@BlakeSNeff How much of this has to do with unconscious acknowledgment of unsafe public conditions?
If I could get stabbed going to the store for groceries, or accosted by homeless drug addicts, I'd spend more on delivery too.
You pay taxes to cover welfare for people who just choose not to work. That’s why I launched a welfare-to-work requirement.
If you’re young, healthy, and get government assistance, you should work, go to school, or volunteer.
This one was fun. Because it's adaptive, most of the test is right at your level of ability, so it's neither boring nor overly challe ging (though I will say that a few of the hardest ones I was entirely guessing)
https://t.co/mFGmY8ZqmL
No, it isn't remotely in that territory. When you look at who uses logical fallacies, and the timeline of their 'discovery', and then how they're employed it becomes clear they're the logic version of calling someone a 'nazi' or their propositions fascist without regard to the actual argument.
Economies already exist that make this irrelevant. The only thing keeping people tethered are social connections (which are going away rapidly as well).
Shadow economies stay that way until they don't and then one day you're the new economy.
This, by the way, is how the Left will ban homeschooling.
They won’t draft a piece of legislation that says “homeschooling is illegal” they will just create a world where you can’t get a job or go to college if you are homeschooled.
They will force parents’ hands.
Constitutional Action preparing to welcome @grayzoneintel at the AF Veterans Hall TONIGHT
Mike will present on counter-organizing against RINO establishment & violent radical leftists in Utah
Join us: https://t.co/Sf64JXhR3u
Pregnancy tests draw a misleading, somewhat arbitrary, binary between a state of being pregnant and not being pregnant. You can be kind of pregnant, a little bit pregnant, or almost pregnant, or maybe pregnant, and still test positive for pregnancy. Pregnancy tests, particularly at-home urine tests, capture a moment in time at which an embryo has implanted and is interfacing with the uterus in some way. “We define how we understand the beginning of pregnancy based on this snapshot, but such a freeze-frame contains limited information,” Apoorva Tadepalli writes. Read more about the difficult task of determining when pregnancy actually begins: https://t.co/hGDewJfdDn
This is not a psyop. These people have no incentive to lie. Nothing about this is meant to rouse emotions, or invert moral intuitions.
This is what a healthy society looks like.
NEW: ABC News speaks exclusively with another Lindsay Clancy trial juror, the *fifth* to have spoken out since the trial ended. ABC said Nick Dargie, one of the two men who sided with the nine women who voted not guilty, was “devastated” he couldn’t to set Clancy free, and SLAMMED the male holdout juror...
“There was — there was several times would ask him to show us, like, evidence or, you know, describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying. And — and he couldn’t. There wasn’t a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was, which is why we ultimately sent in that note. Otherwise, like, there’s nothing wrong with somebody having a complete opposite opinion. Like, that’s — you know, that would be a hung jury. That — like, that is our justice system.”
These juror interviews are extraordinary. They are admitting openly that they disregarded the law entirely for the sake of letting Clancy off the hook. There’s no other way to read it.
One juror says she originally wanted to vote guilty but changed her mind so that “Lindsay could get the help she needs.” That is a clear violation of the law. They were supposed to make a determination solely about guilt or innocence. They were not there to make sure anyone “gets help.”
Another juror says she voted not guilty because the prosecution never produced “character witnesses” proving Clancy was a “bad mother.” The problem is that A) killing your children IS definitive evidence that you’re a bad mother, and B) the prosecution would not have been allowed to call those kinds of witnesses. A witness solely testifying that Clancy was a bad mother would have been purely prejudicial. So this juror acquitted because the prosecution failed to provide evidence that they weren’t allowed to provide and which would have been irrelevant anyway. Extraordinary. This same juror even admitted that it was a “fact” that Clancy “viciously killed her children.” The word vicious literally means “done maliciously and with intent.” So if that’s a fact then they were obligated to vote guilty. But they didn’t.
Meanwhile another juror swooned over the defense attorney’s “entertaining” demeanor. And another one said that all of the facts of the case — “everything,” her words — “proved” that Clancy “loved her children.” Apparently strangling your children to death, in this juror’s mind, does not at all call your love for them into question.
Just a collection of the most morally obtuse idiots ever assembled. Amazing.
This will continue until federal troops are ordered into State courthouses.
Huge opportunity for 2028 contender to run on issues associated with this kind of behavior.
🚨 A federal judge has restored Missouri’s 2025 congressional map for the November election, just minutes after Justice Kavanaugh separately denied the state’s bid to revive it.
These women are totally detached from the reality of what happened.
"I was so excited" is not a phrase that should ever be uttered in the context of a trial where a parent has murdered their children.
BREAKING: Lindsay Clancy feminist jurors are melting down over the Lone Juror holding out all week
“He wouldn’t take our expertise as schoolteachers and nurses into consideration!”
He is an absolute hero
🚨BREAKING: Three jurors have now come forward in the Lindsay Clancy case.🚨
One juror described what happened during deliberations with the lone holdout:
“He admitted he had reasonable doubt…. I started filling out the forms. I was so excited…. And then he said, ‘But I’m still not going to say that she’s not guilty by reason of insanity.’”
I would also love to interview the holdout juror and hear his side of what happened inside that jury room. If you are that juror and are willing to speak with me, please reach out.