Anonymous ID: 313326 April 24, 2022, 6 a.m. No.16143358   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3369

>>16143334

Of course. Everyone wants to crush Disney because everyone knows what's at stake. She does bring up a valid point about retaliation. I pray Disney takes her up on the offer. This is obviously happening for a reason. Can anons rub brain cells together to figure it out?

sips covfefe

Anonymous ID: 313326 April 24, 2022, 6:25 a.m. No.16143430   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

DeSantis will not run against PDJT in 2024. Not sure why people keep regurgitating this.

 

https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/status/1518212367838060546

This was a rare rash decision from DeSantis, in pursuit of a bad policy that he doesnโ€™t actually want, and which, if he gets nevertheless, will lock Florida up in messy litigation (and legislation) for years at the exact moment he is gearing up to run for president.

Anonymous ID: 313326 April 24, 2022, 6:52 a.m. No.16143507   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>16143369

>>16143387

If this translates, then it is meant to be a distraction. Jenna is (admittedly) one of the biggest Disney fans ever, and there's no way she would be making this argument for free speech if, say, Wicked Pictures were getting some privileges/protections removed by California. So, how would it benefit the plan to point out Disney as a distraction? Could be that the entire purpose of it is to generate coverage to get people to wake up to what's really at stake? Could it be to distract from something else? As a cultural issue, I can't think of anything more important than protecting children. So how is that a distraction?

 

Just not sure I agree with the statement provided by this drop in this context. It's a head scratcher.