You're probably getting suggestions for what she should do different because, at least at a starting point, it could just as easily be something her phone is doing before sending as it is something your phone is doing on the receiving end.
I've had a phone say 'video to big, do you want to crop or share through abc app' before. Don't recall the exact message, but seems more likely than you phone downgrading something it's receiving.
There's obviously been a drop in his coherence, but it's not like he was smart and now he's dumb... He's always babbled bullshit at a 5th grade level at best, he's just had enough money and undeserved confidence behind him that he could mostly muddle through an interview just sounding smarmy and punchable.... Now he's also dealing with dementia to the point where he literally can't remember what he started bullshitting about.
Do you have any hints at what would make you consider him not stupid, historically? Being confident and narcissistic, and even talented at bullshit doesn't make you smart. And recognizing weaknesses in the system isn't really smart, even if it is perceptive, when those weaknesses are really just strong arm tactics that happen to be available to him through brazenness, inheritance, litigation, cruelty and others recognizing him as a convenient money laundering option.
That's not a good parallel, it's the politically 'motivated' part he's referring to. If someone is being prosecuted because they're running for office, and you have a legitimate argument that if they had chosen not to run for office the charges would have been dropped, it's legitimate to say it's politically motivated.
On the other hand, if your crime was literally campaign finance crimes and voter manipulation, there's a reasonable argument that 'politically motivated' isn't necessarily a bad thing here. If you did a political crime, and seem likely to continue to be politically motivated to commit more crimes, it kind of makes sense that prosecuting you with a tiny bit of political intent isn't totally unreasonable.
Maybe they'll find Leon working at Four Season Total Landscaping
Well it was just a joke based on the fact that Al and AI look identical in most fonts, and difficult distinguish in most others.
Yeah, guess i meant i doubt Walmart chooses to sell his chocolate based on the chocolate. I mean it could be fine, but unless he's really talented in chocolate making and extremely economical, I'm reasonably sure they're selling a box with the name 'Mr Beast' on it that happens to contain chocolate. If that name ever becomes neutral or negative in driving sales, i would be shocked if they keep it based on quality.
Imagine the suspension of intellect it must take to admit that Russia is willing to pay you push the narrative you are already pushing, or are willing to push, and then considering yourself a victim for doing it.
You weren't the target, you were the tool.
True, but I'm the context of the film, it was set in (then) current day, and at least partially tried to make him being left behind plausible in that context.
Though honestly, with the way they showed the mix-up even back then, it's plausible the same thing could happen with a kid now... If they look similar enough, and the parents were seriously distracted, it's not like they have id for the kids or anything now. It's parents dragging kids along and once you're past security it's basically the ticket agents glancing to make sure the number of people and number of tickets match.
I don't think you could make a Deadpool 1 again because they never made a Deadpool 1. You could easily make Deadpool again, they do that all the time and it kind of sucks because you have to label it like Deadpool (2016) and Deadpool (2024).
Mostly you couldn't make Deadpool today because it takes way, way longer than that to make a feature length film. Maybe you could do a YouTube short or something if you get started now. It's already almost noon.
Second job overnights at a gas station... Pretty much any combination of right/left hand, upside down/mirrored, cursive/text, words forward/letters backwards, etc.
The problem with that is that, being on the reasonable side, if we just assume the obvious and then are somehow 'proven' wrong on a specific topic (there are thousands of them, so it's bound to happen sometime) we legitimately lose actual credibility in the eyes of people who matter.
Like the 'they're eating the dogs!' things. It's perfectly reasonable to mock him for it being an issue, but insisting it has never happened and that even the idea is ridiculous, opens the entire side to being wrong if even one crazy or oblivious person of color has ever done it, which it almost certainly has. I mean if you look hard enough, you could probably find a crazy example of that from any cultural group. One example and pretty much all the mocking gets flipped around in the minds of anyone only half paying attention, and certainly from the other side next time we insist something doesn't happen.