I think it’s pretty obvious that the nutjob was trying to provoke exactly that sort of response out of Aldrin, and that’s the primary reason why I think Aldrin should get a free pass. He had a film crew there and he wanted to get good footage for his documentary or whatever.
Pirro is of Middle Eastern descent, and she’s a woman. Trump, on the other hand, has a history of racism and sexism. Something tells me that if he had to tell the difference between a photo of Jeanine Pirro and one of Kamala Harris, he wouldn’t immediately be able to say who is who.
If we don’t hurry up and put him in prison, he might not even understand why he’s there.
I got one a few years ago that had a setting to automatically go to a specified input when the TV started (similar to how normal TVs used to work).
My only mistake was leaving the TV connected to the network, as it updated and caused some hassle recently.
Your response is nonsensical. First, if they are killed, that doesn’t count. The terms we used were “going broke” and “going bankrupt”. Nobody uses those terms in their normal sense and means “gets killed”. So, your claim that a person getting killed is a counterexample is nonsense.
Lawsuits don’t generally count, either. First, if those lawsuits are big, they are usually about who owns the lottery winnings in the first place. It means the person’s winnings were not as big because they were trying to keep winnings from other rightful winners, not that they lose money. If the lawsuits are big decisions against them for other reasons, then the person was already screwed with or without winning the lottery, they just weren’t worth being sued before. If the lawsuits are worthless, then a lottery winner can afford to hire a lawyer. If they inexplicably don’t hire a lawyer and just pay out settlements, that’s just a stupider example of what I was talking about where they don’t control their spending.
Your. examples. do. not. make. sense.
And on top of that, just go do the tiniest bit of research. I can tell that you didn’t even do a search because when I did, the search results were all about people spending too much. Some of them even appeared to have legitimate statistics. What you’ve done is pull your entire comment out of your ass. If you continue trying to defend these points without linking any proof, I will simply block and report you for trolling.
I’m with you until you get to the lottery part. Your description implies that those lottery winners who don’t go bankrupt are somehow worse than the ones who do go bankrupt, which doesn’t make any sense.
They lose their money because they can’t control their spending, not because they lack the mental illness of money addiction.
What a strange perspective you’ve given. It makes me suspect that you have a personal motive for thinking that way.
Trump has now gotten us into a war that cannot easily be gotten out of. Even if he completely withdraws today, Iran has said that they’ll charge large amounts of money to use the Strait of Hormuz. Which they need now because their country has been destroyed by Trump.
Somebody needs to teach Pete Hegseth the meaning of FAFO.
I understand what you mean, then, but I think it’s part of a definition of a con man that they know they are deceiving others.
The authoritarian personality is a personality type characterized by a disposition to treat the voice of authority figures with unquestioning obedience and respect.
If you look at that Wikipedia page, you’ll see that the largest correlation, in America, with authoritarian personality, is being poorly educated or being an evangelical protestant.
If you really think there are zero preachers who honestly believe in their religion, then you are just as divorced from reality as they are.
Trump doesn’t have any preachers in the normal sense. Trump is most likely a psychopath who wouldn’t pay any heed to moral advice from anybody.
So, any preacher who he acknowledges like this is undoubtedly deeply corrupt and a con man. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Trump chooses preachers who are compromised on purpose, so that they can be controlled. Trump famously tries to get people to swear personal allegiance to him.
Born: Robert James Ritchie, January 17, 1971 (age 55) Also known as: Bobby Shazam
I’ve always thought “Kid Rock” sounds like a competitor to Kidz Bop.
It’s weird that his name is in that order. You’d think he’d be James Robert, because he looks like a Jim Bob more than anything, no offense to Jim Bobs.
AI and bots have officially taken over the Internet
This title makes no logical sense. An official statement about a thing has to come from the entity that is in charge of that thing. So, if AI and bots have taken over the internet, any official announcement would logically have to come from the AI or bots.
How can a supremacist even be bald at that age? If his genes are any good, then where is his head hair?
We don’t need to put that man’s name on anything more than it’s already on.
That’s well-known, though. Anybody could use that against Graham.
When I saw Graham condemn Trump after the insurrection on January 6 2021, and then weeks later support him, I figured that Trump was provided some serious kompromat against Graham. Something worse than anything Trump did with Epstein. It wouldn’t even have to be something directly against the senator. It could even be about a family member, for example.
And they found a black police officer to arrest him.
Maybe he feels guilty about how he made so much of his money by stealing from American taxpayers and how he pays so little in taxes, and he just wants to give back a little bit of what he stole. /s
Pretty sure I saw advertisements on screens in bathrooms in American nightclubs and bars over twenty years ago. I think they didn’t have one per cubicle, though.
At this point, the most Melania can claim is plausible deniability, very light on the plausible. If she wants her words to mean something, there is a way. All she has to do is testify under oath to the congressional committees investigating the Epstein files.
It’s strange that she’s so desperate to put this to bed that she’s willing to randomly call a press conference, and in her press conference, she extolled how necessary it is for all of Epstein’s victims to have their testimony recorded for congress, but she’s not willing to testify herself.
Surely Melania’s testimony would be more relevant than Hillary’s testimony, considering that Hillary truly seemed to have nothing to do with Epstein and said she never even met him.