Search Results: when men are hurt

So the vote in Senate is 67 for Impeachemt and 33 against. Then what happens?

This would destroy Trump. He won't get to see his Ballroom completed or even use it. He wants to be President more than anything in life. He can't set higher Tariffs to punish countries that don't agree with him any longer. He won't have influence in future elections because no Republican will want to be seen with him. He will have to put his Presidential Library on the Plane he was bribed with for favorable treatment because no State will want to be home to his Library. He will just have to fly state to state. No more free Mcdonalds. He will have to move his Walk of Fame Star because it will be damaged on a regular basis. He can't golf in public now because of Jeers. No more MMA or events. No Nobel Peace Prize! He might even have to move to Scotland and leave US because of criminal charges and prosecution.

But before the Fall Out of Impeachment what will he do. ?

Deny the vote , Call it Fake News , Call for riots at the Capital, Try to get his die hard bat crazy followers to physically hurt those who voted for Impeachement, Chain himself to white House desk? Could he even cause a Constitutional crisis by pardoning himself and refusing to leave. Again folks it is all about what Trump wants , what's best for him, not you or the country.

In the end won't Trump end up destroying everything he worked for in life. Apprentice Shows, his first term, his businesses, his family name, his reputation, fame, and his Soul. He will be a bitter man for the rest of his life.

I got in my first relationship weeks after I turned 18 and it was out of pity. I didn't really love or even felt sexual attraction to my first girlfriend.

she liked me however and at the time she recently got out of a very life threatening toxic relationship with an asshole who used to abuse her and assaulted her with every random household object he got his hands on. one night her family rescue her from his claws but unfortunately she got emotionally involved and when back to him days later.

he even returned with her that night she when back to him with a machete in his hands threatening her family that he was going to "chop her into piece" if they try to take her away from him again. lucky for her after that night the whole neighbor sided with her family and were able to rescue her from him and she never got emotionally evolved again. days later she found me and fell in love with me.

- therefore my good Gemini side felt bad for her and was telling me to get with her and show her what good man was.

- however my bad Gemini side in the other hand was tired of being an 18 year old incel so it was telling me "this is you best opportunity, why let it go to waste?"

till then it was the pity that I had for her that made me fall in love with her, but I never told her this and she probably knew either way. but I wonder if this would actually hurt a woman's ego, knowing that the man she's with is with her out of pity and not desire

"The suicide bomber made his away across Bagram air base in Afghanistan in 2016, heading toward a Veterans Day 5-K race featuring hundreds of U. S. soldiers. As U. S. Army Spec. Winston T. Hencely moved to grab the man, the bomber detonated an explosive-laden vest that left Hencely with severe injuries and killed six.

Hencely was credited with saving lives, and the military later concluded that a contractor, Fluor Corp., which employed the suicide bomber, had failed to properly supervise the man before the attack.

Under federal law, Hencely cannot sue the military for his injuries. And when he sued Fluor for negligence, courts dismissed his case, saying federal law preempted it as well.

On Monday, the Supreme Court grappled with Hencely’s last-ditch appeal to revive his lawsuit. The case will determine what recourse soldiers hurt in combat zones might have if they allege that contractors — a fast-growing part of military operations — are responsible for their injuries.

The case revolves around the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), which in some instances waives the sovereign immunity the government typically enjoys against lawsuits. The law sets up some clear barriers to suits, including those related to “combatant activities” during “time of war.”

In 1988 SCOTUS held that the tort law barred suits against military contractors when the claims involve a “uniquely federal interest.”.

Mark Mosier, an attorney for Fluor, told the justices the readiness of the U. S. military to fight a war could be undermined by suits like Hencely’s because trust between the military and contractors is paramount.

“The purpose of tort law is to discourage risk-taking, but waging war often requires contractors to take risks, putting their lives and the lives of others in danger,” Mosier said. “Petitioner’s claims also weaken the military’s control over combat operations. Contractors are part of the total force, and the military cannot successfully wage war without them.”