***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[IATT]

 

[Public Enemy]

Publicity stunt

" Following some backlash, Santos shared another post on X to explain that there was no adult content on his page, adding that he just “wanted to stir the pot.”

“Ok y’all got your panties in a bunch…,” he wrote. “The only fans is Not adult content. I decided to go with only fans because I wanted to stir the pot. Folks need to stop being so sensitive…” "

 

[05fordgt]

Thursday, which means the newest Last Week Tonight with John Oliver on YouTube. He finally discusses the topic more people should be aware of....Project 2025!! Watch and be frightened!



He gets back in, I'll be ****ING terrified!! If any of your friends are unaware of this or just say it's not true, SEND THEM THE LINK!! The more people become aware, the better off we are.

And now I hear Texas is pushing to end No-Fault Divorce! Total Handmaid's Tale bull****!! Scumbags, every last one of them!!

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[Nike Jordan]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[dmbrhs]

It's just a prank, bro!

 

[gry60]

Farage said Andrew Tate was ‘important voice’ for men in podcast interview

Reform UK leader has also argued against diversity quotas and said people on benefits were ‘too stupid’ to work in appearances over past year

www.theguardian.com

Rightwing cases built on made-up stories keep making it to the US supreme court | Moira Donegan

Again and again, the conservative movement promotes cases based on inaccuracies, falsehoods and outright deceptions

www.theguardian.com

The 2017 provision, then, was a mere pretext: the case that came before the court was a much broader project, one that, by some estimates, would have unraveled as much as a third of the federal tax code.

Ultimately, the court ruled 7-2 to uphold the tax, thereby preserving both the theoretical possibility of a future wealth tax and also much of the federal government’s funding structure. The majority opinion was authored by Brett Kavanaugh. Clarence Thomas, joined by Neil Gorsuch, dissented, and would have thrown out the tax, narrowing congressional taxation power only to “realized income”. That interpretation has not carried the day – not yet.

But the fact that the case came before the supreme court at all reflects a troubling trend in the conservative legal movement, aided by Republican-controlled lower courts: the advancement of cases that promise to promote rightwing policy priorities even when the alleged facts are demonstrably untrue. Because Moore v United States was based on another lie, too: the lie that the Moores have not received income from their investment in the Indian company. They have.

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[05fordgt]

What a complete ****ing lunatic!

 

[gry60]

When you think an existing solution is inadequate, you don't stop R&D. You use R&D to find a better solution.

But it's obvious who would welcome such a policy move **looks beyond Alaska**

 

[IATT]

 

[Mark Antony]

We're down to this stuff, meaning Republicans truly have nothing to run on, but somehow they still have a chance.

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[Frankie Blue]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]