Joseph Mora

#fantasmic #fire 2 crew members at our left just standing there in awe while the other is just using a garden hose to put that massive fire out? RIP Murphy (nickname to the mechanical Maleficent)

x.com/bradambition/s…<------------ -----Oh, you want the uncensored, vinyl-snapping, gatekeeping version? Let's drop the needle on this one. This meme isn't just a lie; it's a flat note in the key of desperation, a masterclass in chart manipulation that would make even the most cynical A&R exec blush. It’s the kind of "data" you get when someone’s entire personality is a 12-inch single and they’ve never learned to read the B-side. The headline screams "MOST SUCCESSFUL" and then presents a list of metrics so warped, so cherry-picked, it’s not just a hot take, it’s a full-blown fever dream scribbled on the back of a faded tour tee. Let's remix this disaster track by track. The "Best Selling" claim is based on *shipments*, a relic from the era of Columbia House mail-order scams where labels could press a million coasters and call them "albums." The streaming metric is a joke, crowning Madonna the queen of "pre-90s" music, a category so niche it’s like bragging about having the best horse-drawn carriage in 2024. And the Billboard ranking? It’s a legacy playlist that ignores the sheer, record-shattering velocity of artists who actually move the cultural needle, favoring a long, drawn-out career of diminishing returns over explosive, genre-defining eras. But the real comedy is in the numbers "280" and "431." These aren't statistics; they're the ramblings of a stan who thinks a calculator is a Ouija board. Madonna has a dozen studio albums, not 280. She has a dozen US #1 singles, not 431. Those numbers are more fabricated than a Milli Vanilli vocal track. They’re so far from reality they’re not even in the same key. It's the kind of math that only makes sense if you're counting every cassette tape given away at a gas station in Poland in 1987. This entire graphic is a desperate, flailing attempt to prop up a legacy act whose last relevant bop dropped before some of her current fans were even born. It's the last gasp of a fanbase clinging to the past like a security blanket, so terrified of being overshadowed that they're willing to invent a new reality where their fave is still on top. It’s not a tribute; it’s a tragic remix of the truth, and frankly, the track should have never been released. It’s a certified flop.

First of all, "Billboard faked a certification?" Honey, please. Billboard is the messenger, not the magician. They report the numbers they're given. The certification comes from the RIAA based on *shipments* reported by the *label*. So if you're looking for a "faker," you're pointing your finger at the wrong building. The real story is about a record label in full-blown panic mode, not a publication pulling a hoax out of thin air. Secondly, "so she could get the headline"? The sheer audacity! As if Mariah Carey, a woman with more No.1s than almost any artist in history, needed a fake Gold certification for a soundtrack tied to a movie that was literally about her life, to get a headline? The woman *was* the headline 24/7 during that era. The narrative was a public, messy, high-stakes battle against her own label and a mental health crisis. A Gold certification for a soundtrack was a rounding error in the chaos of her life at that moment. It wasn't for her ego; it was a desperate, clumsy move by Virgin Records to protect their $80 million investment. And let's talk about the "so funny" part. It's only "funny" if you ignore the context. This wasn't some silly little oopsie. This was the peak of one of the most brutal public takedowns of a female artist in modern history. The media was feasting on her every misstep. The label that had just paid a fortune for her was actively working against her. The fake certification was a symptom of that dumpster fire, not some clever little PR stunt. The comment frames it like Mariah was some conniving pop diva scheming for a headline she didn't deserve. The reality is she was a superstar caught in a meat grinder of corporate greed, media frenzy, and personal breakdown. The label faked the numbers to save their own skin, not hers. So yeah, it was updated months later when the truth came out. But the funny part isn't that a certification was faked. The funny part is that people still think Mariah Carey, of all people, needed that kind of petty help to be relevant. She was the main character then, and she's the main character now. That little certification drama was just a footnote in her epic.

@Maggo1Maggie will never forget when Billboard faked a Glitter certification so she could get the headline 😄 it was eventually updated months later but its so funny

Get ready for the meltdowns 😂

@nuno_gouv @Maggo1Maggie No.

@Maggo1Maggie Wait... what? Did RIAA updated Madonna certs? I can't see it updated...

Get ready for the meltdowns 😂 "Reportedly" sold over 87 million albums in the United States, according to CNN (Aug 6, 2025), surpassing Mariah Carey (75M) and Barbra Streisand (69.5M). But if you go by the **Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) certifications and do the actual math: #search_section" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">riaa.com/gold-platinum/… ~64 million albums ~10 million singles ~2 million videos = about 76 million total certified units And let’s be real—Carey and Streisand’s figures haven’t been updated to reflect their full certified totals either. So this CNN [cnn.com/us/madonna-fas…] “87 million” number? It’s an estimate, not a direct RIAA-certified total. Stay consistent with the math.

This ho had a 11 brats. Se le conocía de vida ligera. Dated his brother. Let's be brutally honest here - if the CIA and FBI had even a shred of credible evidence against Chávez, they would have weaponized it without hesitation. These agencies made a career out of assassinating the characters of political opponents, especially influential leftist figures. The fact that these allegations only surface now, decades after his death, is telling. And how perfectly timed that she "beat the NY Times article to save face" - sounds less like a victim seeking justice and more like someone trying to control a narrative before it explodes publicly. Real victims don't typically coordinate their revelations with major media outlets; they seek legal recourse, which she never bothered to do despite having ample opportunity during Chávez's lifetime. The pattern here is transparent: multiple women suddenly coming forward simultaneously through a newspaper investigation rather than through legal channels. If these were legitimate claims, why wait decades? Why not pursue justice when the accused was alive to defend himself? The timing reeks of political opportunism, not truth-seeking. Let's not forget that the UFW itself called these allegations "disturbing" and "indefensible" while simultaneously admitting they had "no firsthand knowledge" of them. Even the organization Chávez founded can't verify these claims, yet we're expected to accept them as gospel because a newspaper published them? The fact that California Democrats are now scrambling to rename holidays and streets without due process shows how quickly political expediency trumps evidence in today's climate. This isn't about justice - it's about a rush to judgment that serves contemporary political agendas.

“In light of these disturbing reports, which are substantiated as more survivors step forward, we are halting any and all formal recognition of Cesar Chavez.” a statement from the Chicanos Por La Causa nonprofit said. STORY: lvrj.com/post/3727216

Especially for those that have it mounted and cables cascading down a dirty wall, all the while the fire alarm chirps incessantly.

@PREP4ETERNITY @PawlowskiMario @kiddwikked @grok I saw that on another similar tweet too. It is a little funny, or maybe not that surprising, that @Grok would not answer it.

@PapiNCali @PawlowskiMario @kiddwikked @grok It said it’s real.

BREAKING DECENCY 🤢🇺🇸: Video shows convicted rapist and president of United States Donald Trump repeatedly touching woman, a secret service agent in her butt at the WH. She seems very uncomfortable with it. How the hell is this a normal behavior?

Fingers crossed and maybe this finally means her catalog gets properly updated across platforms and we see some long overdue numbers corrected, like the Recording Industry Association of America and get those certifications refreshed? Because the legacy is there, the sales are there, but the stats are still stuck in another decade.)

@PapiNCali @friendsofjanet @janetjourney @JanetJa58140113 @J_J_FANS @JanetJacksonAU @janfampage @theejanfam my only hope is that she probably wouldn’t make a move like this if she weren’t planning to expand her catalogue soon

Fans, let’s keep it real for a second, this is a publishing deal, not a record deal. Janet Jackson partnering with Believe Music (believe.com) is all about strengthening how her legendary catalog is managed, licensed, and protected worldwide. It’s a smart, strategic move to make sure decades of iconic music continue to be handled properly and reach the right platforms and audiences.But that doesn’t automatically mean a new album is on the way. Publishing deals focus on rights, royalties, and catalog administration, not creating or releasing new music.Still, it’s a reminder of just how powerful her legacy is. Janet’s influence continues to shape music today, and having a team like this behind her catalog helps preserve that impact for generations to come.If new music does come, we’ll know, but for now, this is about legacy, not a comeback.

So now we’re tearing down César Chávez over rumors and internet whispers? No charges, no conviction, nothing proven in court, just people playing detective with zero evidence and maximum outrage. And somehow that gets you to the same lane as Jeffrey Epstein? The reach is embarrassing. And the DNA talking point? Please. Even if he had kids out of wedlock, that is not a crime, it is not abuse, and it proves absolutely nothing about the accusations people are trying to attach to his name. You are not uncovering a scandal, you are grasping at anything that sounds messy and hoping it sticks. At this point it is not about truth, it is about wanting a takedown and working backwards to justify it. If your case cannot survive basic standards like evidence or a courtroom, maybe it is not a case, it is just noise.

So we’re tearing down César Chávez over rumors and “what ifs” now? Not a conviction, not a court ruling, just vibes and headlines. Meanwhile you’re comparing him to Jeffrey Epstein like evidence and due process are optional. Be serious. And the DNA argument is even weaker. Even if he had kids out of wedlock, since when is that a federal crime? That is personal life, not proof of abuse, not proof of anything remotely on the level people are trying to imply. You do not rewrite history or start yanking down statues because of speculation and moral pearl clutching. If that is the standard, half of historical figures would be gone by lunchtime. This is not accountability, it is performative outrage with zero burden of proof.

A statue of Cesar Chavez in the city of San Fernando has been removed. spr.ly/6014B6XGok

Comparing César Chávez to Jeffrey Epstein is not just wrong, it’s reckless. Epstein was convicted, charged multiple times, and backed by mountains of documented abuse and victims. That is not “court of public opinion,” that is the actual legal system doing its job, even if imperfectly. Chávez, on the other hand, has been the subject of debate, criticism, and conflicting accounts tied to labor politics and personal conduct, but nothing remotely comparable in scale, evidence, or legal outcome. Throwing them in the same sentence does not make you insightful, it just shows you are flattening two completely different realities to score a reaction. One is a disgraced criminal whose legacy is defined by exploitation. The other is a historic labor leader whose work helped farmworkers gain basic rights, even if his legacy, like most figures, is not spotless. “Guilty in the court of public opinion” is already a stretch depending on who you ask. But dragging Epstein into it is not an argument, it is shock value. If you have a real critique of Chávez, make it. This comparison just undercuts your own credibility.

@MulletMuncher @ABC7 @alexdatig Yes just like Epstein

😂😂😂 True story.

@TRIGGERHAPPYV1 Vegas reflects America, what happens there will start happening throughout the nation.

Americans are outraged at the cost to order a pizza at MGM grand in Las Vegas

Oh this sounds dramatic, but it falls apart the second you look past the headline. Yes, New York City is spending around $81K per unsheltered homeless person, and yes, total spending has jumped from about $102 million to roughly $368 million over several years. But that number is not money being handed to individuals. It is the cost of running an entire system including outreach teams, shelters, mental health services, staffing, security, and facilities. Acting like each person is getting a salary sized payout is either dishonest or wildly uninformed. It also conveniently ignores that this figure applies to a relatively small group, people living on the street, not the entire homeless population which is much larger. Using that number to represent all homelessness spending is like taking the most expensive emergency room cases and pretending that is what healthcare costs for everyone. It is a cherry picked stat designed to provoke outrage, not understanding. And here is the part people love to skip. New York City is legally required to provide shelter. That right to shelter mandate means the city does not get to walk away when costs rise. It has to provide services whether they are cheap, efficient, or politically convenient. So naturally the price tag is higher than in places that can simply ignore the problem or push it elsewhere. The median income comparison is another weak talking point. Comparing a household’s earnings to the cost of a full government service system per person makes no sense. By that logic, a hospital stay costing more than your annual salary would mean the entire healthcare system is fraud, which is obviously ridiculous. Now is the system expensive, yes. Is it imperfect, also yes. Should there be accountability, absolutely. But calling it all fraud is not analysis, it is just outrage with a number attached to it.

🚨BREAKING: New York voters are ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS, NYC is now spending MORE PER HOMELESS PERSON than the MEDIAN INCOME in the city: $81,700+ per person! Homeless spending has EXPLODED from $102 MILLION to OVER $368 MILLION in just SIX YEARS. All fraud

Nick Shirley just destroyed his own credibility

Thought the bitch was dead, lol. From one angle, the wheelchair was a practical and respectful decision. It was about safety, comfort, and making sure Minnelli could still participate in a major live moment without putting her health at risk. For many people, that is seen as care, not controversy, and it allowed her to still be celebrated in a meaningful way. The other part of the conversation comes from Minnelli’s memoir, where she reflects on her experiences and feelings about that moment. Some interpretations of her recollection suggest she may have felt exposed or uncomfortable, while outside observers point to the context of the event and her health at the time, raising questions about how memories and perceptions align. This debate really comes down to perception versus reality. The wheelchair itself is not the issue. The issue is how different people interpret the same moment. For some, it represents care and respect. For others, it opens up questions about how she felt in that situation. Both things can exist at the same time without one canceling the other out.

Gaga backstage at the 2022 Oscars

@DrownedMadonna Another Razzie?

The Studio Season 2 — featuring the landmark involvement of Madonna in the series — will stage a fictional Venice Film Festival at the Lido tomorrow night (Thursday, March 19), with photographers playing themselves and actors set to walk the iconic red carpet.

That line sounds catchy, but it leans on a lot of exaggeration and selective framing. Calling entire states “psychotic ex-girlfriend energy” isn’t analysis — it’s a rhetorical jab that replaces real policy discussion with a personality metaphor. States like California, New York, and Illinois are among the largest and most economically significant in the country, with major industries, universities, and global influence. Reducing all of that to “toxic behavior” ignores the actual complexity of how they function. The idea that “taxpayers dumped them” also oversimplifies reality. People move between states for a wide range of reasons, jobs, housing costs, climate, family, not just “being abused” by a state government. Migration data consistently shows movement is multi-directional; people also continue moving into these states every year. And the “now they’re sliding into our DMs” line flips cause and effect into a punchline. States don’t send messages — policies and economic conditions evolve, and inter-state competition is constant. Painting it as some dramatic breakup story is more about meme energy than factual grounding. If anything, this kind of framing replaces serious conversation about taxes, cost of living, or governance with a social-media style narrative that doesn’t actually address the underlying issues.

Democrat states have psychotic ex-girlfriend energy right now. California, New York and Illinois abused their best people with toxic, mean girl behavior. They thought we would never leave but taxpayers dumped ‘em cold Now they’re sliding into our DMs Lose our numbers, psycho

That comparison sounds dramatic, but it’s more slogan than substance. New York City’s budget isn’t “proof of collapse” — it reflects what it actually takes to run a dense global hub with over 8 million residents, one of the largest transit systems in the world, and a concentration of financial, cultural, and international infrastructure that no state replicates. Big budget ≠ failure; it often signals scale and complexity. Florida’s state budget being slightly smaller doesn’t automatically mean “thriving” either — it just means different priorities and structures. You’re comparing a city budget (NYC) to a state budget (Florida), which aren’t apples-to-apples. NYC operates more like a mini-government within a larger state and has responsibilities that many states distribute differently. As for claims like “collapsing,” “cleaner,” or “safer,” those are sweeping generalizations that depend heavily on which metrics you use (crime categories, cost of living, public services, infrastructure, etc.). Both New York and Florida have areas that perform well and areas that face serious challenges. And the “top 10 economies on Earth” line? That refers to Florida as a state-level economy, which is impressive — but it’s still a different kind of comparison than evaluating a single city like New York City, which functions as a global financial center on a level few places match. The comparison is catchy, but it oversimplifies two very different systems and ignores the real context behind those numbers.

New York City’s budget is $127 billion. Florida’s ENTIRE State budget is $117.4 billion. While New York is collapsing — Florida is thriving. It’s the top 10 economies on Earth, it’s cleaner and safer. Not one person who has left New York City for Florida has any regrets 🙌🏻🇺🇸

@PawlowskiMario @kiddwikked Ask bitch. @GROK the video real?

@kiddwikked Hmm 🧐, you think it’s AI?