search results matching tag: individuals

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.005 seconds

    Videos (589)     Sift Talk (115)     Blogs (46)     Comments (1000)   

The death of privacy and all YOUR secrets | exurb1a

luxintenebris jokingly says...

good question.

read somewhere there are things others see that an individual can't see; some things the individual sees others can't; some things are apparent to the individual and others; and some things no one sees.

am okay w/all of 'em. if it's bad don't want to know, they don't need to know, we both know it's part of the deal; and it might be too damn scary.

yah know?

BSR said:

How much do you know about yourself

Beau schools on schooling: why 'FREE' scares Biff & Babs

luxintenebris says...

the whole 'worthless degrees' is largely bogus. unless it's a DJT University ratskin, just the experience alone broads a person's mind (some more/some less).

a cartoon once read where a woman lamented to her girlfriend, that as a housewife, she didn't get to use her psychology degree. her husband interrupts them complaining about the cleanness of the floors. the wife tells him she just did them and the argument goes into overdrive. finally, she chides him w/"oh! big talk! as if you could do better!" oh, of course, he takes the bait, rolls up his sleeves...and the wife's friend smilingly says "you never use it?"

don't think it ever goes to total waste.

and bk33's contention that free education would be undervalued is largely bupkiss too: the desire to pay back is often a motivation; enhances the tax base; fills jobs that translate to greater national security...etc. the value is too great to be ignored. for the country or the individual.

even if it was worthless, it still can be appreciated. like the time Bob Newhart told the story of a tryst he had w/a woman he met at a party. both drunk, ending up in the back of his car - - as he put it, "it meant nothing. never saw her again. it was the cheapest, meaningless moment that i'll never forget for the rest of my life!"

btw: an idea of what a French citizen pays at the Sorbonne
https://www.unipage.net/en/5563/paris_sorbonne_university

newtboy said:

When my mother graduated summa cum laude from Rice University, it was one of the most respected universities in America and 100% free. Her degrees are anything but worthless. So much for that talking point.

In California, jr colleges are quite affordable, when I went it was under $250 a semester for 15+ units, all transferable to nearly any 4 year school. That’s a savings of about $80 k on freshman and sophomore years alone. The classes were small, the professors award winners, and they got to teach instead of trying to weed out 2/3 of the class like many 4 year colleges. Now in many cases 2 years of full class schedules are free in California at least. I don’t know why anyone would go to a 4 year college for freshman and sophomore year.

I didn’t care about a degree, so I stayed at jr college for 10 years taking whatever I wanted. More people should take advantage of them.

Why it's hard to be Republican w/a mind and heart

newtboy says...

Derp. Of course not. As I said, that’s classified level information, just the topics of the documents he stole are classified….fuckwit. That’s the sensitivity level of what he STOLE on his way out, then lied about still having.
Also Trump’s lawyers are fighting (poorly) to keep even the topics hidden from even the FBI and DOJ. They’ll go to the Supreme Court to keep them from becoming public. Why, if there’s nothing there, are they going to such lengths to hide the evidence?

Can you name one sensitive document Clinton had? I seriously doubt it after hundreds of millions and a dozen or more investigations, and those were lowest level classification documents not even labeled classified.

What was found was over 700 pages of classified documents, including at least 11 separate top secret classified sets of documents, at least 3 the highest top secret level not allowed out of secure facilities and that cannot be declassified by the president, usually meaning nuclear secrets but possible non nuclear but just as sensitive highest level state secrets.
You don’t need to know EXACTLY what the secrets are to know it’s criminal to have them, and to keep them unsecured, and to lie to the FBI about having them. You only demand that information because you know it won’t be produced….it’s an artificial bar you’re floating in the sky and saying “you haven’t reached that bar yet”….the fifth or sixth bar this scandal. It will be great if Biden decides the public knowing outweighs the secrecy and declassifies that information….won’t it?

I would point out, the documents being classified is not a requirement of any of the 3 laws cited in the warrant…just that he took them, kept them, and hid/lied about having them. There’s no doubt on all 3.

I’ve never claimed to KNOW they were nuclear secrets, others claimed that, I said they were likely nuclear secrets or might be other secrets of the same import and classification.
“ Classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were among the items FBI agents sought in a search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence on Monday, according to people familiar with the investigation.”. To be honest, I haven’t read the redacted warrant to see if that’s what they were specifically looking for, but word is they found what they were looking for.

You never agree when I’m undeniably right, you just ghost.
You never admit you were wrong. Not once in the near dozen years we’ve been “talking”. I bet elsewhere you still claim Jan 6 was ANTIFA and BLM but not a single Trumpist, despite reality being the exact opposite. I bet elsewhere you still claim 2020 was a stolen election (only the presidential race though, the rest of all the ballots are valid).
You can find dozens of times I’ve admitted I was incorrect, I usually thank the person who set me straight, but I don’t recall you ever correctly correcting me so likely not directly to you.
I’ve agreed with you on some points, but never your overall take. It’s always nuts.
You agree individual cops are bad, then say it’s always an outlier, one bad apple, then throw tantrums accusing me of saying things I had not said like we should have no police at all.
You rarely agree about evil criminal Republicans, sometimes you say they shouldn’t hold office but what about “x”, but soon forget and support them, or Trump does and you say nothing but just grin….or you just say crooks are better than lefties. Don’t you still support Gaetz despite the underage human trafficking, Bohbert despite supporting her husband exposing himself to two 15 year old girls in her presence, Judge Roy despite years of trolling for 13 year old girls at the mall, even Trump despite being best friends with Epstein for years and years after he admitted serial child molesting, partying in private with him and YOUNG girls and joking about sex with his daughter and other children (something actual child abusers do).

“My side” is often wrong (it’s not my side btw, I’m a Democrat based on sanity). Assault weapon bans for instance, are dumb. Either eliminate all clip fed semi auto without a licensed necessity or none. Cosmetics are just that. Your turn.

Again with the Magnificent Spaghetti Monster, may you be touched with his noodly appendage. You like to degrade what you think are my sources, but you have no clue what they are. I’ll just say CNN is never on my TV, and I really don’t know what MSM is, I thought you meant MSNBC, which I also don’t watch! 😂

Only facts matter to me, that’s why I’m willing to cite sources unlike you who is embarrassed of where your nonsense came from. I read both sides of an issue, and the original data the conclusions come from and decide for myself….usually agreeing with the left but not always, but never with the right because they are insane and delusional, believing only their alternate facts (what were called lies before Trump). Facts have never mattered to you, only partisan blame games.

Name a disastrous government response or responsibility you blame on Republicans. I’ll start, I’ll blame our current friendly status with Saudi Arabia on Biden, they should be on the terrorist state list, and it’s his call now. Your turn.
*crickets*

Edit: PS- Courts ruled last week that Barr outright lied about the contents of the Mueller report and about the idea that without a conviction on the underlying crime there could be no obstruction, ruled that there are 10 instances of legal obstruction listed in the report, and that Barr bold faced lied about it, hid it from the public, and did this intentionally to obstruct Justice, to protect Trump from valid charges that might have removed him from office during his impeachment….or as I’m sure you’ll say….”nothing burger” (because you have no problem with criminality if it’s from the right. The chances any evidence would make you say Trump is unfit are zero.)

bobknight33 said:

Nice reads.

The take away is from on of the articles you linked..

https://www.newsweek.com/nuclear-secrets-already-fell-wrong-handstrumps-opinion-1733711

"We still do not, of course, know exactly what the FBI found"

You amaze me with you utter gullible nature.

You stupid fuck stick.
Tell me EXACTLY what was FOUND?

Enlighten me with FACTS!

Everyone is speculating and no one has FACTS. NO ONE! ( except you)

I only call out fools like you.
When you are right I agree.
I can't remember you ever agreeing with me.
When you post a bad cop vid I agree
When you post a bad Republican , I agree
You however can never accept that you side can be so wrong at times. Facts do not matter to you, only MSM opinions do. Those are not facts.

Beto O’Rourke “It May Be Funny To You, Mother F*#ker”

newtboy says...

Exactly…if the militias were to be “well regulated”, it’s insanity to believe individuals aren’t.
Since there are no “well regulated militias”, the second amendment is meaningless, outdated, and moot. It needs rewriting with universal regulations enshrined in the body, codified in the constitution, to shut the ignorami up once and for all.
I also note, no where does it say citizens can OWN arms…only keep and bear them. My interpretation is that only well regulated militias may own arms, which they may lend to their members to keep and bear…under strict regulations. The founding fathers knew well the difference between ownership and possession and wrote it that way on purpose.

luxintenebris said:

on the 2nd Amendment, personally interpreted this way...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eya_k4P-iEo...also (imagine that).

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

You say that, but then you also always support those you admit are doing wrong and accuse those who aren’t of being evil.
For example-Republicans have been caught doing wrong in the 2020 election in dozens of schemes to defraud, not just the uncounted individual frauds. I am unaware of any Democrat schemes uncovered (baseless unfounded accusations from liars don’t count) or even individual cases of voter fraud by Democrats, yet you still insist “everyone knows Trump only lost because Democrats cheated”.
You say wrong is wrong, but you simply won’t see wrong from your cult…even when you admit it, you ignore it.

Edit: for example, you ignored the Trumpist who burnt his own home for insurance money, blaming the fire on BLM, ANTIFA, and Biden including spray painting his own home in their name before publicly accusing them and raising money from other morons based on the lie….and I’m certain you continue to lie to yourself and others claiming multiple cities were burnt to the ground by them in 2020 despite there likely being more prosecutions and convictions against right wing criminals who posed as BLM than actual BLM members, definitely more prosecutions of Trumpists for shooting police and setting off bombs and shooting crowds pretending to be BLM or ANTIFA than Liberals.

bobknight33 said:

Like I've always said Wrong is wrong. This is wrong.

Why I Give Abortions

newtboy says...

That image they claim is 7 weeks is of a fetus well beyond 11 weeks at a minimum…at 7 weeks there are not individual fingers. Always more dishonesty from bob, who always believes his ends justify any means, any lies, and any violence or crimes necessary to achieve them.

There’s a barely perceptible nerve pulse at week 7 but not any heart at all… no functioning heart until week 20 you liars. No heart=no heart beat.

Typical

bobknight33 said:

Heart beat alive and well in week 7

Deceiving the brain with the rubber hand illusion

moonsammy says...

I've seen this demonstrated before, but the individual finger / knuckle reflex testing was new, and damned interesting. I have a hard time making my individual fingers twitch on purpose, the instinctive response working that well is impressive.

Also, this guy seems high as *fuck* to me. Anyone else?

Amish response to covid

Buttle says...

That does not seem to be entirely true. It is true that immunity declines, whether from vaccination or infection. It's not true that vaccination gives better or longer lasting protection than vaccination.

From https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.04.21267114v1


RESULTS Confirmed infection rates increased according to time elapsed since the last immunity-conferring event in all cohorts. For unvaccinated previously infected individuals they increased from 10.5 per 100,000 risk-days for those previously infected 4-6 months ago to 30.2 for those previously infected over a year ago. For individuals receiving a single dose following prior infection they increased from 3.7 per 100,000 person days among those vaccinated in the past two months to 11.6 for those vaccinated over 6 months ago. For vaccinated previously uninfected individuals the rate per 100,000 person days increased from 21.1 for persons vaccinated within the first two months to 88.9 for those vaccinated more than 6 months ago.

CONCLUSIONS Protection from reinfection decreases with time since previous infection, but is, nevertheless, higher than that conferred by vaccination with two doses at a similar time since the last immunity-con

newtboy said:

Herd immunity is a myth with Covid because Covid immunity is not permanent, it’s very short lived, as little as 2 months. You can get Covid over and over and over until it kills you.
The same is true with vaccination, it’s not 100% effective nor does it last, but it seems to be better than natural immunity with the added benefit of not requiring you to get full blown covid to be protected.

Also, temporary immunity against one strain does not necessarily make you immune to other strains at all.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Hey Bob, do you know….who is “Trucker” Randy Bishop?
I’ll tell you since he’s playing make believe, he’s a far right wing radio host and Trump lover who’s running for the senate in Michigan (as a far right wing Trump loving racist anti gay fake Democrat…wtf is that!?) who complains that all families aren’t all white anymore, and race mixing should be outlawed, he shouldn’t have to see it on tv, and whines that black Americans own the nation, the media, the politicians, and the public schools.

Bishop was ranting about the media indoctrinating children through TV commercials, just like racist Trumpist often do (but never Democrats)….

“You will not believe what this country looks like in 20, 30, 40 years from now,” he said during the show, “If we continue down this path with public indoctrination of our kids and their socialist and communist agenda. What is it? Destroy the nuclear family.”

A few seconds later he clarified how the nuclear family is being destroyed.

“Now every single commercial has a biracial mom and dad,” Bishop said in the show.

“I can’t even watch a college basketball tournament without commercials telling me that I have to feel guilty,” Bishop said, “Because I think a family should be a white mom a white dad and white kids.”

Let me guess, 1) you think this proves Democrats are racists (he’s about as much a Democrat as Regan or Dick Cheney or Manchin) and 2)you would vote for him.

Btw, Michigan Democratic Party has denounced him, said they will not support his candidacy, and are deeply insulted this far right wing racist would pretend to align himself with them.

“Views such as the ones Trucker Randy Bishop espouses have no place in the Democratic Party. Candidates who say or believe these things are not welcome. Randy Bishop is not a Democrat, he is a dishonest minor social media personality that enjoys getting attention from making outrageous statements. He shows nothing but disrespect to our system of government by using a run for elected office to promote his personal agenda, entirely based on lies, hate and fear.
Disgusting racist belief systems are not welcome in the Democratic Party and frankly should not be welcome in any political party or community. We will not support his efforts to run for Senate and find it deeply insulting that he would dare to put a D next to his name.“
“With dangerous views such as this, this individual masquerading as a Dem has no business anywhere near any branch or level of government or in policymaking. Calling for the erasure of entire families/groups of people, is another example of & in line with the backwards, heinous views & actions clinging to white supremacy that we’ve been seeing in anti-history & anti-LGBTQ bills & it’ll only get worse w/someone like this in office.”

Republicans, on the other hand, have been supporting him for years, with Republican senators, representatives, and others often going on his show, including supporting his failed campaign as a Republican for the same seat.

More blatant Republican dishonesty, racism, intolerance, vitriol, and more dishonesty. Par for the course if you’re a Republican. You guys REALLY need to stop huffing the keyboard duster.

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

bcglorf says...

@newtboy,

Per my very first sentence in thread, I also oppose gov using this as a wedge issue to rally their base.

Meaning, I 100% am in agreement that nobody(gov or otherwise) should be banning trans kids(and adults) from anything, competitive sports included.

I did point out a single biological fact:
-Whether a person is born with XX or XY chromosomes has a significant impact on development that impacts performance in sports.

You jump all over that observation though, like raising it is hateful, denying peoples right to exist, and on. It is not.

And your observation that the performance advantages aren’t 100% of the time favouring XY folks is the red herring. Of course there are areas were the difference is an advantage, others were it’s neutral, and yet others a disadvantage. In a large population you also always have the possibility of individuals overcoming those odds.

Pointing to those facts though like they mean specific advantages don’t exist is the red herring.

In addition to that one fact, I also proposed applying the same standards for fairness in competition equally to everyone.

And it’s on this point I am automatically decried as hateful, evil and maliciously acting against people’s right to exist….

If your only looking for a villain to demonize there’s no point attempting further discussion.

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

newtboy says...

If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

On average you can agree…

I never said anything against any given pro/competitive female athlete probably beating out plenty of biologically male folks.

I was only pointing to advantages between equally gifted/talented and trained people.

To that point, can you agree that most standing olympic records as currently separated into mens and womens records, indicate that the historical separation based on XX and XY certainly appears to show an advantage. Would you be able to agree following from that, the existence of distinct mens and womens records is because without it, women would be “unfairly” left almost entirely unrepresented in every sprint distance, every lifting record and most other records.

For instance, the Olympic qualifying standard for the mens 100m was 10.05s, while the standing Olympic womens record time for 100m is 10.49s. AKA in absence of a separate competition for biologically female athletes, even the standing Olympic record holding female wouldn’t pass the bar to qualify to compete in the Olympics.

That is the advantage I am stating exists, and matters and I am asking if you acknowledge that distinction existing as a result of biology or not?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Mr engineer, when there are two parties, sentence structure demands you use plurals….both sides have THEIR share of undesirables. An engineer should see grammar as a clearly defined structure that follows simple rules and just get it. Spelling is different, but grammar should be a no brainer….why is it so hard for you? Have you never seen it that way, or was engineering incredibly difficult for you too?

The difference being one side is all undesirables, and the level of undesirability. One side openly calls for an end to American democracy, death for their political rivals, death for anyone who disagrees with today’s talking point. One side has no party platform, no stated goals, and exists solely to stop any legislation the other side puts forth, even when it was something they want or that would benefit them. They are the same side.

We found another point of agreement.

Term limits are a must, and will never happen because our system does put the regulatory onus on those who need regulating….absolute insanity. It also lets them set their own salaries, ethics, and benefits.

Divestment is another must. Perhaps a bigger must. Total divestment across the board. Not just blind trusts that aren’t really blind, and absolutely not what we have now…the “honor” system run by the honorless. Allowing legislatures to write horrific laws because they can personally financially benefit is a recipe for disaster. That should (but never will) change.

Campaign finance is a third must. Corporations should have the same donation limits individuals have, which should be more like $100 each so every person can afford to have a voice, and we should return to an equal time on broadcast tv for free situation and deny the media as a political platform to give candidates a boost….no more Fox News interviews indistinguishable from campaign commercials, no more media smear campaigns, with severe penalties for violations, like $10 mil the first time, $25 mil the second, loss of fcc license the third. Another non starter….but needed badly.

PACs should be outlawed, or regulated into obscurity.

Some reasons often brought up in opposition to term limits can be traced back to Maddison who wrote "[A] few of the members of Congress will possess superior talents; will by frequent re-elections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages. The greater the proportion of new members of Congress, and the less the information of the bulk of the members, the more apt they be to fall into the snares that may be laid before them,"

I think we have proven at this point the cons of self serving representatives legislating for personal gains outweigh the benefits of professional legislators, especially seeing as we have the internet and huge staffs to ostensibly level the playing field of knowledge.

One fix would be the creation of an ethics branch, completely non partisan, not self regulatory, with rules against former candidates (winners and losers) and lobbyists too from serving and strict rules about how they operate, and bans from running for office or being a lobbyist afterwards so it doesn’t become a campaign platform or tool for industry. Maybe even ban close family members from the same. Won’t happen, only the best people intentionally limit their powers, and they are few and far between in Congress….all but absent on your side.

bobknight33 said:

Cheney is 1 of the "others"

Both sides have its share of undesirables.

Term limits should be a must, but we have "the fox watching the hen house" so this will never happen.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

newtboy says...

Did they offer that in the program, or was it only random individuals….or are you extrapolating, assuming the program became universal? I thought this plan was just for the indigent.

$500 each for 4 works out to more than my wife brought home for 40 hours a week after 15 years at her last job…..barely livable for 4 anywhere in California, a nice income in some states. Not a huge amount to provide for 6 months. How much does temporary housing, services, extra law enforcement, etc cost over that time for 4 people? I assume they’re close.

Yes, universal income is costly, but most on the right won’t consider giving the destitute money if they don’t get a handout too, that likely multiplies the amount by over 10 times. With a means test, it would be billions, maybe under $100 billion. We spent nearly $6 trillion on bad Covid response in 2020, including trillions to corporate welfare handouts with no strings attached and they still fired millions of workers. I think if that’s ok we can afford to invest in making people productive again instead of drains on society (of course, not everyone will benefit, but 75% success must be a win overall). If not, socialize any corporation that took a bailout, we bought em, we should own them.

…Or taking on more debt like every government project, but the increase in gdp from turning costs into profits likely pays for the program without a dime in new taxes, just a reduction in costs of handling the homeless and new taxes from their incomes….especially if you have a means test and not universal income.

Yes, they convoluted by calling it universal income but focusing on homeless. It should be UMI. Universal Minimum Income….under employed get less than unemployed up to a certain minimum livable combined income, fully employed (with living wages) get nothing….IMO. Sadly, a large portion of people can’t see what’s in that plan for them (no homeless, less crime dumbshits) so won’t consider it unless they also get $500 even though that’s not even a noticeable amount to them….one more ivory backscratcher.

bcglorf said:

I'm gonna have to be that guy. $500 a month for a family of four is $2k, which is a very good chunk of money to drop in your lap.

That works out the same as it they were on a single income, working 40 hour weeks at $10/hr, so almost equivalent to a full time job. No doubt that's gonna be a big deal and noticeable financial improvement to the recipient(s).

As always with UBI schemes, the devil is in how you pay for it. If it's truly universal, paying $500/month to ~330 million Americans would cost $1.98 Trillion dollars, meanwhile the current entire US gov budget for 2022 is estimated at $1.2 Trillion.

So, to implement $500/month universally in America would require not only increasing overall tax revenues by almost 50% it would also require the cancellation of 100% of every single other expenditure. That not includes military spending going to zero, but even cancelling the jobs of everyone that collects taxes and would presumably have been responsible for distributing the $500 checks.

If the 'fix' is to just tax the pants off anyone earning more than the $500/month, or limiting who we give it to, then it ceases to be a UBI scheme, and is instead just a mundane modification of the existing social security scheme by shuffling more money back and forth between different folks.

Jonathan Pie explains Boris Johnson to the NYT

newtboy says...

Who’s committing generational warfare?
Who’s receiving it? BLM?
What!?

Do you mean generational welfare recipients?
Easy to point out that Red states take WAY more than Blue states from the fed and get less for it, and almost always take more than they put into the federal coffers too. Consistently….over generations. Your policies aren’t producing the results you insist they will. Republicans are in fact the welfare queens here, buddy. Wasting exponentially more through corporate welfare than all individual welfare recipients collectively because….FREE MARKET PRIVATE PROFITS! (But socialist public losses). D’oh!
*🦗 🦗 🦗*

bobknight33 said:

What about generational warfare recipients?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Uh oh. Now the bank and tax fraud surrounding the Trumps acquiring the lease for the DC hotel are under investigation. This time Ivanka is going down with Daddy, because she overvalued properties used to secure the loan bu 3 times, claiming things like her apartment with a for sale price of $8.5 million was worth 25 million, etc.
nothing new, just more Trump fraud, more Trump theft from America, banks, and the public.

This is you pick. This is you guy? Only makes sense if you’re an anti American Russian troll trying to damage America as much as possible.

Edit: D’oh! Pence’s lawyer, present at many meetings in the whitehouse discussing the coup plans, testified for over 9 hours to the Jan 6 commission. He has direct personal knowledge of exactly what the president’s involvement before, during, and after the attack against America for Trump was, and apparently has no qualms about talking about it. He didn’t plead the fifth like all Trump’s lackeys (which Trump says is proof of guilt except when he does it), he didn’t fight subpoenas (which Trump has said is proof of guilt….when it wasn’t him). He testified, with members coming out of the session calling him a patriot who cares about America, unlike many others they’ve subpoenaed and interrogated. A man who put country before a person. Not good for Tangerine Palpatine.

Delay tactics are failing, obstruction is failing, destruction of evidence is failing, hiding the forging of fraudulent certifications for fraudulent electors failed, hiding and denying direct Republican Party involvement has failed, denying individual involvement has failed, denial of the event has failed, abusing expired privileges to hide evidence has failed, whining and crying like spoiled children has failed, threatening prosecutors has failed. Whole lotta fail going on over there.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon