I didn't check all the ~3 million+ pages made public.
Don't you think it would be all over your 'news', if they found even a hint to Obama?
They were outraged for days once, for wearing a tan suit!!!
He couldn't lift a finger without Fox 'News' crying about it.
You can be sure they would 'talk' about it, if he used that finger on a girl.
Hell, because he was so incredibly boring, they mostly made up shit.
Those were even the first political bowel moves of Trump; the birther shit.

Bill Clinton had the gravitas to get a grown women to suck him off out of free will.
He didn't need to pay models or porn-stars, or peep on teenage models, or grab unwilling women by the pussy, or use the services of a ped0phile sex-slave provider, like a small, insecure man, who needs to dominate young girls to feel better about himself. None of the release photo's or texts in the Epstein files is a claim of Bill Clinton doing something illegal, while there are many claims in the Epstein files of Trump doing something illegal. None of it is proven, but Trump's name is in ~5,300 files with references and ~38,000 total mentions. How the fuck did that happen?

The only question is, if you still have (fair) elections by then.
Trump and his cronies are already working on all options to either postpone elections indefinitely, with some Trumped up martial law, Insurrection Act, National emergency declaration or whatever the fuck, or get his cronies (election officials or electors again) in, to steal the election for real this time. He has an army of thugs to keep you under control.

There are lots of other types of reliable evidence,
that are used to convict people of crimes every single day.

It's good strategy to support releasing the Epstein files publicly.
If you know that Trump is in there 100X more, you know to be protected.
And there are still many whole pages redacted, which they would definitely not do
if the names of Democrats are on there.

There looks to be not enough evidence to indict him on, but there is certainly enough
to start digging for more. Piles of testimony is considered evidence too.

There is such a difference between your opinions for people you consider on your side and on the other side. Grasping at straws leading to Clinton. Obama is in those files ZERO times.

No I don't, I'm just NOT picking a main course of poison,
for a little chocolate mint on the side,
I go for the main course of 'as good as I can possibly find'.

ChatGPT: Al Capone did NOT come up with the idea of soup kitchens. Soup kitchens existed long before Capone’s time. They were started in the late 19th century and early 20th century as charitable efforts to feed the poor, especially during economic crises. For example, during the Great Depression (1929–1939), many soup kitchens were already operating across the United States. What Capone did do was fund a very famous soup kitchen in Chicago during the Great Depression in 1931. He reportedly served free meals to thousands of people, partly as a public relations move to improve his image during a time when he was notorious for crime. That’s probably why people mistakenly associate him with “inventing” the idea, but he only popularized it locally in Chicago.
Still ridiculous that Chicago needed a gangster for some social safety net.

Unfortunately, movies aren't real life:
only registered users can see external links

I think that even fables as short as these are too difficult for Trump.
He says he uses his own morality, which is: 'Whatever looks good for Trump'.
Unfortunately, he even fails that morality, because he screws himself constantly.
That's why he needs millions of cult members, to keep him out of prison.
That man really has a gift for grift.

For the same reason all those powerful and rich people who were part of that ped0phile sex ring were protected; there is a two-tiered justice system, in which rich and powerful people can get away with almost anything.

Poor person gets caught stealing a wallet -> Could get 1 year in jail.
CEO gets caught stealing a many millions from people's pensions -> The company pays a fine, maybe CEO gets fired, gets to keep his bonus and possibly exits with a golden parachute.

Don Lemon was NOT interfering with law enforcement. He was also not disturbing the peace in the church, he entered it calmly and peacefully. That is not any violation of the law, until he would have been asked to leave and wouldn't. However, if he wasn't asked personally, as a journalist reporting on the protesters, he had a justifiable reason to stay. Journalists are important for reporting on conflicts, that’s why they are afforded protections under the First Amendment, which safeguards freedom of the press and allows them to gather and publish information about matters of public interest.

Your government says the protest interrupted the service and impeded congregants’ rights, and prosecutors claim Lemon’s presence and actions went beyond neutral reporting. Whether his presence constitutes protected journalism or unlawful interference is now a matter for the courts to decide.

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, 18 U.S.C. § 248, makes it a federal crime to use force, threats, obstruction, or intimidation to interfere with a person’s exercise of rights at a place of worship or reproductive health facility. I have seen NO evidence of him engaging in force, threats, obstruction, or intimidation. An unbiased judge will dismiss the charges.

ICE is not law enforcement, ICE are themselves criminals now.
Until they start to obey the law, they cannot enforce the law.

If you go somewhere that you're not supposed to, you get a fine. Unless you have evidence that Don Lemon broke something, there is no reason for a judge to be involved.
Religion is a first amendement right, so it should have protections from the government and people trying to take people's right away. A little first time 'interference' should not be a crime, it should be no more than an infraction/violation. The law should not protect religion anymore than any other expression of free speech. The term 'sacrilege' is a religious term, which doesn't fit the 1st Amendment. Churches should also no longer be exempt from paying taxes. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”

That's just in the US: U.S. sales weakened sharply in Q4 2025, especially after federal incentives ended, causing big drops in EV purchases, mostly because the $7,500 federal EV tax credit, a major incentive for buyers, expired on October 1, 2025.

Tesla is mostly failing to sell their cybertruck and many people 'still' don't like buying
their car from a horrible ped0phile fascist.

People are working harder than ever. They just want their jobs to pay the bills.

Worldwide, EV sales still grew in 2025, with over 20 million units sold and share ~20-25 % of new car sales in many estimates. Growth overall was still strong year-over-year.
Major industry forecasts still expect millions more EVs on the road in 2026, and long-run growth remains positive.

At the moment, electric cars are still an expensive purchase. The infrastructure is also still lacking a lot. Those 2 factors will change, making electric cars as the standard inevitable.

Cancel culture in the mind of a right-winger:
"I don't like how people are mean to me, when I am mean to them."
"That shouldn't be allowed."

It's a fact that in the US between 25-40% of your corn production is used purely for bio-ethanol for cars. Using the low number of 25%. that is 25 million acres of corn producing farmland in the US. If that land was covered in solar panels instead, it would produce
7.7 billion MWh/year in electricity. That is much more than the complete US energy grid produced in 2023 (4.18 billion MWh). If used to charge up electric cars, that would be much more than required by all cars on the road in the US, today.
The only problem is that electric cars are not affordable enough yet. But, it won't take long.

Here is a video that discusses ALL the other 'problems' you might think are applicable.
only registered users can see external links

You would not say that, if it was FOX 'News' or 'News'max.
But, they would of course not be arrested while doing that.

Of the 9 people who were arrested in that protest, 2 were journalists.

When do you start to care about ICE breaking the law,
instead of the victimized citizens who are protesting that?

A woman can be grabbed by 4 armed masked men, and pulled into a van,
while the police is watching, because that's how ICE operates.
How idiotic for a country, to not just allow that, but organize that?

Before Trump, you would have said that it was your 2nd Amendment duty, to protect that woman, and shoot her assaulters, But now your idiot president hired thousands of thugs, who's uniform is just what the end up buying at their local military surplus. Who the hell came up with that? It's not just the cruelty, it's also the sheer INCOMPETENCE of your stupid regime, that makes me angry.

That's a comment of someone who lost the argument.

It's legal to do journalism about people invading a church service.
The fact that journalists get paid is not relevant and never has been.
Journalists who work for broadcast companies get paid too, sometimes
even many millions per year.

Journalism is no longer limited to broadcast companies.
In fact, broadcast companies are failing to do journalism nowadays
and new media is picking up the broken pieces.
You're not providing a legal argument, that will stick in court.

Here's a sign of what's coming: A local union leader and first-time Democratic candidate Taylor Rehmet, flipped a DEEPLY RED Texas Senate seat, on an unabashedly LEFT-WING working class platform, defeating Republican Leigh Wambsganss.
This WAS a reliably Republican district, that Donald Trump won by 17 points in 2024.

only registered users can see external links

Lemon was livestreaming the protest, interviewing people and describing the event, not participating as a protester. How is that not doing his job?

Protest organizers and participants said they were targeting a pastor at Cities Church who they believed also serves as a local ICE official (specifically an acting director of the ICE field office in Minnesota). That dual role, religious leader and immigration enforcement official, was central to their reason for taking the protest into the church.
If a Christian leader is still involved in ICE, as it is operating today, they are unqualified to represent Jesus.

If police is going to arrest organizers or the main participants of a protest, which
is breaking the law, that is warranted, and the risk they take for doing that.
Arresting journalists covering the protest is clearly a violation of the 1st Amendment, and I am sure only intended as INTIMIDATION. You don't seem to understand that the 1st Amendment is intended to protect the people from GOVERNMENT interference.

The one who tries to solve the problem.
The crying one is obviously the Republican.
Even if you lot win, YOU CANNOT STOP FUCKING CRYING.

It was the time that everything was developing in the world.
Those advancements could have been achieved without an ideology of hate.
An ideology of hope would have created better, without all the suffering.
Hitler wasted incredible resources on this ideology of hate.
All those resources could have been invested much wiser.

Hitler's actions put the world back decades.
Do you know what put the world back in order? Socialist methods.
- Welfare states (healthcare, pensions, unemployment insurance)
- Public housing
- Nationalization of some industries
- Strong labor rights
- Progressive taxation
All over the world, leaders agreed that these socialist methods were needed to rebuild the economy and society, and it resulted in the fastest recovery ever. And then after, these measures were kept in place to recover all the debt that was created by the war and the recovery. It created prosperity like we have never seen.

And then the greedy demands of the rich were listened to again.
Taxes for the rich were combined with austerity for the working class.
And now the working class is getting poorer and poorer, and angry.
And the powerful use an ideology of hate to distract the people from their failures.
This is exactly what Hitler did, and people are falling for it AGAIN.
That's because people like you are unable to learn from history.
And that's why you are parroting this idea that Hitler created progress.
And maybe he did, for a short while, and then it turned to UTTER DESTRUCTION.
Which is what always happens in the world, when people pick leaders like that.
Why don't you learn from how the world recovered after that stupid mistake?

Do you think a model like her wouldn't have had the ability to make it out herself?
She was just lazy, and thought a rich man would make her life better.
I'm sure she has regretted picking THIS rich man, very much.
And until she is honest about that in her film, it's worth nothing.

Melania herself knows the truth. 'News'max is clearly lying their asses off.
I'll wait for her movie, that comes out after Trump is dead, where she explains
how horrible her life was being married to that man.

I feel bad for them too, but we have a government to decide when things like this are necessary for the greater good. I do expect my government to compensate them generously, and improve their living quality.

Government decisions affect people. The natural gas extraction in Groningen resulted in the demolition of 3,300 houses, so far, and damage and safety concerns for 28,000 buildings. Many people were left without compensation
for many years. Those people are far worse off than the villagers of Moerdijk.

Thanks for saying that. How many peaceful protests is Trump breaking up?
"It is a criminal act to intentionally interfere with the expression of free speech of others." Don Lemon was just arrested for covering an anti-ICE protest. If there is ONE thing that should be protected by the 1st Amendment, it's the right to REPORT on protests.

Yes, that's true. However, ChatGPT has ALL the sources, mine AND yours,
and it uses algorithms to figure out logical connections between ALL that data.
Are you doing that?

This was one time that I didn't have a clue about the truth of this, and I didn't care to learn, because it has no use for me. That's when I just ask ChatGPT.
I didn't even read most of it, just formatted it, AND I CLEARLY SAID THAT.

I mostly use ChatGPT as a factchecker. If ChatGPT is incorrect, I know enough to know that, on most subjects that we are taling about, because
I get news from many sources. When I ask ChatGPT something I care about,
I always ask it for it's sources and confirm what it answered.

So, how do you do it? Do you ask Google or some other search engine for links to information? Do you admit that all those search engines can have the exact same problem of being programmed by individuals with prejudices and agendas?

If you are finding information with a search engine, you are reading ONE source that can be completely biased. If you are finding information with AI,
it is usually based on multiple sources. That can be more accurate, but it can also be completely wrong. It all depends on your own knowledge and critical thinking skills to separate the lies and nonsense from the truth.

Grok is written by individuals with personal prejudices and agendas, ChatGPT is NOT, or a least FAR LESS. There is clear evidence that Elon Musk himself is involved in manipulating Grok, but that is exactly why people on your side favor it over AI's from more neutral organized companies.

By the way; if you think that AI is such a threat to the truth, why do you not BERATE Trump, for letting the techbros fill your country with AI datacenters and Trump wanting to forbid ALL regulation that would prevent them from destroying the truth for ever? Do you like being lied to?

I want strict regulation to make sure that no one can use fake pictures or video for propaganda, with heavy penalties if they do. The Trump regime just changed a photo of civil rights attorney and activist Nekima Levy Armstrong, to make it look like she was crying, while she was not. I consider that a crime. I DON'T like being lied to.

Lookatmine2 JUST said: "... a country that elected a half-black man to be POTUS not once but twice, and where the wealthiest woman in the world is Oprah Winfrey, and thousands of black men and women belong to the millionaires club ..."
So HOW are people of other races bringing attention onto themselves?

One of you is denying that have any problems and the other is calling them
all criminals. How am I supposed to take you lot seriously?

You're not dealing in reality. Your "facts" change according to what you want
to argue for. Discuss you ideas with each other first, and come to me with your combined conclusion, about how black people are either incredibly privileged or
how they are awfully struggling.

If you are saying that they are privileged AND struggling, then you are just saying that it's because they are black, which is: racism.

In any case, if that WOULD be the reality, how the fuck is IGNORING race then going to solve anything? IF race WAS the ACTUAL problem, then how stupid
is ignoring it? Your whole support for ignoring race, proves that wrong.
You obviously care about the problem, so explain why you don't want to fix it.

You're probably making a joke again, because it would be a fucking stupid thing to say, as an answer to what I just said, otherwise.

I am exactly saying that I DON'T want a stupid king to rule over us,
but a government of people with brains. We have that, much more than YOU.

OK, Trump ONLY killed one wife.

Why is that 'ironic'? Polls show that around 25–27% Brits are in favour
of abolishing their own monarchy, while their king has almost no power.
About 31–37 % of Dutch people want The Netherlands to be a republic.

I'm not one of them, because I see how awful your republic is.
I don't want ONE person to have so much power to only represent one group of people, and fuck over the rest, while they were voted in by only 31,6 % of the people who are eligible to vote.
I want all voters to represented in a compromise. And I want a cabinet that lays down their jobs, when people lose trust in them. None of your presidents has ever done that, no matter how low their approval had become.

And those problems are caused of the systemic racism that still exists.
Otherwise, you are arguing that 'blacks' are doing that, because they are black,
which is: racism.

No, race is an issue, because you cannot stop making it an issue.
You have no arguments against anything else I said, so racism is real.

How is racism voluntary, when the president repeats Neo-nazi lies that black legal immigrants "are eating the dogs", before he fires many black people from the administration, without any justification, other than the general one, that they were all hired as DEI picks?
Why is your president constantly publicly insulted the intelligence of Jasmine Crockett, who knows all of the law from memory and obviously speaks and reads at a much higher level than the president himself?

Can you point me to some of those 'Leftist race grifters', who are pushing 'Black separatism'?

A grifter is someone who makes money, influence, or attention by deceiving people, especially by pretending to be sincere, principled, or aligned with a cause they don’t genuinely believe in. There is a lot of it on the right, because right-wing ideology favors the wealthy. It is openly documented how almost all right-wing media, old and new, is funded by billions of dollars from the wealthy. To a lesser extend there is corporate liberal media, funded by liberal billionaires, but there is none of that on the LEFT. The left threatens billionaires, because we think they should not exist. They are not funding a movement that wants to tax them out of existence.

When I accuse the US of being racist, I have lots of other examples than that white people live there. Like the fact that ICE is racially profiling people to attack, consistently on a large scale, while we are speaking.

Being born white is not a sin, it's a privilege. No one is accusing me of having low IQ and being incompetent, based on my skin color, because I'm white. If I was black in America, I would now have to prove I am qualified for my job, based solely on being part of a GROUP, that was hired while DEI existed, without being INDIVIDUALLY assessed. Being treated as a ethnic group, instead of as an individual, is discrimination.

If melanin people are discriminated against, than why are white people on average still SO MUCH BETTER OFF, than black people on average? You can only explain that with racism or by engaging in racism. Which one will you pick?

The wealthiest woman in the world is NOT Oprah Winfrey, it is Alice Walton, the Walmart heiress, with an estimated fortune of around $101 billion. Oprah Winfrey’s net worth is about $3.2 billion. Funny how you put sexism on top of racism, and making a separate category for women. The wealthiest PERSON in the world is Elon Musk, with ~$700 billion+. He is white, from South Africa, from a line of apartheid supporting white wealthy people. He is also known from his weird waving, that exactly looked like two Nazi salutes, during your PRESIDENT'S campaign. No one on the side of your president has acknowledged this and condemned this, and Elon Musk was allowed to go into your government's finances and do whatever he wanted with it. Are you going to deny that those were intended as Nazi salutes, or are you going to say that Nazi salutes are not disqualifying for such an important position?

I owned a Yugo as my first car. It was 11 years old when I got it, and I drove the hell out of it for 3 years. I had spent my whole summer school break making it look a little less boring and tuning it a bit. I scared my friends with the noise and my driving style. When we were going 50 mph, it sounded like going 100 mph.

Unfortunately, the battery had leaked acid on the front suspension, which broke off during some harsh braking. Then the car steered to the right when the accelerator pedal was pressed and to the left when the brake was pressed.
I asked my dad if he could weld it all back together, but it was too big of a mess.
I was very sad about it, when we dropped it off at the scrapyard.

I completely agree.

only registered users can see external links

The house is owned by the one who bought it. In theory, you could lose the house,
if you don't pay the ground lease. What you can do on that ground doesn't differ much from when you own it. You can build a shed, a fish-pond, a vegetable garden,
a fence (up to a specific height, and a sunroom, treehouse or sauna, within certain rules. It's mostly rules to not disturb the neighbors, because most gardens are much smaller than in the US.

In the Netherlands, land ownership does not automatically give you the right to build whatever you want. The government regulates land use to ensure:
- Safety (structural, fire, environmental hazards)
- Public order (traffic, accessibility, infrastructure)
- Environmental protection (nature, water management)
- Consistency with local planning (zoning, aesthetics, urban design)
Even if you own the land outright, you must apply for a building permit (“bouwvergunning”) before construction.
If you have leasehold, you also need a building permit for the same reasons as above.

Regulations used to be much tighter. When my parents bought their house, they were forced to keep the facade painted in the same color scheme as the whole street. After about 15 years, that was dropped, and people started using other colors.

Leasehold is more rare in the US, but there are areas in New York, San Francisco and Hawaii where people own houses on land that is owned by the government.

There are some rare cases in which people lost their homes because they didn't pay the ground lease. However, owning your own land is no guarantee against eminent domain. According to ChatGPT, eminent domain happens more often in the US than in The Netherland, even though it's rare in both our countries.
only registered users can see external links

However, just last year, we heard that the village of Moerdijk in the Dutch province of North Brabant, with around 1,100 residents, is facing eminent domain, to make space for large‑scale industrial and energy infrastructure development. And those people own the land their houses have been standing on for many years, not the government.
only registered users can see external links

If you don't care about this subject, why did you feel the need to react?
There are lots subjects to react to, this one is about the price of homes.
Your ONE sentence isn't even worth reacting to, because it adds nothing.
You're only saying "it's the Democrats", with zero justification.

Oh, you own a house, so you don't care? How about that "egoism"?
Good for you to take the mask off. You don't care about your fellow Americans.
How many Americans need to live with their parents until the age of 35,
before you see a problem?

"Trump has never stolen from anyone" Yes, he has, all his life. His Modus operandi was not paying the people who work for him. That's why he has been in 5,600+ lawsuits from the 1970s through 2016. He has always been a crook and he is a crook now. Why can't you see that?

Trump is trying to cheat RIGHT NOW. He is demanding control over the election system of states he is sending ICE too. He is telling all red states to gerrymander
the shit out of democracy.

That property value of states 'that involve the democrats' is related to the economic strength of those states. Ever heard of 'supply and demand'? People want to live in those states, so the price goes up. However, there should still be a government to REGULATE that, so people who already live in a home don't get their rent jacked up 200%, because some landlord wants to get rich fast.

Damn, you lot all come up with the same nonsense argument. There are many forms of democracy. Most most modern democracies are 'representative democracies'. That's the democracy of my country and yours. Yours is just fucking failing to actually represent the people, but your Constitution describes an ACTUAL representative democracy. Your constitution ALSO describes your 'constitutional republic', which is the STRUCTURE of your DEMOCRACY. I think I told you this before. You could have checked it and learned something, but it looks like you have a learning disability.

Your country once stood for truth and justice, but your side destroyed it,
and all of you are lying your ass off for your horrible wannabe dictator.

All the other stuff you're adding to your comments make you look like
the “village idiot”, who's shouting incoherent religious nonsense at people,
who are trying to ignore him.

If you want a fiscally responsible mayor, you vote for a SOCIALIST:
only registered users can see external links

When have you ever seen a Republican major be transparent like this,
even if it's nailing his predecessor from his OWN party to the wall?

Zohran Mamdani is fighting for his citizens, that is his only goal.

When Society Chooses the Villain (and the reason for it)
only registered users can see external links

I approve of this book endorsement.

According to ChatGPT, a moral lesson similar to the one of The Hangman
can be learned from Aesop fables like:
“The Farmer and the Stork”
“The Wolf and the Lamb”
“The Town Mouse and the Country Mouse”
“The Frogs Who Desired a King” (closest thematic Aesop fable)

The Frogs Asking for a King (1884 Aesop’s Fables translation):
The Frogs, grieved at having no established Ruler, sent ambassadors to Jupiter entreating for a King.
He, perceiving their simplicity, cast down a huge log into the lake. The Frogs, terrified at the splash occasioned by its fall, hid themselves in the depth of the pool. But no sooner did they see that the huge log continued motionless, than they swam again to the top of the water, dismissed their fears, and came so to despise it as to climb up, and to squat upon it.
After some time they began to think themselves ill‑treated in the appointment of so inert a Ruler, and sent a second deputation to Jupiter to pray that he would set over them another sovereign.
He then gave them an eel to govern them. When the Frogs discovered his easy good nature, they yet a third time sent to Jupiter to beg that he would once more choose for them another King.
Jupiter, displeased with all their complaints, sent a Heron, who preyed upon the Frogs day by day, till there were none left to complain.
Moral: When you seek to change your condition, be sure that you can better it.

Aesop’s fables are not stories in the modern sense. They’re very short parables, often only a few sentences long. There isn’t a “full-length story” version because they were meant to illustrate a moral quickly, like a proverb. In that sense, they are very much like bible 'stories'.

In historical times, people used parables to teach morality. Humans naturally learn through story, example, and emotion, not pure logic. That’s why parables, fables, and allegories have been so effective across cultures for thousands of years,
they teach without needing formal education or reasoning skills.
It simply tells a short story, and than says: "Do you see what happened to the frogs? Don't be like the frogs!"
That's similar for The Hangman, which only adds an artistic element; poetry.

The problem is that you can do the same for ALL moral lessons, good AND BAD.
In Aesop, the story shows: “This happened → here’s the result → here’s a moral.”
But the same structure could be used for destructive or unethical lessons if the storyteller wanted: Example: “Person X stole from neighbors → Person X enjoyed the loot and nothing happened → therefore stealing is smart.”

Readers or listeners might misinterpret the moral:
"The Boy Who Cried Wolf" (also Aesop) doesn't teach to not lie, if you think about it,
it teaches to never tell the same lie TWICE.

To show why an action is right or wrong, link the behavior to its real consequences for people in general. Then generalize it into a principle.
Morals are accurate when the cause → effect → general lesson chain is clear.

Good for you, you learned the 'ananas' thing.

That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
When the homeless are forced off the streets, where do they go?
Do they magically find a place to live?

Why do you keep avoiding clear questions?

The top 1% richest households in the US own approximately $50 Trillion to $52 Trillion. What wealth have they created for you lately? Do Americans have better healthcare, education, public transport, childcare, and overall quality of life, created by that top 1%?

Will the 1% start creating anything good for normal people, when they own $100 Trillion?
At what point in their wealth growth, will the working class finally be better off?
Do we need to wait for them to leave to Mars?

OK, so explain to me why a 350 sq ft SoHo apartment costs up to $645,000,
only registered users can see external links
and this 1,754 sq ft 4 bedrooms, 2.5 baths house in Buffalo, NY costs $300,000.
only registered users can see external links
Both homes are in the same "horribly expensive", "corrupt", "socialist" blue state.
You can be sure that it's nicer and healthier to walk around near the cheaper home.
There is no reason for the price difference, other than CAPITALISM.

When I bought my house, half the price ($160,000) was for the 1700 sq ft it's build on. That's because the land was owned privately, and then bought by someone who made a huge profit on it. That's CAPITALISM.
A friend of mine has a house on publicly owned land of similar size, and he pays
the government $30/year for that. Before you say it; in my country, there is almost
no difference if you own the land or not.

I would not be able to buy my house today, because I wouldn't be able to afford the $620,000 that it's apparently worth now. That's what a very similar house in the street just sold for, to a very nice couple of highly educated people with very good jobs. Good for me, right? Maybe I'm just lucky to be 52, because it wouldn't be much fun to be 20, and know you will never be able to afford to buy a decent house, because you will never keep up with this market. CAPITALISM!

Ananas (or variants like nanas, ananás, or ananass) is used for pineapple
in over 40-50 languages.

For what you have told me, I believe you. And you deserve it.
But you let Trump, MAGA politics and MAGA media
constantly make you angry, to the level of wanting to kill people,
over things that are not true and don't affect you in the slightest.

To be fair to him; he sees ICE as cops, and he sees cops as legal executioners.

Have you ever heard the poem "The Hangman" by Maurice Ogden?
only registered users can see external links
It's a bit long, but damn, does it tell a story.

They shot him AFTER they took his gun, which was never in his hands.
If this is enough to get killed over, everyone who carries a gun now has
a target on their head.

Trump is giving the next Democrat president SO MUCH to crack down on you.
Complete immunity, to beat you to submission and kill you if you protest,
by putting a bloodthirsty revenge force in your red areas. 100% justified!

OK, sorry to hear that. Take care.

However, you still have enough energy to comment about it,
so I can only infer that you don't WANT to know. Or, we need to conclude
that you love us so much, that you can't miss us for a moment.

In any case, the rest of the country saw it, and is FED UP.
It can be something like this, that results in the end of a regime.
It's definitely showing cracks, even you cannot avoid that reality.

How many times did Trump verbally attack Ilhan Omar? At least dozens of times.
How many times did Biden verbally attack Charlie Kirk? Even once?
How many times did ANY Democrat verbally attack Charlie Kirk?
You still blamed Democrats for Kirk's murder, so don't be daft.

Do I need to remind you about Kyle Rittenhouse?

Trump let the first warning drop, that he wants to kill the 2nd amendment.
“You can’t have guns. You can’t walk in with guns. You can’t do that.”
When he becomes afraid of the people, he will take what you care about the most.
OMG, will I laugh my ass off, when that happens.

This discussion isn't even about immigration, dumb-ass.

What your president has turned loose everywhere,
is much worse than crime has ever gotten.

You have turned your country into a police state.
You have not beaten crime, nor achieved any safety,
you have sacrificed freedom for the idea of safety.
The crimes are now committed by your government.
All because you are unable to learn from history,
because this happened many times before, by people's own choice.

It did make me laugh, but it's sad that this is on your mind.
What's your reason to be angry? Isn't this what you voted for?