gatomontes99

Wow. So you think they advertise just to sponsor X and they have nothing to sell? Let me ask you something. Have you ever heard of a business giving another business money and expecting nothing in return? Have you ever heard of a business that doesn't sell something? It's like all you want to do is contradict me so you take the most asinine position you can just to be contradictory.

Yes I do. I'm 100% positive his company sold stuff on X. He said so. Therefore. As a user of X and a consumer with money, I was his companies target audience to some extent. But, not any more. Because his company doesn't like free speech so they won't advertise to me so I can make their company more profitable. That's bad on them.

Users on X are anonymous as well, if they wish to be. I have money. I buy stuff. I'm a consumer.

Really? What if a user here is a serial killer that rapes little children and makes monkeys smoke cigarettes around babies in a restaurant at the hospital? What does that make you a serial killer that rapes little children and makes monkeys smoke cigarettes around babies in a restaurant at the hospital sympathizer?

Well, it is convenient that I am a customer then, isn't it?

Someone else expressing their opinion on a free speech platform does not reflect on your company. Your company being intolerant of speech they disagree with does.

So you understand that those companies are essentially saying they are intolerant of free speech?

Pro abortion is pro death.

Oi it isn't and the court specifically instructs jurors to not read into legal maneuvers.

It's a lie. Because they know they don't know yet they present it as a fact.

Same same. You get that they are voting with their advertising dollars to tell X that X must censor.

And getting banned or shadow banned. Your best bets now are Rumble and X.

In 2019, 89% of agencies covering 97% of the population submitted data, but by 2021, that coverage plummeted to less than 63% of departments overseeing just 65% of the population. Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City all failed to submit crime data. To increase participation, the FBI relaxed the NIBRS requirement in 2022, allowing agencies to report via the legacy system.    But many other cities, such as St. Louis, which had transitioned to the new method, still struggle to comply and submit partial or faulty data. The FBI compensates by relying more heavily on “estimation,” or informed guesswork, to fill in the gaps and produce aggregated data. What we are seeing is a system in transition, so data is incomplete. However, Joe's handlers, knowing the data is wrong, are trying to use it to convince you Joe did something positive. He didn't. It is a lie.

Ah, so taking the time to properly prepare a defense now means you are guilty. Lol

Remember this lie? Advertisers are returning to Twitter after Linda Yaccarino calmed fears over content moderation. But now brands like Disney, Microsoft, and the NBA have ads placed next to neo-Nazi propaganda. It was a lie because the people that made this happen signed up and followed a bunch of white supremacist and then kept refreshing the page until the ads appeared. In the lawsuit filed in a US district court in Texas, X claimed Media Matters “manipulated” the social media platform by using accounts that exclusively followed accounts for major brands or users known to produce fringe content and “resorted to endlessly scrolling and refreshing” the feed until it found ads next to extremist posts. I would not be surprised if they also created a bunch of accounts just to say look at all these accounts. Even if they didn't, so what? People have opinions you don't like. Hell, I don't like liberal opinions. Should I be able to demand that X blocks and bans all liberal opinions? Of course not. The proper policy is to allow all opinions. Statements that threaten or call for violence against individuals or groups should be moderated and reported to law enforcement. If you, rightly, don't like Nazis, you have two options. You can either debate them or you can ignore them.

Did you ever think you would read this very serious article about the President of the United States? Jean-Pierre told reporters aboard Air Force One that the 81-year-old president was merely expressing how “incredibly proud” he was of Finnegan when Biden suggested New Guinea natives had eaten him in 1944. I guess if my uncle had been eaten by New Guinea natives, I'd be proud as well?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/19/live-israel-launches-missile-attack-in-response-to-iran-assault Everyone is going to jump to the WWIII conclusion. But, as of now, this is two countries fighting it out. Unless others get involved, it is a regional conflict.

The BLS March Real Wages Report shows a 0.2% decrease in real wages.

1. You are so oblivious that you don't even realize how you are making my point for me. 2. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158 The actual law. It absolutely obliterates your view. Go read it.

I'm not going to flood this page with 8 US Code 1158. However, if you'd like to read it, it is right here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158 It clearly states that only people that fear persecution are eligible for asylum. It also states that those people can and should be removed until such time as their asylum request is reviewed. Go have a look. Statista is not pay walled. Neither is Chicago tribune. You are just making excuses to avoid reality.

But that isnt true: Joe Biden believes that his uncle may have been eaten by cannibals after his plane was “shot down” over Papua New Guinea during the Second World War. The US president’s theory is, however, contradicted by official war records of 2nd Lieut Ambrose J Finnegan’s death, which suggest that his aircraft suffered engine failure over the Pacific in 1944 and that he did not survive the crash. This is his personality, though. Joe has to make everything about him. When he walks into the room, he grew up with people just like the people in the room. Remember when he grew up on the black church, loved with Puerto Ricans, was jealous of all the people with Polish names, almost lost his house to fire as he told the Maui residents. It is always about him. Watch the video to see how out of touch with reality he is:

It isn't lazy to not quote entire articles, it is compliance. It is called the fair use doctrine. Second, asylum is for those that are seeking refuge from political persecution. Adding things like domestic violence and fear of crime from gangs is a clear expansion of the policy without congressional approval. The law clearly states that Mayorkas must maintain operational control of the border and that includes following all laws as written by congress and signed by the President.

The following article has two narratives I would like to discuss. It appears, after Tuesday’s arguments, that a majority of the justices will side with the insurrectionists — though it is far from clear how those justices will justify such an outcome. Lets talk about the obvious first. Most of the protested on January 6th were just protestors. They didn't do anything violent. They didn't steal anything. They didn't destroy anything. So a law that is being used to send them to jail for up to 20 years j(ust because they were present) is a bit much. That seems to be where the court will go with this. They will narrow the definition of obstructing a proceeding. But the other, more insidious issue, is the wording of this article. The article lumps everyone at the Capitol on J6 as an insurrectionist. That is factually untrue. Very few people were charged with insurrection. To call everyone that got charged with parading, obstruction, trespassing or any other crime, an Insurrectionist, is a blatant attempt to add emotionally charged language. The goal must be to dissuade all that might be sympathetic with people that are over charged. I'll vote that this writer at Vox is patheticly unprofessional and the editor that allowed this article is of the same ilk.

Yeah...no one was talking about small areas. The atmosphere is the whole thing. Not some little subsect. But I see who you are now. You are someone that doesn't have a grip on reality and will do or say anything to hold onto this liberal fantasy world you "live" in.