Kate Allure

@hey__garrett @aakashgupta Why is this helpful? If she can’t have credit, she won’t have a debt that she’s not paying back. Please explain your logic.

@aakashgupta Yes Margaret Heckler could not get a line of credit. It would help if you pointed out that at the same time she could not be held liable if she failed to pay back a debt.

In 1967, Margaret Heckler was elected to Congress. She was a practicing lawyer. She still couldn't get a line of credit in her own name. A sitting member of the United States Congress needed a male co-signer to borrow money. She joined the Banking Committee specifically to fix this. She arranged meetings with CEOs at JP Morgan, Chase, and Wells Fargo. Their concern? Women might not pay their bills. It took seven more years. Before the Equal Credit Opportunity Act passed in 1974, a single woman needed her father or brother to co-sign loans even if she out-earned them. A married woman needed her husband's permission for a bank account, a credit card, or a mortgage. A widow with perfect payment history could be denied credit because her husband was dead. That was 52 years ago. Your mother was probably already alive. The timeline gets worse from there. Marital rape wasn't criminalized in all 50 states until 1993. Some states still treat it differently in sentencing. South Carolina requires married women to prove a threat of physical violence within 30 days of an assault before pursuing a case. 1974 feels like ancient history until you realize the country spent another 19 years debating whether a husband raping his wife was a crime.

@TaintedSaint2 @memecoinslunar @aakashgupta It is not part of the deal. It is now illegal. Further the wife could be ill, postpartum, have dementia, separated, living apart and he stalks her, he could be having multiple affairs, and you’re saying none of it matters: the wife is his to fuck whenever and wherever he wants.

@memecoinslunar @aakashgupta So if a woman pegs her husband without consent it's fine because "sex is part of the deal"? You still have the right to not want sex on occasion, even if you're married.

@MacMac279556 @native_history_ Why?

@native_history_ No

The question of whether Native American sacred sites should receive permanent protection continues to spark crucial discussions regarding history, respect, land utilization, and cultural rights within the contemporary world. For numerous Indigenous nations, locations such as areas near the Grand Canyon possess profound spiritual and cultural significance. Communities like the Hopi Tribe have long regarded certain lands as sacred spaces integral to ceremony, prayer, ancestry, and identity. These are not merely landmarks—they are vibrant components of tradition that persist in importance today. Proponents of permanent protection contend that sacred sites warrant the same respect accorded to other places of religious or historical significance. They assert that protecting these lands preserves ceremonies, safeguards cultural knowledge, and honors generations who have maintained these connections over time. Many also emphasize that once sacred places are damaged by development or exploitation, they cannot truly be restored. Others pose questions regarding balancing preservation with tourism, business interests, mining, or public access, thereby instigating a broader discussion on how societies determine what should be protected, who should have a voice in these decisions, and how to respect both heritage and future needs. At the heart of this issue lies a more profound question: how should modern communities treat places imbued with spiritual meaning for the indigenous peoples of the land? Should sacred Indigenous sites receive enduring legal protections, or should they be managed akin to any other public land? As awareness increases, more individuals are querying whether cultural respect should play a more substantial role in land policy. Listening to tribal voices is frequently regarded as a necessary initial step toward equitable and thoughtful decisions. What are your thoughts—should Native sacred sites be protected forever? Why or why not?

@JimBrooks166561 @native_history_ Racist bit

@native_history_ Sacred is the new power word. Call it sacred and claim special privileges.

We can't afford the rich anymore.

They didn't want to award the Capitol Police a medal or a plaque but want to reward the people who orchestrated and took part in the violence that injured me and ended my career. In the name of national reconciliation, they pardoned the same rioters who attacked us and now being rewarded for the violence they inflicted on us the officers. They are trying to make the lives of the rioters whole or better than before they assaulted us. Yet to the officers, no apology, no compensation, no acknowledgment of the bravery and sacrifice we made to protect “each of your representatives” regardless of what party they belong. Why did we risk our lives for then? What a betrayal this is to us and to the rule of law days after “police week”.

@Gianl1974 just one....

After inciting a bloody insurrection to try and overturn the 2020 election he lost, Trump set up a slush fund to reward the violent thugs who beat up police. This unprecedented presidential corruption MUST end — and YOU have the power to stop it with a VOTE for House Democrats.

🚨 Every Republican present in the House Appropriations Committee last night voted to make THEMSELVES eligible to collect from Trump's $1.8 billion January 6th slush fund. I am not making this up. I introduced an amendment to stop Members of Congress, the President, and the Vice President from collecting a single dollar from Trump’s slush fund unless a court actually orders it. Every single Republican who cast a vote was AGAINST my amendment, making themselves eligible for settlement funds. Members of Congress, the President, and the Vice President, have no business lining their own pockets by claiming they were victims of government weaponization. Trump set up this fund, now MAGA Republicans in Congress are ensuring they all can collect from it. That is exactly the kind of self-dealing corruption the American people are sick of.

Why did Trump's DOJ just try to permanently ban the IRS from auditing him? Because the math is the motive. Two active IRS audits—including a massive $72.9 million refund—could cost Trump over $100 million. We caught them trying to hide it. Details: dworkinsubstack.com/p/so-much-for-…

If the POTUS can make himself and his ENTIRE family immune from the IRS, why the fuck should any of US pay taxes from now on? Y'all aren't angry enough. 🗣️

I want to say thank you, and farewell, to Stephen Colbert before his final show this evening. But I also want to remind folks of the corruption behind his cancellation. Watch.

@informedviewer @ewarren If what you say is true, and I don’t believe it is true the way you represented it, it was corporate money not my tax payer dollars. Big difference in when GOP/T are busy cutting services for needy people all across this country.

Of course, good old Elizabeth Warren said nothing when the Obama and Biden administrations strong-armed corporate America to pay funds to support Democrat advocacy groups as part of DOJ settlements. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the issue, I suggest you look up settlement payments that were made to the Democrat illegal immigrant advocacy group, La Raza. And that’s just one example. There were plenty of other DOJ forced payments to additional Democrat NGOs. Somehow, that was not problematic. Ironically, the DOJ in the first Trump administration formally put an end to those types of settlements. But Biden and his handlers reinstituted the practice during his tenure. And when Republicans introduced legislation to stop that practice – – Congressional Democrats shut it down. Now, Democrats want to pretend that they care about the issue? How predictable.

My Ban Presidential Plunder of Taxpayer Funds Act would make it illegal for a sitting president or VP to receive settlement payments from the federal government they control—or to direct those payments to a third party. We CANNOT allow this abuse of power.

Here's how the corruption works: Thursday: RJ Reynolds donates $5M to Trump Saturday: Trump invites RJR execs to Mar a Lago; execs ask to loosen regs on flavored vapes; Trump calls up RFK Jr. and tells him to change it Friday: FDA changes the policy #donation-big-tobacco-vaping" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">nytimes.com/live/2026/05/2…

@colbertlateshow his jokes have kept me going during the first and now the second reign of our dictator and I don’t know what I’m going to do going forward.

After this Thursday’s show, the Ed Sullivan Theater will go dark, and we’ll lose one of the nation’s funniest and most courageous, truthful, and gentlemanly critics of Trump and his regime. Farewell, and thank you, Stephen. robertreich.substack.com/p/farewell-and…