LOL
"Remember, don't eat dogs or cats!"
Hahahahahahaha
I am very intrigued. What, exactly, am I looking at?
It looks like it's almost the same group of kids, 3 years apart. One kid is wearing the same clothing... and crocs (I hate those things, btw).
Q delivers... I love it.
Kind of thrashed both harris and trump.
I don't know.. maybe. Nothing would surprise me.
I guess I'm a the point where I don't need or want any more possibilities... I want to know the truth about stuff. Just give it to me straight.
Give me a laundry list of the stories and the facts... two columns... What You've Been Told or Believe, vs The Truth.
But... how will I know that THAT is the truth?
Fuck it.
He did put himself on blast. No doubt.
I think I would do stupid things, too, if my son was dead and I was looking to create meaning.
So you get to judge how a person copes with his child's death, regardless of how badly you think he's coping?
Is he probably psychologically and emotionally broken? Most likely. Does that make him vulnerable to doing stupid shit? Yes. Does this make him a pawn? Yes.
And so let's pile on even more, rather than just ignoring him.
Maybe. But from the clip what I hear most prominently is that his son's name is being used, whereas if it was not a Haitian driver then no one would have cared.
I understand your point about American white men. But that was not his point. You know how we say, "Because the shooter was black, it doesn't fit their narrative... if the shooter had been white, this would be all over the news." He's making the same sort of point: if the driver had been an older white male, the politicians would not be making an issue of his son's death.
Did he explain it like a moron? Yes. I already said he was not very eloquent.
And he did not quote himself... but he said something stupidly that was then cherry-picked and now everyone is jumping on his case. FFS, his son is dead. This guy, regardless of his politics, has lost his son, and he is trying to cope with it.
What are you talking about? The father didn't cherry pick anything. Someone else quoted him.
And, yes, the full context is needed to understand. Did you even listen to it and understand his point? He basically said that his son's death was an accident, and that it is wrong to make it political, and that had it been some old white guy it would not have been a topic. Again, he was not very eloquent about it, but the way the tweet on X portrays it is very misleading. So, context matters greatly.
This is making us look dumb. I watched the clip. The dad is not very eloquent, but all he is saying is to not politicize his death which was an accident (according to him) and not a murder.
Was it an accident? Was it a murder? I don't know, but the dad says it's an accident. But the death is being used politically--which no parent should want.
I am sure there are much better instances of illegal immigration shit to focus on. This one just makes us look bad.
I listened to the entire clip. He might not be eloquent, but I understand his point. The title is an example of the type of cherry-picking that we hate when libs do it.
I don't agree with his political views, btw.
Totally agree with you. I went to sleep trying to wonder how the debate fit into the Plan. Was this evidence of WH's in control?
This one turned my day around for the better. Thanks!
Campaign speak, or Q Plan...
Only The Shadow knows...
50.7 percent of the popular vote is NOT unity.
The Plan better create better unity.
Thanks. Really makes you wonder.
True, but framers are pretty resourceat machining what they need. Plus there are many spare parts on the ones thatdon't work. I think the equipment would last long enough to get by until drid systems are partially restored.
Interestingly, I was at a county fairgrounds today in a flyover state, and it was a show/fair featuring steam-powered tractors. There is plenty of that equipment and know-how still around in the heartland. I think we would be okay, but the population would shrink at least 80 percent.
Getting ready to... so, I should buy a life insurance policy on LL?
Brilliant! Thanks for doing that.
Very cool. Thanks.
Can you add one more question?
"How many coincidences must occur in what you call critical investigations before they are mathematically impossible? "
: )
Zuckfuck is at it again... or, still.