What is the difference between protected and unprotected speech?
Even though the First Amendment uses the word speech, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that it protects a wide variety of expressions.
This includes what is known as “pure speech,” meaning the spoken word.
The First Amendment also protects expression that is written and expression that is typed and published.
It protects symbolic speech or expressive conduct (like burning a flag), and it protects speech plus conduct (like peaceably assembling to engage in protests and boycotts).

There are also a limited number of narrow exceptions to what the First Amendment protects.
This includes situations where immediate violence is provoked, someone is unduly intimidated or falsehoods are spread about someone else.
They include the following categories:
Incitement to imminent lawless action
Harassment
True threats
Defamation
Obscenity and child pornography
Fighting words
Non-expressive conduct
https://uwm.edu/free-speech-rights-responsibilities/faqs/what-is-the-difference-between-protected-and-unprotected-speech/

It appears you are afflicted with a severe TDS mental problem or more.

No fear of Bottom Rot
Keeping lettuce leaves away from contact with the soil beneath them will aid in preventing some types of infestation and disease. Pests and soilborne pathogens have easier access to your crops when plants lie against the ground.
Opportunistic fungi from the Rhizoctonia genus are extremely common in garden soil, and unfortunately, these thrive in much the same conditions as lettuce does.
It’s particularly aggressive when soil temperatures are consistently between about 75 to 80°F.
https://gardenerspath.com/how-to/disease-and-pests/lettuce-disease/

Biden claims not to drink alcohol, does anybody think that's ginger ale?

Why is Biden losing support from people of color?
His numbers among Black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans have reached a new low.
President Joe Biden is struggling in the polls one year before voters will decide whether to give him a second term in the Oval Office.
And it's the Americans who were most supportive of him at the beginning of his term that have turned on the president the most.
Biden's approval rating among Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders and Hispanics/Latinos followed the same general trajectory as his approval rating among Black voters, although he started from a lower peak. Among Hispanics and Latinos, Biden entered the White House with an approval rating of over 70 percent. That number declined through the rest of 2021, and through early summer of 2022, when it plateaued in the mid-40s, but it began declining again in spring 2023.
Today, Biden's approval rating among Hispanics and Latinos remains on the decline, inching closer and closer to 40 percent, which would be an all-time low.

According to a basic polling average,* Biden's approval rating is currently at one of the lowest points of his presidency. But he wasn't always this unpopular.
When he was sworn into office, Biden's approval rating started in the high 50s, but it dropped below 50 percent in summer 2021. That overlapped with the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and the delta variant of COVID-19, which seemed to put an end to Biden's honeymoon period.
https://abcnews.go.com/538/biden-losing-support-people-color/story?id=105272263

Donald Trump FavorabilityIcon indicating this set of polls has an average.
AVG.
April 19-21
Morning Consult
Favorable 47% 50% Unfavorable Unfavorable +3
Joe Biden FavorabilityIcon indicating this set of polls has an average.
AVG.
April 19-21

Morning Consult
Favorable 45% 51% Unfavorable Unfavorable +6
April 20, 2024
Joe Biden ApprovalIcon indicating this set of polls has an average.
April 17-20
American Research Group
Approve 42% 53% Disapprove Disapprove +11
April 17-20
1,100 A
American Research Group
Approve 42% 53% Disapprove Disapprove +11
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

Got it, thanks for your advice.
I'll attempt to be more careful in the future.

What If China Launched a Nuclear Bomb (Minute by Minute)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7r7TlWQz0Y

Why the US Military is Preparing for War With China
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plHRRFHZ_f0

What If China Invades Taiwan (Day by Day)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILB3L5xv7NM

Donald Trump was listed as 6’3 215 lbs.
Donald Trump was arrested and booked in the Fulton County Jail in Georgia after being charged with 13 felony accounts.
On the former President’s booking sheet, Trump is listed as 6 feet 3 inches tall and 215 pounds.
https://www.kron4.com/news/national/donald-trump-was-listed-63-215-lbs-here-are-the-athletes-that-have-the-same-height-and-weight-as-trump/

How the Nazis used gun control
https://wyoleg.gov/InterimCommittee/2019/01-201910313-04Handout.pdf

To maintain its iron grip, the Soviet Union had to turn to the most proven form of suppression — gun confiscation. On December 10, 1918, the Council of People's Commissars mandated that Soviet citizens turn in their firearms.
Failure to do so led to criminal prosecution.
https://mises.org/mises-wire/brief-history-repressive-regimes-and-their-gun-laws#:~:text=To%20maintain%20its%20iron%20grip,so%2C%20led%20to%20criminal%20prosecution.

After the Guns Were Removed, the Killing Fields Began
“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns; that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”
The quote was from Mao Zedong, the founder of Communist China.
Mao’s first act after gaining complete control of China in 1949 was to take away all guns from the population.
It was a policy he began in 1935 as he took over each rural province.
Anyone found with a gun post-confiscation was executed.

An estimated 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s repeated, merciless attempts to create a new “socialist” China. Anyone who got in his way was done away with—by execution, imprisonment, or forced famine.
Mao killed more people than either Stalin or Hitler during World War II.
And it all began after he took away the guns.

Dictators throughout much of history have disarmed their populations before they began their mass killings. Examples abound beyond Mao: Hitler took guns from the Jews in November of 1938, and Kristallnacht and the Holocaust followed; and then there was Fidel Castro in Cuba and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, to name but a few.

Cuba and Gun Control
Everybody ought to have a gun, Castro maintained—until he took over Cuba in 1959. At a rally in Havana before he assumed power, he explained: “This is how democracy works: It gives rifles to farmers, to students, to women, to Negroes, to the poor, and to every citizen who is ready to defend a just cause.”

Weapons ranging from Czech submachine guns to Belgian FN automatic rifles were handed out to 50,000 soldiers, 400,000 militiamen, 100,000 members of the factory-guarding popular defense force, and to many men, women, and children in Cuba’s 1 million-strong “neighborhood vigilance committees.”
Immediately after assuming power in 1959, Castro changed his position, following Mao’s rule that guns should not be in the hands of the people.
For three weeks after the Castro government was formed, Radio Havana warned, “All citizens must turn in their combat weapons.
Civilians must take arms to police stations, soldiers to military headquarters.”

Radio Havana’s explanation was somewhat contradictory: The guns were in bad shape anyway and the “struggle against our enemies requires a rigorous control of all combat weapons.”
There was an urgency about the new policy that suggested serious concern.
Failure to turn in military weapons by Sept. 1, 1959, warned Radio Havana, would be punished not by criminal courts but by the dreaded Revolutionary Tribunals—those kangaroo courts that sentenced thousands of Cubans to death after Castro took over.

Venezuela and Gun Control
Venezuela is now paying the price for allowing Chavez to implement the Mao rule when he came to power in 2012.
The shocking nature of an economic collapse that led Venezuela from being one of the richest countries in Latin America to one of the poorest has been well documented.
One aspect of the Venezuelan crisis that does not receive much coverage is the country’s gun control regime.
All guns were outlawed when Chavez came to power, and harsh penalties were imposed on violators.
The Venezuelan Armed Forces have exclusive power to control, register, and potentially confiscate firearms.
Many citizens now regret the repressive gun control legislation the Venezuelan government implemented in 2012. Naturally, this regret is warranted.
The Venezuelan government is among the most tyrannical in the world, with a proven track record of violating basic civil liberties such as free speech, debasing its national currency, confiscating private property, and creating economic controls that destroy the country’s productivity.

Elections have proven to be useless, as they’ve been mired with corruption and charges of government tampering. For many, taking up arms is the only option left for the country to shake off its tyrannical government.
But the Venezuelan government has prevented such an uprising with its draconian gun control.
These life-and-death lessons of history are lost on too many Americans.
Our Founding Fathers didn’t give us the Second Amendment for duck hunting or simply for self-protection in a country that at the time had a vast and yet unknown frontier.
They bestowed it upon us so that we could protect our precious nation from devolving into tyranny as so many others have done.
Politicians who respect the American ideal don’t try to diminish the Second Amendment or blame it for other ills of society that they have failed to solve but rather embrace it as part of the legacy of rights that helps keep America free.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/06/16/after-the-guns-were-removed-the-killing-fields-began/

Why was a tank driving around a Miami-Dade neighborhood?
https://www.local10.com/news/local/2021/01/11/why-is-a-tank-driving-around-miami-dade/

TANK AMERICA
6605 Muskogee St
Orlando, FL 32807
(321) 241-1122
Visit Website
Tripadvisor Traveler Rating
Tripadvisor Traveler Rating - 5.0 Based on 17 reviews
Tank America is the only amusement park in Florida offering the once in a lifetime opportunity to drive a REAL MILITARY TANK. Come feel 17 tons of awesome power as you navigate through our ½ mile tank course from the driver’s seat of our FV 433 tanks. You will experience pure excitement as you drive the tank over obstacles, barrel through a four-foot-deep mud hole, and even drive over and CRUSH A CAR.
Located just 20 minutes from Universal Studios and International Drive.
Visit Tankamerica.com today to enlist in the thrill of a lifetime!
https://www.orlandomeeting.com/listing/tank-america/51120/

Newly obtained video shows movement of group suspected of constructing Jan. 6 gallows hours before Capitol siege
The people who erected the infamous gallows and noose on the west front of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, began their work in the predawn hours that day, according to newly released videos obtained by CBS News.
A report by a GOP-led U.S. House subcommittee said the perpetrators remain unaccounted for by prosecutors.

Surveillance footage shared with CBS News shows the brazenness of the work behind the gallows and noose, which have a history of racist and threatening overtones.
On Jan. 6, then-Vice President Mike Pence was presiding over the joint session of Congress to certify the Electoral College count and had been pressured by former President Donald Trump to unilaterally overturn the 2020 election.
He refused to do so, while outside the Capitol, protesters and rioters around the gallows and noose chanted, "Hang Mike Pence."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jan-6-gallows-construction-new-video/

No, they don't Biden is still loose.

Impeachable?
Joe Biden’s refusal, as president, to enforce immigration law and secure the nation’s border deserves as much scrutiny as his behavior as vice president.
The House of Representatives has launched an impeachment inquiry into whether Joe Biden while serving as vice president, abused the powers of his office to enrich and protect his dissolute son and himself. But if Republicans are going to pursue such a step, they might have stronger grounds to focus not only on Biden’s vice presidential deeds but also on his refusal, as president, to exercise his powers and responsibilities—namely, by failing to enforce federal immigration laws.

A president’s most basic obligation is to enforce, or execute, federal laws as written and passed by Congress. The opening line of Article II of the Constitution declares, “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” The essence of executive power is the authority—and the corresponding responsibility—to carry out the laws. If any more clarity were needed, the Constitution also states that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The current immigration crisis is largely a product of Biden’s refusal to fulfill his core constitutional duty to enforce federal laws.

Under Biden’s presidency, illegal aliens are often willingly turning themselves in to the authorities under the guise of seeking asylum, even though from fiscal year (FY) 2008 through FY 2019, only 14 percent of those claiming a credible fear were actually granted asylum. In the words of Raul Ortiz, whom the Biden administration selected as U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) chief, aliens are likely “turning themselves in because they think they’re going to be released” into the United States. This awareness of the likelihood of being released has brought a flood of illegal aliens to the American border, a flood that won’t be significantly affected by Biden's recently announced change of heart on building a few miles of border wall.

Indeed, the cause of the current migrant crisis is Biden’s refusal to detain illegal aliens as the law requires. In the words of U.S. District Court Judge T. Kent Wetherell, that refusal is “akin to posting a flashing ‘Come In, We’re Open’ sign on the southern border.” Aliens—and cartels—can hardly miss this signal, and so they have come to the border in huge numbers. Calculations by the American Main Street Initiative (where I am president), based upon U.S. Customs and Border Protection statistics, reveal that in just two and a half years under Biden, 1 million more encounters with noncitizens at the southwest border have taken place than in the prior eight years combined under Presidents Obama and Trump.

Many of these noncitizens have stealthily crossed the border and gotten away. In fact, Biden has already presided over more “got-aways” than his two immediate predecessors combined. Many more have been apprehended at the border and summarily released into the U.S. In December 2020 (under Donald Trump), the USBP released 17 aliens into our country. Two years later, in December 2022 (under Biden), it released 140,355—more than 8,000 times as many.

As these numbers demonstrate, a night-and-day difference exists between immigration enforcement before Biden and under Biden. Of the three most recent presidents, Biden is the clear outlier. His refusal to execute federal immigration laws is unlike anything we’ve ever seen before from any president.

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) states that if “an alien seeking admission is not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted, the alien shall be detained for a [removal] proceeding.” It also states that “if an alien asserts a credible fear of persecution, he or she shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum.” Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito writes that these detention “requirements, as we have held, are mandatory.”

As the American Main Street Initiative points out, “the law requires that those entering the U.S. without proper documentation be continuously detained until their claim can be adjudicated, since they don’t have the documents required to enter lawfully.” This law is not being enforced. As Andrew Arthur, a former federal immigration judge now at the Center for Immigration Studies, writes, “The reason why nearly 100,000 migrants are jamming the streets and hotels of New York City is because the Biden administration refuses to detain them.”

The Biden administration claims that it lacks the space to detain these migrants, but this is a thin excuse stemming from a self-inflicted wound. Judge Wetherell observes that the Department of Homeland Security had the capacity to detain an average daily population (ADP) of 55,000 people just four years ago, but under the Biden administration “DHS requested a reduction to 32,500 ADP for fiscal year 2022” and for FY 2023 “requested a further reduction to 25,000 ADP.” So the administration claims that there isn’t enough detention space, even while proposing further reductions in detention space.

When Biden took office, he announced that on Day One his administration would “reset” immigration-enforcement policies and that it would emphasize “equity.” DHS subsequently announced that it would apply Biden’s notions of equity in “the immigration and enforcement context.” In practice, this has meant prioritizing equity over law enforcement—thereby substituting a de facto new immigration policy for Congress’s duly passed policy, which Biden has no constitutional authority to do.

In an interview last year, Fox News anchor Bret Baier asked DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas whether “it is the objective of the Biden administration to reduce—sharply reduce—the total number of illegal immigrants coming across the southern border.” Mayorkas amazingly wouldn’t answer yes, instead replying, “It is the objective of the Biden administration to make sure that we have safe, legal, and orderly pathways for individuals to be able to access our legal system.”

Such a policy has had significant consequences. In just the first two years under Biden, America’s foreign-born population over the age of 16 rose by 3.9 million. That’s more than enough people to populate a new Los Angeles—or, if you prefer, a new Dallas, Fort Worth, and San Antonio combined. This two-year increase of 3.9 million easily surpasses any decade-long increase in the foreign-born population prior to 1970–1980.

Sixteen years ago, then-senator Biden said, “No great nation can be in a position where they can’t control their borders.” He added that this matters “not just for immigration, but it matters for drugs, terror, a whole range of other things.” Well, the number of encounters on the southwest border between the USBP and those on the terrorist watch list increased from three in FY 2019–2020 to 238 in FY 2022–2023. That’s a 79-fold increase in just three years.

An unsecured border also invites human trafficking. The U.N.’s International Organization for Migration now calls our southwest border “the deadliest land route for migrants worldwide.” A 2023 DHS Inspector General report says, “FY 2022 set the record for migrant deaths with more than 800 migrants dying while attempting to cross the Southwest border.” The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that up to 30 bodies a month have been found in the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass, Texas: “‘It’s like a graveyard,’ said Maverick County Sheriff Tom Schmerber. . . . ‘I’ve been working on the border for almost four decades and never saw tragedies of this magnitude.’” Particularly troubling is the thought of what such treks might mean for innocent children. “The border between the ports is no place for a kid,” writes Arthur, and that “is likely the safest part of the journey.”

Arthur recently visited Cochise County, on the Arizona–Mexico border, where he found an open gate in the border fence. “I was told that there are dozens of high-speed chases across the county weekly,” he writes, with “many of the drivers” being Americans who are “lured to the border via social media to serve as cartel mules carrying drug and migrant ‘loads’ with promises of adventure and easy cash.”

This is the situation that President Biden has created. In sum, his administration has prioritized illegal aliens over Americans, substituted its own immigration policy for Congress’s policy, and failed to fulfill its constitutional responsibility to enforce federal immigration laws, abdicating that duty in the name of equity. Whether this Constitution-defying combination of negligence and usurpation warrants impeachment is for Congress to judge—but many Americans would probably find it at least as relevant to the question as what Biden did when he was vice president.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/bidens-border-policy-is-an-impeachable-offense

Biden's popularity encouraged them to spend $500,000.00 for a fence around his property.

It includes 5000 to over 8500 per day and you believe that's an improvement?
It is insane, the number should be zero.
Then round up all the illegal invaders and deport every last one of them.