Best Of
Re: Oh Phil Steele you silly goose
It would be too over-the-top to do a Coney Island joke here
DerekJohnson
Re: Pup? True?
Lambo was a muffed punt, a fumble recovery, a failed 3rd down conversion, a bad bounce of the ball, and a couple of losses away from winning the Pac-10 and taking the team to the Rose Blow.
Pup's Lambo apologist post was something like that. Fucking laughable.
PurpleBaze
Re: Ayatollah says Iran triumphed in the U.S.-Israeli war and dealt a “severe blow”
Well the Palestinians legit need a complete deprogramming. As it currently stands, essentially everyone over the age of 10 is a terrorist.
Pitchfork51
Re: Burning An American Flag Is Free Speech, But Destroying A Pride Flag Is A Hate Crime?!
Yep. If you grab either of the Fag Flag or the Stars and Stripes from its owner and burn it, both should be property crimes.
If you buy your own Transtastic or USA flags with your own money, free speech says it can be burned.
Re: We need a general tweet of the day thread
Pretty much a summary of the decision.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Supreme Court issued a ruling this morning that it is legal for President Donald Trump to be the president.
In a 6-3 decision, the court held that since Trump was, in fact, elected to be president, his ability to "do president things" was protected under the law.
"The court hereby rules that a president can be president," wrote Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who penned the decision for the majority. "By virtue of being president, that person is the president. I can't freaking believe I'm having to explain this."
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a scathing dissent for the minority, arguing that she really didn't like that presidents could do stuff and also that it was very unfair how pretty Justice Barrett is for her age. "I'm really getting sick of looking at her still-youthful face," wrote Jackson. "Also, I hate laws. Laws are stupid. Case closed."
At publishing time, Justice Jackson had challenged Justice Barrett to a pay-per-view cage match.
WestlinnDuck
DHS sues the entire district court including judges.
But wait, there's more!
Apparently since they are defendants in this case, they may have to recuse themselves from all the cases they are blocking with injunctions.
Blueduck



