Police said one man stayed and made a statement, in the US at least this means identifying yourself, so they have a likely reliable way to identify the men involved

Biden could execute all members of the court and replace them with people who will agree everything he does is legal.

I’d hope this ruling would inspire the need, but I won’t hold my breath.

Brossieres are known to cause medical issues, mostly back, spine, wear and damage.

Does evolutionary pressure only exist on individuals? I’ve never heard that. There’s a wide variety of species that are highly socially organized, do you not accept that that’s through evolutionarily pressure?

The fact that Clarence Thomas has his name on this ruling really helps illustrate how easy and often cheap it is to simply buy rulings.

Very similar to Nazis path to power, a lot of provocative action, violence, and people stop giving a shit that they are constantly doing this, an attempt at a violent coup, it dosen’t work, then the people in power create legal pretexts to allow a seemingly legal way to dictatorship.

That’s what all these articles missed, this isn’t a first offense, the man is a known burglar, did 4 years previously

It’s like I tell my kids, an adult is just a child who got old. It’s also why a lot of cultures have a concept of adulthood that has nothing to do with reaching sexual maturity alone.

What I wrote – Very easily impressed with basic factual statements

What you think it means – there’s something wrong with people who are learning new things.

Does ‘‘basic factual statements’’ mean ‘‘new information that someone is just now learning’’. Can it also apply to information they already know, or believe is true? Can it also be referring to basic knowledge nearly everyone knows?

Does ‘being very easily impressed’ include a situation where someone reacts to information in a typical fashion? Does it exclude adults learning or recognizing factual information and responding with a simple agreement, such as ‘yeah that’s true’? Or is this an indication that an overreacting response is the dead giveaway?

1. Did the sentance make a claim something is wrong with being a child?

2. Did the sentence claim that learning new information is likewise something wrong?

Please write one 5 sentance paragraph explaining your opinion on the above two numbered questions. Proofreading will not be necessary.

I bet if you killed everyone on the court and in the legislature and replaced themb with your personal sycophants, they would probably agree it was an ‘official act’

In My experience energy weapons turn the victim into a toothpaste like glowing blue puddle.

But that kid was killed by an attack marked ‘‘to whom it may concern’’, not a focused deliberate attack with his name on it. He was a casualty, not a victim of assassination.

time to prepare for a harsh right wing fascist regime

Wow, that’s a good point, but some people may take it the wrong way and say things like ‘what taco bell are we meeting up at to plan to depose the current massively corrupt Supreme… taco?’ ‘Is surprise attacks on Taco Bell’s military installations a viable objective?’ ‘Would the taco bell ‘fresh crew’ join the efforts to over turn the corporate structure?’ ‘Or should we all just move to Spain and enjoy the authentic taste of a secular society with universal healthcare and tapas as far as the eye can see’?

Did you sexually assualt that poor woman?

“I’m no church boy”

That’s a REALLY bad answer.

I really wanna go back to when if a candidate went ‘yeeeeah’ in too weird a voice we all just dropped them out of the running.

Crab is the perfect form.

Very confidently wrong, poor reading comprehension, poor grammar, limited vocabulary, emoji gore, catch phrase/pop culture quotes/talking points repeated with no comprehension of what they’re saying, clearly not aware of how many things in life work, religious regurgitation while being surprised everyone doesn’t agree with them. Very easily impressed with basic factual statements, clearly thinking confidence is the main thing that makes someone correct. Thinks their mom telling they they are handsome is a valid point. Idk, that’s all I got.

It would be a valuable teaching moment.

Yeah, the FBI director got ahold of Anthony Wiener’s laptop because he’s a fucking awful dirtbag, and at some point his wife had logged into her work email, so IDENTICAL information from The State Department was on it, so FBI big brain decides to make a big ol press conference to reopen the case against Hillary Clinton days before the election just in case maybe there was more than just duplicate information. Except, he already knew it was all duplicate information. Everyone with a brain new it was all duplicate information.

What a brilliant guy. He deserves a lot more blame than he’s ever gotten.