The president-elect is reportedly preparing to issue an order following his inauguration on January 20 that would effectively ban trans people serving in the military " and then medically discharge the thousands of currently serving trans service members in the armed forces.

In his first term in office, Trump declared that the US would no longer "accept or allow" trans people in the military, citing "tremendous medical costs and disruption," he wrote in 2017. The ban took effect in 2019.

President Joe Biden reversed that policy

Should have gone the "bone spurs" route.

Bye-bye post...

Under Johnson's plan, the tax for the sale of liquor that is 20% or more alcohol by volume would jump from $2.68 a gallon to $3.62 a gallon.

An extra dollar for a GALLON of liquor gonna cause a problem for someone? Maybe they should reconsider their life choices.

Gaetz Withdraws

Pulls out ... It was right there. :(

The West is in a precarious situation.
#31 | Posted by oneironaut

Yes, Putin has the West exactly where he wants them.

If only the West had developed armed forces of its own or even [gasp!] nuclear weapons of some sort...

Giggity!

Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz posted on X on Thursday that he is withdrawing his nomination for attorney general.
#14 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

Maybe he landed the role of Quagmire in the live action Family Guy movie.

Who amongst has not submitted cash payments to attractive young women for no apparent reason, other than the flag being at full mast.

Those who live in glass tents should not cast their rocks off.

Hegseth's Victim Remembers Saying No A Lot

"But what did her eyes say? Oh, they were closed, because she was going unconscious. Sounds like a yes to me!"
- President-Elect Rapist

Ukraine did the hokey pokey and turned themselves - just to FA&FO.
#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds

"The nerve of some people! Defending themselves from an invasion."
- MAGAts (lining up behind Hair Furor to take their turn giving mouth-loving to the Thieving Moscow Midget's even smaller pooter)

50 Cases of Polio in Pakistan

And not a single virgin goat.

You need a straight jacket.
#6 | Posted by oneironaut

What if he prefers a gay one? Because they're FABULOUS!

Translation: Don't fight for injustice because it's inconvenient. That's what I got from reading your post.
#8 | Posted by LauraMohr

Gotta pick your battles. That's how Bill Clinton was able to get elected and re-elected. To appoint a number of SCOTUS justices that protected against injustice for over a decade.

Hillary supported trans rights. So did Kamala. Did you turn out to vote for her? Or did you stay at home or vote third party along with 8 million of your nearest and dearest because those ladies weren't perfect enough for you.

Because I guarantee plenty of people turned out to vote for Trump because he opposed those rights. So why should Dems take a hit for a cause that costs them the office?

But you don't have to take me word for it: "The "progressive" position of the Democratic Party - originally championed by FDR as a practical program for working Americans - was distorted by minority far-left extremist views [...] The Republican ad on this issue saying "she is for they/them and Trump is for you" was devastatingly effective"
-Andrew Cuomo

So what are you saying CENSORED?? That Sarah McBride shouldn't have ran for Congress??
#5 | Posted by LauraMohr

McBride had every right to run for Congress and the folks in that district had every right to vote for Sarah. However, I don't think this conflict is helping the Dems in any way, shape, or form.

I've said the below before and I'll copy/paste it again:

I can't find the quote, but a Repub said a couple days ago that they would definitely consider the ban "since the trans issue won the GOP the election," or words to that effect.

And now the Dems line up to let the GOP rope them into the issue, again.

@LauraMohr, so are you saying the linked MSNBC article is incorrect?

Because there are plenty of other sources saying the same thing.

And just like that, the adults are back in charge

And just like that, this post is removed.

Biden agrees to give Ukraine anti-personnel mines

Yawn. Make them nuclear, now that would be something.

Ukraine isn't in NATO.
#12 | Posted by sitzkrieg

I thought you were alluding to Russia's threats to nuke members of NATO, including UK.

They don't have that option. They're in a wartime economy, if they withdrew overnight their economy would collapse.
#9 | Posted by sitzkrieg

Using nukes against NATO should do wonders for Russia's economic output.

Russia has changed their nuclear policy. This brinkmanship might not work out.
#1 | Posted by sitzkrieg

Russia says the use of US long-range missiles by Ukraine will lead to "an appropriate and tangible" response.

An "appropriate and tangible response," like Russia pooting itself as it enters day 1,000 of its 3-day "Special" Military Operation.

Forbes: S&P To Crash More Than 40%?

So you're saying there may be some bargains out there in a little bit?

Sounds like he's a perfect fit for the Rapist/Vance administration.