@PraiseTheCMen Chile......hyped us up, just to let us down! After seeing it was a toy we all noticed that it looked just like a toy. You were better off showing the commercial first AND THEN giving us the Behind The Scenes.
@GentleIykee@drsjamesserra@TheNetDaily No, it should be in both their names if they are a married couple! She's obviously got a house full of children, so she's contributing in other ways. If she was a gold digger than he shouldn't have married her. I'm discussing marital rights.
@lordiceman@TheNetDaily STFU! That does not discredit my point.....no spouse should not be purchasing a family home without the participation of the other spouse and without their name on the paperwork!
@smoovebeenlit@TheNetDaily And that's why a man couldn't even get me to ride to the Dunkin a block away for coffee on the back of a bicycle only he owns. Let alone live in a house that only he owns as a glorified tenant. I think TF not!
@drsjamesserra@TheNetDaily I didn't watch the vid. I could tell it was some foolishness even I saw her twerking. They're both shady AF. It should be in both their names.
@justvikinggg@TheNetDaily You can't be serious right now. That's HIS WIFE. What dummy is gonna live in a home that only one spouse owns and they're just a tenant?!
That's now how marriage works! The protection comes BEFORE the marriage in the form of a prenup. Any monies and property acquired DURING the marriage belong to both spouses. If a person needs so much protection from their spouse that they can't include them in a home purchase, they shouldn't be married!