I found a different article that quoted her “former friends” and one said she was basic. Another said she’s the poster child for white privilege and a third said she’s nothing but trouble lol
Musk’s purchase of Twitter, the 3,000-word anonymous article said, would amount to a “declaration of war against the Globalist American Empire.” The sender of the texts was offering Musk, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO, a playbook for the takeover and transformation of Twitter. As the anniversary of Musk's purchase approaches, the identity of the sender remains unknown.
The article then expressed sympathy for the Russian-government-controlled news outlets Russia Today and Sputnik, saying they had been unfairly “canceled” after Russia invaded Ukraine. Musk ended the use of “state-sponsored media” labels on Twitter this year, dropping it from the accounts of Russia Today, Sputnik and many other state-owned organizations. The change reportedly prompted RT editor Margarita Simonyan to send Musk a note of appreciation.
“Bargaining with the Big Three in public, all at the same time, also turns the tables on the companies. UAW members aren’t competing in a race to the bottom — instead, the companies must compete to sign a good deal first and prevent more disruption to their operations. And everyone knows who the holdouts are.”
Striking against the big three at the same time is new as well as using social media to highlight the union’s requirements.
Wow, what an idiot, that man should not be allowed to have guns. Properly made blanks aren’t even expensive and guns don’t “just go off” unless there is something seriously wrong with them, in which case, they should be taken out of use immediately and serviced or destroyed.
Yeah when your lawyers have to record you (believe it’s something from Cohen’s testimony) to have a backup of what you requested, you don’t get the best lawyers. Trump would never hire someone that seems smarter them himself, he has to be the most intelligent person in the room (lol). No one intelligent would really act dumb enough to be hired by someone who is notorious for not paying, mean unless there’s other factors but he’s not getting a highly regarded and clean lawyer at this point.
So, I must have followed a link to one of their videos at some point, because the YouTube algorithm spammed me their shit for months until I blocked it.
What kind of content is it? The thumbnails and titles looked rage baity
It’s actually pretty decent legal oriented YouTube entertainment. He’s a practicing lawyer that talks about current events and discusses possibly relevant laws or sometimes legal procedures. Sort of a more serious version of attorney tom.
Kinda dissapointed its not SimAnt. Then again, maybe that had the wrong goals. Still, you trade bodies with the spider and go to town on those other ants.
I’m just some idiot on the internet who doesn’t know what I’m talking about, but…
Is it possible this isn’t a mistake? If you’re going to try to win a trial through corruption and wrongdoings, it seems easier to illicitly win over (and have it stay quiet) one person than half of a jury, no?
The jury has to be unanimous no matter the decision. If they can’t agree, they either deliberate as long as it takes, or if the jury is hung, then they’ll reduce the charges.
That’s their play, they don’t want a jury because they’re trying to pay the groundwork for a mistrial via judicial bias but that is a high jump and they’re stumbling on molehills.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.