Hatfort

Noam Chomsky, a respected man on the left for his book Manufactured consent and others. He, at the very least, knew the shady things that were happening. Does this make his books' points invalid? No, but fuck him. Like Woody Allen, he is in the files too, which is not that a big surprise as he married his adoptive daughter. Are his movies bad now? No, but... Another director, Brett Ratner, who had sexual assault allegations before, is in the files and pictures with Epstein. I think he was one of those kicked out of Hollywood when the Me too, like James Franco, Kevin Spacey, or Bill Cosby. Funny that he was rescued by MAGA to do Melania's movie, and the files come out at the same moment her movie is released. Speaking of Melania, her getting to the US rings a bell of those same girl recruiting ways from Eastern Europe. Media executive Steve Bannon had also a huge relationship with Epstein, and was trying to rehabilitate his image.

Don't want to make it crazier than it already seems, but there are informations that point to a Satanist cult. Also that Epstein could have been taken out from the prison alive.

This is not a new topic, but it has been buried for a while in the craziness of current affairs, as Venezuela, Greenland, Iran, Minnesota... Nobody has really forgotten about it, although some prefer to look the other way, MAGAs mostly. We remember the past campaigns about the Q-Anon stuff saying shit like Trump would go after an elite of pedophiles, or pointing at nonexistent trans bathroom groomers of children. Well, not only Trump is not a savior, but he is deeply involved in the Epstein scandals, the latest leaks reveal he allegedly raped 13-14-year-old girls. Have a bit of shame and decency, MAGAs, and say this is not a worthy leader to follow now. The latest leaks include Trump, Musk, Gates, and Prince Andrew of the UK again. Epstein's relations with the state of Israel are revealed in the files too.

Kyle Kulinski covers Alex Jones's current position. So the man that was saying this years ago, now that we have evidence on the table, he doesn't want to address it entirely because Trump is part of these pedophile elites. Same for Joe Rogan.

Norman Finkelstein appears on the Epstein files. Rejecting any association with Epstein because of his horrible behaviour, there are decent men. On the other hand we have the ones like Dershowitz.

Kyle Kulinski goes through the latest reveals.

In 2009 a Mexican model named Gabriela Rico was filmed getting out of a luxurious hotel screaming she witnessed cannibalism acts. Everyone thought she was crazy. She was never seen again. The thing is, if she was just a crazy girl, why would anyone bother making her disappear.

Well, there was in fact an elite of pedophiles, that's the Epstein case. If you wanna credit Alex Jones for that, suit yourself, but where has he been last months during the cover up? You could credit Q-Anon too, but part of their tale was that Trump was going to be the savior of these issues, so not that much then. The truth is this case is not that new, Epstein was convicted twice, and coincidentally, the cameras pointing his cell failed at the exact time he committed suicide. Meaning he was murdered, I'll say it bluntly to help the slowest minds connect the dots. For media and power cover-ups, the victims have not been heard for years. Democrats are not clean either, Bill Clinton was involved too, and they have powerful donors from those same elites. Not to speak about Israel, the link between this state and Epstein and his wife is irrefutable.

Trump is corrupt, the most that has been in the White House. The powers that you say are in charge behind, he is more than glad to do as they say, that's why he is corrupt. So in the end, you can't separate him from what's happening. But this thread is not about that, neither about the fascist route he is taking with a paramilitary group of loyals now. It's about the awful things he did in the past with Epstein. Do we hold him accountable for that or not? His supporters should be asking him to be removed. He should be in prison, guys, you know it. If anything, the possibility of Trump being blackmailed by powers behind Epstein is worthy to discuss. Because no ordinary man is able to get an island without a huge financial support backing that up.

More analysis by Sabrina Salvini. Musk apparently autoinvited himself to Epstein's island, specifically to attend what he called epic parties with girls. Some months ago, Musk accused Trump of being in the files, which was right, but probably trying to seem more innocent himself. A girl accusing Prince Andrew of being involved in the torture and death of another girl. Other names: Howard Lutnick, a billionaire and Trump donor; Steve Tish, owner of the NY Giants; Woody Johnson, Jets owner; singers Jay Z and Pusha T, businessman Leon Black; attorney William Barr; Weinstein the producer... Hasan Piker about Musk:

Tension is high, US carriers moving to the proximities.

Exactly not. Partner is not homosexual nor heterosexual, it's a neutral word valid in any case. Someone who doesn't know what kind of relationship you have can perfectly ask you if you have a partner, there's nothing beyond that. You are a snowflake if you are troubled when someone who doesn't know you asks if you have a partner. How about answering: Yeah, I'm married, I have a wife. Or: No, I'm single, I'm looking for a girlfriend. Or whatever. You are such a snowflake. I worry about whoever I want.

This is a big mess, and has a lot of implications. If Europe sets military forces, then it would be a bloodfest between allies, although the US is superior, it would mean the end of NATO. Trump and the deep state really want it, but we'll see. I think they will do it. Then also, better doing anything crazy before the midterms, that applies to other parts of the world as well, as we are seeing. How about later? Let's say Trump gets Greenland. Is he going to just let a Democrat come in 2028 to give it back? This is bad.

You don't need to live in a way you don't want, you decide how that is, just do it. The word partner isn't exclusive to business, it can be many other things like in games, in work, and, in the case of relationships, it's referred to as a partner in life. This use probably became more popular for homosexual relationships when they started to be more visible in society, it was perhaps a more comfortable term not only for them, but their families and social circles, maybe on the older side, in times of transition from being taboo to accepted, and out of legality too. In any case, it was something organic, not some kind of imposition. It also happens to be quite a neutral word, so valid for heterosexual relationships too, more so when someone who doesn't know the other person can use it to ask their relationship status. Emphasis in can, you don't have to use it, you just can. So quit crying, being such a snowflake, and word policing. Live your life as you want, and let others do so as well. I know you won't, you are beyond reason, and even ridiculous, but still there it is.

Absolutely. How are you going to live after this? I can't even imagine what you are going through. They asked you if you had a partner, for god's sake! That's too much, man.

No. We have our differences, but I'm gonna put them aside because of the gravity of the situation. Partner... How dare they?! I totally understand that your way of life turned upside down after that. My best, man.

Oh man, someone asked you if you had a partner, and you thought it was a business partner? My goodness, what a traumatic experience. Are you okay? Could you sleep that night? Please, call the police or something, or go to the Piers Morgan show to tell the world about it. You know, there is the movie The voice of Hind Rajab about the little girl who was murdered in Gaza. Your traumatic experience is in pair with that, a movie should be made.

Sure, a few comments ago it was about how annoying it is to see them shove the them pronoun down our throats, which is practically never. Also about how many gay or trans people, very few compared to straight and cis, and in secondary roles mostly, trans characters being extremely rare in mainstream fiction media. There's no overrepresentation by any means, which is fine, but don't pretend it's the opposite. If anything, there has been an explicit and practical censorship historically, writers have more freedom to include these themes without them being excluded now. And with women portrayed unrealistically as badasses, it can be honoring them or making politics for you, but with men, you don't put them in that scrutiny position. You have a clear double standard.

What's not true? There are unrealistic portrayals of men, like John Wick, where the guy defeats hundreds of well-trained armed men on his own without ever getting fatally shot, and nobody cares that this is unrealistic. But when the story is about a woman, suddenly the realism is important for you guys. I'm not writing for the whole world, I'm writing in this context where the word cisgender is understood. Not to trigger you either, I use this word because it's useful in this specific discussion, instead of saying not trans, I can say cis.

Yeah, it's true that now more females get the unrealistic portrait that was exclusive for men before. So what? It's unrealistic in both cases. You only have a problem when females are portrayed like that, but as said, these fictional stories are not targeted exclusively at you, so get over it. Don't lie, anyone who's online enough these days in the US politics field knows what cisgender means.

You brought it up, but the comment I was responding was saying that 40% of the media was trans, so I responded to her about it. Here is the context. This been clarified, here the problems I see with what you say. About your problem of seeing women defeating men, which is not LGTBQ, by the way. Fiction is often not realistic, so we can see movies like 300, where 300 men defeat an army of thousands, or the John Wick movie series, where one man beats an incredible amount of well-trained men without ever a bullet getting him. They are not realistic, we all know it, and we don't care. Your only problem is when women do these incredible feats, but that's a you problem, the writers of these stories are not targeting them exclusively for you as a viewer. The audience is varied, just get over it. Then the supposed 40% of Netflix being LGTBQ is not really like that either. Like the example I gave before, if only 5% of Squid Game series is about a trans person, who is not the main character, and the other 95% are cisgender, but you still place the whole thing in the LGTBQ 40% bucket, this number is a manipulation of the real representation that's happening. Let's make a comparison, the 40% of the plates I eat contain carrots, but the total quantity of carrots in them is 5%, I won't say or imply that 40% I eat are carrots, that would be misleading. So when you measure fairly, there's no such overrepresentation, that's where I'm getting into. Man, be honest, I don't recall even one example of characters using the them pronouns, it's not really something you see often. It's more of a complaint among mostly right-wing conservative commentators when you hear about it.

40% of the media is not about trans, not even close. In a quick memory check, I can only recall one recent popular series with one trans character, which was Squid Game season 2. That was only one trans character out of dozens of cis ones, so to categorize this series as trans themed would be ridiculous too. The screen time that mostly right-wing conservatives spend whining about trans people could be 40%, indeed. That percentage I could believe.

She goes reverse to maneuver out of there. If she wanted to run over the agent, she would have accelerated towards him. He's at a pretty decent distance to shoot at her with his arm fully extended, he was never at risk. It's a middle-aged woman with her hands on the wheel, the shots are intended to kill her, and they do. This is police brutality and state authoritarianism at its finest. The ICE is a fascist abomination.

The American dream.