FilmTVGeek80

"That's somehow fake" implies that people don't have a good reason to doubt the validity of some of those texts when there's proof that the NYT manipulated at least one of them to strip it of context and give the impression that his PR team planted a story in the Daily Mail when the exact opposite is true. It seems like they mostly congratulated themselves on not having to do much since Blake tanked her reputation without any help from them. I've also asked this several times already, but when did they ever admit to planting lies or doing anything defamatory? Highlighting negative true things about her is not illegal.

And just like the Bishop who simply asked FIC to have basic compassion, all the Columbian president is asking is for FIC to treat these people like human beings. Not letting them have food, water, or letting them go to the bathroom. It’s worse than barbaric. Instead of complying, he’s just doing the dumbest thing possible because his delusional ass thinks he looks tough. Never mind the ever present hypocrisy of the whiner who constantly complained about the inhumane conditions that the J6 convicted criminals had to deal with (though notice he never campaigned on fixing the prison system for everyone - only his “hostages” deserved to be treated with decency) doing worse to the people he’s deporting.

Please go back and read my post and show me where I said her telling him she was breastfeeding is creepy or that it’s something to be ashamed of? Don’t twist my words. How how hard is it to NOT tell someone you allegedly find creepy when & where you’re going to be naked? I once lived with my mother’s creepy husband who made passes at me. I was genuinely creeped out by him. So, you know what I never did, told him when I was showering and certainly never told him he could come around while I was showering to discuss anything. Not because showering is “shameful” but because I didn’t want to make it easier for someone who creeped me out to get more opportunities. It’s not that hard. BL can’t have it both ways - act like him coming over when she was breastfeeding skeeved her out when there’s evidence she didn’t have any issue sharing that info with him and inviting him to come over when she was doing it.

For many, it’s not about simply not liking her. At first, I was inclined to believe her - as far as the harassment was concerned (I’ve still not seen a shred of proof that he or his PR team spread lies about her). But, I’m also a big believer in not pretending to know the whole story based on one side or because of someone’s gender. There’s a lot in her complaint that has either turned out to be exaggeration from her or taken out of context. Like, I think it’s ridiculous that she referred to a birthing video as pornography. It’s sketchy as hell that The NY Times cropped a text between his PR people to make it seem like they planted a story when the actual message says the exact opposite. She didn’t tell him to walk right in - and we don’t know that he did. But, she certainly had no qualms about telling him explicitly what she was doing and telling him he could come right over. She only adds the “take your time” after he mentions he was eating with the crew. These messages allegedly happened after she claims the harassment had begun and he was creeping her out. Why tell someone you think is creepy when you have your breast out? Why not just say something like “I’m busy with a personal matter. Come by in 15 minutes.” Now, that’s not to say he never barged in like she claims, but it’s another thing that makes her “receipts” not seem as rock solid as some claim, at least to me. I guess we’ll find out if this ever reaches the deposition phase or goes to trial. Like I said, I want it to get to that phase. To see people under oath - whether either side can back up their claims.

No, I'm not joking. So your alleged proof that he was a puppet all along was because many wanted him to drop out after a debate performance years into his presidency? Yeah, that doesn't mean what you think it means. I wasn't happy about that AT ALL, but it has absolutely nothing to do with him being some puppet. Why do you keep asking if I've heard the audio? I know what he said. I know the lame excuses. I already explained the reasons why I don't buy them and agree with most people who aren't trying to bend over backwards to excuse a Nazi sympathizer's Nazi gesture.

And your evidence of that is...? First of all, fake news...LOL. Guess who is also taking it as a Nazi salute? Anti-semites. Even they called a spade a spade. I don't care about some lame excuse that he was trying to "give them his heart." *roll eyes* Most excited people don't accidentally mimic the Nazi salute in such a way that anti-semites are like, "Yeah, that's our guy." Adding to that, his family history and his current support of parties like the Repubs here, who have quite the overlap with bigots of all stripes, and his support of far-right parties in the UK and Germany. That kind of guy does not get the benefit of the doubt when he knows exactly the type of crowd he is talking to. Conspiracy theorists reside in your party. Seeing a Nazi sympathizer giving a nazi salute and calling it that is not a conspiracy theory. Lies and misinformation get spread by liars like the Felon-in-Chief.

Stills like those don’t really tell the whole story. That shot of Hilary (in combination with her expression) it looks like she has her hand raised to say hello to someone. Like if all we had was a picture of Elon with that stance, I might be willing to give him the tiniest benefit of the doubt - but there’s video. There’s a difference between having your hand raised and doing that salute.

I’d really love to see some more examples of “geeks” spontaneously doing gestures that look remarkably like Nazi salutes. He’s in no way a Nazi sympathizer? Is that why he’s supporting the closest thing to the Nazi party in Germany? What are people overreacting to? What’s not good for my mental health is having a sociopath felon “leading” the nation. But there‘s nothing I can do about that anymore and I’m not interested in completely burying my head in the sand about what horrors he’s unleashing already (though I will take breaks from time to time.)

No, I don’t believe there was more evidence presented in the UK case. In fact there was a lot of evidence that was presented that wasn’t vetted as closely as it was in the US. The UK case was decided by a judge who decided Amber was totally trustworthy partly because of her donation to a children’s charity which was a lie. What did they do to her in court? Present a strong case with evidence with her side being allowed to present their own evidence and counter anything presented. She wasn’t ganged up on. She had her own high-priced lawyers and a PR team working for her in the media. Amber was not as powerless as some like to pretend she was. And “people” are coming around? What people? The media have certainly done there damndest to try and paint her as a victim because admitting they might have been wrong about her is not something most journalists are willing to do. What receipts does she have? What she says in her suit is not the end of the story anymore than what he says in his. I already asked what lies & misinformation was allegedly spread about her. Please don’t pretend that Blake doesn’t have plenty of people on her side. “Believe all women.” Plenty of people take a woman’s side with no thought to evidence and if you actually suggest to wait and see all evidence you’re “taking the man’s side.” I’m not sure how it’s easier to go after the A-lister, especially people like Lively who basically have studios like Marvel and Sony on her side and billionaire friends like Taylor Swift. Jenny Slate is not a defendant in any of the cases. I think Taylor was mentioned because she’s another example of someone giving their two cents among the pressure to give Blake everything she wanted, including having her husband making rewrites.

I don’t think using Johnny Depp is a great example given he won in front of the jury who weighed the evidence - including audio of Heard being abusive. As far as Baldoni, plenty of people hire PR teams, especially when they’re going up against powerful people like Lively and Reynolds. What lies did they tell? The only lies I’ve seen so far is the claim that his PR team planted an article in the Daily Mail, which they actually didn’t. Most of the hate for Lively was because of her own actions (which is something his team laughed about because she was doing their work for them.) Other than hearing some slightly negative things about her from an actor I like, I never thought much about her. I like Ryan Reynolds and because of her association with him, when I did see her, it was mostly positive. Then the promo for this movie started and her own attitude and tone deaf behavior started to turn me off. He figured wrong? Is the case over yet? It seems like it just started. I really hope neither side settles because I want to see this whole thing play out and get the full story. To use your Depp example, I thought he was an idiot for going through with the trial after he lost in the UK. But turns out it was a good call and I’m glad the evidence got out there and the whole thing played out.

Pastor advises 45 to pretend to be human 45 and his VP and their “good” immigrant wives pretend to care about religion and morality and attended a church service today. Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde advised him to be kind to LGBTQIA and immigrant families. 45 was like a toddler and couldn’t sit like a normal adult and looked beyond bored. And, of course, Republican Mike Collin’s reaction was to be circumspect and be true to the Christian values he claims to hold. Just kidding, he went on Twitter and said the pastor should be placed on the list of immigrants to be deported. Never mind Freedom of Speech or the fact she’s a US citizen.

How is calling himself a feminist a red flag? And what proof is there that he gave her or her baby COVID? He didn’t name Taylor as a defendant, but mentioned her as an example of yet another powerful friend Blake has on her side that he felt was trying to push the movie to be all of Blake’s wants and demands when he was the director. If she had a problem with him she could have just refused to do press with him and refuse to take any pics with him instead of not just barring him, but his whole team. Not really. There are plenty of rich guys who give back to the community.

Like someone else mentioned, what do you think the actual role of a VP is? Though I do know some Rs decided to give her the made up title of border czar. The VP’s role is not to enact sweeping changes or anything like that. That’s the president’s job. But, let’s say she did literally nothing. I would vote for that person over someone who separated children from their families (and just ordered to keep those families separated) or raises the prices for people on Medicaid and Medicare. All presidents issue pardons. Most of them don’t refer to those convicted criminals as hostages or do it to try and erase their own crime from history. I don’t recall if he literally said they were his heroes, but he has certainly praised them, said he admired them, and wished for their kind of power. Is the phrase “keep your enemies closer and insult your friends?” Because he has nothing but praise for dictators and insults for our allies. You can keep your enemies close without being a worthless suck-up.

I don’t believe that’s always true. I remember feeling like up until the freak out over the debate, the Left were pretty consolidated. I think it was a strength for a large part of Biden’s time in office. It’s how we won so many elections during that time - up until the general election (which is another reason why the whole thing feels suspect.) The Rs were the ones in disarray - that’s how that embarrassment with Kevin McCarthy as Speaker happened and why the House were known as the do nothing Congress. They were incompetent and didn’t really stand together on much.

He wasn't sermonizing to her. He was trying to talk to her like a rational adult - which Tracy is so far from being right now. Chase went to Nina's house to take the kids in his position as an officer of the court. It wasn't personal or because he believes Willow shouldn't have her kids. Like the scenes with Sonny, I wish I could have enjoyed the scenes between Tracy and Carly the way I would have under other circumstances. They were still somewhat enjoyable getting to see Carly lose for once and at least Tracy wasn't asking someone to murder her nephew. But, I still can't enjoy Tracy right now because she is being such an entitled, raging hypocrite. She's claiming to do all this for Monica and yet she hasn't even talked about this with Monica - so she's basically using Monica as cover. And for her to stand there and talk about Willow being too irresponsible to have her kids. Didn't Tracy barely even raise Ned? She's the last person to act like she's in any position to judge anyone else's fitness as a mother. Party of one, but I enjoyed Drew walking in with the cops and using his position to have Tracy arrested. If she had just given back the kids she has no business keeping hostage that wouldn't have happened. All week whenever people have pointed out she doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to custody she dismissed it and dared anyone to arrest her. I'm glad someone called her bluff. I think Tracy wasn't around for a lot of the beginning of the baby Michael custody saga, but I found it kind of funny how Martin was talking about Tracy knowing how to use the court system and how the Qs are so powerful because I don't remember that power being used in the custody fight for Michael.

Drew's betrayal is the affair. And, while I understand her having a more profound attachment to Jason and Michael, if she did come to love Drew as a son and just dropkicked him after one mistake, that's pretty shitty of her - especially considering her and the rest of that family's track record. It doesn't really matter if the Qs have the staff to take care of the kids or if Michael will eventually return to the house. Right now, he's unconscious, and there's no idea when he'll be able to function as a human, much less a parent. Willow is the kids' mother. Tracy doesn't get to steal them just because she thinks having them around 24/7 will cheer Monica up. If you're right and Monica did disown home, then how would he stay in the house? It's not like she will say, "I'm disowning you, but you can still live here." And your impression is probably right because who wants to live in a house with people who hate you and don't respect you? It wouldn't help Scout. It's like parents who hate each other refusing to divorce because they don't want to hurt the kids. Staying together probably hurts them more. Kids pick up on that stuff. And with a family like the Qs who barely know how to keep their feelings in check the feelings of the others adults in the house towards Drew would be something she can pick up on. Sometimes you tell kids stuff and things change. The bulk of what he told her is still true. He told Alexis he's not moving to D.C. but that he'll commute there when he needs to. They're just not going to be living at the mansion.

The man is the party now. He's just as full of hate. It is not pure bullshit and it is not about him fucking a whore (hilarious that you're looking down your nose at Stormy Daniels when 45 is a bigger whore than she could ever be.) It was about him falsifying business records, which many people are prosecuted for. He was found guilty by a jury of his peers. Sorry if you think that doesn't count because you want to give him the benefit of the doubt. They've been after him because he's a criminal, pure and simple. Yes, they would have prosecuted him because he's a CRIMINAL. The only reason the criminal announced he was running as soon as he did is so he could use that as an excuse. Why do you think it's not criminal to knowingly steal classified documents and then refuse to turn them over and try to tamper with evidence? Why exactly should he not be prosecuted for that? Trying to steal an election is a crime. He did it and what I can guarantee is anyone else in his position would have been charged. But, he got away with it, so you should be happy about that. That fact doesn't prove the point you're trying to make. It was created in September BEFORE the election. The fact that it exploded after doesn't mean it was created for one side or the other. While they were of much, MUCH lesser quality - 45 certainly wanted celebrity endorsements and got them - Dennis Quaid, Hulk Hogan, Kid Rock, Amber Rose, etc. If people wanted to "spew hate" simply for his first term that would be entirely justified. Your job history informs people of whether or not they want to give you another chance. So his record was horrific enough. Then you add on the fact he's an adjudicated rapist and felon and that's worse. Add on that he tried to steal an election. Add on that he riled up his base and set them on the capitol and didn't care if they killed his vice president. Why should anyone give him the benefit of the doubt? And what has that benefit of the doubt gotten his supporters? The main reason they claim they voted for him was because of the economy. His main bright idea to "fix" that are tariffs that anyone with a brain bigger than 45's knows won't fix anything. He claimed he could get grocery prices down with a snap of his finger. Oops. He's already backtracked on that. He claimed he could end the war in Ukraine, day one. Oops. Backtracked on that one, too. It's almost like he's someone who constantly tells people what they want to hear just as long as he gets what he wants. Do you know why the hate started immediately? BECAUSE OF WHAT HE PROMISED TO DO TO GET ELECTED. Fine, you want to ignore his first term. Are people supposed to ignore the things he's done and said in the last four years? Are we supposed to ignore him threatening to jail his opponents? Him threatening to sic the military on ANYONE who disagrees with him? Are we supposed to ignore him threatening to defy the constitution and go after birthright citizenship? Are we supposed to ignore him treating immigrants like lesser life forms? Are we supposed to ignore him threatening to with hold aid from blue states? Genuine question - what in the last four years shows that he's learned any lessons? Though you are certainly right that he's taking a different approach. Instead of surrounding himself with competent people who are more loyal to the Constitution, he's trying to surround himself with incompetent people with no experience. The only thing that matters is if they can kiss his butt sufficiently enough. Sorry not sorry, I'm not going to be spreading positivity about someone like that. This isn't KellyAnne Conway and alternative facts. Facts are facts. There aren't two sides to it. You've been fact-checked when you've posted inaccurate information. Empathy shouldn't have a shelf life. No, I'm not joking. Only you continue to insist that this was made for one side and refuse to look at what was posted by the mods. Whether you believe their stated goal at the top of this thread is irrelevant. Your claim that the title isn't what a 45 supporter would use isn't proof, either.

Well, that kind of makes sense given that he's her only living parent. Where he goes, she goes. And he doesn't really need to use Scout to entic anything from Willow since she already wants to be with him. This is the same day that the kids got taken from her. Drew said he could pull some strings, but the earliest court date she could get was next week. She decided to use the proxy as leverage; she didn't want to wait. I don't understand why everyone is making a pilgrimage to the Qs and begging Tracy for anything. As they've all pointed out - and then done nothing about - Tracy has no legal standing or right to those kids. None of those idiots have ever been shy about calling Diane to get their way. Just do what they did to get custody from Willow in the first place - have Diane show up with a cop (and social worker, maybe) and enforce the court order. A tiny part of me feels conflicted about this because I have wanted Jason to pick the Qs over Sonny and Carly for years but leave it to this show to do it in the most ham-fisted, nonsensical way. Yes, Jason has softened to the Qs over the years, and he's even living there, but there was no believable effort to show that Jason would choose Monica over Sonny and Carly. We go from the beginning of the episode with him taking off as soon as Carly asks him to get the kids to, ultimately, change his mind because Tracy, of all people, guilt trips him. That was the part of the episode that genuinely had me gobsmacked. It's hard for me to give in to my instinct of "Go, Tracy" for calling Sonny out for murdering AJ when, not ten seconds before that, she was basically demanding he kill another one of Alan's kids. What has Drew done to her - other than the usual ELQ shenanigans - that caused her to hate him so much that she asked Sonny to get rid of him? And, how does it make any sense with her current "do whatever it takes to help Monica" agenda? She's begging them to keep the kids in the house because Monica is too frail to handle them being away, but Tracy thinks she can handle having yet another kid murdered? Unless we're to believe Monica disowned him because of what he did to Michael. Carly escalated things by taking Willow's children to punish her for cheating on her son. Drew gave Willow the advice her lawyer said was her only play. Drew didn't hold a gun to her head and make her do anything. I don't think he lied; we don't know yet. Lots of things happen on this show off-screen. Tracy and Ned have been plotting to get him out of the family and the house. They were cackling with glee over it when they found out about Willow and Drew's affair. They said that Monica would pick Jason and Michael's side over Drew, and they could finally kick him out. It's one reason I don't buy Tracy's sudden desire to keep the Q kids at the house. She didn't spare a second thought about what would happen to Scout if she managed to push Drew out of the house. Now, suddenly, it's imperative to Monica's health that she always has her grandkids surrounding her.

It WASN'T a theory. You're calling something that actually happened a theory. That's the problem. I'm not against "someone" changing their mind. I'm against this particular person/group changing their mind. On the one hand, I suppose I can't blame someone for seeing a financial opportunity and taking it. But that doesn't mean I have to admire or like this person deciding to line their pockets by supporting someone who is an admitted assaulter and unrepentant criminal. Yeah, we need to be more empathetic and decent - follow the example of 45 who is absolutely known for those two things. You know how it was so decent and empathetic of him to wish the best to all of those losing their homes and fearing the worst during these horrible California wildifires. Wait, I'm sorry, that orange pussball never actually expressed any kindness, empathy, or decency towards those suffering. Instead he's used their tragedy to call the governor names and spew idiotic conspiracy theories. No one is twistinig your words. You seem to have a problem with people calling out the misinformation you post and correcting it. That's not twisting your words or attacking. It's called fact-checking. It would be nice if you could attempt - instead of blithely referring to people's genuine concerns as "doom and gloom" - to employ some of that empathy you were talking about earlier. Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true. This thread was not created for one faction.

Ugh, there were so many aggravating people today. Shut up, LuLu. It was unbelievable that she said that since Dante is Michael's brother, neither he nor anyone else on the force would—you know— DO THEIR JOB and uphold the law. That Martin seemed to buy it doesn't say much about him either. Willow isn't trying to take the kids from Michael, who is unconscious in the hospital. Shut up, Tracy. How she acted today seemed like almost the reverse of the AJ situation. The way she asserted that the kids were Qs so they belonged in that house. No, they belong with their parents. If one of those parents lives in that house, so be it. Otherwise, it's none of her business. And who exactly has temporary custody anyway? If it's not Tracy, why is anyone acting like she has any say? Shut up, Sasha. The custody of those kids is none of her freaking husband. Her marching in there and acting like she had any right to tell those kids where to go was annoying. That she had the gall to stand their all full of self-righteous judgment while she's standing there pregnant with Willow's husband's child. It's even more funny given that Sasha's last conversation with Michael was her begging him to stay out of their kids' lives. So she gets to make all the decisions about her kid, but she will decide to interfere with Willow and her kids. I wish Willow had smacked the smug off her face. I did love the love the line about things not working out with her cousin.

None of the people in that house have any room to judge. So what they had sex on Q property. And getting together with someone much younger - wasn’t Ned much younger than Monica? Paul much younger than Tracy? Jason stealing AJ’s child is so much worse than anything Drew has done.

My signature changes all the time and it’s not been a problem for me. In fact, my first few times voting I was petrified it wouldn’t count because my signature looked different, but it’s never been an issue. I haven’t had to show my ID. And, I don‘t think not knowing cursive means you can’t sign your name.

I never understood the idea that celebrities shouldn’t be allowed to share their political opinions. I think Susan Sarandon’s thoughts on politics are monumentally stupid, but she still has the right to speak her mind because she still lives in this country too and is affected by the things those in the government do. Despite the F-I-C’s lies, he is 100% connected to Project 25 and, yes, things like going after contraception and marriage equality is on their agenda. Yes, it was done to take away rights. The Supreme Court already gave women the right to bodily autonomy. There was absolutely no need to take it away because some new Supreme Court members decided to change it - despite the fact these new members had lied in their confirmation hearings and agreeing that Roe v. Wade was settled law - until they decided that it wasn’t. Why should it matter that some on the right think it’s murder? No one is forcing them to get an abortion. Their opinions should have no bearing on the law. There is at least one 45 supporter here who has posted several times in the last few days. It’s not a “theory.” One of the members of the band even gave a recent interview where he talked about not initially wanting the felon to use their music and sending a cease and desist letter. The only reason he changed his mind is because he realized how much money he could make from that idiot using their music.

Agreed. I think Drew should have stayed out of it more, but I was also glad he was there. If he wasn’t Willow would have folded so fast to Carly and Sonny. It’s a day that ends in “y” so of course Carly was being a hypocrite. As someone said earlier, Carly used to use Michael as a bargaining chip all the time. Guess she doesn’t like it when the shoe is on the other foot. She’s done worse to hang on to her kids.

The way CW played the scene, it didn't seem like play-acting on Nina's part. Willow has followed Nina's suggestions regarding custody before, so I don't know why she'd think Willow wouldn't consider it if it came from her. Willow starts panicking after Drew says he can pull strings, but she'd have to wait a week for the hearing. Nina says she has no other choice. At that point, Willow was clearly open to any suggestion. Why tell her there was no choice but to wait and then assume Drew, not only knows about the medical proxy, but would suggest Willow use it?