Last edited:
US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians
- Thread starter SeniorFuckFace
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2021
Hol' up, was Law & Order referencing Hunter Biden in this scene from yesterday's episode? The man's some congressman wannabe who got killed after being accused of being a pedo 
FlappyBat
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
Looks like a please oh pretty please stop noticing were trying to fuck your kids episode.Hol' up, was Law & Order referencing Hunter Biden in this scene from yesterday's episode? The man's some congressman wannabe who got killed after being accused of being a pedo
View attachment 3159033
wopirish
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2020
I remember that moment vividly myself, I remember the riots and protests that I looked out my window to see and my buddies were attacked at.
Knowing the truth and seeing the lies was like a light shining in darkness moment.
Fucking knew it wasn't going to be what we wanted (or need).
The RINOs needed another McCain cause the first one died and his daughter is a useless whore.
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2020
The Jackson shit from Graham and company was always just a bunch of useless grandstanding, full of sound and fury. It doesn't change the balance of the Court and her name—"Justice Jackson"—will be lost in the mix with the other two Justice Jacksons that have served on the bench. If she's anything like Sotomayor, she'll produce nothing of value and just be another name on the list.
At least someone like Thomas will have a sustained presence in legal academia because he has such interesting and conflicting views on important legal issues. In nearly every casebook, the editors will include his short and concise dissenting opinions when they can. I think there's a single Sotomayor opinion I've read and it was something inane involving civil procedure. (edit: lol it was Krupski v. Costa Crociere, a case about a woman who got hurt on a cruise and sued the American subsidiary of an Italian cruise company, which was a mistake, and when she amended her complaint to name the Italian company, they wanted summary judgment because they claimed it was too late even though they should have known whom she meant to sue. Yeah, Rule 15 jurisprudence—real interesting stuff. Right up there with Heller and Kelo.)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2019
With an episode title like “Free Speech“? Survey says yes.Hol' up, was Law & Order referencing Hunter Biden in this scene from yesterday's episode? The man's some congressman wannabe who got killed after being accused of being a pedo
View attachment 3159033
Mega Man II Intro - GB
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2021
I'm a lawlet and even I've read one because it was cited as being completely retarded. I read enough of it to understand the woman was not intelligent. As in she was carried all the way to the top. Obama has really brought the best, hasn't he? Kamala is the same way. It's frustrating how so many people can't see this is intentional sabotage of the entire country. You don't appoint known idiots to run your business if you're looking to keep the business.
wopirish
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2020
Hold up WTF. I guess this brings a whole new meaning to pozzload the negholes of the locals while on deployment. I cannot wait until the Jap nationalists get wind of the Marines and Airmen raping women end up with those women being HIV+. This is just ooooof.
Brought to Stripes.com by Bloomberg,, of fucking course.
(Tribune News Service) — A federal judge issued a pair of landmark rulings barring the U.S. military from discharging soldiers who contract HIV and ordering the Pentagon to allow those who have the virus but no symptoms to become officers.
The decisions Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia pave the way for career advancements for HIV-positive soldiers who have long been blocked by policies barring them from deploying overseas, even when their symptoms are suppressed indefinitely by highly effective drugs.
“The court ruled that the Pentagon’s policies regarding service members with HIV are not only outdated, but unlawful,” said Lambda Legal’s Scott Schoettes, who represented plaintiffs in both cases. The findings are among “the strongest judicial rulings in over two decades for people living with HIV,” he added.
The rulings could impact the Defense Department’s broader policy of barring people with HIV from enlisting. A parallel suit challenging that rule was put on hold in 2020 pending the rulings by Brinkema over deployment of HIV-positive soldiers. The judge in that case denied the Pentagon’s motion to dismiss the suit and said the broader policy appeared to have “no rational basis.”
The Defense Department didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
Brinkema’s rulings Wednesday granted motions for summary judgment in a pair of 2018 lawsuits, handing victory to the plaintiffs without trial. Her ruling will be kept under seal for a few weeks while the parties agree on a redacted version, she said.
The suit over the officer ban was filed by Nick Harrison, a National Guard sergeant in Washington who claimed the HIV policy violated of the equal protection clause of the Constitution by preventing him from becoming a military lawyer in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps. The Oklahoma native, who deployed to Afghanistan and Kuwait before testing positive, argued there was a disconnect between advances in HIV science and the military’s rule.
“It’s profoundly emotional to know that all service members with HIV will now be able to serve and defend our country without discrimination,” Harrison, 43, said in a statement. “I’m incredibly pleased with the court’s decision, and it’s very reassuring to hear the court recognize that these policies are irrational and based on outdated stereotypes and stigma.”
The other case was filed by two Air Force airmen who were discharged because they tested positive for HIV. The men, who are participating in the case under the pseudonyms Richard Roe and Victor Voe to protect their identities, were told they had to go because their HIV status prevented them from deploying, and because deployment was a key part of their job.
Policy shift
The challenged decisions were seen as a shift in the Air Force’s treatment of HIV-positive personnel, because service members who previously contracted the disease were generally allowed to remain and perform different duties, if necessary, or get waivers. But in both of their cases, the inability to deploy was deemed to be too detrimental to their job.
Medical science is at the center of the disputes. Harrison and plaintiffs in the related case have argued that drugs developed in 1996 to prevent the virus from replicating transformed the landscape of HIV treatment. The drugs reduce the number of copies of the virus that can be detected in a milliliter of a person’s blood to lower than 20, making it technically undetectable.
About 2,000 people with HIV are serving in the military, according to court records filed in the case. Defense Department records say that from 2011 to 2016, the Navy diagnosed 388 sailors with HIV, while the Air Force diagnosed 181 airmen.
The decisions Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia pave the way for career advancements for HIV-positive soldiers who have long been blocked by policies barring them from deploying overseas, even when their symptoms are suppressed indefinitely by highly effective drugs.
“The court ruled that the Pentagon’s policies regarding service members with HIV are not only outdated, but unlawful,” said Lambda Legal’s Scott Schoettes, who represented plaintiffs in both cases. The findings are among “the strongest judicial rulings in over two decades for people living with HIV,” he added.
The rulings could impact the Defense Department’s broader policy of barring people with HIV from enlisting. A parallel suit challenging that rule was put on hold in 2020 pending the rulings by Brinkema over deployment of HIV-positive soldiers. The judge in that case denied the Pentagon’s motion to dismiss the suit and said the broader policy appeared to have “no rational basis.”
The Defense Department didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
Brinkema’s rulings Wednesday granted motions for summary judgment in a pair of 2018 lawsuits, handing victory to the plaintiffs without trial. Her ruling will be kept under seal for a few weeks while the parties agree on a redacted version, she said.
The suit over the officer ban was filed by Nick Harrison, a National Guard sergeant in Washington who claimed the HIV policy violated of the equal protection clause of the Constitution by preventing him from becoming a military lawyer in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps. The Oklahoma native, who deployed to Afghanistan and Kuwait before testing positive, argued there was a disconnect between advances in HIV science and the military’s rule.
“It’s profoundly emotional to know that all service members with HIV will now be able to serve and defend our country without discrimination,” Harrison, 43, said in a statement. “I’m incredibly pleased with the court’s decision, and it’s very reassuring to hear the court recognize that these policies are irrational and based on outdated stereotypes and stigma.”
The other case was filed by two Air Force airmen who were discharged because they tested positive for HIV. The men, who are participating in the case under the pseudonyms Richard Roe and Victor Voe to protect their identities, were told they had to go because their HIV status prevented them from deploying, and because deployment was a key part of their job.
Policy shift
The challenged decisions were seen as a shift in the Air Force’s treatment of HIV-positive personnel, because service members who previously contracted the disease were generally allowed to remain and perform different duties, if necessary, or get waivers. But in both of their cases, the inability to deploy was deemed to be too detrimental to their job.
Medical science is at the center of the disputes. Harrison and plaintiffs in the related case have argued that drugs developed in 1996 to prevent the virus from replicating transformed the landscape of HIV treatment. The drugs reduce the number of copies of the virus that can be detected in a milliliter of a person’s blood to lower than 20, making it technically undetectable.
About 2,000 people with HIV are serving in the military, according to court records filed in the case. Defense Department records say that from 2011 to 2016, the Navy diagnosed 388 sailors with HIV, while the Air Force diagnosed 181 airmen.
Brought to Stripes.com by Bloomberg,, of fucking course.
MrJokerRager
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2019
The Republicans or Right wing has definitely more "Lu Bu" s than the soycucks on the other side of the aisle.
But no "Cao Cao" equivalent.
- Joined
- May 18, 2020
Gonna be lulzworthy when the chinks chide us on the world stage for using bioweapons in uniform
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2020
I was just talking about majority opinions. If you want to include dissents or concurrences, I bet you can find lots of shit she's spewed. It's a little difficult to directly compare majority opinions, since justices are confirmed in different years, but Alito has served since 2006 and Sotomayor since 2009—pretty close in terms of comparing justices. Alito has delivered 46 opinions. Sotomayor has delivered 19. That should tell you something.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2021
Congress has very little real power. A Republican victory in November means Biden can't get any transformational legislation passed, but he couldn't do that anyway with the current Congress. But as far as anything else goes, Obama did whatever the hell he wanted despite having Republicans in Congress for 6 years. Republicans automatically lose any shutdown fight, and the last 100 years has seen continuous delegation of authority to the executive branch, so there's not much they can do.
Not that what they want to do is what the voters want. When the Republicans do get a big win, they see that as a chance to really fuck over their voters. "After all," the thinking goes, "the Democrats are so unpopular now, people will vote for us no matter how much we betray them!"
Not that what they want to do is what the voters want. When the Republicans do get a big win, they see that as a chance to really fuck over their voters. "After all," the thinking goes, "the Democrats are so unpopular now, people will vote for us no matter how much we betray them!"
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2021
Mega Man II Intro - GB
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2021
This video has a good compilation of "they're grooming the children" if you need one to share among the normies. Starts at 3:35.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
Some Biden copium from a Lawrence.
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2021
There's nothing demonic going on, anywhere.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2021
I am not even religious but I just prayed for these poor girls.
Mega Man II Intro - GB
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2021
Seeing how the left brainwashes children has given me great hope for "brainwashing" my kids the other way.
I laugh, smirk, and mock leftists all the time when I see them. I can handle being called "loser" by losers all day long but they can't.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
I would just turn the other cheek and call them a cunt or twat. See what their reaction be i would let them be violent first and take the blows so I can press charges on them. Just like jimmy mcgill.
- Joined
- May 2, 2020
- Status