BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2
5.6K posts

BeDawg2 retweetledi

@jaypowell39 what are your thoughts about TX players in the bullpen heckling the opposing right fielder? Seems bush league.
English
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi

So let's unpack a few things right up front...
1) He left California and was in DC at the hotel where the WHCD was veing held.
2) Imagine the intent he had to have in order to travel that distance all the while thinking about what he was going to do.
3) He either moved several weapons or procured them in/around DC and figured out a way to get them in proximity to the WHCD.
4) He took the time to load the weapons on to his body (to reportedly include several knives) and nobody noticed.
5) Now here is the kicker...in his hidden location he was somehow aware that the President was in the room and was seated. How/when was he aware of that part?
6) If he wasn't a guest at the WHCD and he couldn't see the President from where he was....how did he know?
7) It's not like he could go look in the room and then go load up with his gear.
8) He was supposedly a guest at the exact hotel? Like every room in that place wasn't booked full over a month in advance? In DC, on a Saturday, with the WHCD in the same hotel....have you ever booked a hotel in DC during a Major Presidential event? Good luck!!!
All of it screams that he had help from someone in DC. Someone with some serious knowledge and capabilities.
You just don't pull off something like that on a whim and without some serious reconnaissance ahead of time.

English
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi
BeDawg2 retweetledi

The year is 1950. Your doctor lights a cigarette and tells you smoking is fine. He read it in a study. He is telling the truth about having read it. He does not know, or is not saying, that the study was funded by the tobacco industry.
The year is 1958. Your doctor tells you to eat less fat. The evidence is contested. The contestation is not in the public messaging. The food industry has been helpful in clarifying which findings deserve attention. Some researchers who published contradictory data have been quietly defunded. Ancel Keys is on the cover of Time magazine.
The year is 1962. Your doctor prescribes thalidomide to your pregnant wife for morning sickness. It has been approved. The FDA gave it the green light in Europe. Twelve thousand children will be born with severe limb malformations before anyone in an official capacity acknowledges the problem. The families are told the drug was safe. The drug was approved. Both of these things remain true.
The year is 1972. Your doctor prescribes Valium. Britain is in the grip of a benzodiazepine wave that will last two decades. The dependency risk is known internally. It is not shared. Your doctor is not lying to you. He was not told either.
The year is 1999. Your doctor prescribes Vioxx for your arthritis. It is newer than ibuprofen, well-tolerated, and Merck has a study showing it works. Merck also has internal data suggesting it roughly doubles the risk of heart attack. This data will not reach your doctor for four more years. Fifty thousand people are estimated to have died in the interim. Merck eventually settles for 4.85 billion dollars. No criminal charges are brought.
The year is 2002. Your doctor prescribes OxyContin. Purdue Pharma trained its sales representatives to tell doctors the addiction risk was less than one percent. That figure came from a letter, not a study. The letter was about patients with terminal cancer on short-term doses in hospital settings. Your doctor is a GP with a patient who has a bad back. Nobody draws a distinction. Nobody is required to.
The year is 2008. Your doctor checks your cholesterol. Your LDL is elevated. You are prescribed a statin. Nobody mentions that the number needed to treat for primary prevention is approximately 250. Nobody mentions that the muscle deterioration you'll notice over the next two years is listed as a rare side effect rather than a documented pattern affecting a meaningful percentage of patients. The trial that informed the prescription was funded by the manufacturer.
Now it is today.
Your doctor has new guidelines. New studies. New consensus.
He is confident.
He has always been confident.
The confidence has never been the problem.
The confidence is, in fact, precisely the problem.

English
BeDawg2 retweetledi

@tatereeves Since this, I’ve made it my next mission to visit Mississippi I’ve been researching.
I’m officially an @OleMissFB fan.
Time for me to “come to the ‘Sip”
English
BeDawg2 retweetledi

@DominicMcGregor Swamps are in Louisiana. Hillbillies are in Kentucky and West Virginia - so called because they were loyalists to King William and fled to the hills. Mississippi is a wonderful place with rich farmland and beautiful forests. My good friend in Cornwall has to work 3 jobs.
English

If the UK joined the US as the 51st state.
We would be the poorest state in the entire union.
Mississippi which is portrayed at swamp dwelling hillbillies in majority of international media is above us.
I don’t think people grasp how far we’ve fallen in real terms when it comes to GDP per capita.
We’ve seen no growth for almost an entire generations.
We’ve seen our productivity decrease and our tax increases.
The average person on the UK, on £50,000 is less well off than your average Mississippi swamp dweller.
Polymarket@Polymarket
JUST IN: New analysis reveals Brits thought the UK ranked 7th against US states in income per person — it actually ranked 51st.
English
BeDawg2 retweetledi

Mamdani Says City-Run Supermarket Will Be Ready In 3 Years But Recommends Getting In Line for Bread Now buff.ly/a6BFO8f

English
BeDawg2 retweetledi

Well it looks like the Pope’s interference in American politics is still top of the news cycle, so I want to repeat something.
The Democrat/Media Complex deliberately set this up so faithful Catholics would be forced to choose: Trump or your faith?
That’s a false dichotomy. The Pope is speaking on politics, offering his opinion only and he is not speaking ex cathedra.
You are not obligated to agree with the Pope in these matters where he speaks as an ordinary human.
If you are a Catholic, you can still support Trump, and disagree with what the Pope is saying about the Iran War and American politics, and still remain true to your Catholic faith.
Please do not fall for the either/or con job.
English
BeDawg2 retweetledi

So the Pope met with David Axelrod last week. David Axelrod. Obama's campaign architect. A man who is not Catholic, has never met a pope before, and whose entire career has been engineering political narratives for the American left.
And then, by pure coincidence, the Pope immediately started lobbing shots at the Trump administration, and three US Cardinals popped up on 60 Minutes doing the same thing.
All organically, I'm sure.
I'm a practicing Catholic. I need you to understand that part. But in my opinion, Trump has all the right to lash out at him. Maybe you'll disagree, but in the end, Trump talks like Trump. Water is wet. I'm talking about MY Church being run like a DNC satellite office but with a golden throne.
This is the same Vatican that watched governments padlock churches during COVID and said nothing. That let Biden take communion while funding abortion and said nothing. That fired Bishop Strickland for defending actual Church doctrine. That removed Bishop Fernández in Puerto Rico for defending religious exemptions THE CATECHISM ITSELF supports.
But somehow Trump is the threat to human dignity.
Pope Francis was bad. Leo has turned out to be worse. Francis at least was vague about his politics. Leo went and hired the consulting firm.
The man has ignored the slaughter of Christians across Nigeria, the Sahel, India, Syria, Bangladesh, Pakistan. Hundreds of believers murdered, churches burned, pastors kidnapped. His response? Platitudes about dialogue.
OF COURSE he won't even name who's doing the killing.
But he'll fly across continents to make interfaith gestures the week after his people coordinated a media hit on a sitting US president.
The weaponization of belief is obvious. You get the Pope to pick a fight with Trump, and suddenly millions of conservative Catholics have to choose between their faith and their vote.

English















