It's something weird you see in white supremacist ideology that is tied to a very archaic understanding of "blood". White blood can only be pure white, and it can only decrease. You can't get more pure, only less. So, in a weird result, you get people who are almost entirely white, and declaring themselves to be something else (See: Fauxcahontas). Using this bizarre definition, there's hardly any white people in the US, but in reality, whites very likely make up 73% of the population, but a ton aren't identifying as white. Especially the """white hispanic""" population.
Yet somehow, people like Barack Obama, Kamala Harris, Don Lemon, and Megan Merkel are all just as Capital B Black as Shaka Zulu, even if they are mullato, indian, mostly white, and actually white.
Unless, of course, you didn't vote for Joe Biden. That's when we know you ain't black.
It took 3 years for the medical sciences to discover the difference between "of" and "with".
But while waiting to publish they decided that it'd have to be 20% benefit to be 'worth it' so of course NPR reports that as yet another study showing Ivermectin doesn't work.
Hey NPR, if the fatality rate of respirators and remdesivir is 85%, is that "worth it"?
You'll have to trust me when I say "I know" on that. It kills me that building a decent new house is gonna be around $150,000 at cheapest, and then instead of building a more expensive house, the builders will cheap out by building a $150,000 house and selling it at $500,000.
I just want to see more homes in America that can last 200 years.
I don't think that helps. Everything he does is bad press. The problem is that even bad press attracts people who will literally pay him money and reward him with encouragement to keep doing this so that he gets attacked. It's a pathological behavior from both sides.
Put him in a cell and delete his shit.
Mask mandates are about control and nothing else.
The masks never worked. We knew this from the beginning. We know this now. It's been re-iterated by multiple studies.
The 'pandemic' ends only when you say it does, and nothing else.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, these journals experienced an unprecedented surge in citations, particularly for their COVID-related publications. The new letter raises questions about these journals being relied upon for accurate and unbiased information, especially during a pandemic.
They removed their own publications regarding the effectiveness of Ivermectin because people were citing it as a potential effective treatment, because it was an effective treatment. They preferred people die rather than be informed and come up with a better way to treat the sick. They chose to kill people. End of discussion.
The Lancent is explicitly guilty of pushing disinformation that the authors knew to be false about the origins of Covid, because the author was the origin of Covid.
There is nothing in any of these medical journals that is better than trial-by-error, and a lot that is probably worse.
Part of the problem is that you are feeding these "Nuisance Streamers" attention when you are giving us updates.
There are laws against harassment, annoyance, and disorderly conduct. Hit him with those every time, take down the videos, and then this stops.
I don't understand why we are still building homes with English architecture when it's clear that shit needs to be built different for different regions. It kind of annoyed me when I found out that Kansas had to make a law to require everyone to have a tornado shelter. What kind of idiot do you have to be to not invest in a tornado shelter in fucking Kansas. It seems like places like that should be investing a lot more in deeper homes and protective earthen mounds.
I suppose part of it is absolutely cost, but it kills me that we make McMansions in the exact same way at $500,000 and up. Hell, a lot of these homes don't even have 30 year shingles for their roofs. If you build shit right, and properly, you won't need high maintenance costs.
Mpetey123 noted that I'm way off on Jewel. I clearly misremembered something.
I could see a defamation argument from the families if and only if anything that they claimed Alex did actually happened, but there's no evidence, and there's been nothing of the sort. If he actually told people to harass family members for being federal agents, then I could see some kind of civil action. But there's nothing of the sort. Basically, the closest I think he ever got was calling one of the father's sick for politicizing the shooting, and saying it was suspicious. There were people on his show that called it fake, but then that's not him committing defamation. The men who actually claimed it was fake, were never sued, which really shows how worthless the case is.
I was under the impression that he's still in the process of appealing the decision, but that can't come until the current argument about the money is settled.
And at that point, you might as well just put money on an attorney for a retainer instead of putting it an insurance company, since you'll need a lawyer anyway to get anything, and he might actually get you something out of all of it.
There's only a couple people who ever got close to being attacked this hard. They don't normally last. Unfortunately, the slander normally works, and as such, the victim either gets imprisoned or dies. On the other hand, a lot of the targets of this level of political aggression are actually people who aren't so innocent.
Randy Weaver (and his family) were quite clearly harassed for at least 9 years until the infamous Ruby Ridge incident. It's a long story, but for the most part, the FBI tried to make him an informant by trying to imprison him, failed, got into a gunfight, caused a complete shit show, and ended up shooting 2 additional family members from a sniper in one of the single greatest American shit-shows in all of Law Enforcement history. Randy's harassment was much lighter than Trump's most of the time, people literally harassing him verbally to his face, and working with the local government to make his life harder. He wasn't a big public figure so there wasn't a ton of slander before hand, and not much lawfare.
Alex Jones obviously comes to mind because he was the mock-run for Trump. But even then, Alex has only been pursued with lawfare around the Sandy Hook stuff. He's been slandered, but the amount of lawfare is much less than Trump.
After a certain point, we actually have to start looking into Leftist groups to find this level of lawfare and slander. There are some members of the Black Liberation Army that were legally pursued this bad... but they were actual terrorists that committed bank robberies, assassinated state's witnesses, and even murdered a judge. In other cases you have to go back to the early WW1 anti-war Socialists who were being locked up for protesting the war and things like that, but even they were less publicly defamed.
Really, Trump is a unique case because he's survived the longest, the defamation hasn't worked, and he's genuinely innocent.
"GOOD NEWS! Once I cracked through the last wooden layer of the barrel, I've been digging up literal metric tons of dirt! I've never seen so much dirt! We've got so much dirt on Trump now! THE WALLS ARE CLOSING IN! DRUMPF IS FINISHED!"
"Steve, that's literally the ground. You went through the barrel..."
Sure, but I feel there's a line somewhere. Nothing's gonna get past a Cat 5 tornado. But also, I want it to survive a Cat 2.