I know that CBT stands for "cognitive behavioral therapy" but every time I see that acronym written I just think about dudes getting kicked in the balls. The internet has ruined my brain.For instance, someone may be able to reduce the severity of some of their behavioural issues with CBT to help them develop coping stragies.
If you knew that was what he was going to do and you still hired him, absolutely you paid him to do that.Nope, but what you did there was. The latter is a reading so insanely obtuse that nobody honest would understand it as the intended meaning of the sentence.
Imagine if i paid someone to cut my lawn, and that's all I asked them to do. The employee then uses their strimmer to intentionally slice through the legs of the postman as he crosses my lawn. Would you say I "paid him to kill the postman"? And that that sentence isn't in any way misleading about my level of involvement in the act?
"If". Which the article doesn't state, and for which you have fuck-all evidence by your own admission.If you knew that was what he was going to do and you still hired him, absolutely you paid him to do that.
Touche."If". Which the article doesn't state, and for which you have fuck-all evidence by your own admission.
What I find funniest about this is that you previously argued tooth and nail that Trump could not be considered responsible for the actions of Giuliani, Cohen, and other indicted figures in his employ. That they did things for their employer, but not at their employer's direction. If someone said Trump "hired Giuliani to" pressure Ukraine, you'd have been lecturing us for pages on it.
Is there something specifically wrong here?
Your tax dollars in Australia.
They are specifically wearing masks so they don't get doxedIt's still always funny seeing people in masks outside.
Why are you saying the RW media isn't trustworthy? They are as trustworthy as the other side. Again, you won't find an LW story to corroborate it because they don't care to report on it. It's like when the NY Post ran the story on the Hunter Biden laptop and the story was basically considered a conspiracy theory and censored. How'd the LW media do with corroboration on that? Epic fail on that front but you'd say the news sources saying the laptop was disintormation are more trustworthy I bet.I'm not saying these right-wing outlets are "spreading misinformation through omission". I'm saying I don't know whether this incident even happened because I can't find anything to corroborate it that's trustworthy.
Very doubtful.They are specifically wearing masks so they don't get doxed
Some right-wing media, such as The Times, are generally credible on the facts of (most) matters. For this, I can find nothing except random rants by no-name belligerants on blogs and Twitter. So no, they're not as credible as an actual source.Why are you saying the RW media isn't trustworthy? They are as trustworthy as the other side.
Also can't find any centrist outlets. Or even any moderate right-wing outlets.Again, you won't find an LW story to corroborate it because they don't care to report on it.
Yes, it's a waste of money and doesn't address male issues such as higher suicide success rates(when we take our lives we actually have a higher chance), male mental health issues, and so forth. Very one-sided. Furthermore, most of the issues feminism has with men isn't with younger more socially liberal men, it's with older baby boomers and Gen X men who beat their wives.Is there something specifically wrong here?
More like going on a dark web marketplace and searching for "lawnmowing", when "lawnmowing" is a well-known euphemism for "killing your postman". And finding a "lawnmowing" company started by a guy who's killed postmen in the past and whose reputation is eagerly and quite efficiently killing postmen. And the "lawnmowing" company is also suspiciously kept on retainer by Amazon, FedEx, and UPS, while being a major supporter of any political candidate promising to defund the postal service, and you know this but have been assured his retention has nothing to do with any potential or forthcoming grudge against postmen.Imagine if i paid someone to cut my lawn, and that's all I asked them to do. The employee then uses their strimmer to intentionally slice through the legs of the postman as he crosses my lawn. Would you say I "paid him to kill the postman"? And that that sentence isn't in any way misleading about my level of involvement in the act?
Insubstantial insinuation, basically.More like going on a dark web marketplace and searching for "lawnmowing", when "lawnmowing" is a well-known euphemism for "killing your postman". And finding a "lawnmowing" company started by a guy who's killed postmen in the past and whose reputation is eagerly and quite efficiently killing postmen. And the "lawnmowing" company is also suspiciously kept on retainer by Amazon, FedEx, and UPS, while being a major supporter of any political candidate promising to defund the postal service, and you know this but have been assured his retention has nothing to do with any potential or forthcoming grudge against postmen.
Then paying your own LLC for "home equity growth ", and through your own LLC subcontracting the "lawnmower" for "mowing your lawn".
And when your postman suddenly and inexplicably drops dead at the hands of your "lawnmower", you throw your hands up and say, "well good golly, I didn't know he'd kill my postman! I only paid this totally unrelated LLC to subcontracting him for mowing my lawn!".
Neither does the fire brigade, should we defund that?Yes, it's a waste of money and doesn't address male issues such as higher suicide success rates(when we take our lives we actually have a higher chance), male mental health issues, and so forth. Very one-sided.
Citation needed.Furthermore, most of the issues feminism has with men isn't with younger more socially liberal men, it's with older baby boomers and Gen X men who beat their wives.
I don't care enough about it, just found it chuckle worthy and that's about it.Some right-wing media, such as The Times, are generally credible on the facts of (most) matters. For this, I can find nothing except random rants by no-name belligerants on blogs and Twitter. So no, they're not as credible as an actual source.
If you can find a credible report, please provide it, rather than just blindly insisting that unverified Twitter rants must be accurate.
Also can't find any centrist outlets. Or even any moderate right-wing outlets.
Yes, this is how misinformation spreads, without the need for someone to read an actual article and then discuss it with peers. I feel like you in particular should take note, eh? Considering our parallel discussion on the pervasiveness of misinformation.I don't care enough about it, just found it chuckle worthy and that's about it.
There was a video...Yes, this is how misinformation spreads, without the need for someone to read an actual article and then discuss it with peers. I feel like you in particular should take note, eh? Considering our parallel discussion on the pervasiveness of misinformation.
Wait TMZ is right wing now?I'm not saying these right-wing outlets are "spreading misinformation through omission". I'm saying I don't know whether this incident even happened because I can't find anything to corroborate it that's trustworthy.
Meaningless caveat: I don't know at which points Trump was and was not paying Giuliani. Let's just pretend he was paying him the whole time for the sake of argument."If". Which the article doesn't state, and for which you have fuck-all evidence by your own admission.
What I find funniest about this is that you previously argued tooth and nail that Trump could not be considered responsible for the actions of Giuliani, Cohen, and other indicted figures in his employ. That they did things for their employer, but not at their employer's direction. If someone said Trump "hired Giuliani to" pressure Ukraine, you'd have been lecturing us for pages on it.
Hadn't seen that one.Wait TMZ is right wing now?
Pro-Palestine Protesters Block Philadelphia Pride Parade, Wild Video Shows
Pro-Palestine protesters faced off with marchers during Philadelphia's Pride Parade ... stopping the flow of the annual event -- and creating a pretty chaotic scene.www.tmz.com
This paragraph is of course laden with qualifications and clarifications about Trump's level of involvement. None of which were present earlier for Clinton.Meaningless caveat: I don't know at which points Trump was and was not paying Giuliani. Let's just pretend he was paying him the whole time for the sake of argument.
Trump did pay Giuliani to try to get a Biden investigation out of Ukraine. It would be wrong to say he hired him for that, but he paid him and it was done in the course of those duties. But that is different than ordering him to do so, and very very different than blackmailing Ukraine.