• 54 Posts
  • 1.02K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle
  • If you’re not dead, no one cares.

    If you’re dead, it now explicitly ties the person who pressured you to do it to your own crimes.

    I think he even sent it to such a shit stain of a person just for optics. Maybe even to a known bad address knowing it won’t bounce back till you did it?

    But still, pretty sure they read mail both out and into prisons…

    So it’s weird this was postmarked days ahead of time. It makes it look like he was allowed to commit suicide and had no motive to hide it.

    I think it’s one of those “two clever by half” things. He wanted to be subtle and sprinkle implications, but an actual video tape of trump doing horrible things wouldn’t even matter now.


  • The letter was postmarked “just days after Epstein died” in 2019, according to the progressive media company MeidasTouch. It was addressed to Larry Nassar, the convicted serial sex offender who was sentenced to 60 years in prison for abusing hundreds of children and young women.

    In the alleged letter, Epstein addresses Nassar as “L.N.,” and makes a startling reference to “our president,” which would have been Trump at the time it was allegedly written.

    “As you know by now, I have taken the ‘short route’ home. Good luck! We shared one thing… our love & caring for young ladies at the hope they’d reach their full potential,” the letter reads.

    “Our president shares our love of young, nubile girls. When a young beauty walked by he loved to ‘grab ------,’ whereas we ended up snatching grub in the mess halls of the system. Life is unfair. Yours, J. Epstein”

    The redacting marker probably ran out ink…



  • Trump is a pile of shit and so is anyone that supports him. Oh hey, I can make up stuff too.

    So to clarify…

    You don’t agree with your first statement?

    Because logically that’s what you said, but I’m almost positive you didn’t mean to go full mask off trumper…

    Edit:

    In fact, I think this all comes down to a language issue…

    I said:

    Hillary is 100% the type

    And you seem to not be familiar with that phrase because you replied with:

    Wow, you must know Hilary quite well, considering the absolute that you are espousing

    Which I should have picked up on that misunderstanding earlier.

    But I’m legitimately trying to help you understand something, and you keep wanting a slap fight while somehow insisting I’m the rude one.



  • How?

    A spokesperson who knows it won’t be released said “release it”.

    People forget when trump and Epstein were running around, and when trump and the Clinton’s were running around were the same time.

    Why do you think Trump’s never actually went after either of them?

    Hillary is 100% the type to just accept her husband is a child rapist, and use him and his knowledge of others’ activities to leverage the blackmail herself.

    I feel like people forget how bad the Clinton’s were/are because trump showed up, which is literally the entire reason they talked trump into running…

    I just don’t understand how you all are still falling for it.






  • One author is in the federalist society (the reason SC is corrupt)…

    And the other seems to believe international laws shouldn’t exist and Israel is totally cool…

    They want us to “accept” it’s corrupt and somehow do away with the entire notion of a SC and replace it with some “populist rule”.

    Similarly, progressives are increasingly converging on the idea of both expanding and “disempowering” federal courts. Attentive to the reality that the supreme court especially is not and rarely has been their friend, left-leaning advocates are finding ways to empower ordinary people, trading the hollow hope of judicial power for the promise of popular rule.

    To label as “nihilists” those sketching an alternate, more democratic future is, in other words, not only mistaken but outright bizarre. Rather than adhere to the same institutionalist strategies that helped our current crisis, reformers must insist on remaking institutions like the US supreme court so that Americans don’t have to suffer future decades of oligarchy-facilitating rule that makes a parody of the democracy they were promised.

    In Trump’s second term, the Republican-appointed majority on the supreme court has brought their institution to the brink of illegitimacy. Far from pulling it back from the edge, our goal has to be to push it off.

    They’re right wingers trying to hijack progressivism to destroy the SC after it changes all the laws to how they want, and before the left can use it as a weapon to change the laws back.

    I’d love to say people won’t be naive enough to fall for this, but I don’t want to lie



  • It’s not that they weren’t racist against Indians the whole time…

    It’s that there was no push for it or format where it was discussed.

    But with them taking so many college slots and H1-Bs, it’s only a matter of time till they get picked as a Boogeyman and/or scapegoat.

    MAGA will play the “we tried to rise above and work together” followed almost immediately by “but there’s just no substitute for a white man”. Likely at that point full mask off and explict.

    It’s plausible they try to take it back to only white landowners being allowed to vote, because that means they’ll keep winning.







  • Wild to me so many people have that view and just want to stop trying…

    Do you even understand that’s the propaganda the oligarchs push the hardest?

    That the lines of division they created can never be erased, and we always have to fight along the lines they drew.

    And that’s not even getting how if we win in spite of your views being popular, were just siletting ourselves up to fall for it again because your hung up on them being unchangeable, and that almost always means we don’t put enough resources into the next generation to prevent them from falling for the same shit