Breaking News

2,422,848 Views | 19106 Replies | Last: 2 hrs ago by oski003
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Breaking News!
A fog went to the park, and out popped a Trump.

movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sikh arrested for not serving halal meat in the UK. Stands firm.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DV6ah_0kt6S/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
^Javier is based!
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lots of Independents are conservative, and are tired of being branded a 'racist' by the Progressive drones. Either way it doesn't matter, the UniParty and Globalists have a lock on most everything. They can't even move the 85% issue SAVE America voting bill.
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

Lots of Independents are conservative, and are tired of being branded a 'racist' by the Progressive drones. Either way it doesn't matter, the UniParty and Globslists have a lock on most everything. They can't even move the 85% issue SAVE America voting bill.

I'd like to have a lock on something - even just one thing. Right now I can control nothing.

Loved the typo, "Globslists". Where do we sign up?
SFCityBear
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Gad Saad: Who are the global terrorists? Grok says top 15 groups are Islamist, top 22 individuals are Islamists.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/918335567577279/?mibextid=9drbnH
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Alito and Thomas are very concerned about the welfare of children. They will set things right after they accept the matter for review.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.



You respond like a baby when someone asks a legitimate question. Grow up.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.



You respond like a baby when someone asks a legitimate question. Grow up.


I'm not interested in what you have to say because you're not interested in a good-faith discussion.

You made that clear over the weekend when you failed to address how moving ships thru the Strait would provide more insight.

I'm going to put you on ignore for the rest of the year.
You'll have to find someone else to follow around and spend 60% of your posts replying to.

Perhaps I will do the same with your buddy BarelySane.
Thanks.


BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.



You respond like a baby when someone asks a legitimate question. Grow up.


I'm not interested in what you have to say because you're not interested in a good-faith discussion.

You made that clear over the weekend when you failed to address how moving ships thru the Strait would provide more insight.

I'm going to put you on ignore for the rest of the year.
You'll have to find someone else to follow around and spend 60% of your posts replying to.

Perhaps I will do the same with your buddy BarelySane.
Thanks.





Then why respond to him at all?

You once again just did what you accuse others of doing. Remember that "essay" that Beargoggles wrote.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.



You respond like a baby when someone asks a legitimate question. Grow up.


I'm not interested in what you have to say because you're not interested in a good-faith discussion.

You made that clear over the weekend when you failed to address how moving ships thru the Strait would provide more insight.

I'm going to put you on ignore for the rest of the year.
You'll have to find someone else to follow around and spend 60% of your posts replying to.

Perhaps I will do the same with your buddy BarelySane.
Thanks.





Then why respond to him at all?

You once again just did what you accuse others of doing. Remember that "essay" that Beargoggles wrote.



I just notified BearGreg that I'm putting you and our mascot on IGNORE for the rest of the year because I'm tired of the constant deflection, lack of good-faith posting, and trolling.

It's also clear that I'm not the only one that feels this way.
Many other posters here have complained of the same.

Perhaps you should stop for a moment and recall how I asked you a number of questions about where you thought interest rates, inflation, inflation, and stock prices would be. You didn't answer the questions. You started talking about a partner of yours that is a stockbroker which made no sense. You deflected.

You'll have to find someone else to follow around and engage with.
It won't be me.

Enjoy!
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

BearlySane88 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.



You respond like a baby when someone asks a legitimate question. Grow up.


I'm not interested in what you have to say because you're not interested in a good-faith discussion.

You made that clear over the weekend when you failed to address how moving ships thru the Strait would provide more insight.

I'm going to put you on ignore for the rest of the year.
You'll have to find someone else to follow around and spend 60% of your posts replying to.

Perhaps I will do the same with your buddy BarelySane.
Thanks.





Then why respond to him at all?

You once again just did what you accuse others of doing. Remember that "essay" that Beargoggles wrote.



I just notified BearGreg that I'm putting you and our mascot on IGNORE for the rest of the year because I'm tired of the constant deflection, lack of good-faith posting, and trolling.

Enjoy!



Thank god. Still waiting for the 5k donation to Cal football though since you lost the bet. Good thing I don't care what posters on an Internet forum think of me, clearly you do because you can't stand the heat when applied and then go whine about it incessantly.

lol why would you message BearGreg to say that? That's a wonderful waste of your time and his. Maybe he won't have time to read the "essay" you wrote him
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?


"A federal judge temporarily blocked efforts to reduce recommended childhood vaccines, citing that the Health Secretary likely violated federal procedures, specifically regarding the restructuring of a key vaccine advisory committee. The court found that these changes failed to follow established administrative processes required for altering public health guidelines."
PBS
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

MORE WINNING!





US judge blocks efforts to reshape childhood vaccine policy


I don't agree with the push to reduce childhood vaccinations. However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?

I will leave it up to you to ask Ai that question.
Thanks.



You respond like a baby when someone asks a legitimate question. Grow up.


I'm not interested in what you have to say because you're not interested in a good-faith discussion.

You made that clear over the weekend when you failed to address how moving ships thru the Strait would provide more insight.

I'm going to put you on ignore for the rest of the year.
You'll have to find someone else to follow around and spend 60% of your posts replying to.

Perhaps I will do the same with your buddy BarelySane.
Thanks.





Just because things fly over your head, it doesn't mean the other poster is not interested in good faith discussion. YOU HAVE LITERALLY BEEN CAUGHT LYING THREE SEPARATE TIMES IN LESS THAN A WEEK. As for encouraging ships to go through, it is common sense that if, you see how someone attacks, it is easier to defend against said future attacks. Obviously, there are negatives as well but it is certainly okay to objectively ponder that seeing something enter a trap will help us figure out how to beat it.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

oski003 said:

However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?


"A federal judge temporarily blocked efforts to reduce recommended childhood vaccines, citing that the Health Secretary likely violated federal procedures, specifically regarding the restructuring of a key vaccine advisory committee. The court found that these changes failed to follow established administrative processes required for altering public health guidelines."
PBS



BINGO.
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The best part might be that I know he's gonna read everything posted by you and I and now he can't respond or he looks like he's going back on what he said he's doing.
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Not really off topic but so cool seeing the Cal community embracing their own
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Posted this a week ago but good to see they are investigating it
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

oski003 said:

However, the article fails to provide the Biden judge's legal basis to block these moves. Why is this new policy illegal?


"A federal judge temporarily blocked efforts to reduce recommended childhood vaccines, citing that the Health Secretary likely violated federal procedures, specifically regarding the restructuring of a key vaccine advisory committee. The court found that these changes failed to follow established administrative processes required for altering public health guidelines."
PBS



Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Venezuela 51 and Cuba 52 sound good
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:






Todd Blanche will be very lucky if he doesn't join the ranks of attorneys in Trump's orbit that lose their law licenses at the end of the reign.

"As of early 2026, Todd Blanche, serving as U.S. Deputy Attorney General, faced allegations of serious ethical violations. A Campaign Legal Center complaint filed in January 2026 alleged he held significant crypto-related assets while directing the Department of Justice to pause crypto prosecutions.
ProPublica

Key details regarding the allegations include:

Crypto Conflict of Interest: The complaint alleges that Blanche violated, or potentially violated, conflict-of-interest laws and his ethics agreement by directing the DOJ to halt investigations into crypto companies while personally owning thousands in crypto-related assets (e.g., Bitcoin and Ethereum).

Asset Transfer Concerns: Records show that while Blanche eventually divested from some crypto interests, he transferred them to his adult children and a grandchild. Ethics experts noted this maneuver, while perhaps technically legal, likely violated the spirit of the law regarding appearances of improper influence.

"Ending Regulation" Memo: On April 7, 2025, Blanche issued a memorandum titled "Ending Regulation by Prosecution," which ordered DOJ staff to cease certain enforcement actions against digital asset companies.

Other Potential Conflicts: During his confirmation hearing, concerns were raised regarding his oversight of cases he may have had prior involvement in, particularly the January 6th and Mar-a-Lago investigations, although he pledged not to violate ethical obligations.
NPR

The Campaign Legal Center has called for a formal investigation into these actions by the Justice Department's inspector general and the Office of Government Ethics."
Campaign Legal Center

I assume there will also be an investigation of his jailhouse "interview" of Ghislaine Maxwell and her subsequent transfer to another prison to determine if witness tampering occurred.

Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Charlie Kirk vs Soy Marxist.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVaZ7iwDTvQ/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Todd Blanche and Pam Bondi deserve a jail cell with Nicolas Maduro.
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

Todd Blanche and Pam Bondi deserve a jail cell with Nicolas Maduro.



Now that's a stretch
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:

DiabloWags said:

Todd Blanche and Pam Bondi deserve a jail cell with Nicolas Maduro.



Now that's a stretch


Ludicrous.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

BearlySane88 said:






Todd Blanche will be very lucky if he doesn't join the ranks of attorneys in Trump's orbit that lose their law licenses at the end of the reign.

"As of early 2026, Todd Blanche, serving as U.S. Deputy Attorney General, faced allegations of serious ethical violations. A Campaign Legal Center complaint filed in January 2026 alleged he held significant crypto-related assets while directing the Department of Justice to pause crypto prosecutions.
ProPublica

Key details regarding the allegations include:

Crypto Conflict of Interest: The complaint alleges that Blanche violated, or potentially violated, conflict-of-interest laws and his ethics agreement by directing the DOJ to halt investigations into crypto companies while personally owning thousands in crypto-related assets (e.g., Bitcoin and Ethereum).

Asset Transfer Concerns: Records show that while Blanche eventually divested from some crypto interests, he transferred them to his adult children and a grandchild. Ethics experts noted this maneuver, while perhaps technically legal, likely violated the spirit of the law regarding appearances of improper influence.

"Ending Regulation" Memo: On April 7, 2025, Blanche issued a memorandum titled "Ending Regulation by Prosecution," which ordered DOJ staff to cease certain enforcement actions against digital asset companies.

Other Potential Conflicts: During his confirmation hearing, concerns were raised regarding his oversight of cases he may have had prior involvement in, particularly the January 6th and Mar-a-Lago investigations, although he pledged not to violate ethical obligations.
NPR

The Campaign Legal Center has called for a formal investigation into these actions by the Justice Department's inspector general and the Office of Government Ethics."
Campaign Legal Center

I assume there will also be an investigation of his jailhouse "interview" of Ghislaine Maxwell and her subsequent transfer to another prison to determine if witness tampering occurred.




What if he had directed someone to halt the investigation of a bank but was accused of having a conflict of interest simply because he owned money? This is silly.
First Page Refresh
Page 546 of 546
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.