US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Ostatnio edytowane przez moderatora:
One of the most radicalizing moments of my life was the first time I heard a YouTuber use the euphemism "unalive" where they meant to say "kill". The realization that the Internet was now FAR more sanitized and censored than mainstream family-friendly shows aired on national television inflicted catastrophic psychic damage that I will likely never recover from.
I've heard someone IN REAL LIFE use it unironically. An HR person, so perhaps not surprising but this bullshit tiktokism will make it into HR corpospeak sooner or later.
 
That's not censorship so much as a demand from the advertisers who keep Youtube's lights on. I'm pretty sure these language rules only apply if you want to be monetized. Say whatever you want just don't expect a payment.
Monetization is also tied into the algo, so if your video gets demonitized it won't show up in trending, won't be recommended to users in the sidebar or under related, is harder to find on search, etc. It effectively unalives kills any chance of your video having organic growth which is crucial for success.
 
You don't need a marriage license issued by the state to do any of that. If you wish for the spouse to have the legal rights of a spouse however you need that piece of paper. I don't care which sky ghost you believe in I care about legal rights and basic contract law. Your sky ghost is irrelevant to that.
"Sky ghost." So edgy. First year atheist? In my first year the term was "bearded sky wizard." Even atheism has gotten less creative over time.

You're correct in the sense that those legal rights are conferred by a license granted by the state. That's not actually a contract, though. It's a license that confers legal status that requires further court action to sever. Can't just "cancel" it like you can a contract. Caring as much as you do about "basic contract law" I'd have thought you knew that already.

I know you want to go all "reductio ad absurdum" on marriage until it's nothing more than a boring, rote five-minute meeting between two unrelated, otherwise uninvolved adults to sign a piece of paper in front of a notary public (handshake optional) and then begin cohabitating for tax and wealth transfer purposes, but you're still fundamentally wrong.

I do enjoy watching the mental gymnastics though.
 
There's quite a fucking difference between uttering the word "kill" and showing a 10-man gangbang, don't you think?
Of course. What does that have to do with Youtube's right to choose what they allow on their platform and your choice to use it or not?

That's not actually a contract, though.
Try explaining that to the judge during your divorce. Of course that never happens in your world because Till Death Do Us Part and all those other promises made to the sky ghost.
 
Of course. What does that have to do with Youtube's right to choose what they allow on their platform and your choice to use it or not?

Oh yeah, I forgot to respond to your lolbertarian drivel. Google stopped being a heccin' private company the instant they accepted billions of dollars in government subsidies.
IMG_0163.webp

Their company, their rules, the taxpayer's financial burden? Blow it out your ass.
 
Can't just "cancel" it like you can a contract.
annulment

marriage is separated into two parts

Religious where deity is involved

civil where state is involved

both can function without the other but loses benefits ie religious marriage only loses you legal benefits (but makes you eligible for gibs)

civil without religious means your kid is a bastard and that has religious consequences if you believe in them
 
Only for a short while after the fact, and only under very specific circumstances (bigamy, fraud, coercion, lack of consent, etc.). After that generally short period expires, divorce is the only remaining option and must be granted by a court. Another signature and a handshake aren't enough.

ETA:
Google stopped being a heccin' private company the instant they accepted billions of dollars in government subsidies.
Now this is interesting. Wouldn't this make Google and its subsidiaries/sister companies obligated to obey the constitution and bill of rights since they're partially government funded now? Last I checked you couldn't use public funds to violate the constitution. It's the same angle anti-religious people use to scrape crosses and other religious symbols off buildings and properties partially or fully funded by government money.
 
Only for a short while after the fact, and only under very specific circumstances (bigamy, fraud, coercion, lack of consent, etc.). After that generally short period expires, divorce is the only remaining option and must be granted by a court. Another signature and a handshake aren't enough.
same with contracts, you generally have 3-5 days depending on the state. meanwhile marriages have years to be annuled depending on the state

my Arab friend married a snake and was married for a year, was able to annul the marriage easily
 
Look at it disassociated from Trump/MAGA/personal bias.

Do you think Governments use crises to manufacture consent to increase their power? Would your trust in what happened be the same if it involved someone ideologically opposed being victimized leading to federal action?
I would laugh at them like the cuck who got stabbed in new york, then had his gf refuse to help to police identify his murderer, but welcome the filth getting removed
 
They could have their own ceremony under whatever auspices they want; if they can invent (or find) a religion with a deity willing to tolerate butt-bumming, more power to them.
I hope the priest, churches, and other members of said churches who allow faggot marriage burn in hell for all eternity for their worship of their new false religion.

Yeah, but you're still gay and retarded if you think a guy getting jumped by niggers in DC was staged.
He decided to fight them with fist instead of shooting them and the cops also allowed him to get roughed up just enough for it to make a point. The niggers decided to attack entirely on their own though.
 
Laura Loomer's lawsuit against Bill Maher resulted in her deposition which kinda got released.

The judge sealed it since the depositions were supposed to be confidential so this is a little oopsies moment.


An excerpt:
Q Exhibit 30 is your response to her; can you
19 read that out loud to me?
20 A "Hey, Marjorie. Remember when you destroyed
21 your family so you could have sex with a Zangief
22 cosplayer? Tell me again how you and the Arby's in
0337
1 your pants" -- yeah. That was widely reported. I
2 mean, that's why she got divorced. And that divorce
3 records --
4 Q No. No. Read the tweet.
5 A "Are representatives of the GOP. You
6 couldn't even run your own family. Don't tell me how
7 to run my free speech."
8 Q Okay. So when you --
9 A But you're not showing the -- the
10 screenshot. It's like intentionally blurred out. I
11 don't know why you blurred it out. But it showed a
12 document where somebody who she had an affair with
13 showed text messages of her having an affair, and it
14 was well-documented. It was in text messages.
15 And it's the reason why she ended up getting
16 divorced from her husband, Perry, who I know. 'Cause
17 when -- at the time, during my campaign, they were
18 married, and they came to my event. And it's
19 well-known. And she's even admitted to it that they
20 got divorced because of her marital infidelity. So --
21 Q Right. Can you explain to me what it
22 means --
0338
1 A But I don't understand why you blurred it
2 out. It's blurred out.
3 Q Can you explain --
4 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy.
5 BY MS. BOLGER:
6 Q Can you explain to me what it means to say
7 to her that "the Arby's in her pants"?
8 A Well, Arby's --
9 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy.
10 BY MS. BOLGER:
11 Q Answer the question.
12 A Arby's sells roast beef.
13 Q Right. Can you tell me what -- why you were
14 talking about "the Arby's in her pants"?
15 A Well, it's just a -- an expression.
16 Q What is the expression trying to convey?
17 A It conveys the reason why she got a divorce
18 by her own admission.
19 Q Because she had roast beef in her pants?
20 A Yeah.
21 Q She'd put roast beef in her pants; that's
22 what you're trying to say there? You're literally
1 saying she put Arby's in her pants?
2 A I'm saying she literally -- it's so
3 ridiculous. I'm saying she literally put Arby's in
4 her pants. Yes.
5 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy.
6 BY MS. BOLGER:
7 Q You're not making a slur about her?
8 A No.
9 Q You're literally saying she put an Arby's
10 sandwich in her pants; is that right?
11 A Yes. That's correct. That's correct.
12 Q Why are you laughing?
13 A Because I just think it's so funny.
14 Q What is your basis for saying she put Arby's
15 in her pants?
16 A I just think it's so funny. I just think
17 it's so funny.
18 Q What is your basis for saying she put Arby's
19 in her pants?
20 A She carries roast beef in her pockets.
21 Q What is your basis for saying she puts roast
22 beef in her pockets and in her pants?
0340
1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy.
2 Harassment.
3 THE WITNESS: Because I know she likes
4 roast beef.
5 BY MS. BOLGER:
6 Q So what is your basis for saying she had
7 Arby's in her pants?
8 A Because I know she likes to eat at Arby's.
9 Q And she likes to put it in her pants; you
10 know that?
11 A Yeah.
12 Q She puts Arby's in her pants?
13 A Yeah. She does.
14 Q Okay. If I ask Marjorie Taylor Greene, she
15 would tell you that she puts Arby's in her pants?
16 A I -- it's my best belief that she would tell
17 you that. Yes.
18 Q Okay. Are you making a derogatory comment
19 about her sex life by talking about Arby's in her
20 pants?
21 A No. I'm talking about Arby's, the
22 sandwiches. I'm talking about Arby's. I would -- I'm
0341
1 a very direct person. If I was making a derogatory
2 comment, I would have said it
 

Załączniki

You don't need a marriage license issued by the state to do any of that. If you wish for the spouse to have the legal rights of a spouse however you need that piece of paper. I don't care which sky ghost you believe in I care about legal rights and basic contract law. Your sky ghost is irrelevant to that.


Then let the market sort that out. Vote with your feet to Rumble or Bitchute. You would have a point if Youtube were a monopoly but they are not.
LOL SAFE EDGY! Next say trump is gay and lol stupid southerner.
 
Scandal: when Vance had to dad-run at Disneyworld, it wasn't because a kid was about to hurt themselves, it was some ogre game he plays with them where he quasi-chases them.
I actually don't believe him. As everyone pointed out before he said anything, it was obviously a "my kid is doing something stupid and I have to go get them without scaring them" run. It did not look like play at all, and he ran too far for a play run. I think it was what everyone pegged it as and he's not admitting it for some reason. My only thought is related to something else he said in the interview which is he tries to protect his kids from the media, so maybe he doesn't want to say he was chasing them because he doesn't want to say why they needed to be chased. Give me a tinfoil hat.
Also looking forward to her husband being interviewed - though finding out he's a mayonnaise guy is a bit concerning. Disgusting.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole