Hey! respect my pronouns bucko. Im not a "you" im a "they" oh wait thats not in effect anymore. Imgotta make a quick run to the store i ran out of blue hair dye.
ADDRESS ALL YOUR COMPLAINTS & CRITICISMS ABOUT HOW TRUMP IS DOING HERE! First 100 days
- Thread starter geechiedan
- Start date
This is going to be one of the longest threads in the history of the board.
Last edited:
i get the feeling thats sarcasm...cuz no ones heard from the Fuckboi Bunch since Nov 4
Pro-Trump Police Union Blasts Jan. 6 Pardons
The Fraternal Order of Police, which endorsed Donald Trump in the last three elections, said it was "deeply discouraged" by recent pardons.
this nigga is really trying to bring back the bad old days....
Could women divorce in the early 20th century
Yes, women could technically get a divorce in the early 20th century, but it was extremely difficult due to strict laws that usually required proving "fault" on the part of the husband, such as adultery, abandonment, or cruelty, making it significantly harder for women to initiate a divorce compared to men at the time; most states required proof of a husband's wrongdoing to grant a divorce to a wife.
Key points about divorce in the early 20th century:
NO FAULT DIVORCE
Yes, women could divorce in the 1950s, but divorce laws were still restrictive:
The divorce revolution of the 1960s and '70s was over-determined. The nearly universal introduction of no-fault divorce helped to open the floodgates, especially because these laws facilitated unilateral divorce and lent moral legitimacy to the dissolution of marriages. The sexual revolution, too, fueled the marital tumult of the times: Spouses found it easier in the Swinging Seventies to find extramarital partners, and came to have higher, and often unrealistic, expectations of their marital relationships. Increases in women's employment as well as feminist consciousness-raising also did their part to drive up the divorce rate, as wives felt freer in the late '60s and '70s to leave marriages that were abusive or that they found unsatisfying.
No-fault divorce is a legal status that allows a spouse to get a divorce without having to prove that their partner did something wrong. Before 1976, divorce was only possible if one spouse had acted wrongly, a rule known as the Schuldprinzip ("principle of guilt"). In 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan* signed the first no-fault divorce bill in the United States, allowing couples to split for no other reason than "irreconcilable differences".
By 1977, 47 states permitted no-fault divorce, and by 1985, all 50 states permitted some form of no-fault divorce. New York was the last state to become no-fault, passing legislation in 2010.
Could women divorce in the early 20th century
Yes, women could technically get a divorce in the early 20th century, but it was extremely difficult due to strict laws that usually required proving "fault" on the part of the husband, such as adultery, abandonment, or cruelty, making it significantly harder for women to initiate a divorce compared to men at the time; most states required proof of a husband's wrongdoing to grant a divorce to a wife.
Key points about divorce in the early 20th century:
- Fault-based system:
Divorce laws were largely "fault-based," meaning a spouse had to prove the other committed a specific offense to be granted a divorce.
- Challenges for women:
Women often faced significant hurdles in proving their husband's fault due to societal norms and limited legal rights.
- Limited grounds for divorce:
Common grounds for divorce included adultery, desertion, cruelty, and sometimes mental illness.
- Social stigma:
Divorce was still widely stigmatized in society, further discouraging women from seeking it.
NO FAULT DIVORCE
Yes, women could divorce in the 1950s, but divorce laws were still restrictive:
- Fault
Until the late 1960s, divorce laws required the petitioning party to prove fault, such as abandonment or adultery, to have their divorce granted. A person could not divorce their spouse simply because they were unhappy in the relationship. - Family court system
In the 1950s, the family court system was created, moving divorce from traditional court systems to one dedicated to divorce and family law matters. - No-fault divorce
The National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL) drafted and promoted a model no-fault divorce law in the 1950s, two decades before the no-fault divorce movement of the 1970s.
The divorce revolution of the 1960s and '70s was over-determined. The nearly universal introduction of no-fault divorce helped to open the floodgates, especially because these laws facilitated unilateral divorce and lent moral legitimacy to the dissolution of marriages. The sexual revolution, too, fueled the marital tumult of the times: Spouses found it easier in the Swinging Seventies to find extramarital partners, and came to have higher, and often unrealistic, expectations of their marital relationships. Increases in women's employment as well as feminist consciousness-raising also did their part to drive up the divorce rate, as wives felt freer in the late '60s and '70s to leave marriages that were abusive or that they found unsatisfying.
No-fault divorce is a legal status that allows a spouse to get a divorce without having to prove that their partner did something wrong. Before 1976, divorce was only possible if one spouse had acted wrongly, a rule known as the Schuldprinzip ("principle of guilt"). In 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan* signed the first no-fault divorce bill in the United States, allowing couples to split for no other reason than "irreconcilable differences".
By 1977, 47 states permitted no-fault divorce, and by 1985, all 50 states permitted some form of no-fault divorce. New York was the last state to become no-fault, passing legislation in 2010.
Conservatives in red states turn their attention to ending no-fault divorce laws
The most sophisticated money launderer in US history is currently occupying the WHITE HOUSE.
Just months before Donald Trump announced his bid for president in 2015, federal regulators announced they were slapping one of his longtime Atlantic City casinos with a record-setting $10 million fine for lack of controls around money laundering.
The problems went back years. The penalty was actually the second record-setting fine for the Trump Taj Mahal involving money-laundering oversight.
What exactly did the Taj fail to do? Casino officials admitted to “willful and repeated” violations of the Bank Secrecy Act: As federal authorities put it in a settlement, the Trump Taj Mahal “failed to report suspicious transactions; failed to properly file required currency transaction reports; and failed to keep appropriate records as required.”
In this episode of Trump, Inc., our podcast with ProPublica, we dig into the now-bankrupt and shuttered Trump Taj Mahal, once one of the biggest and glitziest casinos in the world. It’s a story of chaotic operations, massive debt, and a tendency to treat rules as more like suggestions. Ring a bell?
everything is rite on track to me,,shit is starting to hit the fan and fast...seems like he;s tie-toeing a bit with them tariffs after canada dropped
tha ball down on the kentucky distilleries round table..i think some one is actually advising him that some folks are going to call his
bluff and make due on there threats,,so im see him hesitating a lil bit here and there...even tho-he is fast tracking the border issue
& (stat)...lets get it on ....
......
tha ball down on the kentucky distilleries round table..i think some one is actually advising him that some folks are going to call his
bluff and make due on there threats,,so im see him hesitating a lil bit here and there...even tho-he is fast tracking the border issue
& (stat)...lets get it on ....
......
