placeholder

All of it? That's about 41,000 hours. Have you come back from the future to report to us what you saw?

If you like that image, you'll love snuff films. And he's pretty much sh*tting on himself.

As the old saying goes, "One picture is worth a thousand death threats."

That's a good question to google.

"Despite President Barack Obama’s talk of a “red line” should the al-Assad government use chemical weapons in Syria, it was only under President Donald Trump that the first direct attacks against the Syrian government were conducted. After a chemical attack killed 88 people in Idlib province, US forces fired cruise missiles in April 2017 at a base believed to have been where the chemical attack was launched from. A US-led attack was also launched in April 2018 after a chemical attack in the opposition-held town of Douma." https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/24/why-does-us-still-forces-syria-explainer

"President Donald Trump’s decision to send troops to protect oil fields in Syria means the U.S. may have as many troops in the country — or potentially more — as when he took office, undermining his repeated pledge to end a “forever war” in the Middle East. Commanders are now moving additional forces and armored vehicles into Syria’s war-torn, oil-rich Deir ez-Zor province. Some are being sent to reoccupy bases they abandoned just last week, after Trump abruptly ordered them to pull out from the area. Pentagon leaders have yet to announce how many troops will stay in the country under the new oil field defense mission." https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/31/trump-syria-oil-field-mission-062510

Cherry-picking much? https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/?cid=rrpromo

It could be that the Iranians are making trouble for America in solidarity with or at the request of Russia.

I love it. You're linking to a website that denies the theory of evolution. The supports the notion that the Biblical account of creation is true. Thanks for the laugh. Here's a link to the science https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/10/211020135914.htm

I thought you were referring to all of Trump's legal travails and not just to the weakest case against him.

As already noted, the judge who is overlooking the investigation into the documents case at Mar a Lago actually ruled that lawyer-client privilege is a non-starter in this case because there's a there's a "prima facie showing that the former president had committed criminal violations",. It takes very powerful evidence to undermine the lawyer-client privilege. And the appeals court supported her judgement. Trump's lawyer then declined to take it to the Supreme Court. Does this tell you anything? https://abcnews.go.com/US/sources-special-counsel-claims-trump-deliberately-misled-attorneys/story?id=98024191

The judge in the Mar-A-Lago case ruled that there is a is a prima facie case that there is an underlying crime. The appellate Court wasted no time in supporting her judgment. Trump's lawyer has decided not to appeal to the supreme Court. Does that tell you anything?

What's that got to do with whether you live in an apartment or freestanding home?

You're alleged personal experience is useless. It's not independently confirmable.

Once again you make an assertion and then tell me that it's incumben upon me to disprove it. That's not the way it works. You make a claim, you back it up.

Or you can have encourage people not to buy cars or a second car by making them unnecessary. So people could actually save money. And I saw nothing in the question about apartment living vs single home living. And if they have less expense on automobiles, whiich is usually a drain on income, they'll have more to spend on shelter.

You made an assertion that something is the plan. It's up to you to prove that's the plan. It's not incumbent upon me to disprove it.

A search term is not evidence. Give me evidence that "that the alarmists, call anyone that questions any policy, regulation, program, mandate or subsidy regardless of how ridiculous it is a denialist."

Why would the program make it too expensive for the "the poor/non-rich by making it too expensive for them to own cars or homes with a yard, yes?" You have offered no explanation of how that works.

Please share with what countries the following is typically done: "You will not be made to cower & comply to it. They will just make sure that everything they do not want hoi-polloi to have. like big homes, cars, carports yards, pets and whatnot will just become incredibly unaffordable. You need to be stuffed in a tiny apartment, work from home, have your stuff delivered, and only read and see what they approve." As for this: "Is that not the end game? If not, what is?" Share with some evidence that this is the end of the game. Just asserting that it's so doesn't qualify as evidence.

Well, for one thing here's your absolutist clam: I think it's funny that the alarmists, call anyone that questions any policy, regulation, program, mandate or subsidy regardless of how ridiculous it is a denialist. And then there's articles from the Heartland Insitute, the belly of the beast, It's at the very center of denialsm and figures hugely in the movement "Heartland's conventions of climate change doubters are one of the things the institute is largely known for, according to the Los Angeles Times.[26] Between 2008 and 2019 the institute has organized thirteen International Conferences on Climate Change, bringing together hundreds of global warming deniers.[52][53]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartland_Institute Here's an incomplete of articles published by the the Heartland Institute: https://heartland.org/opinion/cop27-will-loss-and-damage-extremism-kill-national-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/climate-alarmism-posing-as-science-education-for-children/ https://heartland.org/opinion/the-silly-science-of-climate-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/the-crafty-language-of-climate-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/climate-alarmism-versus-integrity-at-national-academies-of-science/ https://heartland.org/opinion/climate-alarmism-is-now-a-real-economic-threat-to-the-us/ https://heartland.org/opinion/matt-gaetzs-green-real-deal-is-big-government-economy-killing-climate-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/press-release-trump-sets-record-straight-on-california-fires-climate-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/the-role-harassment-plays-in-climate-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/heartland-weekly-rebutting-climate-alarmism-in-san-francisco/ https://heartland.org/opinion/climate-alarmism-is-still-bizarre-dogmatic-intolerant/ https://heartland.org/opinion/we-must-not-give-up-the-fight-against-climate-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/avalanches-of-global-warming-alarmism/ https://heartland.org/opinion/renounce-climate-alarmism/ You notice a word that's common to the headlines of all these articles? Now it's your turn to prove "that the alarmists, call anyone that questions any policy, regulation, program, mandate or subsidy regardless of how ridiculous it is a denialist." This is just more of your massively false wholesale villifications..

This certainly doesn't look good for Trump unless it turns out that Corcoran drafted the letter claiming that all documents had been returned was drafted by Corcoran alone without any input from Trump. That seems unlikely.

The search you propose would tell us nothing about the state of the job market as a whole or how many high paying jobs there actually are. So, can you point us to the data on totaljobs that compares current jobs to some point in february? I couldn't find any.

One thing it shows is that support for abortion bans is more about punishing women than it is about "protecting innocent life."

I'm familiar with the video. What do think is in it that contradicts what I wrote?