Bunker D
@bunker-d.bsky.social
The “donations” are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. And donations to this nonprofit organization are tax deductible.
October 24, 2025 at 6:28 AM
The “donations” are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. And donations to this nonprofit organization are tax deductible.
Also, the donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible.
Ultimately, it's still most probably a waste of tax money.
Ultimately, it's still most probably a waste of tax money.
October 24, 2025 at 6:27 AM
Also, the donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible.
Ultimately, it's still most probably a waste of tax money.
Ultimately, it's still most probably a waste of tax money.
The donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible. 😉
October 24, 2025 at 6:25 AM
The donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible. 😉
Besides, “privately funded” through tax-deductible donations a waste of money that would have otherwise been collected in taxes or used by another charity.
And those donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible.
And those donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible.
October 24, 2025 at 6:24 AM
Besides, “privately funded” through tax-deductible donations a waste of money that would have otherwise been collected in taxes or used by another charity.
And those donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible.
And those donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are indeed tax deductible.
Those donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are tax deductible.
Most probably, ultimately, this will be this much money not obtained and better used by the government for the benefit of the people.
Most probably, ultimately, this will be this much money not obtained and better used by the government for the benefit of the people.
October 24, 2025 at 6:18 AM
Those donations are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are tax deductible.
Most probably, ultimately, this will be this much money not obtained and better used by the government for the benefit of the people.
Most probably, ultimately, this will be this much money not obtained and better used by the government for the benefit of the people.
Also, I doubt this won't ultimately cost $250 millions in taxpayers money.
When they tell you the Ballroom is privately funded and won't use the taxpayers' money, keep in mind:
Those private “donations” are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are tax deductible.
That's money that probably won't be paid in taxes.
Those private “donations” are funneled through the Trust for the National Mall. Donations to this nonprofit organization are tax deductible.
That's money that probably won't be paid in taxes.
October 24, 2025 at 6:15 AM
Also, I doubt this won't ultimately cost $250 millions in taxpayers money.
It doesn't even hinge on that.
The author repeatedly claims sociology is an outlier, which implies that using Pearson's r to compute p-values makes no sense here.
The claim relies on a single point.
(Not to mention various choices reeking of p-hacking.)
The author repeatedly claims sociology is an outlier, which implies that using Pearson's r to compute p-values makes no sense here.
The claim relies on a single point.
(Not to mention various choices reeking of p-hacking.)
September 15, 2025 at 5:28 PM
It doesn't even hinge on that.
The author repeatedly claims sociology is an outlier, which implies that using Pearson's r to compute p-values makes no sense here.
The claim relies on a single point.
(Not to mention various choices reeking of p-hacking.)
The author repeatedly claims sociology is an outlier, which implies that using Pearson's r to compute p-values makes no sense here.
The claim relies on a single point.
(Not to mention various choices reeking of p-hacking.)
Alex Jones shared the zoomed-in uncensored footage of the CK's death.
He's only just trying to benefit from it, in any way possible.
He's only just trying to benefit from it, in any way possible.
September 15, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Alex Jones shared the zoomed-in uncensored footage of the CK's death.
He's only just trying to benefit from it, in any way possible.
He's only just trying to benefit from it, in any way possible.
I've also stumbled by this video that mentions the NDA you have to sign just for trying to apply to the program. And it's not looking great.
Taylor Lorenz, Chorus, and The Left's "Joe Rogan"
YouTube video by American Burnout
youtu.be
September 6, 2025 at 2:11 AM
I've also stumbled by this video that mentions the NDA you have to sign just for trying to apply to the program. And it's not looking great.
I love how point (2) is highlighted and point (3) is fully ignored. 🙄
Some other defensive arguments are also so tone deaf, like underlining that Chorus actually doesn't care if you speak, but can still sue you using the contract if it's really bad… which is something THEY would be the judge of.
Some other defensive arguments are also so tone deaf, like underlining that Chorus actually doesn't care if you speak, but can still sue you using the contract if it's really bad… which is something THEY would be the judge of.
September 6, 2025 at 2:08 AM
I love how point (2) is highlighted and point (3) is fully ignored. 🙄
Some other defensive arguments are also so tone deaf, like underlining that Chorus actually doesn't care if you speak, but can still sue you using the contract if it's really bad… which is something THEY would be the judge of.
Some other defensive arguments are also so tone deaf, like underlining that Chorus actually doesn't care if you speak, but can still sue you using the contract if it's really bad… which is something THEY would be the judge of.
The worst thing is the alleged editorial clauses, like needing permission to criticize DNC candidates.
B.T. Cohen has been extremely complacent with some DNC figures deserving of strong criticism. For example I don't want him keeping other people from criticizing Newsom as a threat to trans rights.
B.T. Cohen has been extremely complacent with some DNC figures deserving of strong criticism. For example I don't want him keeping other people from criticizing Newsom as a threat to trans rights.
September 5, 2025 at 8:56 PM
The worst thing is the alleged editorial clauses, like needing permission to criticize DNC candidates.
B.T. Cohen has been extremely complacent with some DNC figures deserving of strong criticism. For example I don't want him keeping other people from criticizing Newsom as a threat to trans rights.
B.T. Cohen has been extremely complacent with some DNC figures deserving of strong criticism. For example I don't want him keeping other people from criticizing Newsom as a threat to trans rights.
“Just pragmatic about it” like “leftists bad because they criticize DNC candidates we like”?
I'm worried about the alleged editorial clauses, that could for example be used to forbid partners from criticizing Newsom for his anti-trans bs.
I'm worried about the alleged editorial clauses, that could for example be used to forbid partners from criticizing Newsom for his anti-trans bs.
September 5, 2025 at 8:30 PM
“Just pragmatic about it” like “leftists bad because they criticize DNC candidates we like”?
I'm worried about the alleged editorial clauses, that could for example be used to forbid partners from criticizing Newsom for his anti-trans bs.
I'm worried about the alleged editorial clauses, that could for example be used to forbid partners from criticizing Newsom for his anti-trans bs.
Any link to a creator sharing the contact? (Or just examples of such creators so I can find it?)
September 5, 2025 at 8:23 PM
Any link to a creator sharing the contact? (Or just examples of such creators so I can find it?)
That's vile.
That's petty af.
But that's also so scientifically bankrupt to hope to find a gene for “AGP” that he could then find in trans people as a proof of AGP. This screams egregiously bad “science”. The guy is a clown.
That's petty af.
But that's also so scientifically bankrupt to hope to find a gene for “AGP” that he could then find in trans people as a proof of AGP. This screams egregiously bad “science”. The guy is a clown.
August 25, 2025 at 4:17 PM
That's vile.
That's petty af.
But that's also so scientifically bankrupt to hope to find a gene for “AGP” that he could then find in trans people as a proof of AGP. This screams egregiously bad “science”. The guy is a clown.
That's petty af.
But that's also so scientifically bankrupt to hope to find a gene for “AGP” that he could then find in trans people as a proof of AGP. This screams egregiously bad “science”. The guy is a clown.
It feels really much like conservatives wanting to feel and look kinda progressive, and not “as bad as *these* ones”.
A brand of “reasonable centrism” that's actually supporting the status quo.
A brand of “reasonable centrism” that's actually supporting the status quo.
August 24, 2025 at 4:22 AM
It feels really much like conservatives wanting to feel and look kinda progressive, and not “as bad as *these* ones”.
A brand of “reasonable centrism” that's actually supporting the status quo.
A brand of “reasonable centrism” that's actually supporting the status quo.
Let's also underline that not only are they legitimizing right-wing straw men, but also no, we should not not use those words.
Their list include “LGBTQIA+”, “Cisgender”, “Patriarchy”, “BIPOC”, “Incarcerated people”, …
They just wish some topics were just put back under the rug. 🙄
Their list include “LGBTQIA+”, “Cisgender”, “Patriarchy”, “BIPOC”, “Incarcerated people”, …
They just wish some topics were just put back under the rug. 🙄
August 24, 2025 at 4:11 AM
Let's also underline that not only are they legitimizing right-wing straw men, but also no, we should not not use those words.
Their list include “LGBTQIA+”, “Cisgender”, “Patriarchy”, “BIPOC”, “Incarcerated people”, …
They just wish some topics were just put back under the rug. 🙄
Their list include “LGBTQIA+”, “Cisgender”, “Patriarchy”, “BIPOC”, “Incarcerated people”, …
They just wish some topics were just put back under the rug. 🙄
No, those words are not particularly “bewildering to ESL speakers”, and are less so than, for example, “bewildering”, or even “obfuscatory” in Third Way's memo.
Those are not particularly hard or obscure words. Just words regarding topics privileged people want to hear less about.
Those are not particularly hard or obscure words. Just words regarding topics privileged people want to hear less about.
August 24, 2025 at 4:01 AM
No, those words are not particularly “bewildering to ESL speakers”, and are less so than, for example, “bewildering”, or even “obfuscatory” in Third Way's memo.
Those are not particularly hard or obscure words. Just words regarding topics privileged people want to hear less about.
Those are not particularly hard or obscure words. Just words regarding topics privileged people want to hear less about.
Yeah. I'm quite tired of seeing some Dem news channels consistently propping up the guy who threw trans people under the bus.
August 23, 2025 at 7:43 AM
Yeah. I'm quite tired of seeing some Dem news channels consistently propping up the guy who threw trans people under the bus.
What about those who are scared, and home? What about the green card holders, the naturalized citizens, the non-white birthright citizens?
July 12, 2025 at 9:27 PM
What about those who are scared, and home? What about the green card holders, the naturalized citizens, the non-white birthright citizens?