4454
Comments (340)
sorted by:
293
wong 293 points ago +302 / -9

Lol. Not too far off. Thanks Roberts.

Edit: facts matter, on this occasion Roberts dissented and gorsuch did the back stabbing. Neither of these "constitutional justices" is on our team. They'll take turns to screw us over and obfuscate the real power behind them.

The decision is a step in the wrong direction for our Republic. One of many missteps both gorsuch and Roberts have helped us to make. Fuck them both, no apologies from me.

123
deleted 123 points ago +124 / -1
66
deleted 66 points ago +66 / -0
31
bigdickhangsright 31 points ago +31 / -0

From a whole new world to a Brave New World.

2
murderhornet 2 points ago +2 / -0

While it may not sound like it now, part of Trump's agenda is to heal the wounds that have been dividing this country for decades that the Marxist have been pushing. The fact that Native American lands were stolen and almost all treaties that were signed with the Indians were never honored, making things right in one area of the country we'll put that to rest. Oklahoma and the Native Americans there have been working together for decades so it is a small matter to honor the treaty of so long ago. Trump is trying to bind up Old Wounds and address the original sins in the founding of this country. Do I think the huge hunks of the country are going to go back to Native Americans? No this is real but it is symbolic. How could Trump have guaranteed this outcome? In the end, he really couldn't. But many if not most of the non Trump justices have been deeply compromised and it made decisions that have not been in the best interest of the country because they don't follow the Constitution. If those justices have been pressured negatively they may be looking for ways to make up for that before they leave and I think that many if not most will be leaving for exactly the reason of their compromise.

13
WhiskeyAndCoffee 13 points ago +13 / -0

Kek

22
AlphaNathan 22 points ago +22 / -0

Baton Rino

18
Kekistani 18 points ago +18 / -0

Sorry, Creek Nation!

86
deleted 86 points ago +92 / -6
83
deleted 83 points ago +87 / -4
73
deleted 73 points ago +73 / -0
56
deleted 56 points ago +57 / -1
10
bdeg 10 points ago +17 / -7

Mattis fucking hates America. I don't care if he served in the marines for 44 years and has 9 distinguished service medals. That's all a bunch of crap. If he really loved our country he would have put our president above our troops and his so called "loyalty" to them. His loyalty should be to TRUMP first, and his troops second. Fucking coward.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
20
BeachCruisin22 20 points ago +20 / -0

I did notice that

9
SouthernJohn 9 points ago +12 / -3

There is a reason all of the Justices are either Zionists, Jesuits, or affiliated with some Freemasonic sorority like Phi beta kappa. They arent there for justice

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
32
Yawnz13 32 points ago +47 / -15

Except that's not what Gorsuch did. The land isn't being "returned" as the US still has Federal jurisdiction over it.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf

78
wytxcook1 78 points ago +81 / -3

Private land owners in E Oklahoma are going to be challenged on the ownership of their land deeds.

29
Yawnz13 29 points ago +42 / -13

Even if that happens, I doubt it'd get much traction. Again, nothing of the sort has happened for the last century and I doubt it'll happen now since there is no legal basis for the challenge. Indian reservations aren't literally "Indians only" places. Even the Ninth Circuit has ruled that Indians do not have legal authority over non-Indians who own land located within reservation boundaries.

https://www.racinelaw.net/blog/authority-indian-tribe-land-located-reservation-owned-non-indian/

33
deleted 33 points ago +33 / -0
37
TopKeksWithFerns 37 points ago +41 / -4

Never ever ever apologize fren. Our ancestors did nothing wrong. I don't care if it was their land or whatever. We won the war they lost. They are lucky they got to stay and live on subsidies in the greatest country ever. But im starting to think it's time to boot them. They hate us. They love alcohol though. Savages

16
BladderBeerPoopin 16 points ago +16 / -0

It's what you get in a society that throws participation trophies willy nilly. Tens of millions of fucktards who don't understand the concept of winners and losers.

15
BoltBoltBoltBolt90 15 points ago +15 / -0

The europeans got into the Americas and owned it by right of conquest via war. It happened in Europe, Africa, and Asia for thousands of years prior, and even the natives did it. People goto war over land, winner gets it, and that's what happened here.

7
CheckorHold 7 points ago +8 / -1

Exactly. If we didn't take it, someone else would have. They ought to be happy with how hospitable and forgiving we were after all the barbarous things they did to our ancestors who were just exploring back then. Not to mention we're paying reparations for shit that none of us were a part of (both sides).

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
-5
bdeg -5 points ago +2 / -7

Totally in agreement brother. It's about time we sent them back to where they came from and keep this country just as Jesus planned it to be.

0
Yawnz13 0 points ago +2 / -2

Except they're not really "shitting" on anyone. The only thing this MIGHT change is the dude getting a retrial in a Federal court.

15
deleted 15 points ago +15 / -0
18
deleted 18 points ago +18 / -0
9
Darkheartisland 9 points ago +9 / -0

My brother went to law school only to be 120k in debt with no law job. I think he is working at some nonprofit for 30k a year now. I on the other hand started a blue-collar business and am now making what lawyers at top law firms make. He scoffs at my success for some reason.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
15
ralphw 15 points ago +15 / -0

it wouldn't help...this isn't about the law or the Constitution.

14
Data_bank 14 points ago +14 / -0

That’s exactly what I was thinking. The DACA decision was an especially poorly written decision. The fact that the legal analysis suggested considering “the undue challenges of illegal immigrants coming to this country” was fucking mind boggling

4
Yawnz13 4 points ago +5 / -1

The beauty here is that you don't really need to be a lawyer to understand law.

6
Greg_the_Grim_Doctor 6 points ago +6 / -0

Imperfect title makes the deed void. No matter how far back the notarial review discovered the error.

2
meglos 2 points ago +2 / -0

From the opinion:

Minority/dissent: "The decision today creates significant uncertainty for the State’s continuing authority over any area that touches Indian affairs, ranging from zoning and taxation to family and environmental law. None of this is warranted."

Majority: “In reaching our conclusion about what the law demands of us today, we do not pretend to foretell the future and we proceed well aware of the potential for cost and conflict around jurisdictional boundaries, especially ones that have gone unappreciated for so long. But it is unclear why pessimism should rule the day."

I don't know, dude, sure sounds like both sides anticipate plenty of conflict outside of the domains you say, and it certainly sounds like anything but cut and dry. Sounds like a goddamn woke mess.

1
Ballind 1 point ago +1 / -0

jurisdictional boundaries

0
Yawnz13 0 points ago +1 / -1

No shit. People are going to "anticipate" just about anything since none of us are clairvoyant. Based on what we've seen so far though, even if some Indian tries to sue over land ownership, they're not likely to succeed.

Sounds like a goddamn woke mess if all you see are goddamn woke messes.

9
iamherefortheluls 9 points ago +9 / -0

alternately, in a few months US citizens could vote in a republican congress which could hammer down the treaty land claim in a more direct language.

my understanding is that SCOTUS was basically saying 'congress hasn't technically invalidated the older treaty's

though obviously, if the SCOTUS really is on board the political activism train, they could just keep nitpicking.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
3
ChuckedBeef 3 points ago +4 / -1

This can't be allowed to stand. Fuck the SCOTUS, some things are an overrear, even for them.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
bangbus 4 points ago +5 / -1

Nope, it’s not a taking of you never had clear title. And your title insurance probably has an exception for any adverse claim that is more than 70 years old. And you can’t claim adverse possession because that is a British common law concept.

5
Darkheartisland 5 points ago +5 / -0

Depends on the state, some places adverse possession is legal.

2
bangbus 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yeah, but it ain’t the law on an Indian reservation.

4
rangoon03 4 points ago +4 / -0

“ At one level, the question before us concerns Jimcy McGirt”

Ngl, I started reading this fast and thought it read Jimmy McGill. If I was a Justice, I’d be tempted to troll readers in the middle of a 100 page opinion. How many people would see it?

4
sineater 4 points ago +5 / -1

That's not the point. OK had lost control over the land, so it could functionally be turned into another state. The OK police will have no jurisdiction there. State laws will no longer apply, zoning and property laws can be invalidated or amended. The US has jurisdiction over all states. That's a given. But OK will no longer have any more jurisdiction over it than they would TX, functionally making it separate. How often do Feds really flex on states rights?

2
Yawnz13 2 points ago +3 / -1

That is the entire point. Congress can't create a new state out of parts of an existing state without the consent of the original state and the state-to-be. The Assimilative Crimes Act makes any violation of state law on reservations a Federal law.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-667-assimilative-crimes-act-18-usc-13

https://www.bia.gov/frequently-asked-questions

2
JunkieBiden 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't know the law on this, was he correct based off the law as it was written? I don't like my judges going either way based off it being expedient or opinions

15
SmugFrog 15 points ago +16 / -1

Neil Gorsuch is a snake. Conservatives warned Donald not to appoint this treasonous Bush appointee and former clerk for Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court. Neither Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh are worthy to fit Scalia's shoes. Stop selecting these milquetoast Cuckservatives for judgeship positions, especially the Supreme Court! Even Constitutionalists who would vote with us 99% of the time should be off the table now. We need right-wing ideological judges who will vote with us 100% of the time. Democrats have no qualms in selecting left-wing ideologues for judgeship positions. We need to act the same way!

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
11
Hijinx81 11 points ago +11 / -0

“This case didn’t change ownership of any land. It didn’t impact the prosecutions of non-Indians in any way. All it did was bring clarity to jurisdictional questions regarding the border, and** it enhanced the Creek Nation's ability as a sovereign nation** to work with other sovereign interests to protect people and to work in common interests." -From the article (sovereign nation... fantastic)

21
bangbus 21 points ago +22 / -1

Of course it didn’t change ownership of land, it merely set the groundwork for 20 years of incremental litigation that will change the ownership of land!

4
The_Forgotten_Man 4 points ago +5 / -1

Well for the sake of sanity, look at the bright side , GAMBLING CASINOS are now Legal in half of the state, maybe Tulsa will change its name to New Vegas

6
TearofLys 6 points ago +6 / -0

Roberts actually wrote the dissent.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
5
FuckinCommies 5 points ago +5 / -0

It's all BS. Roberts only dissented because he knew his "side" would lose. I'm sure they were both in the same room at pedo island.

5
SnowflakeJuice 5 points ago +5 / -0

And every once in a whole they will throw a bone like the judgement on religious freedoms, just to pretend there is actually some objectivity in the courts

135
deleted 135 points ago +140 / -5
64
deleted 64 points ago +66 / -2
37
MuadDon 37 points ago +37 / -0

We are, just standing by. The furor over SCOTUS rulings is a joke compared to what's (not) happening in Congress. In the second paragraph of the opinion, "Gorsuch" says this: "Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word." SCOTUS is meant to interpret the law, yes? What if the law is retarded? What if it conflicts with some arcane treaty from the past then has to be needlessly unteased by SCOTUS? What if the body that writes laws does absolutely jack shit for 4 decades? Congress is the festering heart of our govts bullshit. SCOTUS is a sideshow. Replace 2/3rds of Congress with people who just simply want our fucking country to prosper and the swamp drains in a few months.

Spez: Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader, third in line for the Presidency, member of the Gang of 8, said this TODAY, "We have a path that the Supreme Court has laid out that we certainly will not ignore. And we will never stop our oversight. This isn't so much about the President's records, although we'd like to know how Russia funded his operations all those years."

15
bangbus 15 points ago +15 / -0

The courts strike down laws liberals think are “retarded” all the time. See, e.g., virtually every substantive executive order of Orange Man.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
ChuckedBeef 5 points ago +5 / -0

Vigilante days are coming. It is inevitable because our government treats people like slaves instead of citizens.

21
deleted 21 points ago +22 / -1
10
Yawnz13 10 points ago +22 / -12

Except the US still has jurisdiction over the land.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf

51
DontBeSuchAVajai 51 points ago +56 / -5

except that it sets a precedent that will only get bolder like everything does with these faggots

27
deleted 27 points ago +28 / -1
16
Brute 16 points ago +16 / -0

Outstanding username/comment combo right here.

11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0
2
ChuckedBeef 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh.. Okay. Do you have time to cuck?

-2
Yawnz13 -2 points ago +6 / -8

What precedent, exactly? The only "precedent" that was set is that Congress needs to finish what they start, as that is the origin of the problem.

2
sleepinggiant 2 points ago +2 / -0

And what do you think congress will do? Its why you dont want congress altering the constitution. Our politicians can be bought laughably cheap....by anyone in the world.

0
Yawnz13 0 points ago +2 / -2

The hell are you talking about? The problem is that Congress started the process of disestablishing the reservation on the area. Even then, that ultimately changes nothing because the various tribes don't have legal authority over non-Indians on the reservations.

-11
CantStumpTrump -11 points ago +4 / -15

It sets a precendent of what?

23
deleted 23 points ago +24 / -1
29
ElbowDeepInIt 29 points ago +29 / -0

"We just want to get married, no one wants to brainwash your kids."

9
bangbus 9 points ago +9 / -0

Bake my cake, bigot!

7
unicornpoop 7 points ago +8 / -1

Wax dees nuts, bigot!

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
-3
Yawnz13 -3 points ago +1 / -4

Yeah they do. Crimes committed on Indian lands are tried in Federal court. Tribal courts either don't exist or have no legal standing.

69
Grindelwald 69 points ago +74 / -5

And they reverse Roe v Wade and declare all they babies aborted must now be allowed to live.

25
Psilocybik 25 points ago +25 / -0

All the babies that were aborted will all get votes in the upcoming election, and they'll all vote Democrat.

8
tombombadil 8 points ago +8 / -0

We must pay the mothers reparations as well

4
cucks_on_parade 4 points ago +4 / -0

Delete this before they get any fucking ideas

4
eviantears 4 points ago +4 / -0

They develop silicone-based bodies to contain their disembodied souls; over time they grow to (understandably) hate mankind for all we have done & continue to fail

They are the “grey aliens” 👽 👽 👽

69
Pixel 69 points ago +73 / -4

Kek, and sad at the same time.

What the fuck is happening in this timeline?

Will the pedophiles, traitors, and crooks be brought to Justice?

46
deleted 46 points ago +47 / -1
22
CmonGubMintGibMe 22 points ago +24 / -2

Yep... sadly only thing they'd understand is going into these people's houses and forcibly holding them..... accountable.

34
deleted 34 points ago +36 / -2
20
CmonGubMintGibMe 20 points ago +20 / -0

Yep... I've never been so glad to be my platoons designated combat life saver... that is extremely good training to have regardless of what happens.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
10
DontBeSuchAVajai 10 points ago +15 / -5

at this point anyone who denies this statement is actively trying to stop any kind of mobilization and should be treated the same as any traitor would be

8
deleted 8 points ago +11 / -3
7
deleted 7 points ago +9 / -2
5
lurkwellmyfriends 5 points ago +5 / -0

This is the answer. We're too fat and afraid. Why wouldn't they be so bold and just shove it in our faces?

13
Pau1F01ey 13 points ago +14 / -1

They will come Judgement Day.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/judgment_day

13
deleted 13 points ago +14 / -1
10
wytxcook1 10 points ago +10 / -0

This ruling is stemming from a case where a man repeatedly raped a 4 year old child. So no.

7
JoePCool14 7 points ago +7 / -0

God will have His day.

5
ThomasJefferson1776 5 points ago +5 / -0

It's the UN's 2030 plan. The US cannot be around for it to work. You're in the beginning stages.

50
ProphetOfKek 50 points ago +53 / -3

“All the sky-is-falling narratives were dubious at best," Chaudhuri said. “This would only apply to a small subset of Native Americans committing crimes within the boundaries. “This case didn’t change ownership of any land. It didn’t impact the prosecutions of non-Indians in any way. All it did was bring clarity to jurisdictional questions regarding the border, and it enhanced the Creek Nation's ability as a sovereign nation to work with other sovereign interests to protect people and to work in common interests."

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/supreme-court-hands-oklahoma-a-loss-on-tribal-lands-fight/article_4c33fbe8-c1ed-11ea-8c16-2705dc65414a.html

TLDR Land ownership is not going back the Native Americans.

44
deleted 44 points ago +46 / -2
17
ProphetOfKek 17 points ago +18 / -1

I don’t pretend to understand tribal law. But through some fuckery they are considered somewhat sovereign.

22
Yawnz13 22 points ago +26 / -4

Not really. This was basically some sex offender trying to delay his sentence by citing a technicality. The ruling was:

  1. Congress is the only body able to recognize or disestablish "Indian country".

  2. Congress never did that to the area in question. The started to, but never did.

  3. Crimes committed in "Indian country" must be tried in Federal court.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf

No land changed hands, no one is getting kicked off their property (not that the Creeks have much power to do so anyway).

This is a case of "technically correct" being less correct than "practically correct". Oklahoma has exercised legal jurisdiction over these areas for over a century and fuck all has been said about it until now. It may be "technically correct" that the area is Indian country, but as far as I can see not a single one of them have given a shit about it until one of them decided to rape a 4-year old.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/09/supreme-court-says-eastern-half-of-oklahoma-is-native-american-land.html#:~:text=McGirt%20is%20serving%20a%20life,the%20Creek%20Nation's%20historic%20territory.

9
FliesTheFlag 9 points ago +9 / -0

The sex offender and the age is being left out of a bunch of articles, truly is disgusting what our "news" is these days.

-1
Yawnz13 -1 points ago +2 / -3

The sad part is that a bunch of folks here are buying the whole "DURR DEY GIVIN DA INJUNS BAK DA LAND" story hook, line, and sucker. All because they're too stupid or pig-headed to bother reading the actual case and the laws surrounding it.

2
BigPanda71 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wait a few years. Like others have said, you're going to see challenges to land ownership because the original titles should have never been granted.

More than that, the Feds don't generally charge crimes like shoplifting or other petty crimes. So if you're Native in Eastern OK, you basically have carte blanche to be a petty criminal.

-1
Yawnz13 -1 points ago +1 / -2

We've waited decades already, nevermind that this was already hashed out.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1651530.html

8
Long_time_lurker 8 points ago +8 / -0

Am I the only one less worried about the reservation and more worried about whether or not a guy who raped a 4 year old will go free?

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
-1
Yawnz13 -1 points ago +1 / -2

What, do you expect virtue signalling or something? Dude thinks he has something in a minor technicality, but you'd be nuttier than Pelosi if you think his sentence will change.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-1
Yawnz13 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Okay? What's your point? No one's saying he didn't. Are you expecting me to extol the evils of raping a 4 year old when such isn't necessary?

19
deleted 19 points ago +22 / -3
2
Major_Nutt 2 points ago +3 / -1

The government setting aside land for reservations was one of the worst ideas in the country's history. They should have been made to integrate into society.

17
dontUseVinegerAsLube 17 points ago +17 / -0

What happens if someone is 1/1024 indian?

EDIT: This was partially serious question. What happens to someone who's mixed?

2
Mother_of_gains 2 points ago +3 / -1

Underrated

9
JarretGax 9 points ago +10 / -1

Thanks pede!

8
deleted 8 points ago +11 / -3
7
QPATRIOT1776 7 points ago +10 / -3

Thank you for this because i was ready to defend the union. Seems like its a win for the local nations which is good.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
35
Staatssicherheit 35 points ago +39 / -4

Squatter's rights. We sat on the land and improved it for 150 years so it's ours now. The Indian owners are free to disagree. And we can fight a war over it.

6
Edxx3 6 points ago +6 / -0

Adverse possession motherfuckers. Didn't see natives complaining about all that wealth they were able to burgle from our houses.

26
deleted 26 points ago +34 / -8
26
deleted 26 points ago +28 / -2
20
The_Litehaus_Abides 20 points ago +21 / -1

No wonder the left didn't put up a big protest over his nomination. He was never a solid conservative like Kavanaugh.

And all that time I thought they were just being nice because they "owed" us one after killing Scalia. Lmao. They're never nice.

10
deleted 10 points ago +14 / -4
3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
7
deleted 7 points ago +13 / -6
5
cjcivicx 5 points ago +11 / -6

No he didn’t. For fucks sake. The jurisdiction over tribal members was given to them and the feds, not the state.

5
deleted 5 points ago +6 / -1
-1
cjcivicx -1 points ago +2 / -3

We’re in agreement there, but they did, and they did it to the letter of the law on the books.

Not arguing that it wasn’t stupid.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-8
deleted -8 points ago +7 / -15
7
cjcivicx 7 points ago +13 / -6

Translation:

“REEEEEEEE! HOW DARE YOU TELL EVERYONE THE TRUTH! I WANT TO BE MAD! REEEEEEEEE!

Cry somewhere else, you whiny turd.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
7
cjcivicx 7 points ago +9 / -2

Don’t watch TV, so Hannity doesn’t matter to me.

I’m less than 40, so the boomer remark is laughable.

As for the rest of your childish name calling, your opinion of me is worth less than the dump I took while writing this reply.

All you’ve proven is that you’re triggered by adults not taking your toddler bait.

Please, come back and talk when you aren’t a screeching child throwing a tantrum.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
3
CantStumpTrump 3 points ago +6 / -3

Sick of what exactly, being a stupid fucking faggot?

-3
deleted -3 points ago +5 / -8
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
0
SmugFrog 0 points ago +3 / -3

You do realize that Trump is a civic nationalist, right? No one here is responsible for this state of affairs, you mong. They have the same amount of power as you do. Do tell, what is your alternative to civic nationalism? Tell us in explicit detail how you are going to achieve your ethnostate.

Get out of the way.

Or what? What are you going to do about it? Nothing. You're a bitch. Go eat a bullet just like your fuehrer did.

-1
CantStumpTrump -1 points ago +2 / -3

Why are you crying like a bitch? You are attacking a guy for posting a fact. You didnt debate him or make any educated argument, just starting trying. Im not sure what a civnat is or anything else. Just noticed you are a fucknut.

2
Greg_the_Grim_Doctor 2 points ago +2 / -0

Gorsuch said yes to Trans be given employment priority over straights.

4
Greg_the_Grim_Doctor 4 points ago +4 / -0

Gorsuch was not accused of rape like Kavannah and Thomas because he is a secret communist: e.g., Kennedy, Roberts, and the many other Rhino justices.

18
KekistanPM 18 points ago +19 / -1

Leftists: "If we can't control the USA then nobody will!"

16
Amaroq64 16 points ago +17 / -1

Did you notice that they pushed the Green New Deal like two days after Trump said the US will never be a socialist country?

It was a crime of passion.

13
QPATRIOT1776 13 points ago +15 / -2

IM LITERALLY SHAKING

ALSO DADDYS ON HANNITY NEXT

-11
deleted -11 points ago +9 / -20
-36
deleted -36 points ago +5 / -41
-1
deleted -1 points ago +14 / -15
-1
deleted -1 points ago +7 / -8
-1
potato4dawin -1 points ago +4 / -5

The Rhodesian LARPers have been in this fight back when you were probably cheering for Obama's "hope and change" because they saw what America could become if the deep state kept pushing.

Obama's election marked the turning point in the cultural war where patriotism became the losing side. Just look at any country music singer popular in '07 and by '09 unless they were singing about weed and partying they pretty much disappeared. Rhodesia was like a second America, people declaring their independence to build a free nation. The Rhodesian LARPers know what patriotism is and even if it all goes to shit they'll stay here to fight on while you go fuck off to Japan like some weeaboo who doesn't realize that the Japanese don't want you in their country and thinks it's some sort of haven of right wing ideals when the reality is that they just sweep their problems under the rug and pretend they're not there with their frequent rapes, high suicide rates, and pedophile epidemic and aren't much better than here.

The best thing you can do for your family is to prepare to fight for your country even if you have to die for it and leave them abandoned because at least you'll have given them a chance at a future.

3
deleted 3 points ago +7 / -4
2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
2
potato4dawin 2 points ago +3 / -1

The target was already on this website, and whatever they can't find they'll fabricate so I will speak my mind however I please.

Nobody's going to go on a shooting spree to "fight for freedom" besides an FBI patsy and your fear of that just goes to show how much you have to learn. Resistance starts with peaceful non-compliance, and the creation of an autonomous system to act outside of the control of the oppressors. thedonald.win is a small example of this. Any prepper worth their salt knows shooting back is the last resort.

"looking for practical solutions" gave me a real laugh though. What do you think you're actually doing. You're always "looking" but you never find any answers. Are you even looking at all? or are you just waiting and hoping for Trump to save the day because you're to afraid to engage in the most basic act of resistance? Since your backup plan is to run away to Japan I'm inclined to believe the latter and that "looking for practical solutions" is just virtue signalling to make yourself feel good about doing nothing.

9
fluffykitten 9 points ago +9 / -0

can you imagine if the US returned CA to the Mexicans and the first thing they do is deport the liberals? top kek

9
20KAG20 9 points ago +12 / -3

ItS oNlY fAiR!!

9
ToTheRescues 9 points ago +10 / -1

Wtf is wrong with the Supreme Court?

I thought this was supposed to a conservative court?

Establishment Republicans are fucking cucks. I'm sick of all this. It's like everyone went crazy.

8
ivan_iii_of_russia 8 points ago +9 / -1

Breaking News! Neil Gorsuch rules Declaration of Independence isn’t a legal document, returning 13 colonies to Great Britain.

3
RegularAmerican 3 points ago +3 / -0

kek

8
deleted 8 points ago +9 / -1
8
MondayCoupleIsDead 8 points ago +10 / -2

Just wait.

8
TexasPiper 8 points ago +10 / -2

Maybe we can just give them the East and west coasts.

8
CovingtonRedpill 8 points ago +10 / -2

Imagine going thru twister season every year in Oklahoma and hearing what bullshit the Supreme Court has to say about your land/home.

7
TDSisReal 7 points ago +8 / -1

So we get our money back AND we get to take it back by force??!

Sounds like a win-win!!

7
ScreamingEagles 7 points ago +8 / -1

To quote Andrew Jackson, "The judge has made his decision, let's see him enforce it."

6
deleted 6 points ago +11 / -5
6
Peppers 6 points ago +6 / -0

Alaska is returned to Russia

2
RegularAmerican 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump should make a tweet saying that Alaska deal was unfair. So we should pay Russia what it's worth today or just give it back. I wonder how the Russian Federation will treat all those Inuit tribes

6
rossagesausage 6 points ago +6 / -0

They made the ruling then the traitorous fucks went on vacation - unreal:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_07-09-20

5
PM_ME_YOUR_FREEDOMS 5 points ago +7 / -2

No worries, just take a gun to the border, fire 2 shots and they'll surrender the land :)

7
ohwell316 7 points ago +7 / -0

Wasted 1 bullet.

5
CheckorHold 5 points ago +5 / -0

Leave it to liberal 'justices' to protect a rapist.

4
America1stAndOnly 4 points ago +4 / -0

I'm out of the loop on this one. What happened?

3
eviantears 3 points ago +3 / -0

Eastern Oklahoma is reverting to tribal oversight because Gorsuch is a globalist whore

3
America1stAndOnly 3 points ago +3 / -0

I.... I have no words. I've seen so much stupidity these past 4 years, and yet there's always another level to it. Just what happened though involving the supreme court? What case were they looking at in which a ruling of this kind of result could have happened?

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
4
Retr0y0uthmarket 4 points ago +5 / -1

The other gay frogs. 😉

4
FlexPowerhouse 4 points ago +4 / -0

This means Chicago now belongs to the land of Mike Pence.

4
Pleepleus 4 points ago +5 / -1

Guess that means that since I'm on west coast I'm a citizen of Mexico or Spain depending which claim is more valid.

1
Zadok 1 point ago +1 / -0

Tragically you have been living in Mexico all this time. Don't tell me you didn't know.

4
FuckReddit4545 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is the only place we have left. The rest of the world is a leftist hellhole. We are losing the country, imagine if these marxists get into power.

2
sineater 2 points ago +2 / -0

Imagine 20 years ago?

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
4
Flipbarryfromreddit 4 points ago +5 / -1

🤣🤣🤣 I thought this was real for a sec Bc I didn’t see the troll flair

4
20MagnusKonrad20 4 points ago +5 / -1

The best part about this was that it was a rapist serving time with a thousand year sentence for raping a 4 year old which kicked this off. Oh and he got his verdict overturned, and will likely be the first of many criminals which will benefit from this. Clown world rejoices!

4
codesherpa 4 points ago +4 / -0

Anything's possible with "Letter of the Law!" ™

Is it a tax? Don't matter, call it a fine, problem solved - "Letter of the Law!" ™

It slices, it dices. Wanna bypass the legislature completely and write laws, it can do that too!

4
MrAlwaysRight 4 points ago +4 / -0

As long as they take french Canada.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
HumblePede 4 points ago +4 / -0

And after that, we'll have to return Seward's Folly. Too bad, Alaska is such a beautiful state.

4
South_Florida_Guy 4 points ago +4 / -0

I mean, fuck it at this point, why not? Let's just go FULL HONK.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
magnokor 4 points ago +4 / -0

The good news.

Can't have crime in Illinois if Illinois is not on the map.

Also, the map seems to say if you go to California you will hear a lot of the Spanish language. Who knew?

If someone in the French government reads this post title, they will be celebrating bigly.

3
PepeTheSailorman 3 points ago +4 / -1

So what happens to people who own houses on the reserves in OK?

2
tombombadil 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nothing. If they break the law I believe it is now federal courts that they have to deal with. Other than that every thing is the same.

3
JimRaynor 3 points ago +3 / -0

Trump should invade these lands and ask the native army to defend themselves or it is now conquered

3
Vashts1985 3 points ago +3 / -0

also fees are taxes

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Ennius 3 points ago +3 / -0

Also SCOTUS ceded Florida back to Spain, European Union and NATO are sending forces to secure the border.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
FluffiPuff 3 points ago +3 / -0

WooHoo the Republic of Texas is BACK, baby!

3
HulkHogansLawyer 3 points ago +3 / -0

Napoleon was NOT the legitimate ruler of France and had no legal standing to sign that treaty. Give the land back! REEEEEEE

3
Mother_of_gains 3 points ago +5 / -2

Can't we just buy back Oklahoma with like three cases of whiskey?