fishbane

It's very amusing that you are using two accounts to have a conversation with yourself.

Over 3 million tax returns were filed with an ITIN for tax year 2023. The vast majority of them are probably illegal immigrants. If someone is here illegally there exist a few ways to become legal. All of them have some requirement to show "good moral character" or something along those lines. Some evidence of that is paying your fair share of income tax. If an immigrant living here illegally hopes to get a green card and eventually citizenship some day then they should file/pay taxes. If one were to set a priority to deporting those residing here illegally I would think serious criminals would be at the top followed by those not paying their taxes and way down below them on the list would be those who either entered illegally or failed to leave, but have been paying taxes for years. If you were to prioritize those that file and pay taxes at top of the deportation list because they are the low hanging fruit then not only do you disincentivize the illegal immigrant population from paying taxes, but every deportation results in less tax revenue.

I am referring the to the individual taxpayer ID number (ITIN). This is not for a corporation. It gets issued to individuals that are not eligible for a SSN for tax purposes. https://www.irs.gov/tin/itin/individual-taxpayer-identification-number-itin

Tax ID number.

You might be right about a majority of Americans not caring about his namby pamby whining, but the claim that 64% of Americans want all immigrants living illegally in the US deported seems incorrect. This survey by Pew Research found that only 32% of respondents wanted all immigrants living illegally in the US deported. Often people want something, but they don't want to pay the price. Deporting every person living illegally in this country would be a long and costly endeavor. It doesn't make a lot of sense to try and deport 100% of them. I think a majority of Americans feel that way and that's seen in the responses to Pew's survey. The real number is about half of your quoted 64% and I think if a realistic price tag were attached to the question the number could go even lower.

Unfortunately no. I tried it and you get Lehigh wrestlers. Searching was still fully broken for PSU. Didn’t try the other schools.

It wasn't. The charges were dismissed by the district court in a decision that was ultimately affirmed by the supreme court with rogue woke judge Antonin Scalia joining the majority. It was a lot different. DC was a much more dangerous place in 1990 than it is today. There were 472 murders in DC in 1990 compared with only 187 in 2024. The murder rate improved even more significantly given that in 1990 there were only 607,000 residents in the district compared with 702,000 in 2024.

I don't know but it's unlikely. The permit or lack thereof is unlikely to be the thing that decides the case. In 1990 Eichman didn't have a permit to burn a flag on the steps on the capitol in DC nor did he have a permit to demonstrate. He was charged with among other things "demonstrating without a permit." What happened in that case? Was his lack of a permit a problem for his case?

They are breaking the same law nonetheless. Here are the fire/candle rules established by the superintendent of Lafayette Square Even if they have a permit I see a lot of candles that aren't hand-held in that photo and where are the drip protectors? Finally, the max penalty for lighting a fire in Lafayette Square is only 6 months, which is 6 months less than Trump promised in his executive order.

Perhaps, but they are within their rights to do it the same as the flag burners.

How many people here were arrested? This was in May of 2025.

In 1989 after Johnson vs Texas struck down the Texas State law against flag burning Congress passed a federal law against it. When that law went into effect in 1990 protestors burned flags on the steps of the US Capitol. This same law you reference was on the books at the time and would have been applicable at that location. Those defendants were charged with violating the Flag Protection Act of 1989, disorderly conduct and demonstrating without a permit, but not with violating a law setting fires in federal parks probably for good reason. None of what they were charged with ultimately stuck as the rogue woke judge Antonin Scalia sided with the majority in US vs. Eichman. It would be a long shot that to get any farther with this. From the US District court opinion from 1990 "government cannot regulate the non-speech elements of expressive conduct where its true aim is to suppress the speech elements of the actor's conduct." "Fires" are lit all the time in Lafayette square whether it's someone lighting a cigarette, holding up a lighter at a protest, a candle for a vigil, or a president lighting a menorah for a holiday. How many have ever been arrested or sentenced to a year in prison? The only thing different here is the message.

A bogus charge all the same. Maybe they could host it from Wyoming or Alaska. Those were the only states woke enough to not have laws against burning the flag in 1989 when the Supreme court ruled in Texas vs. Johnson.

That proposed constitutional amendment ultimately failed in the Senate by a single vote. Three republicans voted against it including the wokester Mitch McConnell. Trump has not succeeded in pushing through a constitutional amendment. He signed a do-nothing executive order. Inciting violence is already illegal and the instances of people burning flags to incite riots are virtually nonexistent. It will only result in an attempt to prosecute individuals that burn flags in public as a means of expression which is still protected. A man was arrested yesterday for burning a flag in Lafayette square- no riot followed the act.

It is! And it's better than before. The wrestler search feature that had been broken for years appears to work! Well kind of. When I search for an OSU wrestler it gives me Lehigh results, but that's better than it was before... https://www.wrestlingstats.com/okstate/wrestlers.php

This is the text from his Instagram post on the subject.

I’m a little skeptical of Mineo’s reporting here. I don’t think that things get proven at a preliminary hearing and Sasso’s attorney waived the preliminary hearing. So I don’t know how anything could have been proved at this particular preliminary hearing. Pretty much nothing happened yesterday and things are just proceeding. He does appear to be facing three misdemeanor charges and one summary offense. Next court date is 8/28.

Could it be a coincidence that this is the first class that did not receive a free year from COVID?

It was there! It's been there since April.

I think there are three non champs with 5 PFs. Dan Gable 2nd place 1970 in 22:08, Darryl Peterson 5th place 1985 in 5:31, and Gary Albright 3rd place 1986 15:34. Both Gable and Peterson benefited from a championship pig tail. You had Albright and Gable with 5 falls in the table in your thread on this award, but Peterson only had 4 falls in the table. Interesting stuff in that thread.

Darryl Peterson ISU at NCAAs in 1985 5 falls in 1:32+1:00+1:40+0:41+0:38=5:31 Darryl Peterson (ISU) WBF John Long (VMI) 1:32 Kirk Trost (Michigan) Dec. Darryl Peterson (ISU) 5-3 Darryl Peterson (ISU) WBF Mark Johnson (Army) 1:00 Darryl Peterson (ISU) WBF Rick Petersen (Lock Haven) 1:40 Darryl Peterson (ISU) WBF Al Sears (SIU-Edwardsville) 0:41 Steve Sefter (PSU) Dec. Darryl Peterson (ISU) 6-1 Darryl Peterson (ISU) WBF Kahlan O'Hara (OSU) 0:38 Rick Petersen Lock Haven at NCAAs in 1985 1 Fall in 1:02 Rick Petersen (Lock Haven) WBF Andy Cope (Indiana State) 1:02 Rick Petersen (Lock Haven) MD Jeff Green (Morgan State) 10-2 Kirk Trost (Michigan) Dec. Rick Petersen (Lock Haven) 10-8 Darryl Peterson (ISU) WBF Rick Petersen (Lock Haven) 1:40

Darryl Peterson ISU 1985. 5 PFs in 5:32. Finished 5th at unlimited. I think he is the overall Gorriaran at NCAAs. If I'm off on that it's because there are multiple Petersons in that bracket and they wrested each other.

His performance wasn't only outstanding It was historic. One cannot score more team points than he did. A wrestler has only maxed that out a handful of times. He was also the Gorrarian of all NCAA tournaments up to that point. By that I mean at the 1973 tournament he had 5 pins in 13:52. No one had more that 5 pins and no one had 5 pins in less time. Since 1973 someone has scored 5 pin at NCAAs in less time, but that person didn't win the title.

If Askren never redshirted he’d be 1-11 against Pendleton in college and only a one time champ/Hodge winner. Kevin would still believe that Askren jumped levels after Pendleton graduated and that 2006 Askren would beat peak Pendleton. In the timeline that actually happened Pendleton was 7-1 against Askren in folkstyke and 2-0 in freestyle. Kevin thinks Askren jumped levels after Pendleton graduated and either the jump didn’t work for freestyle or he jumped back by the time they wrestled in freestyle a second time. There is a window in time from late June 2005 to early October 2009 when Askren totally would handled Pendleton... Unfortunately they didn’t wrestle during this period.

Wait they picked Askren in the top spot? Did they forget about Carter Starocci? This made me watch the announcement video. They didn't even mention Greg Jones or Ed Ruth. Jones beat two of the guys they did mention Koscheck and Pendleton. The only other champs they didn't mention at all were Robbie Lawler, Matt Brown, Myles Martin, and Dean Hamiti. Ruth and Jones should have been included.