politics
Thursday, June 22, 2023
Friday, June 23, 2023
Saturday, June 24, 2023
Tldr, political stunt by one of the top 3 in the military (private military chief), who wanted more autonomy
Didn't get the backing he was hoping for from Putin, and they mutually agreed to deescalate
Possible there was also talks about who gets what part of Ukraine, as they've been buckling I know Belarus has been interested in securing some of the land in he North
Might have come at the expense of Wagner land, hence the political stunt to test Publix support, which wasn't there
Sunday, June 25, 2023
putin just died
Thursday, June 29, 2023
oops
Asians can finally stop getting penalised
WE DID IT HERDDIT!!!
(it's like "heard" instead of "read")
We did it seedit
(Its like reddit but you plant your seeds)
Replying to Rusp #rusp. Because I’m sure Reddit supported that
Funilly, it seems they disagree with race based and want it to be family income based
the solution is to send all the money to me personally and then there will be no problems that are important
I think we need a real genius to handle the money (no offense pirate). Someone go look up elementary school report cards nation wide to see who is most qualified
Nice semon inferno
A college systematically marked every Asian applicant with -20 (on their numerical scale for admissions) and unlike past Supreme Court cases where it's just one white girl bitching about the process being unfair/rigged, this time it was obviously bad enough that they ruled it unconstitutional
that's my very lightly informed summary
doesn't say applications have to be race-blind or anything gay like that, but that even veiled systems that promote one race over another are illegal
in the case they ruled on, the -20 points for being asian was called "bad attitude" or something like that
I was interested, final vote was 6-2
I never pay attention to the couts, how have they ruled on 20+ cases this month alone
some of these are pretty major too
there's was a 7-2 ruling on threats being protected by the 1st amendment (in most cases)
“The State must prove in true-threats cases that the defendant had some subjective understanding of his statements’ threatening nature,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority.
you can say something intending it to be hurtful, shocking, vulgar, demeaning, or otherwise inflict harm
but you need to show provable premeditation that you intended that statement to cause true harm
some stalker in Colorado argued successfully, that's a nice win for free speech
Counterman sent a Colorado musician as many as 1,000 messages during a two-year span that began in 2014. She ignored his messages and repeatedly blocked him, but he continued to send messages that implied he was watching the woman, was romantically interested in her and was frustrated by her lack of response.
Friday, June 30, 2023
Student loan forgiveness is dead
6-3 vote
“The Secretary’s comprehensive debt cancellation plan cannot fairly be called a waiver – it not only nullifies existing provisions, but augments and expands them dramatically,” Roberts wrote. “However broad the meaning of ‘waive or modify,’ that language cannot authorize the kind of exhaustive rewriting of the statute that has taken place here.”
The White House sought to use the HEROES Act authority to waive the debt.
Roberts said the government needed direct authorization from Congress.
“The question here is not whether something should be done; it is who has the authority to do it.”
from some article I found
no, 6-3