TimLovesTech

I would love to see it streamed/televised live in primetime in split screen so you can see them both doing it live so conspiracy theorists would have to really work at coming up with an excuse for Trump. Any other way Trump would afterwards just make up an alternate reality where he "aced" a dementia test.

I know he would still lie afterwards, and try and discredit the test, but people would have access to the video evidence, which is also the reason we have a better chance of him releasing his tax returns.

In his joke, Hinchcliffe, known as Kill Tony, said: "There’s a lot going on. I don’t know if you know this but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it’s called Puerto Rico."

US congresswoman Maria Elvira Salazar said she was "disgusted" by the "racist comment". She said on X that it did not "reflect the GOP values", referring to the Republican Party, and noted thousands of Puerto Ricans served in the military.

This is exactly the "GOP values", has she not listened to the hate coming out of the GOP for decades?

US Senator Rick Scott said: "The joke bombed for a reason. It's not funny and it's not true." He added that "Puerto Ricans are amazing people and amazing Americans".

Weird take when the GOP candidate has been spewing lies [many racist in nature] about anyone he sees not bending the knee.

"This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign," spokesperson Danielle Alvarez said in a statement.

Funny how they pick a guy with a history of saying racist stuff as a "joke" and then try to distance Trump and his campaign from it when even Republicans got upset about it.

The same guy that lied about rushing to help people on 9-11? Surely he wouldn't lie about helping people in the aftermath of a natural disaster? You'd think he was kind of a con man trying to grift himself into some kind of position of power, huh.

It's rats jumping ship, and pretty telling when Trump's "brand" is deemed too toxic for even some of the biggest shit heads in his orbit. And that is how the media should be framing it, if they didn't want a fascist in charge at least.

He doesn't sound like he wants to be a cuckold, he wants to spank his daughter in a sexual way. This is just like Trump broadcasting how he wants to have sex with Ivanka more than anything. If their daughters could be talked into it, both of these sick fucks would be down with fucking their kids.

The man is dropping recorded in real time reports of how he wants to overthrow democracy, why would anyone waste time trying to locate and edit Trump campaign staff previous statements. And messing with the Internet Archive would be a waste of resources for Putin, or any foreign state, as things are batshit crazy everyday in the present, why mess with obscure quotes from people nobody knows and have no impact on anything?

Biden doesn't do anything to piss Republicans off, he bends over constantly to make everything bipartisan. And picking Garland was probably because he knew that he would play it "safe" and do nothing rather than have anyone be able to begin to say he was doing something political. Garland has been in such contrast to Barr who just shit all over the law like he had done in the past (and I wouldn't doubt got a secret pardon before the end just in case he ever needs to play that card).

Like JD Vance, Trump loves people that need to humiliate themselves doing a 180 in service to him and shamelessly covering for him in public.

A few from the top of my head: Lindsey Graham Ted Cruze Nikki Haley Ron DeSantis

Are suggesting Trump's campaign has anyone competent enough to hack the Internet Archive in an attempt to remove material from years ago? Or are you saying that maybe someone hacked the Internet Archive to plant creditable sounding comments about Trump's campaign staff?

Maybe I'm way off though, and you're not trying to create a new conspiracy theory and just forgot to finish your sentence.

Yep, this is all about exhausting public resources and damaging the image of public education so that less people question the push towards "private" education making a profit for the grifters, and will allow them to rewrite the rules.

I feel like although possible now, that this may need to change going forward since I'm not sure how Amazon can validate your review if not done through their platform.

This of course fragments reviews to specific retail storefronts, but if the platform can't validate at least the fact you purchased the item I don't see anyway they can even begin to know you're leaving a legit review.

I don't see a link for this, but found the github page for Mentions United.