VakAttack

Nay, good sir. Under the old legal system, when we were a Constitutional Republic, despite it's reputation, qualified immunity was not a COMPLETE shield against any prosecution or law suit. The protections were broad but not complete. Ahh the dark days before the ascension.

Well, given that decision uses the phrase "absolute immunity" and not "qualified immunity", some of my fellow lesser beings may feel that those are two different things given that they are two different things.

Ahhh, I see some of my fellow plebes have noted the slight snafu in the legal proceedings. What is an official act? Who knows?!??! It's not really for us mere serfs to know. Eventually I'm sure the trust magistrates will deign to defining them for us. Could they have told us in this ruling? Sure, if they so chose, but why should they? Who are we to ask? They will surely do what is best and provide for us as needed. I mean, sure, they decided SOME of the acts were privileged, but then said "these others...we have no opinion, somebody else decide so that we can later decide whether that new decision was a good decision", but again, who are we lowly peasants to ask?

Super excited to be back in a monarchy system again, and on the week of July 4th! All Hail the Leader and his many wise and unassailable "official acts"!

Nope sorry Jimmy, welcome to the resistance.

I feel even better about my take that nobody over 65 should be POTUS. Yeesh.

I've said this before (not that I expect you or anyone to remember every post I ever make, lol) but I actually don't watch any cable news channels. Not Newsmax, not Fox, not MSNBC, not CNN, none of them. The way they typically make their way into my consciousness is clips on Twitter or Threads or some other social media site. After I see them, I'll try to track them down from a different source and verify whether the clips are real or edited. Most of my actual news consumption is thru reading various sites and then some YouTube commentators whose opinions I respect.

No Dominion defamation lawsuit for us, thank you very much!

Hahahaha. It was a dumb one.

One million percent. We sound like those old people yelling at me in the 90s for listening to rap music. times move on, the young people of every generation are going to have their own thing, lets try to be better than previous older generation and just recognize IT' S NOT FOR US, we don't have to scream that the Devil is in Elvis' gyrating hips or whatever. That's ok, lol.

Not all content is for all people. If you don't like it, you don't have to partake.

Extremely unlikely IMO, unless Hrovat were just outright lying. Truth is a complete defense to anything like that (defamation/slander/libel). Also opinions and whistleblowing have protections as well.

Those are just the most famous scandals, but I'm not sure that I'd agree thay USA gymnastics had THAT much more at risk than USA wrestling. But there are hundreds and thousands of scandals like that, both on big (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal) and small scales (This one just happened where i live: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wcjb.com/2024/05/31/former-vanguard-high-school-dean-arrested-sexual-offenses-against-students/%3foutputType=amp , but this is a tale as old as time; then you have the intrafamily stories of the "don't leave kids alone with Uncle Jim..." variety.)

I mean....doesn't history tell us that is exactly what organizations do? USA gymnastics, the Catholoc Church, PSU football.

Well, along with Iowa State.

@Husker_Du said on HR that Iowa is trying to flip Lockett also, which god I hope so, lol.

....well, one of those actions is a crime, and involve an adult striking a college student, so I see that differently. That said, there was a Michigan wrestler who flexed on the Brands brothers a few years ago, I thought that was all in good fun.

Yeah, I don't care about this at all. In fact I love it; I want more theatrics and showmanship. This kind of theatrics I'm fine with; in fact, I was fine when AJ was doing it as a freshman.

All signs pointing to Angelo staying at Iowa.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C8ZsoN3MBXK/?utm_source=ig_web_button_native_share The only important thing regarding Iowa and Ferrari at this point.

Northern Colorado makes some sense, given all the Baylor Fernandez stuff. The rumor re: Cass is AJ said something undefinedly douchey to Rose Cass, she told Slim Tony, he told Terry, Terry told AJ to hit the bricks.

The reason, IMO, were to get Angelo. No inside info on that. I said this on the Hawkeye Report board, but, once AJ was already in the door, this may end up being the best possible way this could have played out. Nothing illegal, AJ's shenanigans occurred not in an Iowa singlet, and Angelo appears to still be on board. I do not consider "AJ keeps it together for 3 years as a viable possibility.

Not sure what's happening here other than Cinnabon's typical inanity, but I can confirm @Hammerlock3 is not a fat guy.

Happy Father's Day to all the dads!

Definitely the federal ban. As to your second paragraph, that was more of what I was trying to get at, using the Heller case as the prism. The language in the amendments says the right shall not be infringed, but we definitely allow infringements Do you agree or disagree that, if we're interpreting the language as is under the Heller case and using originalist interpretation that many of the Heller court and definitely the current court favor, that any gun ownership law at all is illegal? This is more of a philosophical and legal interpretation debate that just, frankly, may only be interesting to me.