Mr. Beerd
@mrbeerd.bsky.social
Atheist, humanist, lover of science, inventor, Certified SolidWorks Professional, horror enthusiast, Urbansteader, maker of beers, meads, & country wines.
This is the stupidest timeline.
I'm ready to wake up from this alternate universe.
I'm ready to wake up from this alternate universe.
November 29, 2025 at 11:19 PM
This is the stupidest timeline.
I'm ready to wake up from this alternate universe.
I'm ready to wake up from this alternate universe.
Does issuing orders from a personal platform constitute any sort of validation to them?
November 29, 2025 at 4:01 PM
Does issuing orders from a personal platform constitute any sort of validation to them?
...charitable, & educational institutions with the Revenue Act of 1913.
Which was later refined and incorporated in 1954 with the IRC Section 501(c)(3).
There is no evidence the reasoning was based on voting rights.
Which was later refined and incorporated in 1954 with the IRC Section 501(c)(3).
There is no evidence the reasoning was based on voting rights.
November 28, 2025 at 3:31 PM
...charitable, & educational institutions with the Revenue Act of 1913.
Which was later refined and incorporated in 1954 with the IRC Section 501(c)(3).
There is no evidence the reasoning was based on voting rights.
Which was later refined and incorporated in 1954 with the IRC Section 501(c)(3).
There is no evidence the reasoning was based on voting rights.
That's not correct. It had nothing to do with voting. They were considered public aid. It was common law that was adopted by colonials to provide tax relief (property tax) to churches.
Then after the 16th amendment was ratified, Congress explicitly eliminated taxes for religious, scientific, &
Then after the 16th amendment was ratified, Congress explicitly eliminated taxes for religious, scientific, &
November 28, 2025 at 3:27 PM
That's not correct. It had nothing to do with voting. They were considered public aid. It was common law that was adopted by colonials to provide tax relief (property tax) to churches.
Then after the 16th amendment was ratified, Congress explicitly eliminated taxes for religious, scientific, &
Then after the 16th amendment was ratified, Congress explicitly eliminated taxes for religious, scientific, &
So amazing. Very well done.
What color are you going for? Will you glaze them as well?
What color are you going for? Will you glaze them as well?
November 27, 2025 at 5:59 PM
So amazing. Very well done.
What color are you going for? Will you glaze them as well?
What color are you going for? Will you glaze them as well?
I call bullshit. They were all told what he would do; they mocked and dismissed the warnings.
They believed the lies and fairytales because that's what they are brainwashed into doing at birth.
The rest did understand, but they thought they would be spared for voting for the felon.
They believed the lies and fairytales because that's what they are brainwashed into doing at birth.
The rest did understand, but they thought they would be spared for voting for the felon.
November 27, 2025 at 2:52 PM
I call bullshit. They were all told what he would do; they mocked and dismissed the warnings.
They believed the lies and fairytales because that's what they are brainwashed into doing at birth.
The rest did understand, but they thought they would be spared for voting for the felon.
They believed the lies and fairytales because that's what they are brainwashed into doing at birth.
The rest did understand, but they thought they would be spared for voting for the felon.
First, all parties in the House & Senate need to be convinced, then they need to ACT like he doesn't and stop caving to the toddler's temper tantrums.
November 27, 2025 at 1:41 AM
First, all parties in the House & Senate need to be convinced, then they need to ACT like he doesn't and stop caving to the toddler's temper tantrums.
Protect ICE from what?
The police are just as bad, if not worse, than ICE.
Are police really required to swear an oath to the community? If so, they constantly break that oath.
The police are just as bad, if not worse, than ICE.
Are police really required to swear an oath to the community? If so, they constantly break that oath.
November 26, 2025 at 9:27 PM
Protect ICE from what?
The police are just as bad, if not worse, than ICE.
Are police really required to swear an oath to the community? If so, they constantly break that oath.
The police are just as bad, if not worse, than ICE.
Are police really required to swear an oath to the community? If so, they constantly break that oath.
🙄
First, focus on the scammers in Congress and the White House.
First, focus on the scammers in Congress and the White House.
November 26, 2025 at 9:19 PM
🙄
First, focus on the scammers in Congress and the White House.
First, focus on the scammers in Congress and the White House.
Well, IMO, "national security" is just a euphemism for "rights don't matter and we (the government)can do anything we want".
Leaking the tapes/files is that which most supports justice and accountability. It supports the duty to stop protecting rapists and pedophiles. It supports the victims.
Leaking the tapes/files is that which most supports justice and accountability. It supports the duty to stop protecting rapists and pedophiles. It supports the victims.
November 26, 2025 at 8:58 PM
Well, IMO, "national security" is just a euphemism for "rights don't matter and we (the government)can do anything we want".
Leaking the tapes/files is that which most supports justice and accountability. It supports the duty to stop protecting rapists and pedophiles. It supports the victims.
Leaking the tapes/files is that which most supports justice and accountability. It supports the duty to stop protecting rapists and pedophiles. It supports the victims.
*almost* is doing A LOT of heavy lifting...🤭😛
November 26, 2025 at 6:21 PM
*almost* is doing A LOT of heavy lifting...🤭😛
So long as they are kept safe, they should bring all the names forward.
November 26, 2025 at 2:48 AM
So long as they are kept safe, they should bring all the names forward.
I know what "crime" would attempt to be laid out... something national security.
Unless, as far as I'm aware, a judge has deemed any information or testimony to be kept quiet as to not jeopardize any proceedings (which would be contempt, I think); I can't think of any crime it could fall under.
Unless, as far as I'm aware, a judge has deemed any information or testimony to be kept quiet as to not jeopardize any proceedings (which would be contempt, I think); I can't think of any crime it could fall under.
November 26, 2025 at 2:46 AM
I know what "crime" would attempt to be laid out... something national security.
Unless, as far as I'm aware, a judge has deemed any information or testimony to be kept quiet as to not jeopardize any proceedings (which would be contempt, I think); I can't think of any crime it could fall under.
Unless, as far as I'm aware, a judge has deemed any information or testimony to be kept quiet as to not jeopardize any proceedings (which would be contempt, I think); I can't think of any crime it could fall under.
Indeed!
They're just too stupid to realize it.
They're just too stupid to realize it.
November 26, 2025 at 2:42 AM
Indeed!
They're just too stupid to realize it.
They're just too stupid to realize it.
If there wasn't such a misogynistic view when it comes to the victims, and if there was any accountability laid at the perpetrators feet; I'm not sure how much good it would do to let them safely speak in public.
I'd be all for the victims to speak publicly. It's so fucked up though.
I'd be all for the victims to speak publicly. It's so fucked up though.
November 26, 2025 at 2:41 AM
If there wasn't such a misogynistic view when it comes to the victims, and if there was any accountability laid at the perpetrators feet; I'm not sure how much good it would do to let them safely speak in public.
I'd be all for the victims to speak publicly. It's so fucked up though.
I'd be all for the victims to speak publicly. It's so fucked up though.
Or of even reading about it.
That's why I mentioned leaking the info. If there is no evidence as to who or how the information made it into the public eye, then they have no way of arresting anyone.
It would be foolish for the administration to try to scapegoat someone as well.
That's why I mentioned leaking the info. If there is no evidence as to who or how the information made it into the public eye, then they have no way of arresting anyone.
It would be foolish for the administration to try to scapegoat someone as well.
November 26, 2025 at 1:24 AM
Or of even reading about it.
That's why I mentioned leaking the info. If there is no evidence as to who or how the information made it into the public eye, then they have no way of arresting anyone.
It would be foolish for the administration to try to scapegoat someone as well.
That's why I mentioned leaking the info. If there is no evidence as to who or how the information made it into the public eye, then they have no way of arresting anyone.
It would be foolish for the administration to try to scapegoat someone as well.
I'd have thought that by now people would've leaked some actual documents.
They must've been under hardcore surveillance, or they literally are fine with rape.
They must've been under hardcore surveillance, or they literally are fine with rape.
November 26, 2025 at 12:39 AM
I'd have thought that by now people would've leaked some actual documents.
They must've been under hardcore surveillance, or they literally are fine with rape.
They must've been under hardcore surveillance, or they literally are fine with rape.
When the dumbest people commit crimes...
November 26, 2025 at 12:37 AM
When the dumbest people commit crimes...
You seem to have missed my point. 😔
November 25, 2025 at 9:52 PM
You seem to have missed my point. 😔
The headline used the plural variant, which insinuates the mainstream consensus is validating stupidity.
Scientists do not do that.
Scientists do not do that.
November 25, 2025 at 9:06 PM
The headline used the plural variant, which insinuates the mainstream consensus is validating stupidity.
Scientists do not do that.
Scientists do not do that.