I think we can go a step further and add 'non-white wefare recipients' and 'aliens' in a bid to dehumanise and create 'otherness' for social status and economic gain.
That surely is the greater cheat from which so many have prospered and Donald Trump has eagerly utilised for his unique success.
It's perhaps the greatest cheat of all time, to thrive off, to arbitrarily inflate oneself at the expense of deflating, abbreviating 'others'.
It's interesting how those two acts of fraud, Trump's business fraud and social fraud, mirror each other so intimately.
It demonstrates the objectification of people, the commodity value of human life other than his own, in Donald Trump's disordered perception of society. It is the manifestation of his intent, not to serve, but to be served.
Once you accept that defrauding in one currency is unacceptable, you must surely accept the very same fraudulence in human currency is unreasonable and intolerable. Ergo, Trump supporters must support and applaud his financial theft in order to avoid seeing themselves as tender.
You're not cutting anyone any slack when you're gossiping about child abuse allegations you have no evidence for.
You're just contributing to a world where women and girls are vilified, punished and even imprisoned for trying to report genuine abuse, whilst you as a man think it's your right to piss on them by genuinely making unsubstantiated allegations.
You're not even cutting yourself any slack here, having demeaned yourself in this way.
You appear to have your legal cases a bit muddled up.
This case is a civil fraud case.
The only connection with his presidency is that he was protected from prosecution for the duration of his tenure.
Although he was cleary hiding his fraudulent business practises, it wasn't illegal for him to refuse to make his tax records public while in office. It was just poor etiquette and quite rightly suspicious as it turns out.
There are three, or four other legal cases unrelated to this one which deal with his alleged presidential misconduct. Don't panic, there's plenty more to come where you can whine in defense of his presidency.
Btw, you can't minimise this case by trying to make out it involved a few minor tricks, like he pinched a couple of pencils, or claimed business expenses for a sandwich on his day off.
The ruling was that Trump enaged in willful, intentional and persistent business fraud, inflating and deflating the value of his assets to the tune of $3.7 billion for the purposes of tax evasion, or receiving loans he wasn't entitled to.
When people like Trump tax defraud the government they are defrauding, aka thieving from, the people. Not that it's necessary to demonstrate there was a victim; business fraud is illegal in it's own right.
Which begs the question, how do Trump supporters not understand that less money in the government coffers means less expenditure on services for them, higher taxes for themselves to make up the difference, or both?
was that he was not easily outmanuvered by highly intelligent gov officals from abroad, making him able to make good deals on behalf of the american taxpayers.You appear to have your legal cases a bit muddled up.
This case is a civil fraud case.
The only connection with his presidency is that he was protected from prosecution for the duration of his tenure.
Although he was cleary hiding his fraudulent business practises, it wasn't illegal for him to refuse to make his tax records public while in office. It was just poor etiquette and quite rightly suspicious as it turns out.
There are three, or four other legal cases unrelated to this one which deal with his alleged presidential misconduct. Don't panic, there's plenty more to come where you can whine in defense of his presidency.
Btw, you can't minimise this case by trying to make out it involved a few minor tricks, like he pinched a couple of pencils, or claimed business expenses for a sandwich on his day off.
The ruling was that Trump enaged in willful, intentional and persistent business fraud, inflating and deflating the value of his assets to the tune of $3.7 billion for the purposes of tax evasion, or receiving loans he wasn't entitled to.
When people like Trump tax defraud the government they are defrauding, aka thieving from, the people. Not that it's necessary to demonstrate there was a victim; business fraud is illegal in it's own right.
In a 35 page decision, Judge Engoron found Trump has engaged in willful, intentional and persistent fraud by inflating and deflating the value of assets for gainful tax and loan purposes to the value of $3.7 billion.
Trump's accounting firm, Mazars USA, has stated that nothing they have done for Trump in the ast 11 years can be relied upon because they can no longer trust the information provided to them.
All certificates of operation have been cancelled for any entity controlled, or owned by Trump, Trump Jr, Eric, Allen Weisselberg (chief financial officer of the Trump Organization), or Jeff McConney (senior vice president and controller of the Trump Organisation) are cancelled. This means they are out of business in the state and it's of immediate effect.
Within 10 days of the date of the order, Trump must appoint no more than three independent receivers to manage the dissolution of his businesses in NY, including the Trump Organisation and the main trust he inherited from his father which he uses for all his assets.
Disgorgement (taking back profits he gained through fraud) is expected.
The decision will likely be stayed for the purposes of hearing Trump out on appeal because the decision is so devastating.
However, Judge Engoron has already issued sanctions against all of the firms involved in defending Trump to the tune of $7500 each. Sanctions of this nature are very rare, but have been applied on the grounds of his lawyers presenting frivolous motions (the same thing three times in different words) and attempting delaying tactics, as well as mirepresenting and misciting the law.
A part of the issue appears to be that Trump's lawyers from New Jersey and Florida are wholly unfamiliar with the complexities of New York legislation and precedent.
Between the overwhelming evidence of fraud that lead to this rare summary judgement and unskilled defense lawyering, hearing Trump out on appeal may be a fruitless courtesy.
And there was I about to congratulate you for actually reusing something and then you blew it by thinking that reusing reusable ziplock bags was about the cost to you.
Aye yi yi...
But if it takes you 15 minutes to wash one, I suppose I should be comforted than putting your landfill bin out for kerbside collection must take you several years.
She had a photo of herself where you could see her body so how was she lying to you about her body that you could see for yourself?
I find that certain profiles have mismatched photos and descriptions and it has bugger all to do with body dysmorphia. Try inhaling through your nose a bit harder.
Apart from the joke about your friend's '10' and the pic of women's body types and it being posted under the category of humour, right? *taps foot*
So you know you're posting something potentially 'offensive'.
I'm not sure I'd use the word 'offended' and I don't think you really understand why some women might find your comments piss annoying, hurtful, a put-down, or whatever.
So it's okay for a woman to feel your scorn, but not okay for you to feel a woman's scorn?
Mmm hmm...you wrote this knowing it would likely hit a nerve but not giving a damn, so suck up the backash, princess. You haven't earned any special sensitivity points you can wave around on this blog.
When you say chicken carcass, do you mean that you cooked a chicken, removed the meat and then used the bones?
Only, I think you might have broken a few cardinal food hygiene rules with a food stuff known for it's pathogens.
When you cook meat it should reach a temperature of about 65C in the centre to be safely consumed.
Once you've cut the chicken off the bones you need to get it down to 8C within 90 minutes and into a fridge, ideally at 2-5C before reheating it, or at least put it straight into boiling water before it cools below 65C which is tricky.
If you want to roast the carcass first it must reach at least 70C and then it needs to go straight into boiling water, not cold water in a slow cooker
When you reheat meat, it should be piping hot before consuming. Leaving it reheat slowly in a slow cooker that doesn't boil the food vigorously means you may be providing pathogens the ideal evironment to multiply and not heating it up high enough, or for long enough to kill them off.
Once you've made your bone broth it should be cooled to 8C within 90 minutes before being refrigerated at 2-5C. It must not be reheated for a second time and is only any good for consuming cold.
You'd be better off using raw bones that have been kept refrigerated at 2-5C. I doubt your butcher refrigerates his waste which is why he didn't have any bones to give you.
Roast the raw bones until they reach 70C, put them straight into boiling water, preferaby on the hob and simmer. Cool your broth when it's cooked to 8C within 90 minutes (stand your pan, or storage containers in cold water, with ice if you've got it to speed the cooling) and get it into the fridge at 2-5C. Using this technique, you've only cooked the food once so you can reheat it to piping hot for consumption.
Connecting Singles is not just a dating site given it has options like 'talk/email/penpal' and not just dating.
It's not even just a singles site because it has the 'not single/not looking' option.
Given the inherent breadth of profile options (except for gender and sexuality of course), I'm not sure anyone abiding by the rues shoudn't be a member, or should be made to feel they're in the wrong for having friends using this medium.
So, back in the days when only men could vote, hold public office and make all the decisions, it would have been hypocritical if men pushed, or voted for women's suffrage too? How would women have created change without the men who held all the power agreeing it was right that they should relinquish their monopoly?
I don't see that it's hypocritical to protest for access to something you have as yet little access to.
I don't see that people mustn't be a part of regular society in order to protest against something in regular society. It's surely those within the system that you need most?
When fossil fuel companies feel the wind of change and start to invest in renewable energy in order to remain relevant, profitable businesses (as is happening) then we will see the greatest change. We will have more and more access to renewable energy in order to use our consumer power as well as protesting, abstinence and reducing our reliance on/usage of fossil fuels.
Another wee nugget of interest - the Super Pac associated with RFK Jr that is half funded by longtime Republican mega-donor and Trump backer Timothy Mellon, is almost equally funded by billionaire Gavin de Becker who assisted the United States Secret Service (1999-2000) in the development of its guide for Protective Intelligence and Threat Assessment Investigations.
It seems RFK Jr already has one of the the most highly regarded one time Secret Service security advisors looking after him.
jac_the_gripper Blog Comments (2,986)
RE: Cheaters always prosper...
It's his blog, you McMuppet