Johnny made $300,000,000 off of Pirates of the Caribbean alone. How can that much money get squandered so quickly?
Stories like this just boggle my mind. People like him just live in a different world.
BTW: I picked the topic of "face palm", the site changed it to "Fun/Jokes".
I agree, it boggles the mind.
If he were buying and selling companies it might be possible, but I don't think that's the case here.
I just dont know.
Frivolousness....stupidity??
Them on steroids! :)
Right?
I could whoop it up in a big way for a lifetime from the interest, from a regular bank savings account, on 300 mil.
I agree. Even at 3% that's $9 million a year.
More than plenty.
It's way beyond my understanding. It makes me sad, but people are free to throw away their money.
I've never seen 300, 000, 000 of anything in one place I cant even imagine it
Ask ANY session of congress. Republican OR Democrat.
I can imagine how much fun it would be at first, to not have to worry about how much something you need or just want costs. Giving money to people and 'causes' one cares about would be (is) a great feeling.
Seems to me that people like Depp get so caught up in their grandiosity and wealth, that they sort of lose their minds.
Botox, Penis Enlargement....Depp has an ego.
That's a little more than I care to find out about the boy. Ha Ha!!
Bad investments.
Figures. Depp's a Democrat.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/p...ion/index.html
BTW, dru, do you know what Depp means in German?
https://www.dict.cc/german-english/Depp.html
Joking about killing Trump, makes him a Democrat? There are many Republicans who fantasize about doing the same thing.
Wow, that's almost interesting.
Nope. But only a lefty Democrat could be a big enough fool to say it out loud. Bad investment.
Try again, catso.
Trump opened the door for publicly putting a small foot into an enormous mouth.
I guess Depp, being an actor, was only giving an honest portrayal.
Depp is anything but honest, as he admitted himself.
Not much of a businessman either.
You muffed it again, catso.
What part of "honest PORTRAYAL", confused you?
And Trump is? Seems to me that Forbes just dropped his fat ass, about fifty notches.
Nothing confused me, least of all you.
Just watch the clip, which you obviously didn't.
Not even CNN approved of Depp's performance.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/23/p...ion/index.html
And I said nothing about Trump in this thread; are hallucinations among your other infirmities?
Are you still here, scratching your head?
His performance of what?! LMAO!
No, I didn't either, but with you mentioning a joke about killing TRUMP......
Your confusion is clouding your mind again. It was DEPP'S joke about Trump that was a further example of what an utter fool Depp is (not rare among doctrinaire libs). That on top of his squandering $300 million.
Try again, catso.
Nice attempt at backpedaling.
I am alarmed by your brain behaving so....muddled.
Poor attempt at trying to defend Depp, and trying to cover up your confusion.
Try again, catso.
Was I defending Depp, or merely pointing out the many potholes in your asinine reply?
Yep, you were trying to defend Depp.
http://www.amirite.com/816471-j...ey-get/2692068
http://www.amirite.com/816471-j...ey-get/2692817
http://www.amirite.com/816471-j...ey-get/2692837
Not very effectively, though.
If you say so. Although, I don't think saying "bad investments" is sticking up for the guy.
But if your confused mind thinks so, then hey, have at it.
As usual, you didn't read the links. Links to your own comments, no less!
"Joking about killing Trump, makes him a Democrat? There are many Republicans who fantasize about doing the same thing. "
"I guess Depp, being an actor, was only giving an honest portrayal."
"What part of "honest PORTRAYAL", confused you?"
Yep, you were doing your clumsy level best to defend Depp.
And once again, even with links, you failed to make your point.
YOU first brought up Trump, I was merely setting you straight.
I merely brought up a further example of Depp's idiocy.
And you tried to defend him, tooth and nail. Too bad for you that you're toothless and nailless.
How did I defend him?
By taking apart your feeble argument? Shit, I could do that one for anybody.
This is how you tried to defend him.
http://www.amirite.com/816471-j...ey-get/2694334
Try again, dru.
I believe he post was about Depp losing a lot of money. Not whether the man had talent.
And if you are going to hold a joke about killing Trump against him, you better be prepared to go after a shit load of people.
He lost all that money by being an idiot. And he made the Trump joke because he's an idiot, like the other libs who made similar jokes in public.
Try again, dru.
So by all accounts, those that lose money are idiots? Did you tell that one to Trump when he declared bankruptcy six times?
Have you mentioned that to Trump as his brand continues to lose money?
Did you bring it up when Forbes knocked him down?
Try again, stinker.
I don't mind saying Trump is an idiot; I didn't vote for him.
Unlike the mindless bots that couldn't bring themselves to see anything wrong with the Clintons. They gave us Trump. If you don't like him, blame them.
Try again, dru.
Don't be embarrassed to admit you voted for Trump. Your slobbering defenses of him speak volumes.
I didn't vote for either of them, nor did I defend Trump.
But... your slobbering defense of any lib, no matter how stupid or corrupt, speaks volumes regarding your rigid adherence to groupthink.
Try again, dru.
Once again your mind is muddled for you defend Trump all the time. Not very well, I might add, but you still persevere.
Now what lib have I supposedly slobbered all over? And please don't say Depp, because that record has already worn down it's grooves.
Besides Depp, you slobbered all over Bill and Hillary.
Try again, dru.
And just how did I slobber over them? By defending them against your nutty right wing conspiracy theories?
1. By defending Bill's perjury and obstruction of justice.
2. By overlooking the obvious quid pro quo in the Whitewater case.
3. By no doubt voting for a crook for President a year ago.
Try again, dru.
Okay, let's shoot these down, one at a time.
How did I defend his perjury? I explained his perjury, and no, I don't think his lying about having an extramarital affair with a consenting adult is grounds for impeachment. I also stated that Bill Clinton more than paid for his part.
How is Hillary a crook? Did she steal something, that none of us are aware of?
What was the "obvious quid pro quo", Einstein, that was so overlooked?
1. He lied about it under oath. That is a crime.
And besides, Senator Gillibrand, Hillary's successor, is now saying Bill should have resigned. But not you! Faithful to the end.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...=.a843ddd879f8
2. Ask Donna Brazile what Hillary stole
3. The pardon was the quid pro quo. Elemntary, my dear Watson.
Donna Brazille said nothing about Hillary stealing the election.
Senator Gillibrand had no problem taking the Clinton's money or their support when she needed it.
Brazile not only said it, Elizabeth Warren says it too.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...=.d2b29398f914
Give it another try, dru. You flopped yet again.
No, they didn't. But you would love to spin it that way.
Tell that to the Washington Post, dru.
Which, AGAIN, says nothing about Hillary.
Doctrinaire Hilly-bot that you are, you didn't even bother to read the first paragraph of the Post's story.
"The former interim head of the Democratic Party just accused Hillary Clinton's campaign of “unethical” conduct that “compromised the party's integrity.” The Clinton campaign's alleged sin: A hostile takeover of the Democratic National Committee before her primary with Sen. Bernie Sanders had concluded."
You had better get with the new party line, dru. Protecting the Clintons is now sooo passé.
When Warren, Gillibrand and Brazile take over, you're liable to be sent to a re-education camp.
You having to prove a case by taking everything out of context while cherry picking is sooo typical, and yes, passe.
Yeah, right. I cherry picked the title of the WaPo article, the quotes from the principals, and the whole first paragraph of the article, all of which you characteristically tried to dodge, with nothing to offer in rebuttal except your pathetic denial, based on NOTHING factual.
If I am wrong about what Brazile and Warren said, as reported by the WaPo, then by all means, cherry pick something from the article that PROVES I’m wrong.
If you can, that is.
I read that article when it first came out, and yes, you have indeed cherry picked.
Now go back to your corner with your tail tucked firmly between your legs.
And of course, as predicted, you couldn't find anything to cherry pick in the article to disprove what I said.
Just a mindless repetition of your unfounded doctrinaire opinion.
Try again.
You didn't even send a link to the Post's article! Only a link to a blogger's excerpts from the article.
YOU try again.
Not only can't you think, you can't read either. Here it is, straight from Warren's mouth, on PBS, no less.
It is still not the article!
Why do you have a hard time producing the whole article?
Why do you have so hard a time refuting the "blog"? If your beloved "whole article" could do so, you would have produced it long ago.
So, once again, did Warren say the Dem primary process was rigged, or not? All you've produced so far are dodges and lib polemics, and NO facts.
Try again, Flopsy.
The Germans have Depp's number.
https://www.dict.cc/german-english/Depp.html
LOLOL!
Personal feelings