Methinks the JD doth protest too much.

Or trusted.

He’ll answer in two weeks.

I’m guessing that’s in reference to your reply to someone else about messages going out asking for donations after the supreme court decision? That may be in poor taste, I’ll grant you, bug doesn’t change the fact that it still wasn’t the democrats that made the decision in the first place.

If Person A punches Person B, and Person C could have stopped it, I would still blame Person A for throwing the punch.

I mean, I am utterly befuddled at how you could reach that conclusion.

It’s a bold take to blame the side that failed to prevent something, rather than the side that actually did the thing.

But not from X. Checkmate haters.

What an oddly flattering photo of Trump.

The real Reddit 2014 memes were the friends we made along the way.

I feel like you’re overestimating your ability to subtly shit yourself.

I too am a fan of the film Sesevenen.

I’ll grant you, Boebert wasn’t the first person to make the claim. But I doubt she’s got an awareness of historical allegations from an association that most people who don’t follow boxing won’t have heard of. I suspect she’s either jumping on a bandwagon of other people making the claim, or making a claim based on her ‘feeling’ that Khelif doesn’t look traditionally feminine.

But it didn’t. She was disqualified from the competition, it wasn’t clearly stated why. And as previously mentioned, there are huge questions of trustworthiness regarding that organisation. I also have my doubts that Lauren Boebert has any awareness of previous allegations, but suspect she has just jumped on an assumption as many online seem to have done.

The ‘accusation’ is that Imane Khelif is a ‘biological male’, which is absolutely some bullshit she just made up. Maybe there’s an argument to be had around testosterone levels in female athletes (although again, the allegation that Khelif has higher than average levels has not actually been corroborated) but I personally don’t think so, and I don’t think this is an example that necessitates that conversation.

I would disagree. As another poster pointed out, there are serious questions about the integrity of the IBA, not least the fact that they aren’t recognised by the IOC. To suggest that the IOC wouldn’t have clear eligibility criteria feels at best misguided.

He’s playing both sides, so he’ll always come out on top.

Oboe - oh bow

I worry this isn’t the most helpful guide even for someone who speaks English as a first language, is that bow as in bow, or bow?

Frivolity makes absolute sense to describe the suit as frivolous, but just makes it sound a bit too lackadaisical for my liking.

Maybe I’m just being too forgiving, but I don’t have an issue with this headline. For me, something being clickbait or not comes down to whether I have to open the article to get an overview or if I can get it from the headline alone. In this case, I’d say it’s the latter. You are more than welcome to your own opinion on that.

Well, every article or story want you to read the whole thing, otherwise newspapers and magazines would cut themselves down to only headlines. In my opinion, headlines like this one give you an overview, and give you enough to decide if you’d want to read more, for details, context etc., whereas ‘clickbait’ headlines don’t even give you that, and you have to click to find out whether you want to read more or not. This title still tells you who (Boebert), what (laughed at), where (House floor), and why (fact checked), even if not when, so covers a lot of the vital information you’d want, even if slightly exaggerating the extent.