Does America break up families, keep kids in cages, and abuse illegal immigrants? Obviously, not enough or there would be far fewer illegal immigrants. (They're far more looped into the risks than the average Joe). The facts are this is rare, temporary, this has been done forever (and under the Obama and Clinton administrations), and the idea that criminals shouldn't be separated from their kids is absurd. Under the Democrats reasoning, for domestic crime, it is fine to separate families. But for foreign invaders and perpetrators should get special exceptions. But a nation without laws is no longer a nation.
IG report has many startling revelations: there was rampant anti-Trump bias and at least 5 different people that should be investigated for that bias (not counting Comey was a partisan Hillary supporter), there was a rampant incompetence and insubordination by Comey (he deliberately concealed his plans for the July Press conference to exonerate Hillary, based on overwhelming evidence against her), the FBI had hid evidence from Congressional investigators (newly discovered Strzok texts that had been redacted), Obama lied to the public about Hillary's emails, Hillary was guilty of a crime (and her servers had been compromised and secret documents stolen) and the FBI under Comey's leadership went completely off book to protect her and her cronies from prosecution.
Facts: Trump was right, his detractors wrong with regards to Comey's firing (it was justified: not obstruction), Comey was so clueless that he didn't know that Anthony Weiner was Huma Abadin's spouse, Comey's revisiting of the Weiner emails was likely because the FBI was trying to stall reopening until after the election (or forever) but panicked when the NY AG asked about the laptop (so reopening was trying to protect Hillary's legacy and not sabotage her election), Obama lied about Hillary's emails in that he was aware of her private server and was kept aware of her investigation (he lied to the public about both, and had a conflict of interest/obstruction of justice in the case), Hillary was guilty and leaked national secrets and her investigation was corrupted, and Comey and staff had doctored his statements on multiple occasions to protect her from justice.
Media: The media (CNN, MSNBC, NYT and others) focused on Horowitz’s measured response of saying while they didn't find the smoking gun of anyone admitting in writing that they were doing partisan things for partisan reasons, that "we couldn't prove that [the FBI] was free of bias". The opposition media flipped "we couldn't prove it", into the delusion that, "The IG report says that the investigation was free of bias", and then infers there was nothing damning in the report at all. Those minor piddling things like corruption of justice, bias in the FBI's investigation of Hillary, that Trump and their supporters were correct, and the resist movement was wrong in virtually all their claims, are all glossed over or ignored. Other than the complete corruption of our most powerful police agency, that goes all the way to the Obama administration, there's nothing to see here at all.
Does gun-control ALWAYS lead to Genocide? Of course not every time... just more often than not. Or put another way, not all gun control leads to genocide, but every genocide was precipitated and facilitate with gun control. Since gun control has no good (positive) correlation with crime, suicide or murder rates -- the only question is why risk it? If gun control empowers the government over liberty and minorities, why take away a natural right, and start a civil insurrection over something that doesn't have a historical upside, and can lead to very big downsides. That risk/reward ratio is pretty fucked up.
Asia Argento demonstrates everything that's wrong with Hollywood (and the larger SJW Entertainment industry), with her sanctimonious hypocritical speech. She calls out Harvey for "rape" on something she willfully participated in and blames everyone else for allowing it to happen after she didn't lift a finger to report or stop it, and the truly clueless will call her brave for coming forward (after everyone else gave her cover), and for being a Woman's advocate after sucking dick in exchange for career advancement -- and only coming forward after she allowed the abuse to continue for 25 years. There's a word for what she is, and it isn't "hero".
Trump started another scandal by telling the truth. He was talking about the need to crackdown on violent street gangs, which are partly fueled by illegal immigration, including ones like MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha). And he said some of them are Animals. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo called them all thugs. And the left/media, which has no problem calling Trump or Trump supporters animals, said that the use of animals for violent thugs was too harsh and should only be used on patriotic Americans who disagree with them politically.
Samantha Bee is a non-funny Comedian, nasty partisan polemic, with lousy ratings. She also used sexist and derogatory speech that would have gotten any conservative fired (and did scare away some of her advertisers): but hyper-partisans on her network have protected her from the consequences of her incompetence, in ways they never would have if they had a competent and conservative talent.
After every mass shooting (especially School shootings), there's the hue and cry, "this happened again, we have to do something!" They usually don’t say what, and the few who do, usually aren't very informed on the topic. So let's tear it down and look at what we should do, and should not do, and what people are asking for. And understand why were are likely to stay divided between gun controllers and those with a clue.
When Parkland happened, a few sock puppets for the DNC came forward to follow what they were told to think, and regurgitate shallow and misinformed gun-control diatribes. And leftist news organizations like CNN and MSNBC fell all over themselves to talk about how brave they were to take the popular consensus opinion and try to steal other people's civil rights. And then there was Kyle Kashuv, who was an informed free thinker, who took the path less travelled, stood against the flock of little jack boots, and explained why they were wrong. The media and rest hated him: free speech is only for people who think like all the other far lefties, not informed kids like Kyle.
I must say, after seeing her speak and reading multiple things by her (books, articles, etc), Madeleine Albright (Marie Jana Korbelová) is a vicious, small minded and fundamentally dishonest person. IMHO, of course. She served under Bill Clinton as the Secretary of State (1997-2001), and is one of the few that served under him, without that literally being true. I can't say I blame him, dishonest people are a turn-off. This goes into a few things about her.
Seattle: once called the Emerald City, they paid a consulting company $200,000 to come up their new slogan: "Metronatural". Then they painted it on the Space needle. That sums up the sad state that Seattle has become: the intersection of radical political correctness with radical environmentalism, mixed in a concophany of homelessness, high taxes, and the worst traffic in the nation. They might not be able to handle the hard stuff, like roads or homelessness, but at least they know how to drive out jobs and hurt people.
I was never a fan of the Ocean's series, partly because I'm not a caper-heist movie fan (too much artificial complexity), and most ensemble films substitute star power for good writing, acting and plot. Plus, it had George Clooney, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt, the trifecta of clueless-but-sanctimonious douchebaggery. So the Ghostbuster's Girl-Power remake of THAT wasn't high on my priority list for films I gotta see. But my wife wanted to see it, and she sees enough of my stupid movies that a little quid pro quo was in order.
Maybe it was my lowered expectations, but I really liked it. It was far better than the others, though that's a low bar. It was one of the better heist movies I've seen, probably because it didn't go over the top with an elaborate 400-stage, everything has to go perfect, sorta bullshit complexity that is crammed into most. There were whiffs of that, to keep the heist-plot pages filled and continue the genre... but a lot was leading up to the theft, or afterwards, and that played better for me. And while it had some plot holes with over-complexifying a snatch a grab, the holes weren't as in-your-face as in the average episode of The Walking Dead. So I liked it better than some other recent films I'd seen, such as Avengers: Infinity War. It was mostly just a heist film, with a few twists -- where criminals are the heroes, and James Corden plays himself as carpool insurance investigator. There were a few subtle undertones of Girl Power, without beating you over the head with it. While it's not deep, it was an afternoon of escapism.
I did a training at Google, and they had the fancy Japanese style bidet toilets in their visitors center. Since i was using the facilities, I tried it out. Not bad. I decided to get one for the home -- hey, a few hundred bucks to a squeaky clean pooper sounded like a fair trade to me. Something to do with removing my gallbladder and my intestinal issues, often gives me sticky poops that require a lot of wiping. I had a work-friend that thought these were life changing... while I find it nice, I don't quite go to that extreme. But I do think it's worth the money and a better experience.... especially when you're sick and sore from wiping.
Look, I watch HBO for Game of thrones, and that's it. I only turn it on for that 6-8 weeks, then it's gone. The reason is while they do a few shows that I liked (Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Silicon Valley), I've always felt it's a bit overpriced for the usage.... but more than that, their obnoxious politicization of TV isn't worth my time. I watch TV for either entertainment or education (information) -- HBO spends way too much time funding liberal disinformation or advocacy shows. So even when they run a good one, I'm reluctant to subsidize all the shit they produce: they've destroyed their brand with many libertarians, moderates or conservatives by being so blatantly one-sided.
Some names include: Sex and the City (feminists behaving badly), Girls (basically, a ruder version of Sex and the City), Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (liberal propaganda), Looking (pro-gay propaganda), The Newsroom (anti-conservative propaganda), Real Time with Bill Maher (anti-conservative propaganda), Big Love (anti-Mormon/Polygamy propaganda), Game Change (anti-conservative and anti-Sarah Palin hit piece), Recount (propaganda about the Bush election recount), Entourage (celebrating hip-hop culture), K Street, The Fence, Spike Lee's - When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts, By the People: The Election of Barack Obama, every obnoxious far-left Comedian gets an HBO special (few of the conservative ones). Then there's the fact that HBO started Comedy Central and the Comedy Channel, which turned out to be far left propaganda mills.
Solo: A Star Wars Story is a prequel about the Star Wars character Han Solo (in case you've been hiding under a rock or something). Like Rogue One, this is a stand alone story about events prior to "A New Hope" (the original) -- and this tells about the early adventures of Han Solo, Chewbacca, and Lando Calrissian, and their caper heists within the criminal underworld of the Empire. On it's own, it's thoroughly predictable but done well enough to not be a rip-off. But for Star Wars lore, or to get the full canon, it's probably a bit better than that. And if you're a Star Wars fan, it's probably better still.
If you liked Deadpool, you will like Deadpool 2. Sequels are never as "fresh" as the original, but you're going to watch them for more of the same, and that's what you get. Lots of snark, dark humor, occasional talking to the camera, fast talking and fast action, with hysterically inappropriate humor that appeals to the 14 year old boy in all of us. Loaded with adult innuendo, language, and so on, if you want 2 hours of immature escapism, this movie is for you.
Infinity War is a superhero film based on the Marvel's superhero team the Avengers. It's either really pretty good or pretty bad, depending on how many of the other 19 Marvel films (and TV shows), you've seen. I'm glad I saw it, my wife felt completely ripped off: she hadn't seen all the other Marvel films, and was constantly, "who is that", "what's that ability", "why isn't Cap'n America in Red, White and Blue", and so on. And it was a 2 1/2 hour long continuous fight scene, with a couple separate simultaneous adventures thrown in... but the graphics, visuals, fights, and so on were glorious. One of the most expensive films ever made (≈$400M), it's really part 1 of a 2 part epic, which you figure out at the rather abrupt end.
If you know superhero canon (authoritative scripture), and want to see the greater story arc, it's really pretty good. If you're going to see a single super-hero movie, save your money and see one that is a less tangled web of 100 intersecting plot-lines.