I am a Meat-Popsicle

  • 0 Posts
  • 129 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle

  • The first three statements in my post support the fourth. Just because you don’t like my conclusion doesn’t make it unreasonable.

    From the light details in the article, here’s what’s not in question: He came on to his nanny. He came on to his fan. Two separate unrelated people. They are both half his age. They both have unsubstantiated but like stories.

    Now any of three things could be lies or deceptions or something else. That’s why if he has something to say he deserves to be heard.

    We don’t have any form of denial from his side. No claims of I don’t know these people or you don’t have all the facts. No statements of collusion. I would assume his lawyer said don’t say anything. Well this is fine and does not make him guilty it also doesn’t give us even the slightest indication that any of this is a fabrication.

    The next problem is when I say it’s reasonable that is my subjective opinion. If you know him and have a long personal knowledge of his history maybe you have a different opinion than me.

    Based on the information that’s brought forward substantiated and unsubstantiated I’m saying that this is a reasonable and likely direction that this will head. That is unless they settle out of court and what you won’t hear about it again.













  • In theory, it works that way.

    In practice, we’ve never openly stopped anyone with those systems.

    When it comes time for them to justify the invasion of privacy, they don’t have any school shooters stopped, and they don’t have any Unabombers stopped. They don’t have any cases of stolen kids stopped. They’d be shouting all that from the rooftops to expand and extend that funding.

    If they have actually stopped anyone, it’s at super-secret spy game levels. The guys you’re expecting them to stop aren’t even a concern for them. Worse yet, they may actually be rooting for them.