I especially like how he acknowledges no one believes that money is going to be spent building a ballroom on federal land without saying it.

I'm not sure you do get my point.

My point is ChatGPT never does what you're doing.
ChatGPT is always non-judgemental and helpful. Chat GPT is never offended, never bullying, never condescending.

This is why people are becoming so emotionally dependent on ChatGPT. Not because they're childish.

Get into what?

You made a generalization, I made a generalization. We're generalizing.

You responded to my generalization as if I was talking specifically about you. Weird!

For the other kids on the playground, please confirm we don't know each other.

Things *were* different 20 yrs ago. US Iraq invasion, not only the greatest geopolitical blunder in US history, but set the stage for epic corruption and Trump. At the time, no one gave a damn. Even Abu Ghraib didn't prevent Americans from re-electing George Bush. That's how much no one cared.

Not Garland. John Roberts SCOTUS.

Bolsonaro prosecution: identical timeline with Garland, same 4-year deadline. It was successfully completed because no Brazilian court slow-walked it like SCOTUS.

Regardless, the Georgia state charges had nothing to do with the federal cases.

Generalization: a broad statement or conclusion drawn from specific examples, observations, or data — often by noticing patterns and assuming those patterns apply more widely.

via ChatGPT

I'd like to see more journalists talk about the (considerable) utility of AI in reducing the 20-year, ever-growing, mountain of tedious, maddening, drudgery created by lazy developers and rapacious tech investors that has crushed all the joy out of work and human existence.

ChatGPT for the win.

Or the passionate devotion, longing, pride, heartbreak any person with a penis feels toward cars.

Ok, that makes no sense and your dudgeon is misplaced. If you don't need explanations, stop posting nonsensical silly comments.

Alternatively, you could also say Democrats are finally getting some of their rightful share of those billions of $$$ of free campaign advertising media gave Trump in 2016.

More nerd-dom: the question is not whether it's a right or wrong font, it's that the fonts are different.

If you want to identify the fonts you can put screenshots into www.whatfontis.com

I think we're witnessing the beginning of that economists, historians, lawyers and others stepping in to do what most people think of as journalism, in addition to some amazing journalists such as pro publica, popular information, wired, bellingcat and others.

THIS.

It's not a kerning issue--it's another font entirely, and--if you want to nerd out for a second--the x-height is very different so whoever did this tried to resize the words (as images) to make it match. That's why the kerning looks so weird.

What's disheartening is how steadfastly media has refused to report or even acknowledge this with its "half the country" scare tactics for TEN YEARS.

Media made Trump. Without media, Trump couldn't have mainstreamed MAGA.

Because $$$.

#mediadoyourfuckingjob

Anything that can get people fighting with each other instead of uniting against a common enemy has value, I've observed.

That said, this doesn't sound like how trolls operate; it's too straightforward, and there aren't enough contradictions--something for everyone to disagree with is the goal.