Recently on the Federalist podcast they talked about how Trump went back on his promise to “lock her up” and didn’t prosecute Clinton for her e-mail violations. He said at the time that he wanted to unify the nation and move forward together. How did Democrats respond? They kept up the Russia collusion hoax and then engaged in aggressive lawfare while Biden was president.
Democrats really are just horrid people. They want to controls EVERYTHING and will destroy anything in the way of that. The worst thing Charlie Kirk did was question their practices and beliefs, and for that he was killed.
He was a competent artist. He’s just not blessed with much imagination. Even this thing is animation is very reliant on key art from the game manual. Left to his own devices, his idea of biting satire is to have a black lesbian kick a white woman while shouting “lesbian kick!” There was nothing in his mind besides a pastiche of liberal talking points and pent up anger.
What is the grounds for the FBI removing videos which were, until moments ago, publicly available? Like, if it an evidence thing? They feel like if they download a copy for their investigation then that must be the ONLY copy around?
Even when they were reading it was crap. What was big in 2003? It was all Harry Potter, Twilight saga, and Dan Brown. If they’re not reading now, it’s because media isn’t shoving the one hot thing to read down their throats. Absent of that, people don’t read. Before we try to drive people to read more, we need to get them to think for themselves and not pick up a book purely because there’s movies of it coming out.
It is shocking to me that I haven’t felt any desire to buy a PS5. I was all in on everything up through the PS4. Even had a PSP Go and Vita. But when the headline game for the PS5 was Demon’s Souls, which I’d already played on the PS3, they lost me.
To its credit, I don’t recall them leaning too heavily on racial grievances with that protagonist, who was native American. I imagine if that game came out now it would have been WAY more obnoxious. But it has been 10 years since I played it.
So I work in audit and there’s a common term in this field: segregation of duties. It means you can’t have one person performing a lot of controls, because it means they’d be in a position to override those controls. Recently there’s been a movement to not call it that because “segregation” is triggering to people. Now it’s “separation of duties.” Which is NOT the same thing. “Segregation” is “separate but equal.” As in if it’s a control you need managers doing you split it among them. If you’re merely separating then, hey, have the janitor sign off on a $1,000,000,000 acquisition (okay, that’s actually “delegation of authority”). Who cares?
I absolutely can’t fathom the mind of someone that unironically says this.