁 4 💬 3 📌 0

Stephen Miller mocked for 'rebellion against logic' by law expert after bizarre meltdown A prominent former federal prosecutor tore into a top White House advisor on Thursday, blasting the aide's comment that a judge committed "legal insurrection" as an "absurd" "self-cancelling oxymoron."White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller made the remarks while answering reporters' questi...

A prominent former federal prosecutor tore into a top White House advisor on Thursday, blasting the aide's comment that a judge committed "legal insurrection" as an "absurd" "self-cancelling oxymoron.

10.10.2025 01:30 — 👍 101 🔁 57 💬 9 📌 4

All to cover up the Epstein files.

10.10.2025 00:16 — 👍 21335 🔁 6542 💬 1056 📌 362

10.10.2025 01:33 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

20 paragraphs down in the NBC News story that broke the information that the administration is considering invoking the Insurrection Act is the report that Stephen Miller is driving the issue.

09.10.2025 14:47 — 👍 13408 🔁 5355 💬 679 📌 359

GOV. PRITZKER: “This is a convicted felon threatening to jail me? He’s an unhinged, insecure wannabe dictator. Come and get me.”

08.10.2025 21:36 — 👍 19711 🔁 6297 💬 494 📌 329

New hate crime law is a cover for suppressing Palestine protests ⋆ The Breach The proposed 'Combatting Hate Act' is built on the idea that protests inspire hateful violence, and gives police the tools to crack down on expression

Until a few years ago, it was a criminal offence in Canada to scare the Queen of England

The Carney government's new hate crime proposals have a similar aim—to protect the ruling classes from discomfort and political dissent

My latest for @breachmedia.ca

breachmedia.ca/new-hate-cri...

09.10.2025 15:08 — 👍 77 🔁 35 💬 3 📌 0

Sean Fraser 🇨🇦
This year marks 150 years of the Supreme Court of Canada helping to shape this country, standing in ardent defence of Canadian democracy and in defence of our freedoms.
May its work continue so that 150 years from now, Canada remains the true North, strong, and free. #cdnpoli

09.10.2025 09:01 — 👍 421 🔁 175 💬 20 📌 12

U.S. bill calls for more integration between Canadian, American border agents | CBC News The U.S. Congress is being asked to adopt legislation that could lead to Canada and the United States further integrating their enforcement of the border — including allowing U.S. officers to more fre...

www.pm.gc.ca/en/connect/c...

Contact our Prime Minister and let him know we will NOT allow this to happen. It takes 2 minutes, and we should all do it. I just did

We must NOT allow the U.S. to step one foot on our sacred land.
We will NOT be terrorized by them

www.cbc.ca/news/politic...

09.10.2025 12:02 — 👍 46 🔁 22 💬 6 📌 7

Annual pumpkin weigh-off in P.E.I. to include even more garden giants this year | CBC News Growers are ready to show off their specimens at the annual P.E.I. Giant Pumpkin and Squash Weigh-off to see who brought along the largest of the bunch. This year, even more garden giants will be weig...

Annual pumpkin weigh-off in #P.E.I. to include even more garden giants this year
Growers from across the Island will compete for gourd glory Saturday

www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...

09.10.2025 12:43 — 👍 39 🔁 11 💬 4 📌 1

U.S. bill calls for more integration between Canadian, American border agents | CBC News The U.S. Congress is being asked to adopt legislation that could lead to Canada and the United States further integrating their enforcement of the border — including allowing U.S. officers to more fre...

This is extremely bad.

www.cbc.ca/news/politic...

09.10.2025 11:25 — 👍 65 🔁 30 💬 11 📌 6

Sharon Chisholm

Latest posts by theogsharonc.bsky.social on Bluesky

@theogsharonc is following 20 prominent accounts