Youtube comments of Sean (@sean2015).
-
709
-
680
-
651
-
579
-
544
-
426
-
416
-
285
-
273
-
252
-
247
-
213
-
199
-
190
-
188
-
180
-
173
-
169
-
167
-
165
-
163
-
154
-
151
-
147
-
147
-
141
-
130
-
124
-
123
-
120
-
118
-
117
-
116
-
115
-
109
-
107
-
103
-
101
-
93
-
87
-
I HATED the way this movie wasn’t accurate with the technical aspects of military life. For example, Cruise would've been hung out to dry for saying ”Wow, I'm sexually aroused Commander!" to Galloway, and he would've been court-martialed for the way he screamed at Col. Jessup on the witness stand.
EDIT: Does anyone here remember the football movie Rudy ? Dan Devine (former Notre Dame head coach) was so furious by the way he was portrayed in that movie that he threatened to sue the film's producers...
Does anyone here remember the movie Flight Plan with Jodie Foster? The Association of Flight Attendants and the Transport Workers Union Local 556 (two labor unions representing flight attendants) tried to organize a nationwide boycott of the film, because they felt the film depicted flight attendants as rude, unhelpful, etc.,...
Does anyone here remember the movie Chappaquiddick ? Members of the Kennedy family worked behind the scenes to try to stop the film from even being made...
Does anyone here remember the movie W. about George W. Bush? Members of the Bush family trashed the film (even before it was released in theaters)...
So no offense, but when I hear all you clowns saying "Ahhhh, so what? It's just a movie, so what if it's unrealistic?" , I think of the examples I've listed and many others. FACT IS: if any of you ever clowns ever got to be rich or famous and they had you as a character in a movie, there's no doubt in my mind you'd be screaming bloody murder if you didn't like how you were portrayed.
86
-
85
-
85
-
82
-
80
-
79
-
77
-
76
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
75
-
71
-
70
-
68
-
66
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
64
-
63
-
62
-
62
-
60
-
58
-
55
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@jt8251 Systemic racism, inherent bias, institutional discrimination, white privilege, white man’s fault, orange man bad, fascism, white male sexism, Republican homophobia, conservative transphobia, far-right Islamophobia.
I could make a Scrabble game out of all these bogus Leftist talking points.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
@NikoBased not really. Even you or I could disappear and stay disappeared for a certain while (especially if you receive help from someone else, as was the case here). Sooner or later though something’s gotta give. You run out of cash, food, etc., or you just become delirious from the isolation. This convinces me that someone is harboring him.
If he’s so smart then he wouldn’t have done so many stupid things to incriminate himself, like arriving home without his fiancée, then promptly taking off, being seen in public assaulting his fiancée, buying the new cell phone, etc.,
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
There is nothing I dislike more than a "YouTube lawyer" like G D who pretends to be a Harvard Law-educated legal scholar issuing legal proclamations like he's the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Especially one who doesn't know how to spell "suit" and who doesn't know that 'First Amendment' is always capitalized.
I live in Illinois and here is what the law says about trespassing from "public property". From 720 ILCS 5/21-5, Ch. 38, par. 21-5
(a-5) A person commits criminal trespass to State supported land when he or she enters upon a right of way, including facilities and improvements thereon, owned, leased, or otherwise used by a public body or district organized under the Metropolitan Transit Authority Act, the Local Mass Transit District Act, or the Regional Transportation Authority Act, after receiving, prior to the entry, notice from the public body or district, or its representative, that the entry is forbidden, or the person remains upon the right of way after receiving notice from the public body or district, or its representative, to depart, and in either of these instances intends to compromise public safety by causing a delay in transit service lasting more than 15 minutes or destroying property.
Every source I've come across says that you CAN be trespassed from public property like a school. A homeless person can't just go into a school and pitch a tent and sleep there.
The White House is paid for by federal tax dollars but that doesn't give you or me the right to move into the Lincoln bedroom.
The OP is an idiot.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I live in Fargo, and driving on icy roads really isn't a "skill" you can develop (especially if it's black ice). I guess the only thing I've learned from living here is just to drive more slowly, and try to anticipate ice based on the temperature and presence of precipitation such as snow, sleet or ice. 4WD vehicles are obviously a great investment but some people can't afford it. I keep a shovel in my trunk to dig myself out in case I wind up in the ditch (which I've actually had to do once, after I skidded off the road at a cloverleaf). But plenty of times I've seen cars that are in the median upside down, with the lights on and the wheels still spinning. Even people who live here don't know how to drive during the winter, lol.
I've also got a homemade 'winter survival kit' in my car which includes an extra jacket, hat, gloves, a blanket, matches and some candles. Enough things to keep me warm while waiting if I ever needed roadside assistance. Our winters here are no joke.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@jermainelatimer804 "Whites commit the exact same crimes as black people do too. " ...yeah, and whites who break the law go to jail as black people do too. What's your point snowflake? (aside from trying to be a victim).
He would have never been approached or had the police call on him if he would have been WHITE.
Baloney. Did the police not pull over Timothy McVeigh after the OKC bombing? Did a jury not convict Scott Peterson for murdering his wife? (and they convicted him despite practically no physical evidence). Did they not convict Ted Bundy and give him the death penalty? And all of those dudes were clean-cut Casper Milquetoast types who (by the logic of Leftists like you) have "white privilege" and never get arrested or pulled over. Damn those racist, white supremacist Trump-supporter cops right Maine?
Tell me how George Zimmerman would've even been able to tell the color of Trayvon Martin 's skin at night, in a rain storm, approaching him from behind, and with Martin wearing a hoodie over him. YOU CAN'T. Even by the time Zimmerman called the 911 operator, after watching Martin for a couple of minutes, he still didn't sound 100% sure ( "ummmm,...he looks black" in his words)
In your mind you think 🤔 that you're more mighty, superior and better than me because you are WHITE and I'm beneath you because I'm BLACK
Wrong again, but the fact YOU think that (which you do...since you brought it up...I've never said anything of the sort) shows that not only do you have a victim mentality but you're also a race-baiter. Which is typical of Leftists.
No you're wrong Sean ! I'm not even a Leftist! ....uh-huh, sure you're not.
like not winning the Powerball because it was setup for the WHITE MAN to win anyways
Is it? You tell ME.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@countessratzass5408 I can't say for sure whether or not this was illegal (I'm not a lawyer and would have to ask one). But I will say it's questionable not to mention highly unusual. In my 25 years as a member of the workforce, I've never seen this type of thing. Imagine if you were to go into a Walmart and the cashier tells you that Walmart has outsourced their entire cashiering department to XYZ Corporation, and the employee tells you she is an employee of XYZ and not Walmart.
As I understand it, generally speaking, the more "control" or "say" that a company has over someone who performs work or services for them, the more likely they are an employee and not a contractor . I was working as a receptionist for a large company. I had to work during hours when the office was open (8-4:30), which means they had control over my schedule. I sat at their front desk, used their computer, printer, phone, etc., and was even issued a company email address. At the time, I didn't question it because, for one thing I didn't know THEN what I know NOW -- and secondly, my wages were supposedly about equivalent to what I would've been receiving had I been an employee of the actual company. But, as I said, I resigned after a year because I was sick of being an "outsider". My thinking was, if you value my work so much but you won't actually hire me, then you can go and screw yourself. On top of that, they were gradually increasing my workload throughout that time. Who's going to want to continue working for that type of company when opportunities for transfers or promotions are non-existent?
I'm sure Memphis' crime problems are over-exaggerated. I live in Chicago and I too get sick of hearing people ask me how I manage to dodge bullets on my way to work.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@MrJames-te4bw first of all, let's set straight the definition of "homeless". There are many people who are homeless who are couch surfing or living out of trailers, cars, vans, etc., and showering at the gym but hold down full-time jobs and are otherwise clean and sober individuals. They choose to sleep in cars or whatever because they live in expensive areas where they can't afford housing, such as Southern California.
I've lived out of my car as well. So yes I've technically been "homeless", even if it was only for a short time. But it was my choice. I could've gone to live with my parents and slept in their basement, but I chose not to.
These "homeless" people are DIFFERENT from the "street people" who actually live on the streets and sleep in trains, train stations, airports or sometimes inside ATM lobbies. THOSE people are so screwed up from drugs that are unable to seek help for themselves, and many will reject help offered to them other than hard cash so they can buy dugs or booze. I've volunteered at a shelter and we have had to remove such people for things like fighting, stealing, assaulting, and shooting up, etc.,
So I just want to get the definition of "homeless" straight before I debate with you any further.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@vallee7966 I'm tired of people making excuses for this thug. The media has been harping on the fact that is mother was killed in 2007, as if that's any excuse for his mile-long rap sheet or the fact that he broke a 67 year-old woman's nose or pushed a 60 year-old man onto the tracks.
I know plenty of people who lost a parent at a young age, but didn't turn to a life of drugs, vagrancy and thuggery like Neely did. Again, I'm not interested in hearing about his mother. The old mental illness excuse has been getting worn thin by the Left for years now.
There are infinitesimal resources available for people like Jordan Neely: our country spends half (HALF!) of its annual budget just on Social Security and health care alone. That's $2 trillion. Nobody in this country is starving (with all the food pantries we have), nobody is dropping dead in the street for lack of access to health care (that's a bogus Leftist lie).
From what I can gather, Neely was placed under psychiatric care at some point but fell off the wagon, stopped taking his meds and stopped attending his appointments. You can't help people who won't accept help, and unfortunately bums like Jordan Neely usually only want one type of help and that is cash so they can buy booze or drugs. He did not have a "mental illness problem", he had a substance abuse problem. He alone chose to go down that path. I feel no sympathy for him, nor should I. I only feel disgust towards him that he could've made something of his life but didn't.
The rest of us trying to go to work have to deal with them threatening us because 1) our government isn’t caring for them and 2) our government isn’t providing safe mass transit for us. ...you can blame the Police Defunders for that. These people should NOT be allowed to use subway trains as shelters, they should be actually staying in a shelter where they belong. And no, shelters are not always full every night of the year (that's another bogus Leftist myth) but people like Neely refuse to stay in them because they don't want to abide by the "no smoking/no drugs/no alcohol" rules. Otherwise we need to bring back insane asylums and commit these people, even forcibly if necessary. The alternative is leaving them on the street.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@humblecourageous3919 you never did answer my question about by how much you lowered your rent (?)
Yes, in fact, I do donate money to reputable charities (I just donated $15 yesterday to the Alzheimer’s Association) but I do NOT give cash to so-called “homeless” bums, as virtually ALL of them are drug addicts looking for cash to fund their drug or alcohol habits, which is enabled by folks like you who think with their hearts rather than their brains. We have food pantries, we have shelters (12,000 in the U.S. alone, and no, they’re NOT all “full”) and anyone needing emergency medical treatment in this country can walk into any Emergency Room without having to pay one penny upfront. Thus, there is no need at all for these bums to be hounding people for cash. NOBODY in this country is starving. This is not North Korea, this is not Eritrea, this is not the Central African Republic.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jermainelatimer804 "GZ was seems as a victim and TM was seems as a violent one"
...are you kidding me? Martin has been treated as the sweet and innocent young victim since Day One. Let's look at some FACTS. For STARTERS...Martin (at the time of his death) was 17 years old, approximately 6 feet tall and was lean, muscular and covered in tattoos. And yet, the photo we've been seeing of him in the media (still to this day) was taken when he was 13. You know the photo I'm talking about. Cherub-faced Martin clad in his burgundy Hollister shirt, grinning ear to ear. All part of the media's effort to make sweet little Tray-Tray appear as the innocent angel who got racially profiled by that white supremacist bigot George Zimmerman, whom the media did mental calisthenics to describe as a "white Hispanic". What the hell is a "white Hispanic"?
What was Martin (who lived in Miami Gardens) doing 250 miles from home on a school night in the first place? Oh yeah, that's right. He got SUSPENDED from school and his mother decided to farm him off to dad when she decided she could no longer deal with him. Some dad, by the way! What kind of dad moves 250 miles away from his kid? As far as why Martin got suspended, he had been caught with weed, stolen jewelry and burglar tools..and he also skipped school numerous times.
( "Oh Sean, you're being too harsh, he was just a kid, we all make mistakes, you gonna tell me you perfect Sean?" ...I never used weed in high school, nor did I ever steal jewelry or play hooky from school)
Question: Who do you think is more dangerous? A unarmed BLACK MAN with his hands straight up in the air or a 17yrs old WHITE KID with a AR 15 Assault Rifle in his hands???
Is this a serious question? Anyone who's unarmed is less dangerous than someone who is armed, duhhhh. But what if I turned the question around and asked "who is more dangerous? A unarmed WHITE MAN with his hands straight up in the air or a 17yrs old BLACK KID with a AR 15 Assault Rifle in his hands"? Oh but I can't ask that now can I? Cuz THAT would be "rathist". Yeah Sean, you're just a rathist white thupremathist Trump thupporter.
Who said Martin had his hands up anyway? Martin made it to within 60 feet of his dad's gf's apartment front door (we know this by cell phone records and testimony). GZ had lost sight of him (audio recordings prove this) and Martin was home free. If Martin felt threatened by GZ, all he had to do was high-tail it inside and lock the door. If he had done that, he'd still be alive today. Instead, he turned right back around to even the score with "dat creepy-ass cracker". Guess what? Decisions have consequences.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kanariepotts3394 How would they know about these things if they don't know the person?
Easy. You get to know faces really quick, even if you don't know their names. By the way, it's not just people being turned away at the door. Many times people are admitted and then asked to leave a short time later when they are caught breaking a rule (such as smoking, using drugs, fighting, etc.,)
And as far as being refused due to circumstances usually people already know if it's a shelter for just men or families.
Not necessarily. Not if it's a shelter they've never applied to before
Also, are shelters not year round?
I believe most homeless shelters are open 24/7/365. I'm not sure though. Some might only be open during the wintertime just to give people a place to stay during extreme temperatures (cold weather is dangerous). Why do you ask?
I hope you also realize that many people who are living on the street don't WANT to live in a shelter even if a bed is available. They prefer living on the street because they can smoke, drink, use drugs, panhandle and do many other things that shelters strictly prohibit.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Austin Vanwie well snowflake, for one thing he was caught with a counterfeit $20 bill. The person who first called the cops on Floyd was the 18 year-old cashier, who was black. Much as you'd just loooove to think that Floyd was racially profiled.
The court later PROVED that there was a fentanyl deal in the car and his dealer was sitting in the backseat
Floyd resisted arrest from the first second, but the cops were rather polite and mild considering the circumstances.
Floyd said "I can't breathe" WHILE HE WAS STILL IN THE CAR - before the cops had to pull him out (which wouldn't have been necessary had he cooperated).
The cops even said they would even open the window for him so he could breathe better.
He pulled the "I had Covid" card as an excuse to not get arrested, but the cops were still polite and gave him the benefit of the doubt.
When the "I have Covid" card didn't work, he pulled the "I'm claustrophobic" card (didn't work either, and an obvious lie).
The cops called an ambulance for him.
He resisted because he knows about the fentanyl pack he swallowed that was about to open up in his stomach (proven in court, proven by an autopsy).
The cops acted according to how they were trained and restrained him using a method established and approved by a DEMOCRAT city and a DEMOCRAT police department (Democrat just like the KKK, and just like you).
The ambulance was already on the way.
The cops surely thought he finally got exhausted and gave up resisting the arrest.
One of the cops even did CPR on him to try to save his life.
Oh I'm sure you'll look at all these facts and just say "Oh that's rathist, you're a rathist" ...but don't let facts get in the way of your feelings, snowflake.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1:41 There is no evidence the owners consulted fire safety codes; this is hogwash. As a freelance news reporter for WHDH-TV in Boston, Jeffrey Derderian produced a news segment in the fall of 2000 in which he described "polyurethane foam: fire safety experts call this stuff solid gasoline" . Jeff Derderian knew the foam on the walls of his nightclubs was dangerous and yet he did nothing to address it.
2:20 The grandfather clause exempting the building from a sprinkler system was nullified when the building changed its intended purpose of use from restaurant to nightclub. Thus, the Derderians were in violation for not having a sprinkler system -- which would have cost less than the state-of-the-art sound system they had purchased.
3:00 there is no evidence whatsoever that the Derderians had a "strained relationship" with the West Warwick fire inspector, Denis Larocque. In fact, evidence suggests the opposite, that they were quite chummy. The building was full of safety violations (e.g. a lack of sufficient exits, unlit exit signs, the polyurethane foam, no workers compensation policy, no safety training for staff, a history of overcrowding, fire extinguishers stashed in closets instead of mounted on walls) AND YET... the only thing for which Larocque cited the Derderians, was an inward swinging door by the stage. On two occasions, the Derderians requested -- and Larocque approved -- an increase in capacity -- first from 200 to 300, then from 300 to 400. He also allowed them to classify the entire building as "Standing Room Only", something which has never been done before and which made no sense. There were 460 people in the nightclub the night of the fire. 460 people in a building no bigger than half a basketball court.
Witness statements and forensic analysis of Daniel Biechle's computer by investigators provided good evidence that he had asked for, and received permission from the Derderians to use pyrotechnics.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Black privilege =
* Affirmative Action hiring preferences
* Black History Month (when is Asian or Jewish history month?)
* Can’t criticize them, can’t say anything negative at all about them, can’t arrest them, can’t prosecute them…otherwise you’re fired, fined, canceled,
banned, unfriended, de-platformed, threatened, harassed, assaulted and labeled as racist. .
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ij2750 First of all, stop upvoting your own comments, okay? That looks pathetic. Second, I’m insulted you would think I’d be stupid enough to believe 1) that you routinely deposit $20,000 checks and 2) that you have no problems doing so. Because even Jeff Bezos would run into issues if he tried to deposit checks in those amounts.
Stop declaring what banks are supposed to do and not supposed not to do. You obviously have never worked in a bank, and based on the nonsense you’ve written here, I doubt you even graduated college.
From the website of the Federal Reserve:
”There is no federal law that requires a bank to cash a check, even a government check. Some banks only cash checks if you have an account at the bank. Other banks will cash checks for non-customers, but they may charge a fee. You should shop around for the bank that best meets your needs.”
”No federal consumer protection law requires your bank to return your original check. Many banks destroy original paper checks after putting them into electronic form, often to save the expenses of storing or mailing paper checks. Increasingly, check processors make electronic images of your checks and destroy the paper checks that you wrote. A law called Check 21 gives you legal protections when your bank sends you images of your check instead of the paper check. More information on Check 21 is on the Board of Governors' website.”
Oh let me guess…now you’re gonna tell me you used to be president of a bank. 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
But not every unhoused person is a drug addict. ...we know this. Many "homeless/unhoused" people are actually clean and sober people who sleep in cars and vans, (or couch surf), shower at the gym, and hold down full-time jobs.
But when people talk about "homeless", I can guarantee you that 99.99% of the time they are referring to the bums who roam the streets (because they don't want to stay in shelters where drugs and alcohol and cigarettes are prohibited), sleep in trains, piss and poop on sidewalks, loiter and litter everywhere, aggressively panhandle and harass people for money, drink and shoot up in public, and go weeks without bathing.
Why should they be made to suffer from lack of food?
Nobody in this country is starving. The guy who panhandles in front of the store where I work makes at least $50 in four hours (tax-free). Unfortunately, he doesn't use all of that money for housing and food. I caught him just yesterday smoking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@garretdrake2347
Nicholas Sandmann settled Friday with NBC-Universal, he said.
The media had lambasted the Covington Catholic High School student from Kentucky, now 19, over a confrontation at the 2019 March for Life in Washington, D.C.“
At this time I would like to release that NBC and I have reached a settlement,” wrote Sandmann on Twitter, adding that the terms were confidential.
Following the 2019 incident in Washington, D.C., many media outlets and Democratic politicians criticized Sandmann for a confrontation with a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial following the march.
Sandmann was recorded on video wearing one of former President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” campaign hats while smiling at the activist, Nathan Phillips, as Phillips beat a ceremonial drum and chanted at him in close proximity.
Several media reports at the time claimed the incident was racially charged on the part of the White teenager, which Sandmann and other witnesses disputed. People have judged Sandmann “based off one expression, which I wasn’t smirking, but people have assumed that’s what I have,” he said a 2019 interview with NBC News anchor Savannah Guthrie.
Nearby members of the Black Hebrew Israelites group were shouting slurs at him and his classmates, he added.
“I heard them call us incest kids, bigots, racists,” Sandmann said.
His filing against NBC-Universal and MSNBC reportedly asked for $275 million in damages.
CNN and the Washington Post both settled defamation lawsuits from Sandmann in 2020 for undisclosed amounts.
The suit against CNN sought damages for “emotional distress Nicholas and his family suffered” in the fallout of the network’s reporting.
Law school professor William Jacobson told Fox News at the time that CNN agreeing to settle is a “rare example of a ‘little guy’ being able to stand up to a media behemoth” and estimated the deal was worth at least seven figures.
Sandmann, then a Covington Catholic High School student, was criticized following a confrontation with a Native American elder at the March for Life in 2019.
Sandmann, then a Covington Catholic High School student, was criticized following a confrontation with a Native American elder at the March for Life in 2019.
REUTERS
In 2020, Sandmann attorney Todd McMurtry told Fox News that lawsuits against “as many as 13 other defendants will be filed,” including ABC, CBS, The Guardian, HuffPost, NPR, Slate, The Hill, and Gannett, which owns the Cincinnati Enquirer as well as other small outlets.
After Illinois teenager Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of homicide charges in the shooting deaths of two Kenosha, Wisconsin, rioters Nov. 19 amid similar media attacks, Sandmann told Fox News the teenager’s experiences seemed similar and that as of November, he had six pending suits against other media outlets himself.
“It’s terrible, Sean — as a 17-year-old in Kyle’s case and mine 16, your mind is still developing,” he told host Sean Hannity. “So to deal with an overload of stress where you have this feeling that half of the country — hundreds of millions of people — hate you for something that you are innocent of, but how you are painted can do a lot to you mentally.”
“It takes a very strong will to be able to resist that and keep a level head,” he added. “I think that Kyle Rittenhouse is dealing with that right now."
--New York Post, 12/18/21
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RS-ti7bz I watched the video again and her windows do appear to be tinted (when you live in a sunny locale such as Florida or Arizona, it is a temptation to install tinted windows but you have to be aware that you may draw the attention of law enforcement and she should know that) not to mention that it appears to be late evening on an overcast day, thus, it would have been difficult if not impossible for any police officer to peer into a moving car and instantly determine the gender and race of the driver. The idea that she may have been profiled is baloney, though I'm sure CNN would love its viewers to think otherwise.
As far as the officer bringing up the issue of the tinted windows, this is another perfectly common thing for law enforcement to do, for example you may be pulled over for a license plate light being out, but the officer can (and almost all of of them do) look for other secondary infractions or illegal activity during the course of the stop, such as: open containers of alcohol, not wearing a seat belt (which is now a requirement in every state except New Hampshire), possession of unlicensed firearms, etc.,. When police approach your car, they will ALWAYS look around inside your car for any visible evidence that can be used against you (this is called the "plain view exception" to the Fourth Amendment).
1
-
1
-
@RS-ti7bz First of all, you should know that the person driving the vehicle is not always the registered owner. In addition to that, a vehicle could also be a rental car, or it could be registered to a business or to the government (duhhh). Since this Ayala woman is a state attorney, it's entirely POSSIBLE that she could've been driving a state-owned vehicle to or from court appointments (CNN does not specify whether this is the case). If so, this would explain why the officer initially had trouble matching the vehicle to its registered owner, and would debunk your entire theory that this was based on racial profiling.
Second, you've already more or less admitted that you were wrong when you said that vehicle registrations contain the owner's picture. Now you're doing a 180 and suggesting that cops can instantly recognize the race or ethnicity of a person simply by their last name ? Really? Does that mean ALL people with the surname "Ayala" are African-American? According to Wikipedia the surname is of Basque origin; it is a Hispanic name (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayala_(surname)). And when a car is flying by at 80 mph, do you honestly think a police officer has all that extra time to sit there perusing through computer records while they decide whether to peel out and pull the car over? The car would be LONG GONE by then.
Going by your logic, does this also mean that all people named "Murphy" are Irish? (well what about Eddie Murphy then? isn't he African-American?) Are all people with the last name "Malone" Irish? How about Karl Malone? (14-time All-Star and power forward for the Utah Jazz) or even the late Moses Malone, a Hall of Famer and former 76er (both of these men are...wait for it...African-American).
Don't rattle off baseless or questionable facts and then finish it off by telling me to go "look it up". Include a verifiable and credible link to support your assertions and then I'll go check it out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@terrymckenzie8786 there you go. That's the point I was trying to make and I've been saying this all along. Almost all of these people living on the streets are drug addicts. They COULD seek h a bed at a shelter, but shelters have rules (e.g. no smoking, no drugs, no alcohol, curfews, etc.,) which they are unwilling to abide by.
This is different from "homeless" people who may be living out of cars, vans, trailers etc., but are otherwise clean and sober people and often hold down jobs. But Leftists love to lump everyone into the same category and claim that the cause behind this is greedy landlords, lack of resources, or "rathism". There is really no excuse to be homeless in America. We are a generous and charitable nation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Best restaurants in the country, beautiful lakefront, affordable rents, high wages, generous social services, large dating pool, a major international hub airport (O'Hare), five pro sports teams, a free public zoo, world-class museums, extensive public transportation which saves money on owning a car.
Does that answer your question?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@VONiiE8 "Her accusations of they came in earlier causing commotion, sounds like she was just trying to save face" ...interesting that you're willing to just take the employee and her kids at their word, but the manager's word needs double-checking and verification. I'm not sure I would want you sitting on a jury with you picking sides so easily.
"I’d need their side of that as well, by your logic" ...they've already presented their side of the story. It's the manager's turn to present hers (which I'm sure would include a lot of material that the employee and her family purposely omitted in their description of events). If you want their side of the manager's side, help yourself. But I'm sure it would consist of a lot of denials. Ideally it would've been nice to see some video footage from the restaurant cameras which could easily prove one side's story over the other. Or perhaps even some statements from witnesses.
"If her story is correct that they came in earlier asking about it, it seems more plausible that they asked and she was rude then too and they just decided to record it this time" Wrong. People don't just lose their tempers at the drop of a shoe (common sense). There is no question that there was some type of provocation beforehand. Also people don't tend to walk around their cell phones recording unless something is happening or they're expecting something about to happen. My feeling is they had been pushing her buttons and they were expecting a reaction.
Another thing: I would NEVER ask two of my family members to come into my place of employment and confront my manager about some type of issue involving pay, scheduling, workplace safety, etc., That's really weird, and creepy. If you have trouble with the language, then learn the language or use Google translate [smdh], Not that hard.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Let’s recap shall we? Shes a 19 year-old drug addicted stripper with an abusive drug addict boyfriend. He ran up onstage, took her money, ripped it up, assaulted her, called her a whore, threatened her, and she calls the cops — despite the fact that she clearly hates
When the cops show up, not only does she refuse to press charges against him (after already having called the cops to the scene for him) she deliberately attempts to interfere with their work, she insults and berates them, and then threatens to file complaints and sue them despite the fact that they were nothing but polite and professional towards her and her loser boyfriend who resisted arrest by punching, kicking, headbutting and biting them. She actually blames the cops for her boyfriend ripping up her money.
She revolts and disgusts me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@VelhaGuardaTricolor Jake Blake was in front of his home, had his kids in the back seat, was tased twice and was entering his car when he was shot 7 times in the back.
You need to get your facts straight there genius.
Jacob Blake wasn't in front of his home, he was in front of the house of his ex-girlfriend (and mother of his children), except that SHE had a restraining order against him. So he wasn't supposed to be there in the first place and was breaking the law just by showing up. The restraining order was because he had assaulted his ex-gf on a prior occasion (with one of their children nearby) by digitally raping her. It was his ex-girlfriend who called the police on him.
Meanwhile, Blake had an open warrant for his arrest stemming from the rape as well as prior incidents of domestic abuse and trespassing. This was not the first time he had violated the restraining order.
FACT: he showed up at the house in direct violation of a restraining order (while under the influence of marijuana and likely PCP as well, which caused his aggression).
FACT: he took the keys to his ex-gf's car and refused to give them back.
FACT: he attempted to kidnap his own kids (he had no custody agreement with his ex-gf, so that counts as kidnapping)
FACT: he ignored police officer's repeated (loud) commands to surrender, shook off two tasers and brawled with the cops, putting one in a headlock. He has tacitly admitted doing this.
FACT: he walked away from the cops and lied and said he couldn't hear them from only 3 feet away when several witnesses heard them clearly and they were audible on cell phone video taken from across the street
FACTS: he reached into his car for a knife (no, he wasn't "entering his car" to drive to his daily Bible studies class contrary to the narrative you and your buddies have tried to push).
Other than that, he was a "good kid" and didn't do nothin' to deserve any of this...right Joy Reid?
In fact, you Leftist clowns originally tried to lie and say Blake had no knife. But Blake himself ADMITTED he had one, then he backpedaled and tried to say he was reaching for it but without any intent to use it (yeah right Blakey, that makes a lot of sense).
I'll address the rest of your message later as this is getting too long.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KaiPetro Also half the movies you quote are about specific people while the other half are about a broad group of people sharing a profession.
And I would add, half the movies I quote are based on real-life and half are fiction.
But if you go back and read what I wrote, you'll see the point that I was trying to make is that there are commenters here (including you) who are saying "Meh, it's just a movie, that's Hollywood for ya" ...but, if you yourself ever became famous and got to be portrayed in a film, you'd be blowing your gasket if you didn't like the way you were portrayed. I admit, I probably would too. So, this is consistent with how outspoken I am regarding the way the military personnel are depicted. I'm not suggesting there should be any legal constraints, just like there shouldn't be any legal constraints on me criticizing Aaron Sorkin, for example.
It doesn't really matter though, whether a film is fiction or non-fiction, because even fictional works often make references to real-life people, places or events. Remember the Seth Rogan film The Interview from 2014? The North Korean government became irate when they got word of this film, and even wrote a letter to then-President Obama asking him to step in and prevent the film from being released in theaters. At the same time that the North Koreans were bitching about this film being hateful, unfair, inciteful, etc., etc., they (the North Koreans) were busy releasing their own propaganda films showing Washington DC being destroyed by nuclear missiles.
So as you can see, people can be very hypocritical on this topic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@scraplifetrashtocash4551 are you a lawyer? NO YOU’RE NOT, so shut up, and don’t comment on issues you don’t know about.
”Where a landlord shuts off or interrupts utilities intending to terminate occupancy, a tenant has causes of action against the landlord for (1) breach of contract, (2) negligence, (3) violation of statutory protections under Civil Code section 789.3, (4) wrongful eviction, and (5) violations of local rent control ordinance, where applicable.”
”A tenant with interrupted utilities can sue to have the utilities turned back on or move out and sue the landlord for actual damages, including moving costs, emotional distress, and the difference in rent between a new unit and the old unit.”
-California Civ. Code § 789.3.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1:41 There is no evidence the owners consulted fire safety codes; this is hogwash. As a freelance news reporter for WHDH-TV in Boston, Jeffrey Derderian produced a news segment in the fall of 2000 in which he described "polyurethane foam: fire safety experts call this stuff solid gasoline" . Jeff Derderian knew the foam on the walls of his nightclubs was dangerous and yet he did nothing to address it.
2:20 The grandfather clause exempting the building from a sprinkler system was nullified when the building changed its intended purpose of use from restaurant to nightclub. Thus, the Derderians were in violation for not having a sprinkler system -- which would have cost less than the state-of-the-art sound system they had purchased.
3:00 there is no evidence whatsoever that the Derderians had a "strained relationship" with the West Warwick fire inspector, Denis Larocque. In fact, evidence suggests the opposite, that they were quite chummy. The building was full of safety violations (e.g. a lack of sufficient exits, unlit exit signs, the polyurethane foam, no workers compensation policy, no safety training for staff, a history of overcrowding, fire extinguishers stashed in closets instead of mounted on walls) AND YET... the only thing for which Larocque cited the Derderians, was an inward swinging door by the stage. On two occasions, the Derderians requested -- and Larocque approved -- an increase in capacity -- first from 200 to 300, then from 300 to 400. He also allowed them to classify the entire building as "Standing Room Only", something which has never been done before and which made no sense. There were 460 people in the nightclub the night of the fire. 460 people in a building no bigger than half a basketball court.
Mr. Hicks, you need to get your facts straight.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NoCreativeNameGirl you and Scrap Life need to keep your mouths shut and not comment about topics you have no knowledge or expertise in. Here is what the law says, okay? Read on.
”Where a landlord shuts off or interrupts utilities intending to terminate occupancy, a tenant has causes of action against the landlord for (1) breach of contract, (2) negligence, (3) violation of statutory protections under Civil Code section 789.3, (4) wrongful eviction, and (5) violations of local rent control ordinance, where applicable.”
”…a tenant with interrupted utilities can sue to have the utilities turned back on or move out and sue the landlord for actual damages, including moving costs, emotional distress, and the difference in rent between a new unit and the old unit.”
—Cal. Civ. Code § 789.3.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jones2277 all of the candidates were democrats. yes, even Vallas.
...LOL, you actually answered what was gonna be my next question (amazing). Yes,
not a single Republican candidate was on the ballot (duhhh, real surprise there) not just because they know they can't win but also because they know people like you will boo them off the stage and call them "rathists" , "MAGA white thupremacists" blah blah blah. So Chicago is stuck with people like Black Panther/BLM activist Brandon Johnson.
btw, i voted for him. jokes on you. ....lol, oh, so you voted for Vallas? What do you expect, a hand job? 🤣Vallas may be a lot better (errr, less worse) than Johnson but he's no different than the other Democrat mayors who have been driving this city into the ground for the past 100 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ why would I want to talk to the security who removed you from the plane? They weren't there either! I'm talking in terms of what happened in the 10, 15, 20 minutes leading up to your removal from the aircraft. The only thing security did was to remove you from the aircraft. They didn't witness the stuff beforehand, and please, do me a favor and DON'T tell me "Well this is what happened, I got on the plane and I was being a perfectly respectful gentleman blah blah blah and these rude flight attendants came up to me and started harassing me about my shirt blah blah blah blah!" Yeah, I've already heard your version of events, I don't need to hear it a fifth or sixth time. You've given your side of the story, now I want the other side.
The ones I would be interested in talking to are passengers who were seated near you, or the flight attendants. Not airport security, not the airport janitor, not the air traffic controllers and not the bartender at the Chili's next to your departure gate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jermainelatimer804 being right about something is a simple matter of having the facts on your side. It has NOTHING to do with skin color, and you sound childish and pathetic to make that claim. In fact, when I think about it, what you’ve written here is in fact racist. ( ”no Sean you’re wrong wahhh wahhh! I was only being sarcastic and you were too dumb to pick up in it!” ) Yeah right Jermaine! Just imagine if I ever said something like ”Black people are always wrong” and then tried to blow it off as sarcasm, what the reaction would be.
But then again, when it comes to racism I expect nothing less from a Democrat like yourself - the party of the KKK, the party of segregationists like George Wallace, Lester Maddox, and Bull Connor (look them up). The party of former Klansman Robert Byrd (look HIM up too, and his repeated use of the n- word in an early 2000s interview).
”No Sean you’re wrong, I am not a Democrat wahhh wahhh! You don’t know anything about me Sean wahhh wahhh!” )
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Never mind being illegal. Just imagine having no education, no skills, no knowledge of English (and with no intent to learn it), no money, no place to stay, no job offer, and often with small children in tow...and just showing up at the border and expecting the host country to provide you with money, shelter, food, clothes, health care. The entitlement of these people is disgusting.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@macobats I'm surprised that you're surprised that I'm comparing Laura Bush's accident to Ted Kennedy's. The two accidents are eerily similar in several ways, mainly that a young person was killed and in each case, the person responsible managed to avoid prosecution for manslaughter on account of being wealthy. I don't believe either Ted Kennedy or Laura Bush were malicious or intentionally tried to cause their respective crashes, but when it comes to manslaughter, "intent" is not a mitigating factor under the law. The fact is that they both should have been charged.
I'm tired of people using the excuse that "but she was so young" ...you said you've read my responses so please answer the question which I've already asked. which is: what exactly is the age at which people can and should begin to be held responsible for their actions Priscilla? Because I have a strong feeling that if some 17 year-old kid caused the death of your loved one under similar circumstances, you would be screaming for their head on a plate.
As far as Laura Bush not leaving the scene of the accident, to me that is irrelevant because, 1) she was thrown from the vehicle and possibly knocked unconscious; she has given very sketchy details about this (her car was traveling at at least 50 mph so if she had been thrown from the vehicle she should have been more injured than she says she was, and 2) she had a passenger in the car with her (a friend) and there was also another witness to the accident (the boy's father) so fleeing the scene or covering up evidence would not have entered her mind. Finally, 3) no sobriety test was administered, so we don't know for sure if Bush was intoxicated.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mister8224 well for one thing, 1 out of every 4 Floridians is over the age of 65, and people in this age group spend very little money on anything other than groceries and medications. You’re never gonna have much of an economy with that kind of demographic.
I love seeing Floridians thumping their chests about the fact that their state has no income tax when this simply means that the state has to make up for the shortfall by scaling back on social services and/or taxing you in other areas, such as property taxes. Which is why Florida has more miles of toll road than any other state in the country. Why should we pay for our own roads when we can just let Tommy the Tourist do it?
Wages are much lower in Florida than elsewhere in the country, and this is due to a phenomenon called the “sunshine tax” which simply means that people tend to settle for lower salaries to live in a place that’s warm. Don’t believe me? Try a little experiment for yourself. Go talk to five of your friends and ask them would they rather accept a $40,000/year job in Miami or a $70,000/year job in Minneapolis, and see what they say.
The other thing that accounts for low wages in Florida is the fact that the state’s entire economy revolves around tourism, and this does nothing other than generate low wage jobs in the service industry (retail and hospitality). So yeah, there are jobs in Florida all right…wanna be a cashier in Target or Kohl’s? Wanna be a housekeeper at the Days Inn for $10/hour? Hey after a few years you can even become a housekeeping supervisor and then you’ll earn a salary of $11/hour! And remember…warm winters and no state income tax, yaaaaay.
No you’re wrong Sean, I’ve lived in Florida a long time and I make a ton of money. Why, I’ve got so much money that I wipe my butt with $100 bills! And everywhere I look here in Florida, everybody is rich and has fancy cars and fancy houses. So you’re WRONG Sean!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Cheri Merchant "allowing stores to starve poor people with high profit is genocide,, people have to eat, and eat healthy," ...stores also have to generate a profit Cheri so they can pay their suppliers, pay their employees' wages, their property taxes and electric bills. Which brings me to my next point: when a store fails to sell an item, it represents lost profit for them. Stores don't raise prices because they're "greedy" or to make your life miserable. Every cent that a store raises the price of a particular item further decreases the probability that a customer will buy it -- whether it's a new iPhone or a gallon of milk. If a store decides to raise the price of a gallon of milk to (let's say for argument's sake) $20 ...what happens? Nobody buys it, right? Too damned expensive. The milk sits in the cooler and perishes, the store has to throw it away, which means lost profit for them. So what happens then? The store lowers the price...to $10. STILL too expensive...it perishes and has to be thrown away. The store loses money on this because it had to pay the supplier. The price gets lowered further, to $5. Still a bit too expensive. The price gets lowered again, to $3.99. BOOM - sold! This is a basic example of something called "free markets" which liberals like you don't understand.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm starting to notice a pattern here...
"Trump Faces Possible Prison Time" --MSNBC, March 2018
"Jail to the Chief: Why Trump May Wind Up in Prison" --MSNBC, January 2019
"It's Over: Trump is Going to be Convicted" --MSNBC, September 2019
"Conviction a Near Certainty for Trump" --MSNBC, January 2021
"Legal Experts: Trump Likely to Wind up Behind Bars" --MSNBC, August, 2021
"Not If, But 'When' Trump Goes to Prison" --MSNBC, June 2022
Trump Should be Very Worried About Prison" --November 2023
"Trump Will Go to Jail" --MSNBC, April 2024
"Airtight Case Against Trump" --MSNBC, May 2024
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@quixoticdragon2357 well first of all, yes there ARE different types of homeless, I am WELL AWARE of that and in fact I have addressed this very issue in some of my previous posts.
For example, there are many people who can (technically speaking) be considered “homeless” insofar as they couch surf, live in cars, vans, etc., but are otherwise clean and sober, law-abiding people and often hold down full-time jobs. I am not referring to people in that category.
The people who I AM referring to are also (or at least USED to be) known as “street people”, “hobos”, “tramps” or “bums”. But because of political correctness and wokeness, Leftists have more or less banned the use of those terms in everyday speech and now they are simply referred to as “homeless” (in fact, San Francisco has now gone a step further and banned the word “homeless” in favor of a new Leftist euphemism called “domicile-challenged individuals”). This has the effect of lumping them into the same category as the people in my previous paragraph, which is unfair to the people in my previous paragraph.
So yes, it’s important that we distinguish between people who are “homeless” because of financial circumstances versus street bums who are homeless because of substance abuse issues and who CHOOSE to live on the streets because they are unable much less unwilling to abide by the rules of a shelter.
You don’t have to lecture me, I live in Chicago (a city run entirely by DEMOCRATS by the way, which has BEEN run by Democrats for the past 100 years, and hasn’t had a Republican mayor since before the Great Depression) has one of the largest numbers of street people (and yes, I am going to refer to them as “street people” no matter how much that me offend your delicate Leftist sensibilities) of any other city so I see these types of people on a regular basis, and believe me when I tell you that there are PLENTY of resources and help available to these individuals but they are only interested in begging for cash to buy booze or drugs. Being homeless is definitely not an ideal situation, but if you’re going to be homeless, the US is one of the better countries to do it.
1
-
1
-
@quixoticdragon2357 I say that because it looks like you had previously responded to me, but I can’t see your responses anymore on this page.
The problem is that the word “homeless” has become too broadly defined as a result of political correctness and wokeness. There are many people who fit the technical definition of “homeless” insofar as they live in cars, vans, trailers, etc., but who have full-time jobs, and are clean and sober and law-abiding citizens. We have to differentiate those people from “street people” and “bums” who choose to live on the street because they have a substance addiction problem and are unwilling to abide by the rules of a shelter (for example no smoking, no drinking, no drugs etc.,)
The people in the former category I have some sympathy for, the people in the latter category I have zero sympathy for.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ What "facts" have I stated?
You wrote That is the controversy, he did take it off.
That's not an opinion, that's a statement of fact. If you had stated it as an opinion, you would've opened your sentence with "I THINK such and such happened." or _"I BELIEVE such and such happened..." etc., Is English your first language?
This is a public forum of opinions.
Is it now? Or is it know-it-all people who think they can say what happened somewhere even though they were never there, based only off a five-second video of an incident that probably went on for 10, 20, 30 minutes beforehand, because they lack the common sense to say "You know, there must be something more to this story. I think I'll wait to hear from the other side as well as independent witnesses before I speculate on what happened" That's all. Now how hard is that for you to do? I guess it would require you to admit you were wrong, which is something you don't want to do, which is why instead now you're backpedaling and saying you were just giving an opinion when in reality you gave a statement of fact and even got snippy with people like me who challenged you.
Wahhhh wahhh shut up sean2015! You're just mad because I'm smarter than you and you can't handle it. I know what happened on that plane, I don't need to have been there. If the guy says that's what happened then I believe him because never, ever lie or withhold information, nahhhhh"
1
-
@shawnferrie6990 you also wrote "He was removed for asking the security guard's name" ...and I've said before that we do NOT know that this was the one and only reason he was removed from the plane. Personally, I don't buy it because it doesn't make sense. And if something doesn't make sense, there is more to the story.
I suspect what happened was THIS: they spent 10-15 minutes asking him to remove the shirt and he refused like an uncooperative jackass. They repeated several more times to remove his shirt, he still refused. They repeated it one more time and he refused and asked for their names. At that point, they deciedd enough was enough. He was removed after asking for their names, but that wasn't the reason. He was removed for being an obnoxious jerk. Of course, he won't tell us this, and wants us to believe he was being this sweet angel who was removed just for asking their names.
Try to THINK for a second. Let's say you're on a flight, you walk into the plane, and you see a flight attendant. You ask her "Hey what's your name?" and she gets upset and says "Sir, you have to get off the plane" you say "Why? What did I do? I just need your name!"_ She responds in a firm tone "Sir! If you don't get off the plane right now I'm going to call security"
Now does that sound like a ridiculous scenario to you? Well that is exactly what the guy in the video wants the rest of us to believe happened. He's full of it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bateauivre9391 When I say "better quality", I'm referring to insurers who would pay for medications, treatments or services which are otherwise not covered under the basic universal plan. That's what "better quality" means in terms of a healthcare plan. For example in Canada, physical therapy and services such as LASIK are not covered. Prescription medications are also not covered (you pay for those out of pocket).
In the U.S., co-payments and cost-sharing depend widely on the type of plan you have. For example, you can have a plan with a much lower annual deductible, but you'll have to pay higher monthly premiums.
Where you live, you say to have to reimburse 30% of the cost. I'm perfectly fine with such a system, so I don't see the point in us going back and forth. I just don't want healthcare being provided for "free" which is what a lot of people in our entitled society are demanding. When something is given for free, it is unsustainable and it will be abused. Low cost healthcare, yes sure. But not "free". And certainly not free to anyone who has entered the country illegally or remain in the country illegally by overstaying their visa.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
James Lade ”Most people aren’t going to the doctor because it’s fun or because it’s free” ...I’ve heard this exact same line of reasoning from others. If you honestly believe that then it shows you understand nothing about human psychology - yes, people WILL show up at hospitals just because it’s free. Have you ever been to a buffet restaurant? People fill their plates, stuff their faces, and then they go back for seconds, thirds, fourths, fifths. They eat even after they’re full, they eat enough to make them sick. After all, it costs them nothing extra to do so, so they figure “why not?”
James close to 90 percent of all health issues are related to lifestyle choices. Do you believe it’s fair for a three-pack-a-day smoker to benefit from taxpayer-funded healthcare at the expense of the rest of us taxpaying saps who get plenty of exercise and don’t smoke or drink? And I’ve already said this but I’ll say it again: Canada requires all of its prospective immigrants to undergo a thorough physical, and if it’s determined that they have a health condition which would cost over a certain amount of money to treat in the first year, their application for a work/residency permit gets denied. So no, Canadians are not all perfectly happy to pay for universal healthcare, otherwise they wouldn’t have so many strings attached. The oft-repeated myth that “Canada will take anybody in” is baloney. Not to mention their points-based immigration system (imagine if Trump ever proposed something like that - everybody would be labeling him a racist) but I digress.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kles44 "In just wondering who wants to be caught hiding a fugitive" ...the same type of people as his parents who (by all indications) aided and abetted their disgusting offspring and provided him with money and a means to escape. Keep in mind also, that at the time he took off (Sep. 14th), he still wasn't yet considered a fugitive and the story hadn't yet broken into the media circus it is now (...in fact, even NOW he's still only considered a "person of interest" in connection with Gabby's homicide and the only crime he is wanted for is the debit card fraud)...so on Sep. 14th, whichever friend or relative whose door he knocked on, would've had no reason to turn him away. If he is holed up in somebody's basement, there could be some heated argument taking place right now between he and his friends/relatives hollering at him to either give himself up or at the very least move on to somewhere else so they won't be charged as accessories along with him.
"Unless he was lying about that, there's a good chance he is moving to a certain area or will stay put in a remote place and live off the land. Why don't you think he's capable of it?" ...because folks like you have such a ridiculously romanticized and unrealistic vision of "living off the land". Consider someone like Heimo Korth -- he'll tell you that it took years and years for him (and his wife) to get to the point where they are now. But even Mr. Korth isn't entirely self-sufficient; he has non-perishable foods, medicines and other supplies flown to him by bush pilots at certain intervals of the year. I've watched a documentary about Korth (he is someone who actually DOES live off the land) and he said exactly what I'm saying to you now, which is that people like you have no clue about what "living off the land" truly entails.
If this Dirty Laundrie clown did head into the wilderness, he wouldn't be able to survive for very long (absence of food supplies, lack of access to sanitation and proper medical care, etc.,) and he'll be found eventually, whether dead or alive (though in less-than-full health). But after a months-long cross-country excursion in a van with his girlfriend, I seriously doubt the dude was in any mood for more camping.
I'm certain of one thing though: he sure isn't in Mexico sitting on a beach drinking a Corona (shesh, some people with their ridiculous theories). I'm almost certain he's either still in Florida or a bordering state. He could not and would not have gone very far.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
'Mountain' of evidence against Trump -MSNBC, April 2017
Prison time looms for Trump -MSNBC, October 2017
No way Trump can survive these legal troubles -MSNBC, April 2018
Trump will likely wind up jail by the end of this year -MSNBC, September, 2018
No way out for Trump -MSNBC, November 2018
Orange Man will soon be wearing an Orange Suit -MSNBC, May 2019
Trump will go from the White House to the Jail House -MSNBC, September 2019
Virtually certain Trump will wind up in jail -MSNBC, January 2019
Trump has no defense -MSNBC, July 2019
Trump is on the road to prison -MSNBC, November 2019
Trump will have the biggest and most beautiful prison cell, it'll be fantastic -MSNBC, March 2020
VP Pence: Invoke the 25th amendment and remove Trump from power -MSNBC, January 2021
It's over, Trump is going to be convicted -MSNBC, November 2023
Legal experts say Trump is certain to be convicted MSNBC, January 2024
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@teresaweaver1012 you weren't even 100% sure when you first posted your original comment - you had to look it up. Incidentally, I searched all over the Internet and I was not able to confirm what you wrote about Nevada's courts being open (I saw that criminal/jury trials in Nevada are being held virtually, but I was not able to find anything definitive about civil actions).
Whatever the case, it doesn't matter anyway (as far as the landlords are concerned) because, even though Nevada's eviction moratorium recently expired, tenants are still protected by the federal ban which is still in place.
You and I can go back and forth all day about how malicious or premeditated this murder was, but the bottom line is that the whole tragedy could've been avoided had the tenants simply paid their rent (which is something they should've been doing anyway, instead of spending their stimulus checks on 60-inch TVs, new iPhones and trips to Disney World). The murder was not a hate crime nor a copycat crime nor was it motivated by drugs, sex, or racism. Clearly the landlord had some underlying mental issues and those deadbeat tenants poked the bear, so to speak.
You've been going back and forth with other commenters - who's the one being argumentative here?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bobbanana568 please stop using words and phrases like "out of context" or "go back and read it again". Those get really, really stale after a while, y'know?
"And just because she makes an observation..." --> WRONG. She's making a claim , not an observation. It is entirely subjective, and she is stating what allegedly happened based on her emotions and feelings rather than facts or evidence. Neither you nor I were there to witness any of these incidents, and she is unable to offer any evidence.
In her very first sentence she brought up her skin color. Completely unnecessary and irrelevant. I don't know why she even brought it up, but she continued by saying she has endured poor customer service (as a direct result of this) and racial profiling. Attributing negative interactions with others to one's own race or skin color is as classic a case of self-victimization as there is.
I really need to be addressing this directly to her, I don't know who you are or why you're jumping in here but you have nothing to do with this, so you can stay out of this, k?
That profile name is really, really lame btw.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1