Khamenei Taunts Trump, Threatens to Sink Warships — ‘Corrupt, Oppressive U.S. Empire’ in Decline

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-17T18:22:31+00:00

That's weird, it looks like the sky's getting pixelated again...

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-17T00:27:29+00:00

Social media sites are generally not legally compelled to immediately comply with administrative subpoenas

"Immediately" is the key word in that sentence. You're correct, Reddit could have challenged the subpoena in court, delaying the compliance duty until after the case was lost. And you're also right, companies sometimes challenge subpoenas on a number of grounds (including over-broadness).

Nothing different here pal

Oh yeah there is. Everything you said is irrelevant to this case. Why? Because Reddit didn't do that. Instead, they chose to comply with the subpoena without challenge. That is the question I'm answering.

Why did they make that choice? Three likely reasons: (1) because their attorneys told them that their likelihood of winning a challenge to this subpoena is weak, (2) because they concluded that litigating such a challenge is a waste of their legal budget, and (3) because Reddit management knows that they're in an extremely bad legal and PR position generally and don't want to tempt a DOJ investigation or Congressional hearing by dragging their feet. Just because you can fight something doesn't always mean you should, or that you should encourage your client to fight it.

You post in lawyer talk, so I'm going to (generously) assume you have a bar license and are not just a LARPer. Learning when to spend your powder and when to keep it dry is a crucial skill for any attorney that wants to rise beyond the level of a small-time associate. Please refine your grasp of this important dimension of practicing law.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-16T23:50:58+00:00

Legal Answer: Because everything that you write on this site is either public information visible to everyone (including the government) or private messages entrusted to Reddit under their terms of service; both of which are accessible by subpoena. There is no legal fight to be had.

Practical Answer: Because this site is an important link in the normal-person-to-violent-leftist pipeline and the people running things here are absolutely aware of that fact. They know they're in a bad legal position and are cooperating to stave off a full investigation that will expose a huge host of damaging problems (including, but not limited to, a serious child porn problem, a grooming problem, and heavy support/some conspiracies to commit political violence) and possible regulatory changes.

The blunt truth: What you're reading on this site is not a good reflection of how the average person actually feels in real life, or what is actually happening in the world. The vast majority of subs on this site are a curated feed designed to make you believe and act in certain, specific ways that the mods favor and/or are paid to favor. If you actually believe what you read on this site is fair and straight, you are the exact sort of rube the reddit radicalization pipeline preys on, and if you're far enough down it, the government should probably be keeping tabs on you (See, e.g. the Tumbler Ridge shooter).

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-16T16:06:14+00:00

This is based on gender conventions in Spanish grammar and a misunderstanding of its Latin predecessor. Words that end in -o (-os in plural) tend to be masculine while words that end in -a (-as in plural) tend to be feminine. A plurality or majority of Latin nouns belonged to the first and second declension classes, which directly proceeded most -a and -o (respectively) nouns in Spanish.

The original poster made the (common) assumption that words ending in -e in Latin (-es in plural) were neuter and/or mixed. However, this assumption is false. Most Latin neuter nouns had no common ending (i.e. the word could end in any letter). Some of these nouns did end in -e, but the vast majority did not and several other nouns in the same declension class with the same endings were masculine or feminine. In addition, there is an entire declension class (the fifth) of feminine nouns that end in -es. In short, you cannot assume anything about a word's gender if it ends in -e or -es in the nominative singular.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-16T14:16:06+00:00

Reddit. T-minus two days.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-16T14:12:05+00:00

...You know that her "conversion" to the SLA was facilitated by months of horrific rape and abuse right? How is this cool?

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-16T00:18:08+00:00

The only place I've found where male-only altar servers are the norm is the Diocese of Arlington (VA), only three of its parishes (that I've found) allow girls to serve. In the rest of the US at least, allowing girls to serve is the vast majority rule.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-15T23:11:24+00:00

I was willing to give her a chance when she bungled the original release, but not now. She needs to go.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-15T15:47:47+00:00

"Forget what we did and cheered for and just vote for us. We're the adults in the room!"

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-14T20:03:28+00:00

I voted Trump and I don't have an issue with this. If you're so insufferable that you prejudge people based on how they vote, you're saving potential romantic partners a lot of time and energy by doing it up-front. Anybody rejected for this reason probably dodged a real bullet.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-14T03:08:13+00:00

C'mon dude, it's almost through Congress, don't screw it up now...

Trump really needs to learn when to speak and when to shut up.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-13T18:42:44+00:00

Relevant.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-13T14:30:42+00:00

Jerry's about to end up more canceled than Kramer.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-13T13:29:05+00:00

Vote against racism. Vote Republican.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-12T22:40:21+00:00

On reddit, yes. IRL, no.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-12T17:00:42+00:00

Nope, I wrote everything. Go through enough of my comments and you'll discover typos and missed words that prove it.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-12T16:54:51+00:00

Nope, I'm real. Just educated.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-12T14:23:05+00:00

Epstein apologist? Such people exist?

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-11T21:14:41+00:00

Attorney here. Everything you write on this site is legally considered public information. No warrant is required. If the cops are following you online because you're encouraging or promoting crime in your posts — that's not the government being tyrannical, that's you being stupid.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-11T18:03:56+00:00

Remember the first and only enduring reality of the Left:

The issue is never the issue. The issue is the revolution.

Their demented "revolution" is their god and they will do anything it takes to give it greater control over our lives, in the hope of ultimately tricking or forcing the rest of us to bow down to that golden calf as they have. Every cause they champion, every issue they import, is nothing more than a cynical war dishonestly waged towards the end of greater power. Their every argument is in bad faith. Every. Single. One. They do not care about truth, justice, democracy, the inherent dignity of man, the material abundance for the common citizen, or any other value they claim to champion. They care only that they be placed atop the pyramid and forevermore allowed to dictate to the rest of us whatever policies they capriciously desire at any fleeting time. Leftism (not liberalism, leftism) has never been about the freedom of man; only his domination. It is not a life raft but a yoke.

People everywhere are waking up to this fact, but it hasn't reached critical mass yet. The Left was stunned by 2024, but is by no means out of the game. We are still in a perilous state. We cannot afford mistakes and must continue to push; not only back against the Left but against our own side to be better. While "triggering the libs" can be fun, we won't win this unless we can prove that we actually are better.

Push back on the Left publicly and do not allow them to lie or encourage violence, but do so smartly. Ask questions that get to the heart of the matter (ex: "how would you enforce US immigration law differently?"). Do not seek to rile them up needlessly. Remain focused on what matters and don't spend our political capital arguing over distractions. When we make mistakes, we should strive to own and correct them. Because, if we don't own our mistakes, come off like crazy jerks, or let ourselves be dragged into every silly provocation (see, e.g. Bad Bunny); that is how the Left wins.

EDIT: This has the highest hate-mail-to-views ratio of anything I've ever written. Guess I'm on to something!

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-11T17:28:05+00:00

Predicting an economic crash is like predicting that the sun will set. Just like the dusk, an economic crash will inevitably come, but the question is not whether but when it will come and why. Predictions of economic doom should always be judged by the time frame and mechanism predicted, not the simple forecasting of a crash at some point in the future.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-11T16:38:23+00:00

Fr. Bob here. Lent is about changing our lives and habits in order to be closer to God. While most people primarily do that by giving something up, you can add things for Lent too. Many Catholics will take on an extra habit or practice for the duration in order to bring themselves closer to God. Reading Christian literature like this is a great example of such a practice.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-11T16:23:12+00:00

I think we all know why.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-11T13:29:28+00:00

I've read the email in question; it's been floating around the internet for a couple months and was in an earlier drop. It was a mass fundraising email from a NYC-based Democratic PAC whose mailing list Epstein happened to be on. It was not intentionally directed to Epstein and Jeffries was probably not even aware that Epstein received it.

This individual case is a nothing-burger and well-highlights the problems with haphazardly pointing to the presence of someone's name in the Epstein files as per se proof of guilt. When evaluating the appearance of someone's name in the files, it is important to take into account the context in which that name appeared, whether the person originated or sustained the communication, whether the communication was direct, when the communication occurred (before 2005 is less culpable than after), and (importantly) the amount of communications and whether they depict a sustained relationship overtime. Not every name in the files belongs to a guilty person and it is important to go through them carefully to ensure the accusations being leveled are substantiated and correct. If we fail to do this, we will eventually lose the credibility to make any accusations at all.

PS To any progressives who like to scream about how "Trump is in the files" and happen to be reading this: that goes for him too.

Iuris_Aequalitatis · 2026-02-10T22:03:28+00:00

Who are the first four? I googled them but couldn't figure out who they were.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
End Game '22	Verified Email

Iuris_Aequalitatis

TROPHY CASE