Adam Frisch has a good chance of winning, which means boebert has a shot at flipping two districts from red to blue.

What a glorious outcome this would be. After a short but pointless career, she’s essentially run out of politics and goes down in history as the first person to cost their party not just one but two seats on her way out.

I would celebrate with a hearty chuckle.

It seems unlikely that she will take that chance though since she can cause more delay by staying where she it, but who knows, she doesn’t seem to be the sharpest crayon in the box so maybe she will do it.

She has two goals:

1. To entertain all of the ridiculous motions to get the charges dismissed that Trump makes and deny them. This is for the purpose of cover so she can point to those rulings as a defense against accusations of bias, while also delaying the trial until after the election in the hopes that Trump wins and orders the DOJ to drop the charges.

2. If and when the case does go to trial, then she’ll entertain and grant a motion to dismiss once a jury is seated so double jeopardy attaches and Trump walks anyway. She’s already openly all but said as much, as she is intentionally waiting until the start of the trial to rule on some defense motions.

Plus, then she’d probably be free to go on the right wing talk circuit and make piles of money while still supporting Trump.

The appellate courts removing her from the case won’t mean she stops being a judge. Only impeachment and removal can do that, and there’s zero chance that 2/3 of the senate is going to vote to remove her from the bench. Her seat is secure. She’s basically trying to angle for a seat on the Supreme Court, knowing that two judges are likely going to be replaced during the next term and this is her best shot at getting one of them, while also knowing full well that her job is secure even if all of this blows up in her face. In her mind, she’s basically gambling with house money.

Polling earlier this month placed Boebert with a 35-point lead over five other candidates, though 40% of voters were undecided at the time, according to the Kaplan Strategies poll.

What the fuck? Her new district sees a carpetbagging moron who has successfully passed zero bills, came within a cunt hair of losing a safe R seat to a Democrat because she’s an embarrassment to Colorado, then went on and became a national embarrassment after going to second base with her boyfriend at a Bettlejuice play, was basically run out of her own district, and collectively said “Yeah, we want more of that!”?

We really are in the stupidest timeline. I will never forgive Trump for a lot of things, but especially for opening the door and allowing people like her and MTG to rise to power.

The bill says that “most male and female infertility” can be treated with medication, surgery, or simply by figuring out the optimal time for intercourse in a woman’s cycle.

This sentence alone should tell you all you need to know: This bill was written by a whole bunch of old, white people who have no clue what the hell they’re talking about but want to push their religious views onto others.

Their whole argument is just basically a really long-winded way of rehashing the same nonsense they’ve been saying for years: “Use the rhythm method.”

Let’s be realistic. Take her politics and personality out of it, and she’s a very attractive woman with a pretty damn impressive rack. I’d be willing to bet that 99% of guys would consider it a pretty damn good night if they woke up the next morning next to her and didn’t know who she was.

Granted, she spoils it the minute she opens her mouth and reveals herself as a complete cuntrag. But she’s still at least a very attractive cuntrag.

Nitpick: The US just does whatever the hell it wants. In this case, for whatever reason, those wants just happen to line up with Netanyahu.

His chances were essentially nil to begin with. The only reason he’s even being discussed at all instead of being lumped in like the other no-hopers is because he has juuuuuust enough support to be able to make either Trump or Biden’s math slightly more difficult.

The entertainment industry aside (Looking at you, Rock), I refuse to take seriously anybody who refers to themselves in the third person.

Trump, one of the shittiest human beings ever produced, could’ve been a okay to good president.

I have said before and I will say again: We all are very lucky that Trump is too stupid to be able to get out of his own way. Had Trump just said “Look, it’s going to be OK. Like I always say, I only take on the best people, and the best people are going to guide us through the pandemic” and just listened to people who actually knew what the fuck they were talking about, he could have easily won the 2020 election in a landslide that would have been up there with the Regan/Mondale landslide in the 1980s, and Biden would have been a footnote at most.

But Trump had to let his ego take control, as it does literally every time, which means that he always must take the absolutely worst possible option available in any given situation, and he has mastered the art of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

And for each one of those, two that don’t give a shit about age verification will pop up to take it’s place. Pornhub could close today and it would be replaced with hubofporn and pornohubs dot com by lunchtime, hosted in some country like the Isle of Man or something.

Funny thing is…do people think Pornhub is the only porn site on the internet or something? That if they make Pornhub shut down that all the porn will magically disappear? Fucking LOL. Sure, there’s a good idea guys. It’s not like there aren’t a billion other porn sites on the internet that couldn’t give a shit less about US age verification laws.

All this will do is drive people away from the most popular porn sites that at least have something in place even if it isn’t very good and drive them to any number of other sites where they’ll pick up all sorts of malware on their devices and probably finding even more of the porn-of-questionable-legality that these bills were meant to stifle in the first place.

Fire hot, water wet, teenagers are gonna find porn. It’s embedded in their DNA. Don’t believe me? Ask any teenager in the 80s about going into the woods to find a stash of porn magazines. We weren’t told this shit. It’s just like we…knew. Basic instinct. We somehow just knew there was porn in the woods and on scrambled cable TV channels at like 4 in the morning. Porn is eternal. And as long as it’s out there, teenagers are going to find it.

These are the best kind of responses. The ones where I have heard so many stupid things coming from religion that I can’t tell whether or not you’re serious.

If I lived in Louisiana, I’d demand that this was posted right next to it. I’m not even a believer (I’m apatheist, FWIW). But The Satanic Temple just doesn’t have the shock value that it used to. Use the real thing; go for maximum shock value.

What would the second guy be doing?

I would hardly count these people as “believers in the constitution” or exposing “how police forces abuse the rights of the people.”

https://youtu.be/gPgo1N53fH0?si=yRgVbNQ5eeAz_RS_

https://youtu.be/uPrKYXnwORc?si=9580elfeT26-X658

https://youtu.be/oGocHyc4QRw?si=VFcxyS-bSPZVe0c8

These people are simply hiding behind their twisted interpretation of the first amendment to justify harassing people for youtube views.

My wife and I watch a lot of the videos on youtube from these people. And the videos make me wonder if a lot of these people are true believers or if they’re so desperate for youtube views that they’re willing to get a permanent criminal record for the privilege. The same goes for the “first amendment auditors” or whatever those morons call themselves.

First, they all read from the exact same script. Every time. Once you watch one or two of them, they become so predictable that you could recite them verbatim. Heck, some of them literally grab notes and start reading from their notes. To me, this sounds less like an ideology and more like a bunch of morons saying “All I have to do is say this to a cop and I’ll get 50,000 viewers on Youtube too?!?!? Sign me up!!!”

Second, they lose. Every time. But they still post their own videos. Why the hell would you spout SovCit nonsense, fail in spectacular fashion, and then post the video anyway? And then after that, why would you do it again and again? And why would you keep posting the videos, unless all you wanted was the attention?

Ever notice how these “sovereign citizens” only become “sovereign citizens” only after they have their licenses suspended, typically after multiple driving infractions, drug arrests, and DUIs? Funny how they “see the light” and use being a SovCit as justification to drive after they’ve burnt through all their legal options.

And then there’s the fact that they literally advertise that they’re breaking the law with those “Not for Hire” bumper stickers and the fake “TRVLR” or “PRIVATE” license plates. If the real goal is to just “travel” from point A to B undisturbed, why the hell are you essentially begging cops to pull you over by plastering this crap on your car?

And if they don’t believe in US law, why do they pull over in the first place? If they think they’re out of the reach of law enforcement, why are they pulling over for it? Why are they showing up to court cases if they feel the courts are invalid? Why are they using the (mostly fake) US Supreme Court cases they keep citing if they think the entire court system is invalid and doesn’t apply to them anyway?

I could go on and on, because literally nothing about SovCits or 1A “auditors” makes the first bit of sense. But you get the idea. Maybe it’s just me, but I see the SovCit movement as little more than a whole bunch of low-IQ morons who figure “Hey, I’ve already got a criminal record, what do I have to lose at this point?” and are just doing this for the Youtube views and whatever extra cash that generates.

I’d love to hear the viewpoints of anyone who’s had to actually deal with these people in real life. Are these people true believers, or are they just in it for the attention?

“You got Donald Trump in Detroit talking to 8,000 people at a Black church,” she told Bartiromo.

Oh, come on Kellyanne. It was right there. He didn’t talk to 8,000 people. He talked to over 9,000!

I mean, if you’re going to make up complete bullshit like that, have some fun with it at least.

Just because it’s not on a report doesn’t mean providers have no recourse when it comes to seeking compensation.

No, but most of the time it’s simply not worth it for hospitals to fight. Either they’d spend more time and money on lawyers, arbitration, etc. than they’d be able to collect if they win, or the patient is poor and all but judgement-proof.

If they so choose they can take anyone to court and obtain a legal judgement. The frequent calls and letters from collectors are no picnic either.

If I recall reading the updated proposal from the CFPB correctly, it’s supposed to be putting a stop to the debt collectors too. The only recourse left, if I’m reading everything correctly, would be for the hospitals to sue patients directly, and that would probably only be for bills high enough to make seeking legal action worth it and if they feel the patient has the resources to pay. The latter is the most important part – whether the bill is for $100 or eleventy billion dollars won’t matter if the patient is, for example, and elderly woman on disability with no possible way to repay anything.

When else is someone allowed to force you to agree to unknown terms at the consequence of your health?

You’re not even “agreeing” to the unknown terms a lot of the time. Your “agreement” is just assumed. How the hell can you “agree” to anything if you’re unconscious and being brought to the hospital in an ambulance after a car accident? Or when you’re literally in the middle of a heart attack?

99.99% of people who are going to hospitals aren’t exactly in any condition to shop around, make informed choices, or “agree” to anything at all, and most of the services they’re being billed for were most likely for services rendered while the patient was still incapacitated or otherwise unable to agree to anything. And what if you disagree? You die? And if you don’t like the prices your hospital is going to charge, what are you going to do if it’s the only hospital in your area?

If you were to enter literally any other “agreement” in this country when there are no competing hospitals in your area to shop around for, the terms of the agreement are unknown until weeks or months after services are rendered, and you are in no way capable of giving informed consent at the time the agreement is made, it would be thrown out of court for being made under duress and for being too one-sided.