Street

SpaceX IPO cash → AI. AI cash → Micron. $MU

The natural law finds a way.

Watched STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT (1996) last night. A few funny aspects relative to today. Cochrane’s entire motive for developing warp drive was to get rich, not bring about fully automated luxury communism (which I guess was a nice side effect in the context of the story). The Federation had no qualms about exploring and colonizing the galaxy, although they did try to respect the Prime Directive. They expand and explore, not trying to live a life of asceticism in service of “equality.” Leftists of today are at their heart degrowth. Any libtard who is like “umm actually space is bad, tech is bad, just gibs money to poors, it’s the Star Trek way” doesn’t understand the conditions under which these things develop in their fictional universe. If eliminating war and poverty and disease is your goal, you need to create conditions where our current economics are irrelevant, and some people may have to get rich along the way there. “The ideology is just window dressing” is and always has been correct with them.

Dude

$MU truly amazing 20-pt recovery…. If it closes above 366 today, we might see 400+ incoming

i could not stop thinking about how the theatrics were not as epic as it deserved so i made an edit

BREAKING - Passengers on an American flight from Atlanta to Puerto Rico captured one of the closest videos of the Artemis II launch from their plane, and it’s going massively viral, with some commenters expressing concern about how close the plane was to the rocket.

$DRAM New memory-centric ETF Better choice for exposure to SK Hynix and Samsung than $EWY $MU $SNDK $WDC $STX

Victor Glover absolutely SCHOOLS a woke reporter trying to get a DEI answer out of him.. “I hope one day we can look at this as ‘human history’ — not black history or women’s history..” 👏👏

It’s so simple, only a complete moron, or TDS leftist, could possibly misunderstand it. A simple understanding of language, punctuation, and sentence structure helps too. Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan introduced the 14th amendment and said this: "This amendment which I have offered, is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."

@FrizzellH @ASFleischman @JDMikeJ You are very dumb if you think citizenship is a souvenir given away freely to foreign nationals with no allegiance to this country

@StreetCitizen @ASFleischman @JDMikeJ You are very dumb if you think he is saying that

Mike Lee vigorously argues that it's illegal to deport immigrants because they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

One of the strongest arguments against birthright citizenship: Sen. Howard said during opening remarks of the citizenship clause debate: “This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States...This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.” As Edward Erler anticipated, the left has argued that Howard meant to only include “families of ambassadors or foreign ministers” when he used the wording “who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.” But “if so,” Erler argues, “this would be an extraordinarily loose way of speaking: ambassadors and foreign ministers are foreigners and aliens and their designation as such would be superfluous.” Erler argues the commas following “foreigners” and “aliens” “suggest a discrete listing of separate classes of persons excluded from jurisdiction.”

@MarioNawfal At least they’re doing what they’re good at.

🇮🇷🇺🇸🇫🇷🇮🇹 Europe is striking back at the U.S. by doing nothing. They are refusing to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and now Spain, France, and Italy are even denying American planes airspace and base access for the Iran war. What started as normal transatlantic bickering has turned into a real rift. When your "biggest allies" start blocking you instead of helping, you know the alliance is under serious strain. U.S. will have to continue playing on its own, and Europe as well. Source: William Spaniel - YT

@ASFleischman @JDMikeJ Illegal immigrants have the right to be here? Our immigration laws mean nothing? That’s very dumb.

@StreetCitizen @JDMikeJ Wait so it's not just crimes that make you not a citizen but any sort of civil infraction? That's very dumb

@ASFleischman @JDMikeJ Immigration law, and unlawful presence, is a civil matter. Tax fraud is a criminal matter.

@StreetCitizen @JDMikeJ "You have an obligation to pay taxes. Failure to do so is failing in your obligation "

@RepYassAnsari He is talking about the Islamic Regime

“We’re going to bring them back to the stone ages where they belong.” He’s talking about a country of 90 million people. Vile, horrifying, evil.

@ASFleischman @JDMikeJ No…, occupied territory is still our territory. Under your interpretation, as “subjects of our jurisdiction,” illegal immigrants have the obligation to self-deport. Their refusal to do so demonstrates they do not even consider themselves “subject to our jurisdiction.”

@JDMikeJ Because that's no longer your sovereign territory. If your argument is that anyone who commits a crime isn't subject to jurisdiction, then no one is born a citizen. The argument falls apart under very slight pressure.

OMG! This is absolutely hilarious 😂 🚨 KBJ’s Own Senate Quote Backfires and Accidentally Hands Trump’s Legal Team the PERFECT Argument to End Birthright Citizenship! Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson tried to bolster the case for broad “born on U.S. soil = citizen” interpretation by quoting a 19th-century Senate exchange from the 14th Amendment debates. She referenced Senators Fessenden and Wade discussing a hypothetical: a child born in the U.S. to parents who are “from abroad temporarily in this country.” In the exchange, Wade reportedly stated that “a person may be born here and not be a citizen,” using the example of children of foreign ministers (who are not fully “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. due to diplomatic immunity and lack of allegiance). Jackson then immediately admitted uncertainty: “I’m not sure whether these are Senators. I apologize.” This moment undermined her entire credibility and preparation. More critically, Solicitor General D. John Sauer seized on the opportunity, pointing out that it ACTUALLY SUPPORTS the government’s position. The framers of the 14th Amendment clearly understood the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause as requiring full political allegiance—not just physical presence on soil. Temporary visitors, diplomats, or those without complete subjection to U.S. laws were NOT INTENDED to automatically confer citizenship to their children. CASE CLOSED! End Birthright Citizenship! rumble.com/v77xecm-kbjs-o…

W(r)ong—read the case. Wong Kim Ark framed domicile as a key component of both the question presented and its holding—plus, used the phrase more than 20 times in the opinion. x.com/senericschmitt…

JUST IN: Justice Thomas asks the key question: how much did immigration feature in the 14th Amendment debates? Sauer answered directly: The main goal was citizenship for freed slaves. The framers also took it as a given that children of tribal Indians were not covered by birthright citizenship. Multiple mentions of temporary sojourners in the debates cut against automatic citizenship for those without full jurisdiction. Even Wong Kim Ark involved lawfully domiciled Chinese immigrants with permanent residence, not illegal entrants. The opinion mentions domicile three times in stating the legal principle. The original meaning was never universal citizenship by geography alone.