Trump, a main draw for Truth Social users and many retail investors in the company, said earlier in September that he will not sell his stake. The stock price briefly shot up after his remarks.

Other early investors have made no such promises. They include ARC Global, a sponsor of the blank-check firm that took Trump Media public, and United Atlantic Ventures, an entity controlled by two former contestants on Trump’s reality show “The Apprentice.”

I believe it’s not only that these investors made no promises not to sell, but that several of them specifically expressed that they would be selling as soon as they were legally allowed to do so.

It’s hard to accurately value Truth Social. But I think if Trump were to leave the platform, its value would go to zero, and that makes it very risky. I just saw a price of 12.74. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s still quite overvalued, and so it makes sense for those investors to try to sell at this price.

The “lie” that is one of the foundations that all modern medical science is based on?

I agree with you. Imagine being that guy and thinking that scientists are pretending to do research and lying to the public for zero benefit.

One idea is to look at what kinds of weeds want to grow there, and plant desirable plants that look similar to the weeds.

The problem is that if these people are voting for Jill Stein, then they are not actually voting for who they wish. Jill Stein is not the person who they think she is.

If she were to magically win the election, they’d by-and-large be extraordinarily disappointed in the result.

This is why misinformation and disinformation is so destructive in a democracy. The voters need to be properly informed.

It’s actually a lot more difficult and expensive to send something to the sun than to send it to Mars.

He should use the money he has now to build a rocket and send himself to Mars. That way he won’t have to worry about US government programs anymore.

It’s just such an obvious and outrageous lie. If you believe that, you’ll believe anything.

Also, if it was happening, wouldn’t the parents be the ones complaining? I mean, wouldn’t the parents be famous right now? They’d be on all the talk shows making the news circuit.

If this actually happened, the parents’ names would be famous. Trump would be parading these people around.

I also think he meant “defuse.”

I learned something from this post. Previously, I would have said that trickle down economics doesn’t work at all.

But that’s not right. It has always worked as intended. Because it was always intended to benefit the rich and increase the wealth gap between them and everybody else.

Joe Rogan should spend more time riding on public transportation. He’d be sure to find other people who make sense to him. They’ll be the ones who are walking around talking loudly at other passengers.

The VP actually has a great deal of Constitutional power already, as the Constitution declares them to be President of the Senate, with the power to cast a tie-breaking vote. Their ability to be Presiding Officer of the Senate, I would argue makes the VP more powerful than a normal Senator. The fact that modern VPs choose not to use this power, I think demonstrates that the VP actually has a lot more power than people realize.

She’s got a point, but the same point could be made about her, so it’s hard to take her seriously.

So, you agree with her statement because of its content, but then try to cast doubt on the same statement because of who said it?

Also, ACAB doesn’t mean there are no good cops. Just that even the good cops are sullied by being a part of an organization that promotes and protects those who commit terrible crimes. Sort of like, “Even the really good ones are sort of bad.”

I thought there was supposed to be video footage somewhere of Trump saying the n-word in The Apprentice board room for his TV show. Something along the lines of asking whether people would accept it if an n-word won. That would be a lot more recent.

This article is a debate-style where they asked people to argue each side.

The person defending Clarence Thomas really stretches in that defense, relying on the fact that he sort of knew him in law school and he was “sweet”.

He furthermore relies on it being “travel expenses” with “a close friend” who has no “pending” cases. Those words in quotes do a shitload of heavy lifting.

Thomas didn’t just get travel expenses paid. Somebody bought him an RV. This billionaire didn’t become “a close friend” until Thomas complained about his pay publicly and acted like he would resign. And for an oligarch, many cases are of interest.

It was a weak argument and the guy obviously knew it. He did his best, but Thomas’s actions are really basically indefensible.

Since these people aren’t treating any ear injury, you might as well call these “ear diapers.”

Does the prohibition of genetic enhancement also apply to pets?

I think that there are many serious inherent flaws with the idea of lifetime appointments, especially for the highest court in the land, and this is one of them.

I’ve recently become a fan of the idea that for Supreme Court justices, they have a fixed-length term, and each President gets to nominate a predetermined number of them.

That doesn’t make any sense. Explain why you included the part about genocide at all of you didn’t intend it to be about Biden. It wouldn’t make sense to include that paragraph if you meant Trump or were trying to be ambiguous.

If you know the Sinatra version, it wouldn’t occur to you to ask which version they’re referring to.