Yes, as I said earlier, I got that. An Epstein joke.

Still trying to figure out how / why so many people are fixated over whether a convicted child-rapist was murdered vs. committed suicide. Either way is a net-positive for society.

Because he has tons of ties to Trump and these parties he went to to meet the girls were along with Trump..

Attachment 236532



Here's why this is funny:

You believe Epstein was murdered because he had ties to Trump.

Braineack believes Epstein was murdered because he had ties to the Clintons (or some other unspecified deep-state actor.)

Most likely, you are both wrong, but in ways which are not obvious at present.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...d987130df3.jpg

Liberals always ignore facts and protect their own kind. It's only funny if you find humor in the sad and pathetic. Trump is the only person linked to Epstein to speak negatively about him long ago, and the only one to provide the FBI with information to help bring him down. Trump has less ties to Epstein as the Congresspeople who pushed Russian Collusion with Trump has to Russians.

It's kinda like how you don't believe in witch hunts, despite an entire spy operation perpetrated against an individual based on his relationship with a known CIA asset-- using that very fact as the reason to open a FISA investigation, however, lying to the courts about this other individual's work with the CIA. The FBI then continued to renew FISA warrants against this other individual, altering documentation and sourcing an unverified, uncorroborated, bought-and-paid-for dossier in order to mislead the courts -- all while reporting back up-the-chain via 302 reports, not about this CIA asset [who the CIA, and asset both told the FBI about], but about the first individual -- discovering nothing, in fact, exonerating everyone involved from day one. Yet still, just the fact there were these initial investigations on the individual, despite being illegal and purposefully crafted as political/character assassination used against the individual to open a broader investigation directly into him -- again, already knowing from day one the basis of the investigation was false and would result in nothing, except as a political campaign to smear this individual. To make it look more legit, and to trick the sorry, naive, weak-minded, idiots who don't care to actually learn about what's going on but want to sound cool online, the investigation on the first individual would blackmail, smear, and arrest random actors during the course for non-related "crimes" during the course in order to encourage guilt-by-association -- because if CNN says it's true, it has to be true, because there is no bias in the media -- the media is ethical to the highest caliber. These sorry, naive, weak-minded, idiots also never admit being duped when the entire circus gets shut down by PETA -- because CNN told them to have faith, the same CNN who smeared and lied about the CIA asset from illegally leaked materials from the FISA warrant, which resulted in many lost jobs.

Again, no one cares if he was murdered or actually committed suicide. The memes are a means to keep the story alive to ultimately uncover the truth and out all involved, but journalists and the FBI are too busy trying to stop orange man. Stop acting dumb about it. It's almost as annoying as the memes themselves.

The memes serve only one function: to perpetuate the lie that Epstein is dead.

By getting people to argue about whether he is dead by murder or dead by suicide, everyone is conveniently blinded to the truth that he is very much alive.

QFT

https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...ee&oe=5EAFF75B

https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...86&oe=5EADB2D3


to be fair, counting to two seem pretty hard.

https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...3f&oe=5E809641

.

"Things that never happened for $1000, Alex."

I believe that McDonalds does sometimes ask for gender on kid's meals because the toys in the meals can be either for a boy or for a girl.
If the person taking the order cannot see the child to make a judgement they then ask the person doing the ordering if the kids meal will be for a girl or for a boy.
Nothing diabolic or strange in that.
Do you want a doll or a plastic car in your kid's meal?

So if it did happen, the ridiculous overreaction to an innocent questions is what needs to stop.

*I don't have kids so I've never purchased a happy meal from McDonald's as an adult.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...629b36811f.jpg

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...3fd0fd64f3.jpg

I have no trouble believing that it happen. There are in fact a lot of people who are opposed to the concept of distinguishing between genders, or even recognizing the concept of gender. Some of these people are parents.

Here's the original article: https://www.popsugar.com/family/mcdo...-bias-46828615

If you read some of Kate Schweitzer's other articles, it's clear she's one of the people who oppose pretty much all societal norms. A few excerpts from the article:



One sentence I really loved:
She felt she'd be normalizing such as classification? I'm not sure if she realizes this, but it's already normal. She's part of a movement attempting to passive-aggressively de-normalize it.

Found out where she went to school

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...1b748f1e9a.jpg

And the FBI opened an investigation on possible Russian collusion.

In other words, “I don’t have the intelligence to choose my own health plan, but I can choose everyone else’s.”

That’s the point of the meme. The politically correct question today is to ask what type of toy they want and not what type of thing* they are.



*See, I don’t even know what to call them, since they may not identify as human.

Yeah, she's pretty wound-up about the whole "rampant gender discrimination" thing. Another meme from her blog:

Attachment 236531




In general she seems to be opposed to most things. Another one of her articles, entitled An Airline Now Alerts Passengers to Where Babies Are on a Seat Map — and It's Flat-Out Wrong basically says that by allowing passengers to see where babies have already been assigned in their seat map, airlines "removes what little privacy families have," claims it to be "it's simply an unfair and dehumanizing classification," and goes so far as to hypothesize that JAL has "just kicked off what could become a dangerously intolerant new trend. If ever there was the potential for a slippery slope, it'd be when the popularity of this seat map leads to a new "coach" section of the plane, far in the back, where parents are mandated to sit."

I gotta tell you, if any domestic airline creates a "child-free" cabin at the front of the plane, that airline will get 100% of my not-inconsequential business. You might think that first class is a ""safe" zone in that regard, but no, I often wind up finding people with infants or children in first-class. The one saving grace is that they usually can't kick the back of my seat, due to the increased distance.