1. Hello,


    New users on the forum won't be able to send PM untill certain criteria are met (you need to have at least 6 posts in any sub forum).

    One more important message - Do not answer to people pretending to be from xnxx team or a member of the staff. If the email is not from forum@xnxx.com or the message on the forum is not from StanleyOG it's not an admin or member of the staff. Please be carefull who you give your information to.


    Best regards,

    StanleyOG.

    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hello,


    You can now get verified on forum.

    The way it's gonna work is that you can send me a PM with a verification picture. The picture has to contain you and forum name on piece of paper or on your body and your username or my username instead of the website name, if you prefer that.

    I need to be able to recognize you in that picture. You need to have some pictures of your self in your gallery so I can compare that picture.

    Please note that verification is completely optional and it won't give you any extra features or access. You will have a check mark (as I have now, if you want to look) and verification will only mean that you are who you say you are.

    You may not use a fake pictures for verification. If you try to verify your account with a fake picture or someone else picture, or just spam me with fake pictures, you will get Banned!

    The pictures that you will send me for verification won't be public


    Best regards,

    StanleyOG.

    Dismiss Notice
  1. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    american hater yet again slips off his high moral ground, despite warnings to be careful. :D
    [​IMG]
     
  2. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    This headline caught Shooters eye
    Supreme Court Justices Compare Bribes to Taking a Teacher to Cheesecake Factory (msn.com)
    Supreme Court Justices Compare Bribes to Taking a Teacher to Cheesecake Factory
    Story by Charisma Madarang

    Shoulda known. Rolling Stone magazine.
    The only leftist propaganda sheet worse than Rolling Stone is wrong story. Or maybe MSNBC.

    Anyway, in reading the story and then doing a bit of research, what was really going on was oral arguments in a corruption case, Snyder v. United States.
    The story is, Snyder was mayor of a town in Indiana. After the city bought a couple of trash trucks Snyder received $13,000 from the successful bidder. Snyder called the money "consulting fees" but no one believed him and he got convicted for bribery and the case ended up at SCOTUS.

    The justices were trying to get the parties to nail down exactly when corruption, or bribery happens. Is it bribery to take your kid's teacher to Cheesecake Factory? What about a Starbucks gift card? What if the official you gift has no sway over anything you're involved with at the moment, but maybe later? And if later, how much later, and how much before it becomes bribery or corruption?

    You see? The justices were just trying to get the two sides to offer up an opinion about when a simple gesture becomes illegal. But this is how the left fucks with us. The headline makes it sound like, according to the Supreme Court justices, bribery is no big deal, doesn't it? But if you read the story, and do a bit of checking, you find out what the justices were really doing was their job.

    The moral of the story? Always, but always read and do your own research. And consider the source.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    This is where the lie of conservatism as it is preached and practiced in this nation will meet reality. It appears the Court is going to affirm a town or city's right to criminalize homelessness. But then what? What are they going to do to people sleeping outside? Fine them?If they don't have enough money to have a place to live they don't have enough money to pay fines. Put them in jail? Almost every jail in every city is already overcrowded and they no place to put them.

    The reality is people are homeless for a whole bunch of different reasons and they have to exist somewhere. So if they don't have a home they have so choice. Which is why nothing like this will ever work to help the homelessness problems.
    .

    But do you know what does have a huge impact on getting people off the streets and into homes? There are multiple studies now of places that implemented guaranteed minimum income as experiments that show once people are given money each month the vast majority use it to find a home and get off the streets.



    U.S. Supreme Court weighs ban on homeless people sleeping outside

    Agence France-Presse
    April 23, 2024 7:56AM ET



    [​IMG]
    (Photo: Shutterstock.com)




    The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Monday on whether cities can ban homeless people from sleeping outside, as the country grapples with increasing rates of Americans living on the streets and a lack of shelter beds.

    The case centers around regulations in the city of Grants Pass, in the western state of Oregon, which banned camping or using any kind of bedding on public property after its public parks became filled with tents, blankets and cardboard.

    Those breaking the rules face hundred-dollar fines and possible prison sentences for repeat offenders.

    Homeless advocates have argued that banning people from camping when there is nowhere else to sleep amounts to "cruel and unusual punishment" -- prohibited by the US Constitution's Eighth Amendment.

    The decision of the nine Supreme Court justices, expected by June 30, could carry high stakes. A record 653,100 people are homeless across the country, according to a 2023 count.

    "The ordinances by design make it physically impossible for homeless people to live in Grants Pass without facing endless fines and jail time," Kelsi Corkran, a lawyer arguing against the ban, told the Supreme Court on Monday.

    Corkran added that the ban turns "the city's homelessness problem into someone else's problem by forcing its homeless residents into other jurisdictions."

    Theane Evangelis, lawyer for Grants Pass, defended the city's punishments as "not in any way unusual."

    "This court should reverse and end the Ninth Circuit's failed experiment," Evangelis told the justices, referring to the appellate court which in 2022 blocked the city's regulations.

    Evangelis said the 2022 ruling had "fueled the spread of encampments while harming those it purports to protect."

    Grants Pass, population 40,000, does not have a municipal homeless shelter and instead relies on private charities.

    Asked by Chief Justice John Roberts what the city would do if its appeal failed at the Supreme Court, Evangelis said its "hands will be tied."

    "It will be forced to surrender its public spaces," she added.

    Roberts said that the city's ban was not necessarily a criminalization of homeless "status" since this could change, and instead was about "conduct."

    "You can remove the homeless status in an instant if you move to a shelter or situations otherwise change and of course it can be moved the other way as well if you're kicked out of the shelter," Roberts said.

    Elena Kagan, one of three liberal justices on the conservative-dominated bench, reproached the city authorities for criminalizing a "biological necessity."

    "You could say breathing is conduct too, but presumably, you would not think that it's okay to criminalize breathing in public. And for a homeless person who has no place to go, sleeping in public is kind of like breathing in public."

    In addition to poverty, drug addiction and a lack of shelter beds propelling homelessness, economists argue the country's market-rate housing stock is woefully behind target -- leaving the United States short of millions of homes needed to meet demand and increasing prices for existing housing.



    https://www.rawstory.com/u-s-supreme-court-weighs-ban-on-homeless-people-sleeping-outside/
     
  4. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    Not sure what the problem is.
    Heck, if New York stopped paying for laundry service for ILLEGAL MIGRANTS they could probably pay for housing for all the homeless AMERICANS.
     
  5. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    [​IMG]
    The Saga of Clarence Thomas and His Luxury RV Takes a Disturbing Turn
    Greg Sargent
    Thu, May 16, 2024 at 3:59 AM MDT·6 min read
    1.6k


    [​IMG]











    Faced with a barrage of ethics scandals that have tarred the Supreme Court as riddled with corruption, Justic leaving the page." data-wf-tooltip-position="bottom" data-wf-reset-every="90">e Clarence Thomas has sought to cast them as merely an outgrowth of politics in Washington, D.C. “It’s a hideous place,” Thomas said recently of the nation’s capital, in some of his most extensive remarks about his ethical lapses, noting that he’s been subject to “nastiness” and “lies.” Thomas added, “It’s one of the reasons we like RVing.”

    So it’s fitting that the latest sordid turn in these sagas involves none other than Thomas’s recreational vehicle, that symbol of his yearning to escape Washington to mingle with reg’lar folk who don’t subject each other to the viciousness he faces in the capital.

    Thomas is still refusing to reveal whether he repaid the principal on the $267,000 loan that he received from Anthony Welters, a wealthy health care executive and personal friend, to purchase his R.V. in 1999, according to a letter that Senators Ron Wyden and Sheldon Whitehouse have sent to an attorney for Thomas.


    Thomas also has yet to say whether the loan’s principal was forgiven by the lender, the Democrats argue in the letter, which was obtained by The New Republic. If it was forgiven all or in part, the senators say, it could constitute “a significant amount of taxable income” that should be reported on federal tax returns.

    “Your client’s refusal to clarify how the loan was resolved raises serious concerns regarding violations of federal tax laws,” the senators write. Wyden chairs the Finance Committee, and Whitehouse chairs the Judiciary Committee’s panel on federal courts, both of which are spearheading an investigation of Supreme Court ethics scandals.

    The tale involving this R.V. constitutes one of the higher-profile instances of Thomas potentially accepting a form of income from wealthy benefactors, resulting in a drumbeat of stories that have shaken the court. Though Thomas’s frequent depiction of his Prevost Marathon R.V. (which he purchased used) as a sign of his affection for salt-of-the-earth leisure activities appears sincere, it’s also a luxury vehicle and an extremely pricey asset, perhaps comparable to a medium-size yacht.

    The whole saga began when The New York Times revealed last summer that Thomas had purchased the R.V. in 1999 for $267,230 with financing from Welters that Thomas almost certainly could not have obtained from a bank, as experts told the Times.

    In response to the paper’s questions, Welters—a longtime friend who grew up poor, as Thomas did, and went on to amass a reported $80 million fortune in the health care industry—would say only that the loan was “satisfied.” As the Times noted, this doesn’t mean the loan was paid back.

    Thomas also has not been forthcoming, the Democrats say. Since the Times story broke, Wyden’s Finance Committee has sought information about the loan and, through Welters’s cooperation, has obtained a limited number of documents related to it. As the committee announced last fall, those materials showed only that Thomas had paid back some of the interest and appeared to reveal that, in 2008, Welters forgave most or all of the principal of the loan.

    But Thomas did not report this on his 2008 Financial Disclosure Report, the committee said, and in response to the committee’s questions, he has not clarified whether he reported any of that money as income on tax filings.

    Which brings us to the present. The senators have been pressing Thomas’s lawyer, Elliot Berke, to provide additional detail on the forgiven loan, and last month, Berke responded with a letter. But once again, the letter—which TNR viewed—offered little additional clarity. It said Thomas “made all payments” on a “regular basis until the terms of the agreement were satisfied in full” and that he’s complied with judicial disclosure requirements.

    That avoids detailing what those terms were, whether the payments were merely for interest—as opposed to paying off the loan’s principal—and whether the arrangement ended up forgiving much or all of that principal. If so, it would functionally constitute a large chunk of taxable income, Wyden argued.

    “This raises the question of whether this justice is in compliance with federal tax law, which requires a disclosure of forgiven debt and taxable income,” Wyden told me. “The central question is: Did he ever repay the principal?”

    The senators’ new letter demands more information on all those fronts. Berke, Thomas’s lawyer, didn’t respond to a request for comment.

    This raises important issues even if there is no suggestion whatsoever that this particular money impacted any Thomas rulings or that Welters himself had any business before the court. We should expect such transparency from judges because we deserve to know what sort of financial interests could conceivably motivate those who issue rulings that shape our lives, and because judges should serve as models of upholding rules and laws upon which the integrity of the system rests, notes Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin.

    “We subject all federal judges—including the justices—to financial disclosure rules because we are worried about even the appearance that they are deciding cases in ways that are consistent with their financial interests,” Vladeck said, stressing that the Democrats are raising legitimate questions about Thomas.

    “We want judges and justices who are participating in the system and not subverting it,” Vladeck added, and thus “lead by example.”

    After ProPublica revealed that Thomas accepted an extraordinary array of luxury trips and vacations from billionaire and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow without disclosing them, Thomas defended his conduct. He claimed that “colleagues” advised him that “hospitality from close personal friends” is “not reportable,” but ethics experts sharply dispute this and insist such disclosure is required.

    That aside, as The New Republic’s Matt Ford argues, Thomas has made it clear he views all this mainly as a public relations problem and demonstrates little concern for any need to demonstrate ethical propriety, thus making him partly responsible for the questions and the “nastiness” that continue to dog him.

    Wyden seconds the point. Thomas could simply be more forthcoming about the R.V. loan, he says, thus demonstrating both that he respects the need to maintain appearances and that he’s in compliance with income tax filing requirements.

    “We’re giving the justice the opportunity to clear this huge mess up,” Wyden told me. “Nobody in this country is above the law. Not even Supreme Court justices.”


    https://www.yahoo.com/news/clarence-thomas-won-t-divulge-095900851.html
     
  6. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    Traitors to the United States of America on our highest court.


    MAGA symbol was visible on Samuel Alito's property as Supreme Court weighed election case

    Matthew Chapman
    May 16, 2024 7:22PM ET



    [​IMG]
    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito (from Creative Commons)




    Far-right Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's property was flying an upside-down American flag — a known MAGA "Stop the Steal" symbol — right around the same time that the Supreme Court was deciding whether to take up a challenge to the 2020 election brought by the Republican Party of Pennsylvania.

    According to The New York Times, "The upside-down flag was aloft on Jan. 17, 2021, the images showed. President Donald J. Trump’s supporters, including some brandishing the same symbol, had rioted at the Capitol a little over a week before. Mr. Biden’s inauguration was three days away. Alarmed neighbors snapped photographs, some of which were recently obtained by The New York Times. Word of the flag filtered back to the court, people who worked there said in interviews. While the flag was up, the court was still contending with whether to hear a 2020 election case, with Justice Alito on the losing end of that decision."

    Alito denies having put up the flag himself, saying that, “It was briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs.” His wife was involved in a dispute with a neighbor over an anti-Trump sign in their yard.

    ALSO READ: Delay, delay: Lauren Boebert keeping personal finances secret until after GOP primary

    Nonetheless, "Judicial experts said in interviews that the flag was a clear violation of ethics rules, which seek to avoid even the appearance of bias, and could sow doubt about Justice Alito’s impartiality in cases related to the election and the Capitol riot" — including upcoming rulings from the Supreme Court on whether January 6 defendants can be charged with obstruction of Congress, and whether Trump himself has presidential immunity from prosecution for his role in the election plot.

    “You always want to be proactive about the appearance of impartiality,” former federal judge Jeremy Fogel told The Times. “The best practice would be to make sure that nothing like that is in front of your house.”

    Alito has emerged as one of the hardest partisans on the Supreme Court. In addition to being the architect of the ruling that reversed abortion rights around the country, he has often gone further than even his fellow right-wingers, including being in the minority in a 7-2 ruling by fellow right-winger Justice Clarence Thomas that reversed a Trump-stacked lower circuit court trying to gut consumer financial protections.


    https://www.rawstory.com/alito-maga-symbol-yard-upside-down-flag/
     
  7. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    Lets see if we can follow the logic.
    So Alito had an upside down flag and a MAGA symbol on his property and american hater starts twirling up there on his high moral ground.

    Judge Marchon, sitting in judgement of trump and his hush money trial, donates to despicable political campaigns and has a daughter who is an advisor to liberal causes, and has demonstrated his bias to all things trump. That evokes a large yawn from the hypocrite liberals.

    What a despicable does is politics.
    What a deplorable does is criminal.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    One thing that proves Justice Alito was deliberately displaying the symbol in support of the J6 insurrection is by the stupid lies he is trying to tell about it. Think about this. Alito is a Supreme Court justice. The highest court in the land which is responsible for determine what is and is not Constitutional. And yet he is not denying the American flag at his house was flying upside down for several days. But instead blames his wife claiming she flew the American flag upside down due to a dispute with their neighbors. Does that make sense? A Supreme Court justice that has so little regard and respect for the American flag he would allow his wife to use the American flag in a personal pissing contest with their neighbors?



    'Not reassuring': Reporter drops new Samuel Alito details that put his story into question

    Matthew Chapman
    May 17, 2024 4:48PM ET



    [​IMG]
    Samuel Alito (Photo by Nicholkas Kamm for AFP)




    A damning new report from The New York Times this week revealed that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's house displayed an upside-down flag — a popular symbol used by MAGA election conspiracy theorists — right around the time that the Supreme Court decided against taking up a Pennsylvania-based challenge to the 2020 presidential election, over Alito's own objections.

    Now, a Fox News reporter who spoke to Alito is revealing new details, that have triggered even more questions.

    "I spoke directly with Justice #Alito about the flag story in the NYT. In addition to what's in the story, he told me a neighbor on their street had a 'F--- Trump' sign that was within 50 feet of where children await the school bus in Jan 21. Mrs. Alito brought this up with the neighbor," posted Shannon Bream on X.

    ALSO READ: Delay, delay: Lauren Boebert keeping personal finances secret until after GOP primary

    "According to Justice Alito, things escalated and the neighbor put up a sign personally addressing Mrs. Alito and blaming her for the Jan 6th attacks," Bream continued. "Justice Alito says he and his wife were walking in the neighborhood and there were words between Mrs. Alito and a male at the home with the sign. Alito says the man engaged in vulgar language, 'including the c-word'. Following that exchange, Mrs. Alito was distraught and hung the flag upside down 'for a short time'. Justice Alito says some neighbors on his street are 'very political' and acknowledges it was a very heated time in January 2021."

    This explanation for overtly political and election-denial symbols at the home of a Supreme Court justice didn't satisfy many people.

    Congressional staffer Aaron Fritschner pointed out that Alito's excuse that his wife was upset about vulgarity near a school bus stop doesn't add up: "Justice Alito says his wife Martha-Ann Alito had an altercation with neighbors about a ''F--- Trump' sign that was within 50 feet of where children await the school bus in Jan 21.' Except... FCPS and ACPS were all remote in January of 2021. No children were waiting for buses," he wrote.

    Other commenters criticized the arrogance in Alito's explanation.

    "Best part of the Alito statement, the most perfect distillation of his entire worldview is him saying that it’s his *neighbors* who are 'very political.' Not the Alitos of course! The ones who went through the trouble of flying the coup flag!" wrote MSNBC host Chris Hayes. "The Alitos are victims of rabid, nasty ideologues everywhere they go. But *they* have no animus or ideological drive. It’s everyone else."

    "That a Supreme Court justice is so thin-skinned that neighbors saying vulgar things caused him to allow his home to fly a treasonous flag is not reassuring at all. This man has no business on the Supreme Court. Period," wrote former Associate White House Counsel and Protect Democracy founder Ian Bassin.

    According to the New Yorker's Susan Glasser, the new details made things worse for Alito.

    "Fascinating thread with Justice Alito’s direct excuse," she wrote on X. "Remarkably he admits the upside-down flag flown on his home was a direct response to his wife being mad at a neighbor’s ‘F--- Trump’ sign—ie an explicitly partisan gesture.

    https://www.rawstory.com/alito-interview-questions-details-not-reassuring/
     
  9. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    As usual, american haters rant proves nothing.
    Standing up there on his high moral ground screeching about Alito and his flag while nancy antoinette and her family finish up their hunters point theft and brandon with his million voter plan.

    Can't hate america more than that, eh?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    Ex-prosecutor shows how Justice Alito's flag scandal may be 'worse than people are saying'

    David McAfee
    May 18, 2024 4:08PM ET



    [​IMG]
    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito (from Creative Commons)




    Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito may be in deeper trouble than media reports suggest, according to a former federal prosecutor.

    Alito has been under fire since it was first reported that the jurist's home flew an upside-down American flag weeks after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot and insurrection attempt at the Capitol. The upside-down flag was also carried by numerous protesters claiming they were trying to "Stop the Steal" of the presidential election in 2020.

    Alito has claimed it was his wife who hoisted the flag. If that's true, "it's worrisome but mainly another problem spouse," according to former federal prosecutor Harry Litman.

    ALSO READ: Delay, delay: Lauren Boebert keeping personal finances secret until after GOP primary

    "If he knew anything, it's even worse than people are saying," he added on Saturday.

    In a video published on Saturday, Litman elaborated, suggesting knowing about the display is the same as "announcing a position" on a turbulent issue of politics.

    "To make it worse, it's a lie. It's just a complete fiction," he added. "This would be a Supreme Court Justice expressing sides that are, on a factual level, just a lie, a fiction... there is no 'steal' going on Jan. 17, 2021, in this country, and the suggestion otherwise is an absolute treachery to confidence in democracy that no one of any position of influence should be taking, much less a Supreme Court Justice who will be hearing cases involving an offshoot of this very set of beliefs and social turmoil."

    If Alito honestly believes a "steal" was going on, Litman said, it is "indefensible" for him to take part in any opinions involving Jan. 6.

    "You probably hear it in my voice, but this is not like a financial conflict of interest," the ex-prosecutor continued.

    Watch the video below or click the link right here.





    https://www.rawstory.com/alito-flag-scandal-worse/
     
  11. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    American hater can't refute Alito's explanation and can't prove his own allegation villanizing Alito.

    Won't stop him from bloviating with authority, will it?
     
  12. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    To see how outrageous Alito is all we have to do is imagine the opposite of how treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans would be reacting if Ketanji Brown Jackson had a BLM flag flying at her house.

    But we don't have to imagine fake patriots that love to wave the America flag but have no problem with Alito and/or his wife flying the American flag upside down. We can clearly see the fake patriots right here.



    Bigwig GOP Senators Bash Justice Alito Over ‘Stop the Steal’ Flag

    Several high-ranking Republican senators are expressing misgivings about an upside-down American flag—a symbol most strongly associated with Trump supporters who believe the election was unfairly stolen from him—that was flown outside the Virginia home of Samuel Alito in early 2021. Senate Republican Whip John Thune, the second-ranking member of his party in the chamber, told CNN in a brief interview on Tuesday that the flag was “a bad decision,” adding that he wasn’t sure how it could be explained. (After The New York Times first reported the incident last week, Alito said his wife had briefly flown the flag in a dispute with neighbors over political yard signs.) “It creates a bad image,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told the network. “It created a situation that we’re all talking about. So, yeah, I think it was a mistake.” Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), for his part, called the matter “very unfortunate” and suggested legislators ought to investigate it further. Their uneasiness adds to a chorus of Democratic lawmakers who have more harshly criticized the Supreme Court justice and demanded he recuse himself from cases related to the Jan. 6 Capitol attacks.


    Read it at CNN

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/alitos-upside-down-flag-fuels-anxieties-over-supreme-courts-trump-ties


    upload_2024-5-21_18-40-30.jpeg
     
  13. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    It's telling, isn't it?

    American hater equates a conservative flying the American flag upside down with a liberal flying a BLM flag.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    1. BigSuzyB
      I would prefer that the conservative get their shit squared away properly.
      Quit fuckin about with our flag, ya fuck.
      I don’t give a shit about a BLM anything.
       
      BigSuzyB, May 22, 2024
      stumbler likes this.
  14. Bron Zeage

    Bron Zeage I am a river to my people

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    13,657
    What's there to refute? If Alito says his wife wears the flag in his family, there's no reason to think it's because he no longer wants to be associated with people who attacked the Capitol and assaulted police officers with bear spray.

    At some point there had to be a sifting out of the MAGA who are so stupid they believe the election was stolen and the MAGA who know better, but keep giving hope to the stupid. This group includes the group whose vanity can't allow themselves to parrot easily refuted lies and thus be grouped among the stupid. Self awareness is a real handicap for a MAGA loyalist.

    If a MAGA can't happily accept a patently false narrative, or happily repeat it as if they believe it, there's really no room for them in MAGA. MAGA sees them as weak and the rest of the world sees them as funny, in the sense that a mime working in a mall food court is funny.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    What is Christian nationalism?

    Christian nationalism i2s the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way. Popularly, Christian nationalists assert that America is and must remain a “Christian nation”—not merely as an observation about American history, but as a prescriptive program for what America must continue to be in the future. Scholars like Samuel Huntington have made a similar argument: that America is defined by its “Anglo-Protestant” past and that we will lose our identity and our freedom if we do not preserve our cultural inheritance.


    https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/february-web-only/what-is-christian-nationalism.html


    [​IMG]
    Another controversial flag flew over a home of Supreme Court Justice Alito: New York Times
    Maureen Groppe, USA TODAY
    Updated Wed, May 22, 2024 at 6:28 PM MDT·2 min read
    691




















    WASHINGTON − Another flag − not an upside one, but a flag that said "Appeal to Heaven'' − carried by some of the people who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, flew over a home of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito last summer, the New York Times reported Wednesday.

    The second flag, which the report said is a symbol for a religious strand of the “Stop the Steal” campaign, was raised over Alito's New Jersey vacation home in July and September of 2023.

    The Times previously reported that an upside-down American flag flew over the justices Virginia home in January of 2021.

    Supreme Court justices are supposed to avoid politics.

    Alito told the Times his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, raised the inverted flag in response to a dispute with a neighbor and he “had no involvement whatsoever."

    The Times said Alito declined to respond to questions about the beach house flag.

    A spokesperson for the Supreme Court did not immediately respond to a request for comment from USA TODAY to the latest report.

    More Justices Thomas, Alito complain about 'nastiness' and 'imperiled' freedom of religion


    [​IMG]
    Oct 7, 2022; Washington, DC, USA; Members of the Supreme Court pose for a group photo at the Supreme Court. Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. Mandatory Credit: Jack Gruber-USA TODAY ORG XMIT: USAT-510520 (Via OlyDrop)
    The high court is deciding two cases related to former President Donald Trump and his supporters’ efforts to overturn the results of the election, decisions that will affect the criminal election interference charges pending against Trump.

    Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee, renewed his call for Alito to recuse himself from cases related to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 insurrection.

    “This episode will further erode public faith in the court," Durbin said in a statement in which he also urged Chief Justice John Roberts to add an enforcement mechanism to the court's ethics code.

    Durbin has been pushing for Congress to impose on the court stronger ethics rules backed by an enforcement process but has been blocked by Republicans.

    Related Supreme Court grapples with limits on obstruction charge in Jan. 6 cases

    'Freak flag': Senate Democrats bash Supreme Court Justice Alito for upside-down flag

    The "Appeal to Heaven" flag − a white flag with a green pine tree in the center − was used during the American Revolution. It has become a symbol for Christian nationalist.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has hung the flag outside his congressional office.

    The Freedom From Religion Foundation calls the flag a "sectarian symbol that indicates government endorsement of Christianity."

    Delivering the commencement address at a Catholic University this month, Alito said that the freedom of religion is "imperiled."

    He told the graduates of Franciscan University of Steubenville they may soon find themselves in a job or social setting where they will feel pressure to endorse ideas they don’t believe in or to abandon core beliefs.

    “It will be up to you," he said, "to stand firm."

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/another-controversial-flag-flew-over-213621442.html
     
  16. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Ilhan Omar questions Alito’s patriotism

    Matt Laslo
    May 23, 2024 1:04PM ET



    [​IMG]
    Left: U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) at the Statuary Hall of the U.S. Capitol on February 7, 2023, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) Right: Associate Justice Samuel Alito sits during a group photo of the Justices at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on April 23, 2021. (Photo by Erin Schaff-Pool/Getty Images)




    WASHINGTON — Democrats are asking who’s the treasonous one now that pictures have surfaced of an upside American flag flying at the home of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.

    Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) — the Somali-born congresswoman who some Republicans have called “treasonous” and accused of being “a foreign agent” — is in disbelief that the GOP is defending Alito after his wife allegedly disrespected the American flag.

    The upside-down flag that flew at the Alitos’ home in Virginia in the days after the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was a well-known symbol of Donald Trump’s “stop the steal” effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election. A separate “Appeal to Heaven” flag — a banner carried by some January 6 rioters — flew at the Alitos’ vacation home in New Jersey less than two weeks after the riot, the Associated Press reported.

    ALSO READ: What Trump's weird WWE Hall of Fame speech tells us about his presidential debate strategy

    “It sounds insane. It sounds un-American,” Omar told Raw Story while walking through the basement of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.

    While there’s disagreement within the Democratic Party over whether to hold hearings into this latest Supreme Court scandal, there’s broad agreement in the party that this latest incident is a new low for the nation’s high court.

    On the GOP side, Alito has his defenders, but many Republicans — a party that’s tried to ban flag burning in recent decades — don’t want to wade into this controversy.

    At the very least, there’s broad agreement the Supreme Court has astounded a Congress that itself is known for astounding even the most seasoned political observers.

    Hypocrisy watch
    Omar doesn’t use “un-American” lightly. That allegation has personally stung her

    — she was born in Somalia before migrating to refugee camps and eventually landing in Minneapolis — as she’s endured sustained attacks questioning her patriotism from many on the right.

    In February 2023, Republicans booted Omar — one of just three Muslims in Congress — from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Then, at the start of this year, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) introduced a censure resolution against Omar.

    “I wish I had the votes to expel and deport her,” MTG tweeted on X in February.




    While the GOP did censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) — another Muslim member — Greene’s effort to shame Omar never got a floor vote. But earlier this month, Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) introduced a new censure resolution against Omar.

    Omar is wondering where these Republicans are now that Alito, a fellow conservative, is accused of disrespecting the flag in which they drape themselves.

    The U.S. Flag Codea largely symbolic and unenforced law — states that the “flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.” Trump himself has advocated criminalizing flag burning.

    “It shows that the flag is just a prop for them and not something that they honor,” Omar said. “You can’t make this s— up. These people really are a special breed.”

    “Does this show, like, that MAGA is now the GOP and the court is now MAGA-ish?” Raw Story asked.

    “Yeah. That’s been clear,” Omar said. “In the last six, seven years it’s been evident.”

    Evident or not, Democrats’ hands are tied — at least in the House of Representatives, where the party is locked in the minority.

    Dems divided
    This is an election year, and the Supreme Court was already on the ballot after conservative justices overturned Roe v. Wade. But Democrats are now vowing to triple down on their calls to try and restrain the Supreme Court.

    “This is one of the reasons why we really need a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices,” Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) told Raw Story. “And he does need to, I believe, recuse himself from a litany of cases.”

    Frost is generally supportive of a legislative response some of his Democratic colleagues are crafting to this Alito flag incident, but he goes a step further than others.

    ALSO READ: NFL drafts Capitol Hill staffers for lobbying retreat

    “It’s bizarre. Some may say, treasonous. I would say that,” Frost said.

    “Treasonous” is a step too far for many of his colleagues — in part because many Democrats are still in disbelief over this flag incident.

    “It's pretty pathetic, actually,” Rep Dan Kildee (D-MI) told Raw Story. “In an era where it's hard to find things that are not outrageous, they figured out a way to outdo it. It’s pretty bad.”



    [​IMG]

    Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) speaks on a panel at the office of The Center for American Progress (CAP) Action Fund on January 10, 2023, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)


    While Alito blames his wife, Kildee says that’s a flimsy defense.

    “He can try to hide behind his wife all he wants, but it's pretty weak,” Kildee said. “The idea that he can express that view and then be a fair judge in cases that involve that particular question, that’s pretty hard to imagine.”

    Earlier this session, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed a measure that would saddle Supreme Court justices with a concrete code of ethics. Republicans opposed it, and it squeaked out of the committee on a strictly party line vote., 11-10.

    Some Senate Democrats are now calling for hearings into this latest Alito scandal, but so far the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), has nixed the idea. He is, however, calling on the justice to voluntarily bow out of cases about presidential powers and allegations of misconduct surrounding the 2020 election.

    “He should recuse in cases — in Article II cases,” Durbin told Raw Story while heading to the Senate floor to vote Wednesday.

    In the House, 45 Democrats agree. They penned a letter Tuesday calling on Alito to recuse himself from all Jan. 6-related cases. While the Democratic Party is itching to put up some restraints on the Roberts Court, the GOP wields the gavels in the House.

    Controversy is ‘crap’ — to at least one Republican
    On cue, Republicans disagree about whether Alito is in the wrong — especially over calls for one of their conservative compatriots to recuse himself from some of the biggest, most controversial cases ever to come before the court.

    “That's just asinine,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) told Raw Story of Democrat’s calls for Alito to recuse himself from Jan. 6 cases going forward.

    “It’s crap,” Biggs said. “It’s stupid. It is really dumb.”



    [​IMG]

    Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ). (Facebook)


    Other Republicans won’t go that far. In fact, many don’t even want to touch this controversy with a 10-foot flag pole.

    “Not sure what’s the motivator of it, but I guess it’s something between the two of them,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN) told Raw Story of the associate justice and his wife. “It’s probably inviting scrutiny. Beyond that, I don’t really weigh in on stuff like that when I don’t know much about it. I just know that it happened.”

    “‘Inviting’ or ‘welcoming’ scrutiny?” Raw Story asked.

    ALSO READ: 'A fantasy of manhood': Are frat boys the new Proud Boys?

    “However you want to phrase it,” Braun — who, after recently winning Indiana’s Republican gubernatorial primary, is likely the next governor of his state — said through a chuckle.

    The issue of an upside down flag isn’t something many veteran Republicans want to weigh in on.

    “What are your thoughts when you see an American flag flying upside down?” Raw Story asked Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), who famously and heroically lost his right eye on his third tour to Afghanistan as a Navy SEAL.

    “What was the context here?” Crenshaw asked Raw Story.

    “Justice Alito, his wife did it. But I was just asking more broadly. Like, is that offensive to you aside from that?”

    “I really don’t have a comment. I don’t know,” Crenshaw said. “I got no comment. I have no idea why.”

    Democrats are filling that void, including with laughter.

    “Well, my first thought is, everybody has neighbor troubles from time to time,” Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA) joked to Raw Story.

    “They're just like us!” Raw Story quipped back.

    “Yeah,” Neal said as his laughter waned and his face became serious. “But secondly, it seems to me to be petulant.”

    Alito is no Clarence Thomas?
    Petulant or not, some Democrats are urging their colleagues to stay focused, in part, because the freedom of speech extends to justices and their spouses.

    In fact, some Democrats say this episode is doing their job for them.

    “It doesn’t surprise me about any of those folks. It’s a shame,” Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ) told Raw Story. “It doesn't bother me at all what they’re doing, because it only shows how they really are. Better than words. That makes them part of the MAGA group.”

    Pascrell says he’s more concerned about Justice Clarence Thomas taking lavish gifts from billionaire donors, including exclusive, all expense paid vacations on private yachts to accepting free tuition payments for his nephew’s schooling, as ProPublica reported last spring.



    [​IMG]

    Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (Photo by Olivier Douliery for AFP)


    “The other guy that’s taken his off the top, that guy should recuse himself,” Pascrell said. “He's just taking tremendous amounts of donations from the MAGA types. I don’t think you can say that about Alito.”

    “And that's more worrying — the taking of the money, because there are strings attached?” Raw Story inquired.

    “Absolutely,” Pascrell replied. “Yes. Exactly.”

    “But they say there's no strings?”

    “There's never any strings,” Pascrell told Raw Story through a laugh. “That's what they said in New Jersey.”


    https://www.rawstory.com/raw-investigates/samuel-alito-ilhan-omar/
     
  17. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    Omar questioning any American's patriotism is like american hater claiming he's a patriot.
    It just leaves one slack jawed.

    Omar has declared her loyalty is first to her birth country of Somalia, not America.
    She has by all accounts fraudulently applied for citizen status, marrying her brother in a sham marriage.
    She has declared her support for violent demonstrations, and she is no defender of America.
    But she dares question Alito's patriotism?

    <iframe width="660" height="371" src="" title="Ilhan Omar EVISCERATED for &#39;Somalia first&#39; speech" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
     
    1. mstrman
      Fuck her.
       
      mstrman, May 24, 2024
  18. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    Not even with dog's dick.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. stumbler

    stumbler Porn Star

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    106,324
    If anyone has any doubts the US is still in fact and in deed a racist country we can always look to the Supreme Court for proof.




    • [​IMG]
      The “Appeal to Heaven” flag flew outside the Alitos’ New Jersey vacation home last summer, along with a “2022” Phillies flag and a Long Beach Island flag.
      Skip to contentSkip to site index
    The “Appeal to Heaven” flag was among several banners carried by the Jan. 6 rioters, who also favored religious banners symbolizing the white Christian nationalist movement.,

    Politics
    Supreme Court sides with South Carolina Republicans in redistricting dispute
    By Melissa Quinn

    Updated on: May 23, 2024 / 3:47 PM EDT / CBS News




    Washington — The Supreme Court on Thursday maintained the lines of a congressional district in South Carolina that a lower court had invalidated as an unlawful racial gerrymander, delivering a win to Republican mapmakers who said they used politics, not race, as the predominant factor when drawing the district bounds.

    The 6-3 ruling from the high court reverses the ruling from a three-judge district court panel that found GOP lawmakers improperly used race when designing Congressional District 1, represented by Republican Rep. Nancy Mace.

    In a majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito, the court's conservative justices said that the district court's findings were "clearly erroneous." Race and politics "closely correlate" in South Carolina, and voters who challenged the congressional lines failed to provide direct evidence of a racial gerrymander, the Supreme Court said.

    "The fact of the matter is that politics pervaded the highly visible mapmaking process from start to finish," Alito wrote.

    In a dissenting opinion written by Justice Elena Kagan, and joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, the three liberal justices accused the majority of cherry-picking evidence presented during the lower court proceedings and "reworking the law" to impede racial-gerrymandering cases.






    [​IMG]

    The video player is currently playing an ad.
    "The proper response to this case is not to throw up novel roadblocks enabling South Carolina to continue dividing citizens along racial lines," Kagan wrote. "It is to respect the plausible — no, the more than plausible — findings of the district court that the state engaged in race-based districting. And to tell the state that it must redraw District 1, this time without targeting African-American citizens."

    South Carolina Republicans and the state chapter of the NAACP had asked the justices to issue their ruling by Jan. 1 to ensure clarity for voters in the 2024 elections. Arguments in the case, known as Alexander v. South Carolina Conference of the NAACP, were held in October and were among the first of the court's new term.

    But as January came and went with no decision, GOP officials requested the three-judge district court panel that oversaw the case pause its own January 2023 decision invalidating the lines Congressional District 1, which it agreed to do in March. The order from the judges allowed the state to use the map that it found was racially gerrymandered for the upcoming congressional contests. Statewide primaries are set for June 11.

    President Biden criticized the decision and said in a statement that it "undermines the basic principle that voting practices should not discriminate on account of race and that is wrong."


    "This decision threatens South Carolinians' ability to have their voices heard at the ballot box, and the districting plan the court upheld is part of a dangerous pattern of racial gerrymandering efforts from Republican elected officials to dilute the will of Black voters," Mr. Biden said.

    South Carolina's congressional map
    Located along South Carolina's southeastern coast and anchored in Charleston County, voters in Congressional District 1 have elected Republicans to the House from 1980 to 2016. Democrat Joe Cunningham won the seat in 2018 in an upset, but Mace claimed a narrow victory in the following congressional election.

    During the redistricting process that began in 2021, Republican lawmakers wanted to give the district a stronger GOP tilt. To accomplish this goal, they moved more than 140,000 residents out of the district and into Congressional District 6, long represented by Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn.

    The new voting map was enacted in January 2022, and Mace won reelection that November by a wider margin than two years earlier. But the NAACP's South Carolina chapter and a voter in the district challenged the boundaries of Congressional District 1 as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander and alleged the district was designed with racially discriminatory intent.

    After an eight-day trial, the three-judge panel agreed and concluded that GOP lawmakers impermissibly used a racial target and sorted voters predominantly by race to achieve a partisan outcome.

    The judges found that Republican mapmakers set a target of 17% Black voting-age population in Congressional District 1 and moved more than 30,000 Black residents into Congressional District 6 to produce a stronger Republican lean. The district court blocked the state from holding an election with the GOP-drawn map for Congressional District 1.

    South Carolina Republicans appealed the panel's decision last February and argued the district court failed to disentangle race from politics. The lawmakers said politics was the main motivating factor they considered during redistricting, which is permissible after the Supreme Court in 2019 said federal courts could not hear claims of partisan gerrymandering, the practice of drawing voting maps to entrench the party in power.


    The opinions
    Writing for the majority, Alito said that the map's challengers failed to offer direct evidence to support their claim that South Carolina Republicans had a racial target — a voting-age population that is 17% Black — when they drew Congressional District 1. Instead, the court said that figure is "simply a side effect of the legislature's partisan goal."

    "Where race and partisan preferences are very closely tied, as they are here, the mere fact that District 1's BVAP stayed more or less constant proves very little," Alito wrote. "If 100% of black voters voted for Democratic candidates, it is obvious that any map with the partisan breakdown that the legislature sought in District 1 — something in the range of 54% Republican to 46% Democratic — would inevitably involve the removal of a disproportionate number of black voters. And since roughly 90% of black voters cast their ballots for Democratic candidates, the same phenomenon is very likely."

    The majority rebuffed the district court's focus on the Black voters moved out of Congressional District 1 and into Congressional District 6, which it relied on to show a racial motive. Instead, Alito wrote that "because of the tight correlation between race and partisan preferences, this fact does little to show that race, not politics, drove the legislature's choice."

    In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said he does not believe courts should hear racial gerrymandering and vote dilution claims at all.

    "Drawing political districts is a task for politicians, not federal judges," he wrote. "There are no judicially manageable standards for resolving claims about districting, and, regardless, the Constitution commits those issues exclusively to the political branches."

    Thomas, who joined nearly all of the majority opinion, said that attempting to determine how a legislature would have drawn voting boundaries "in a vacuum is a fools errand."

    "It behooves us to abandon our misguided efforts and leave districting to politicians," he said.


    In her dissent, Kagan accused the majority of imposing a more difficult standard for proving voting lines were racially gerrymandered, which she said put "uncommon burdens on gerrymandered plaintiffs" and includes an evidentiary rule that is intended to "scuttle gerrymandering cases."

    The liberal justices said that the majority opinion sends a signal to state legislators and mapmakers to use race as a proxy to meet their partisan goals.

    "And so this 'odious' practice of sorting citizens, built on racial generalizations and exploiting racial divisions, will continue," Kagan wrote for the dissenters. "In the electoral sphere especially, where 'ugly patterns of pervasive racial discrimination' have so long governed, we should demand better — of ourselves, of our political representatives, and most of all of this court."

    The battle over Congressional District 1 is the latest to come before the high court that arose after the 2021 redistricting process. The justices in September 2023 declined requests by Alabama officials to use a congressional map drawn by Republicans in the state in the 2024 elections, which a lower court said likely violated federal law.

    That decision came after the high court upheld a ruling that invalidated the boundaries of the state's seven congressional districts. As a result, federal judges in October selected a new congressional map that will give the state a second district where Black voters make up a significant portion of the electorate.

    Similar disputes over the voting lines in Georgia, Louisiana and Florida have also played out, and a new map crafted in Louisiana could give Democrats an advantage in the November elections, when Republicans are seeking to hold onto their control of the House. The Supreme Court earlier this month cleared the way for Louisiana to use for the upcoming 2024 elections a congressional map that includes a second district where the majority of voters are Black, giving them the opportunity to elect their favored candidate.


    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-south-carolina-gerrymandering-opinion/
     
  20. shootersa

    shootersa Frisky Feline

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    86,587
    Clearly American hater didn't read the article, or the decision.

    Or didn't care in his rush to attack the Supreme Court for ruling against his wishes.

    "The fact of the matter is that politics pervaded the highly visible mapmaking process from start to finish," Alito wrote.​