VakAttack

Musk has endorsed Ron DeSantis, who is very right-wing. Maybe he voted Dem at one point in his life, but he's very obviously shifted his politics now. It happens. It happened to me, for example, just reverse of him.

I'm honestly not sure what this is even referring to? My last post was telling @Wrestleknownothing that I believe @jross saying Twitter was breaking even was referring to Musk's own claims, nit an earning statement. I don't personally care if Twitter lives or dies. But I do find the idea that Twitter is better nowseems to correlate to your political ideology. I care about it functioning dependably. The functionality and dependability of the site has gone way down. Online conservative folk want to cheerlead for the guy because he aligns with them politically. I don’t care. I'm left leaning, but i use plenty of businesses owned by conservative people that run just fine. Twitter function worse than it used to. There isn't currently a viable alternative, so m stuck.with it for now. As to Musk specifically, I think he's a very wealthy man with an overinflated ego and overinflated reputation based on some timely investing rather than his own superior intellect. That doesn't mean he knows nothing but he's not the tech wizard he holds himself out to be. Mostly, he employs those people. He's big idea guy, which is fine, but actually getting those ideas to market? Not his forte.

I'm pretty sure April is when Musk said in an interview that Twitter was "roughly breaking even." Make of that what you will.

LOLOLOL. Sure he did man. The site was virtually unusable (again) but it was actually a GOOD thing. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

Big day for the "Twitter is better" thread!

So random web designer who doesn't actually have a business yet is allowed to discriminate if/when she ever opens up her business. Currently open Colleges, even private ones, are not allowed to "reverse discriminate."

You're right, but that says more about the viewership than the format, unfortunately.

Because those fees are up front and easy to understand, and the banks compounding interest is not. When the financing options are presented to you, they are designed to look simple and easy to understand, like a car payment, but many student loans essentially become negatively amortized by the low-paying jobs students get when they first get into the workforce not matching up with what they were sold when they entered, leading to students being stuck with non-subsidezed compoundingi nterest loans where they end up paying close to double the original loan amount thru interest accruing; that is where the colleges are most at fault and predatory, IMO, in their fudging the numbers on employment rate ("our finance majors are employed at a rate of 94% within 6 months of graduation" while leaving out the fact that many of them are employed as waiters or something unrelated to their degree.)

It doesn't have to be one or the other, but either way, what the banks/lenders do is far more predatory than what the schools are doing.

I'm going to need some time to divorce myself from the events to really give an unbiased opinion. However, right now I would have to argue that Spencer techfalls you and your face and all other wrestlers' faces ever.

So now you're taking one written adjective and deciding what I think and feel, despite me explicitly stating that I do NOT know if those things he claims are true or untrue...simply pointing out that he doesn't either. I have not posted anywhere that I know Trump to be guilty of anything, although many people with federal experience that I know tell me that the case looks bad, but they think he might get a favorable plea deal because the nature of the documents in question is so classified that prosecutors would rather not have to go thru the process of having them declassified so that they can be available to the public potentially during the discovery process. I don't have an answer as to where these documents are because I'm not an investigator or federal prosecutor or Trump himself. There are multiple possible explanations centering on why they might not have located the document(s) in question and thus made the decision not to charge him with the document: 1. The documents were given back during one of the many known attempts to get them back, and that's why he wasn't charged with the retention of those documents. (SIDE NOTE: People in this thread and elsewhere are saying that CBS is reporting that the documents weren't found. That is not what has been reported, actually the CBS report says "It is not clear from the indictment if the documents referred to in the recording were recovered by investigators. " https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-audio-describing-highly-confidential-secret-documents/ ) 2. The documents are still in Mar-A-Lago in a place that hasn't been discovered. 3. The documents are at one of his other properties that either hasn't been searched or that federal LEOs doesn't have jurisdiction to search. 4. The documents have been destroyed. 5. The documents have been sold. 6. The documents were never there, despite the actual words he said. All of this ignores the facts of the situation in that he WAS charged with retention of many other documents and the recording appears to have been used to show that, despite attempts to argue that he had the ability to declassify them in his head without documenting it anywhere and after he was out of office (which he and many of his media proxies argued), he knows he didn't. Right in the original Tweet: "The Trump recording involved publishers and writers for Meadows's book, so it would follow that the documents Trump was referencing were actually The New Yorker article as well as Meadow's report"

Given how everything has played out, I would have to be PRETTY unreasonable to say that Spencer had a better college career than Gable..... Fortunately, I am exactly that amount of unreasonable. #SPENCERGOAT

And you'll note that I didn't say anything about you. My response was purely in response to Charlie Kirk.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Pointing out that somebody is making an assumption is not asserting that they are definitely wrong or that I know the opposite to be true. It's asserting that they have no idea if they're right or wrong, but they are acting as if they're right.

When I'm typing on my phone, I'm not taking the time to proofread. This isn't a legal filing and none of you are a judge. If you would like to call into question my intelligence, feel free. I didn't make ANY assumptions. I was pointing out that he was making assumptions. I didn't assert anywhere in my post that the opposite of what he said was incontrovertibly true. Thanks for playing, though. I'm sure you felt pretty proud of yourself writing this.

The stupidest person on conservative Twitter west of Dave Rubin strikes again. The man who tasked himself with bringing in the youth vote to Republicans and is based out if Arizona (how's that going for him, btw) just made wild assumptions throughout his Tweet and just assumes their true, then finishes ofd by both assuming the document in question hasn't been found AND asking why it hasn't been found from the home of a man who has been charged with refusing to return stolen documents.

This is such weird cope. They didn't release the actual papers, they released the audio recording of something that was already publicly charged.

Truly amazing.

If Ayala wrestles Gary Steen I'm willing to bet you any amount of money on that match up. Iowa could win 149, 157, and 165. I'm not sure why I'm supposed to be writing Messenbrink in pen over either Caliendo or Kennedy. Iowa is also alive at HWT.

You are severely overestimating the profile of the wrestling team ad also underestimating people's ability to be uninformed.

Important to remember that police reports are purposely written from one perspective to justify probable cause to arrest. The problem beyond the allegations for AJ in that one case is that it's not his only effing problem. People (not you necessarily) often conflate "presumption of innocence" criminally with the idea we should or do presume people innocent socially or in other facets. The standard of presumption of innocence exists in criminal cases because the government is trying to take away a person's freedom. Shit, we presume people guilty all the time. Countless examples: OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, R. Kelly before his convictions, Michael Jackson. Right now in this country, the vast majority of Democrats are presuming Donald Trump is guilty of crimes (despite only being charged) and the vast majority of Republicans are assuming that Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden are guilty of crimes (despite neither having ever even been arrested) I do not know if AJ Ferrari will be found guilty of the crime he's charged with...I do know that regardless of that outcome, I do not want him to wrestle for my favorite team. I'm just one person with an opinion though.

Given the timing of when they've scheduled his criminal trial it definitely COULD happen depending on the outcome. Whether it should happen? No, of course, lol. This is just me speaking legally. Obviously you're going to be way more informed on the logistics about getting back into school and eligibility concerns, etc.

I would say that Haines-Franek is a semi tossup, but I would say it should be a lean Haines given his youth and upward trajectory. Re: AJ, I just disagree. Again, we're talking in a hypothetical world where he can healthily make 197; I agree with you I don't think that's reality. But if he were able to make it, he could definitely beat Brooks. People are using the Taylor matches to talk about size disparity, but Ferrari, even in his college seasons, was WAY bigger than Taylor is now. Combine this with Ferrari's obvious athleticism and Brooks' lack of dynamic offense (as in he's not putting a bunch of points on high level opponents in general) and I could easily see Ferrari in this hypothetical scenario winning. The other thing I would say is that people are making a lot of assumptions about Mesenbrink. The kid is obviously a huge talent, but who is his biggest win? I'm not saying it's impossible that he's a title contender right out of the gate (although I'd say it's extremely unlikely if he's at 165), or even a surefire AA. I don't think it's reasonable to pencil him in above Kennedy or Caliendo without seeing him do some stuff at the college level first. He's a talent, but he's not Meyer Shapiro.

Noah Adams is better than Marcus Coleman. I don't think "close losses to lesser opponents" is necessarily a strength for Brooks in this debate. I do agree that I think Brooks is the more skilled competitor, based on the most recent Ferrari we've seen (like 3 years ago) and the most recent Brooks, and I also think it unlikely that Ferrari has made huge gains in wrestling by not wrestling.

Does @Husker_Du's infamous turtle neck photo qualify?