If the CDC concentration Covid camps weren’t bad enough (see the post below this) To the surprise of only the most clueless, DEI ideology has been found to hurt everyone, including the identity groups it ostensibly helps at the expense of the rest of us. Still less surprising, the media has attempted to suppress this information.
A study published Monday by the Network Contagion Research Institute and Rutgers University provided strong justification for why Americans should dismantle the remainder of the DEI regime sooner rather than later, noting that race-obsessed programming is divisive, counterproductive, and helps create authoritarians.
From the study:
“DEI initiatives seen as affirmative action rather than business strategy can provoke backlash, increasing rather than reducing racial resentment. And diversity initiatives aimed at managing bias can fail, sometimes resulting in decreased representation and triggering negativity among employees.”
That is not a bug but the main feature of DEI. Cultural Marxism rests upon the increasingly obvious lie that favored groups are oppressed by bigotry. To prop up their failed ideology, liberals must create resentment.
The broader goal of DEI and Cultural Marxism in general is to provide a framework for left-wing totalitarianism:
“[A]n emerging body of research warns that [DEI] interventions may foster authoritarian mindsets, particularly when anti-oppressive narratives exist within an ideological and vindictive monoculture,” said the study. “The push toward absolute equity can undermine pluralism and engender a (potentially violent) aspiration of ideological purity.”
No monoculture was ever more ideological and vindictive than that of woke liberals.
The paper concluded, “The evidence presented in these studies reveals that while purporting to combat bias, some anti-oppressive DEI narratives can engender a hostile attribution bias and heighten racial suspicion, prejudicial attitudes, authoritarian policing, and support for punitive behaviors in the absence of evidence for a transgression deserving punishment.”
Speaking of the monoculture of woke liberals, the media establishment reacted to the study by refusing to acknowledge it:
Thank the Lord it got exposed. The fact that they planned this should tell you how evil the deep state and the WEF people really are. What are we, Germany in the 1930’s?
Here is a taste of what these bastards were planning and a link to read as far as you can stand before you want to strangle them.
This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings. This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available. Please check the CDC website periodically for updates. What is the Shielding Approach ? The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high-risk”) and the general population (“low-risk”). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.
It was undoubtedly planned to be permanent and nationwide if not worldwide. Instead, the scheme had to be dialed back.
Features of the CDC’s edicts did incredible damage. It imposed the rent moratorium. It decreed the ridiculous “six feet of distance” and mask mandates. It forced Plexiglas as the interface for commercial transactions. It implied that mail-in balloting must be the norm, which probably flipped the election. It delayed the reopening as long as possible. It was sadistic.
Even with all that, worse was planned. On July 26, 2020, with the George Floyd riots having finally settled down, the CDC issued a plan for establishing nationwide quarantine camps. People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel.
The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy.
It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.”
AJ Huber tweeted with a video, “Mexican president Claudia Sheinbaum just announced that she is stopping the migrant caravans from arriving at the U.S. southern border after President Trump’s tariff threat. Nothing can stop what’s coming! Only DJT can change the world even before the inauguration!”
She said, “I have the vision that there will be an agreement with the U.S.”
And the experts said tariffs don’t work and would ruin our economy.
No thank you. I trust randos on Twitter. They get fact-checked by truly independent fact-checkers — Twitter users.
Oh, Sheinbaum also threatened retaliatory tariffs. Big deal.
Peter St Onge, Ph.D., tweeted, “Mexico threatens retaliatory tariffs. Exports to the US make up almost a third of Mexico’s GDP — 29%. While US exports to Mexico make up 1.1% of our GDP.”
Her cry for retaliation is bravado to save a little face.
Wall Street Mav tweeted, “Back in late 2018, former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador was a charismatic, old-school politician who developed a chummy relationship with Trump. The two were eventually able to strike a bargain in which Mexico helped keep migrants away from the border — and received other countries’ deported migrants — and Trump backed down on the tariff threats.”
Actually, Trump gave AMLO the choice between tariffs and protecting our borders. It was a negotiating tool and it worked. It has worked again.
Canada is capitulating as well.
Benny Johnson tweeted with a video, “Canada PM Justin Trudeau agrees to work with Trump on border security after tariff threats: ‘I had a good call with Donald Trump. We talked about some of the challenges we can work on together. It was a good call, this is something we can do.’ ”
The Ballerina had better do something because Pierre Poilievre is standing in the shadows, love. He is ready, willing and able to replace Trudeau.
Poilievre said he understands Trump putting Americans first and that as prime minister, he will put Canadian workers first. This is not brain surgery, folks.
Trump started now to get Canada and Mexico to start to close the border. He ain’t waiting for January 20. He completed his cabinet before Thanksgiving. His appointees already are on the job.
Border Czar Tom Homan visited the Mexican border in Texas two months ahead of beginning his job.
He said, “We finally got a president. President Trump’s gonna come in January. But we’re not waiting until January. We’re already talking, we’re already planning.”
Oh man, Homan also said, “Let me be clear: There is going to be a mass deportation because we just finished a mass immigration crisis on the border.
“It is a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal illegal immigrants from immigration authorities. Don’t test us.”
But wait. There’s more. Trump is tossing in peace in the Middle East at no extra charge.
Gunther Eagleman tweeted, “Ceasefire agreement has been reached between Hezbollah and Israel. The incoming Trump presidency is forcing nations to get back in line!”
ABC reported, “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is recommending the country’s security cabinet agree to a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hezbollah that was brokered by the U.S., he said in a taped video message Tuesday evening local time.
“Netanyahu said he was submitting the plan to the cabinet for approval Tuesday night.”
Bibi made it clear that he is not messing around, saying, “With full understanding with the United States, we maintain complete military freedom of action.
“If Hezbollah violates the agreement and tries to arm itself — we will attack. If it tries to renew terrorist infrastructure near the border — we will attack. If it launches a rocket, if it digs a tunnel, if it brings in a truck with missiles — we will attack.”
Getting Iran to sign the Abraham Accords is next.
There could be more peace breaking out.
Reuters reported, “President-elect Donald Trump’s team is discussing pursuing direct talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, hoping a fresh diplomatic push can lower the risks of armed conflict, according to two people familiar with the matter.
“Several in Trump’s team now see a direct approach from Trump, to build on a relationship that already exists, as most likely to break the ice with Kim, years after the two traded insults and what Trump called beautiful letters in an unprecedented diplomatic effort during his first term in office, the people said.”
And if there is any Ukraine left after the sabre rattling by Britain, Biden and France, peace may break out there.
CNN reported last week, “Zelensky says Ukraine war will end ‘faster’ under Trump presidency.”
I could not tell from the story if that gladdens or saddens the Little Z.
Trump learned from the Resistance and the impeachments not to trust DC Republicans and to make his executive orders bulletproof.
Reuters sobbed, “President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to use the U.S. military to help deport millions of undocumented migrants, a plan that breaks from U.S. tradition against deploying troops domestically but which legal experts said would still be hard to successfully challenge in court.
“Trump advisers have said they intend to use the military to build detention camps or to transport undocumented migrants out of the U.S., freeing border patrol and immigration agents for investigations and apprehensions.
“Experts said the administration would have legal cover if the military is confined to support roles, particularly along the border with Mexico, without interacting with suspects.”
The military protects the border.
Duh.
Trump’s reputation has struck fear in liberals. Jack Smith dropped all charges as he seeks to skedaddle out of town. Alvin “Chipmunk” Bragg’s conviction seem meaningless. Fani Willis looks like she’ll be the one prosecuted, not Trump.
Stuart Varney noticed a huge difference between now and 8 years ago.
On Tuesday, he said, “ If you didn’t get the message yet, you’ve certainly got it now, a dramatic transformation has arrived.
“The president-elect is not tinkering with policy, there are no minor adjustments. The second Trump presidency is something very different.
“He won the election convincingly. He has won hands down in court. He has organized his team in record time and voters like what they’ve seen so far.
“He’s off and running, way before he takes office.
“Last night’s tariff announcement was a shot across the bow to Canada, Mexico and China. Work with us on drugs and migrants, or else.
“That is the exact opposite of the Biden-Harris approach. There’s no weakness here, no soft diplomatic language that fails.”
Democrats are saying publicly that Trump did not win in a landslide because he got only 49.9% of the vote. But they are acting like he received 60%.
More importantly, Trump is acting like he received 60% of the vote, and perception is 90% of politics. Mexican president Claudia Sheinbaum’s sudden move to close the border proves that.
For the first time in history, a Chinese president has openly delivered clear red lines to an American president, delineating Beijing’s non-negotiable core interests. When Chinese President Xi Jinping met with President Joe Biden at the 31st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in Lima, Peru, the world’s attention was drawn to Xi’s blunt articulation of China’s “four red lines.” Unlike previous APEC meetings, which often emphasized cooperative economic growth, this meeting was starkly different in tone, as Xi chose to lay down firm boundaries. Xi delivered these red lines with a strategic calculation: he saw Biden as weak—a perfect target for asserting China’s boundaries—preferring to establish these limits before Donald Trump, a leader with a much stronger and more combative stance on China, takes office again in January. These red lines were issued as a stark warning to Washington: do not cross boundaries concerning Taiwan, democracy and human rights, China’s path and system, and its rights to economic development. Xi’s delivery of these red lines marks a critical turning point in global power dynamics, reflective of an increasingly confident China testing the resolve of a U.S. president they perceived as pliable.
Taiwan: Beijing sees Taiwan as an inalienable part of its territory. Xi emphasized that any U.S. support for Taiwanese independence or actions that embolden the island’s efforts to solidify its separation from China would be unacceptable. The language was a firm reminder that Washington’s increased engagements with Taiwan would be seen as a direct challenge to China’s national unity.
Democracy and Human Rights: China demanded an end to external interference concerning human rights and democracy, both of which Beijing deems to be domestic matters. U.S. criticism over China’s treatment of Uyghurs and actions in Hong Kong has been seen by China as interference designed to undermine the ruling Communist Party.
China’s Path and System: Xi underscored that the United States must respect China’s governance and its chosen socialist path. Any attempts to influence or undermine the authority of the Communist Party would be viewed as an existential threat.
Rights to Development: Finally, China asserted its right to pursue economic development and technological advancement without external obstruction. Restrictions on trade, technology transfers, or economic development would be seen as direct infringements on China’s core rights.
First, the U.S. already is in a Cold War. It was started by the CCP, and it is high time that the U.S. joined the fight against it. The many tens of thousands of Americans killed by the CCP’s fentanyl alone shows that the CCP is at war with the United States and has no qualms about killing Americans.
The current Cold War with the CCP is multifaceted and fought, thus far short of kinetic war, but in all other domains—including the economic, diplomatic, and political. It is important to understand the similarities between this Cold War and the one with the Soviet Union. The most salient is that the motivation for aggression remains the same, the Communist ideology of the Soviet Union in the past and of the CCP today. The impact of the ideology of Communism and its role in driving the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) aggression is essential to comprehend. Communism is a Western ideology imported into China and is not a part of Chinese civilization, political culture, or political history.
But its effect on China has been profound and created a swath of destruction through that country. It has intentionally destroyed the traditional pillars of Chinese culture, society and civilization and killed many scores of millions of Chinese. Understanding the CCP’s ideology provides major insights into the People’s Republic of China’s behavior. It allows Americans to comprehend why the PRC is inherently aggressive. Communism seeks to force societies like China’s into an ideological Procrustean Bed defined by Marxism-Leninism. In addition, Communism requires aggression, including unrestricted warfare, against non-Communist states. The effect on U.S. national security interests could not be more significant as this explains the CCP’s aggression against the U.S. In the CCP’s worldview, the U.S. is the fundamental enemy to be destroyed.
Third, the right response to the “Four Red Lines” is total rejection. In essence, the affirmation of whatever Xi tells Americans they cannot do.
First, the U.S., not Xi, sets its policy toward Taiwan. U.S. must revisit its policy over Taiwan to reflect the strategic realities of the 21st Century.
Second, while Communist dictatorships abuse the human rights of their captive populations, which perforce all do, the rest of the world must not accept this. The Chinese diaspora, people of goodwill around the world, and the U.S. will speak for those oppressed.
Third, Xi knows that his government is illegitimate and tyrannical, and so the incoming Trump administration might revisit every aspect of its policies towards that regime. It is certainly appropriate for the world’s population to ask whether the CCP is a legitimate government and should continue to oppress the Chinese people.
Fourth, Xi is asking that the U.S. not impede the PRC’s power and accept its position while it seeks to supplant the U.S. without an adequate U.S. response. For too long, the U.S. elite have gone along with supporting the CCP because it has profited them. It was only the first Trump administration that turned the rudder and challenged the CCP. Xi’s effort to define the boundaries of PRC-U.S. relations with the new Trump administration is bound to fail.
Xi’s free ride is over. There is a new sheriff in town as of January 20th. This sheriff is unlike the previous one. He might have some demands of his own.
RUSH: Well, happy Thanksgiving, everybody. I hope it is as great as you want it to be, getting together with family, friends, hangers-on, people that got nothing to do trying to horn in on your action, whatever it is. Well, you know that happens. You get a call, “Hey, what are you doing for Thanksgiving?”
“Ah, got the family coming over. What are you doing?”
“Nothing.”
“Really? You want to come over with us?”
“Yeah! Yeah! I would love that.” Whatever happens, whatever’s going on with you, we hope it’s a great one. Do you realize next year will be the 400th anniversary of Thanksgiving? Four hundred years since the Pilgrims arrived without guaranteed reservations at Plymouth Rock.
Greetings, my friends. Welcome to the Thanksgiving edition of Rush Limbaugh program. We are going to do what we always do. We will recite to you the real story of Thanksgiving as first written about by me in my best-seller, See, I Told You So, Chapter 6: “Dead White Guys, or What the History Books Never Told You. The True Story of Thanksgiving.”
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Look at this, folks. I went to the computer during the break just to check and see if anything had happened, and I got a message. I got a message from the guy that used to mow my lawn when I lived in Kansas City. When I lived in that shack and worked for the Royals, I couldn’t pay anybody to mow the lawn, but I was able to get him Royals tickets. His name is Dan. So I got a message from Dan. He says, “I wish you could see this. Maria and I are driving out to Colorado Springs.”
They live in Kansas City still. They’re driving out to Colorado Springs for a wedding over Thanksgiving. “I’m in the backseat of the minivan because I’m rehabbing from a hip replacement. Anyway, five minutes ago, I hear this cheer. Maria cheers like the Chiefs have won the Super Bowl. But of course the Chiefs haven’t won the Super Bowl. No, it was because you are on live today. No guest host! Our minivan is cheering that you’re there. So bless you. Have a great Thanksgiving.”
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Happy Thanksgiving to one and all from all of us. And, of course, this begins the — here, anyway, the official beginning of the holiday season, which is a great time of year. But you know what suffers during the holiday season is normalcy. You’ve got less action happening than normally does, business is slowed down in a sense. I mean, sales pick up, hopefully. But conflicting times, but we hope it’s joyous for all of you, as joyous as it can be.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: We’re here on Thanksgiving eve as we start the holiday season. It’s an annual tradition. It’s actually not quite 30 years now we’ve been reading from my second book, See, I Told You So, Chapter 6: “Dead White Guys, or What the History Books Never Told You: The True Story of Thanksgiving.” I also have George Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation, the very first one, and also the truth of how the Indians screwed the Pilgrims out of Manhattan. Everybody thinks that we screwed the Indians and gave ’em a bunch of garbage for Manhattan.
It’s the other way around, actually — and it’s something I look forward to every year. And you know what? Despite doing it every year, with millions and millions and millions of people having heard it, there’s still a bunch of caca out there about Thanksgiving. I mentioned earlier that the College Fix website has a headline: “Students say it’s NOT okay to celebrate Thanksgiving,” that it’s “‘based off of the genocide of indigenous people.’”
What’s being done to young skulls full of mush via the education system in our country and cumulatively over decades is nothing less than obscene. Yesterday at the College Fix website, they posted a video where their correspondent, Kyle Hooten, interviewed students at Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota, and asked them about Thanksgiving, and here’s about 45 seconds of it…
WOMAN #1: I think that, like, Thanksgiving has been misconstrued a lot, especially in textbooks, and it’s kind of just based off of the genocide of indigenous people. And I don’t really any that we actually give thanks on Thanksgiving. We just eat a bunch of food and a bunch of capitalist bulls(bleep)t.
HOOTEN: Is it okay to celebrate Thanksgiving?
MAN #1: Nnnno. It’s probably not as bad as Christmas or Easter but, like, I don’t know.
HOOTEN: So what do you think the real Thanksgiving story is?
MAN #2: I don’t know what it is (snickers) ’cause I wasn’t there and ’cause I don’t have the — all the historical information.
WOMAN #2: I mean, the public school education — ugh! — tells you that this Thanksgiving was this great meeting where, you know, the Native Americans showed the Pilgrims how to, you know, grow corn — and obviously that’s not true. But what legitimately happened on Thanksgiving? I have no idea.
RUSH: If you have no idea, then what the hell was the answer, “Well, you know, what’s being taught is we gave thanks to the Indians gave thanks, the Indians teaching how to grow corn, maize, popcorn, and all that”? It is amazing when you stop and think about it. I don’t know what you were taught about Thanksgiving, but I was taught a version that goes like this: The Pilgrims showed up, and they were incompetents. They were well-intentioned good-hearted people but incompetent, and they didn’t know how to do anything. They were stumbling and bumbling around in a foreign place, had no idea even where they were.
And as they’re on the verge of starvation, the Indians stumbled upon ’em — across them — and showed them how to basically live, gave them everything, showed them how to grow crops and kill turkey and build tepees and stuff, and so the Pilgrims survived, and we were giving thanks, that Thanksgiving is to acknowledge the Indians’ role in saving the first Pilgrims. Now, it’s a quaint story, and it has attached itself to a number of people, but it is nothing to do…
Well, I can’t say that it’s nothing to do, but it is very far removed from what the first Thanksgiving is really about. Thanksgiving. George Washington first proclaimed it, Thanksgiving. Well, who was thanking who for what? That’s the root of the error. The root of it is that the Pilgrims must have been giving thanks to the Indians for saving them. That’s not what the Pilgrims were thankful for, as you will soon hear.
“The story of the Pilgrims begins in the early part of the seventeenth century (that’s the 1600s for those of you in Rio Linda, California). The Church of England under King James I was persecuting anyone and everyone who did not recognize its absolute civil and spiritual authority.” The first Pilgrims were Christian rebels, folks. “Those who challenged [King James’] ecclesiastical authority and those who believed strongly in freedom of worship were hunted down, imprisoned, and sometimes executed for their beliefs” in England in the 1600s.
“A group of separatists,” Christians who didn’t want to buy into the Church of England or live under the rule of King James, “first fled to Holland and established a community” of themselves there. “After eleven years, about forty of them” having heard about this New World Christopher Columbus had discovered, decided to go. Forty of them “agreed to make a perilous journey to the New World, where [they knew] they would certainly face hardships, but” the reason they did it was so they “could live and worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences” and beliefs.
“On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail. It carried a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims,” now known as Pilgrims, “led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up an agreement, a contract, that established” how they would live once they got there. The contract set forth “just and equal laws for all members of the new community, irrespective of their religious beliefs,” or political beliefs. “Where did the revolutionary ideas expressed in the Mayflower Compact come from? From the Bible.
The Pilgrims were a “devoutly religious people completely steeped in the lessons of the Old and New Testaments. They looked to the ancient Israelites for their example. And, because of the biblical precedents set forth in Scripture, they never doubted that their experiment would work.” They believed in God. They believed they were in the hands of God. As you know, “this was no pleasure cruise, friends. The journey” to the New World on the tiny, by today’s standards, sailing ship. It was long, it was arduous.
There was sickness, there was seasickness, it was wet. It was the opposite of anything you think of today as a cruise today on the open ocean. When they “landed in New England in November, they found, according to Bradford’s detailed journal, a cold, barren, desolate wilderness. There were no friends to greet them, he wrote. There were no houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could refresh themselves.” There was nothing.
“[T]he sacrifice they had made for freedom was just beginning. During the first winter, half the Pilgrims — including Bradford’s own wife — died of either starvation, sickness or exposure.” They endured that first winter. “When spring finally came,” they had, by that time, met the indigenous people, the Indians, and indeed the “Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers” and other animals “for coats.” But there wasn’t any prosperity. “[T]hey did not yet prosper!” They were still dependent. They were still confused. They were still in a new place, essentially alone among likeminded people.
“This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end. Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than what it really was. That happened, don’t misunderstand. That all happened, but that’s not — according to William Bradford’s journal — what they ultimately gave thanks for. “Here is the part that has been omitted: The original contract” that they made on the Mayflower as they were traveling to the New World…
They actually had to enter into that contract “with their merchant-sponsors in London,” because they had no money on their own. The needed sponsor. They found merchants in London to sponsor them. The merchants in London were making an investment, and as such, the Pilgrims agreed that “everything they produced to go into a common store,” or bank, common account, “and each member of the community was entitled to one common share” in this bank. Out of this, the merchants would be repaid until they were paid off.
“All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well.” Everything belonged to everybody and everybody had one share in it. They were going to distribute it equally.” That was considered to be the epitome of fairness, sharing the hardship burdens and everything like that. “Nobody owned anything. It was a commune, folks. It was the forerunner to the communes we saw in the ’60s and ’70s out in California,” and other parts of the country, “and it was complete with organic vegetables, by the way.
“Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that” it wasn’t working. It “was as costly and destructive…” His own journals chronicle the reasons it didn’t work. “Bradford assigned a plot of land” to fix this “to each family to work and manage,” as their own. He got rid of the whole commune structure and “assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage,” and whatever they made, however much they made, was theirs. They could sell it, they could share it, they could keep it, whatever they wanted to do.
What really happened is they “turned loose” the power of a free market after enduring months and months of hardship — first on the Mayflower and then getting settled and then the failure of the common account from which everybody got the same share. There was no incentive for anybody to do anything. And as is human nature, some of the Pilgrims were a bunch of lazy twerps, and others busted their rear ends. But it didn’t matter because even the people that weren’t very industrious got the same as everyone else. Bradford wrote about how this just wasn’t working.
“What Bradford and his community found,” and I’m going to use basically his own words, “was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else… [W]hile most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years — trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it — the Pilgrims decided early on,” William Bradford decided, “to scrap it permanently,” because it brought out the worst in human nature, it emphasized laziness, it created resentment.
Because in every group of people you’ve got your self-starters you’ve got your hard workers and your industrious people, and you’ve got your lazy twerps and so forth, and there was no difference at the end of the day. The resentment sprang up on both sides. So Bradford wrote about this. “‘For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.
“For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense,’” without any payment, “‘that was thought injustice.’ Why should you work for other people when you can’t work for yourself? What’s the point? … The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive.
“So what did Bradford’s community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property. Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result? ‘This had very good success,’ wrote Bradford, ‘for it made all hands [everybody] industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.’ …
“Is it possible that supply-side economics could have existed before the 1980s. … In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves. Now, this is where it gets really good, folks, if you’re laboring under the misconception that I was, as I was taught in school. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London.
“And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the ‘Great Puritan Migration.’” The word of the success of the free enterprise Plymouth Colony spread like wildfire and that began the great migration. Everybody wanted a part of it. There was no mass slaughtering of the Indians. There was no wiping out of the indigenous people, and eventually — in William Bradford’s own journal — unleashing the industriousness of all hands ended up producing more than they could ever need themselves.
So trading post began selling and exchanging things with the Indians — and the Indians, by the way, were very helpful. Puritan kids had relationships with the children of the Native Americans that they found. This killing the indigenous people stuff, they’re talking about much, much, much, much later. It has nothing to do with the first thanksgiving.
The first Thanksgiving was William Bradford and Plymouth Colony thanking God for their blessings. That’s the first Thanksgiving. Nothing wrong with being grateful to the Indians; don’t misunderstand. But the true meaning of Thanksgiving — and this is what George Washington recognized in his first Thanksgiving proclamation.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Thank you for being with us today, folks. Have a great rest of the Thanksgiving weekend. And know without doubt how truly thankful for you I personally am and all of us are. Never forget it. Can’t say it enough that we love you. See you back here on Monday. We will be here.
This essay was first published on Daily Pundit in 2017. More applicable now than then, I think.
——
I have one. You have one. We all have a tard in our family circle. If you’re lucky it’s not a blood relative, just a boyfriend or in-law, but they’ll be showing up at the big family get-together for Thanksgiving.
Not just any tard, either. A Progtard.
They’re sort of like the Terminator: They can’t be bargained with. They can’t be reasoned with. And they absolutely will not stop, ever.
Unlike the Terminator, progtards aren’t dangerous except in large groups or if they’re in the position to ambush you from behind or to file a bogus complaint with your employer. Progtards are mostly pathetic, and they’re even more amusingly pathetic when they’re angry and self-righteous.
Herewith, a guide for dealing with the tard at the table. This will be most useful if you have someone to work with, someone contemptuous of sloppy thinking, of feeeewings, and of self-entitlement.
(If you’re the sole hard thinker at the table and you’re surrounded by progtards, you can still use these suggestions, but I wouldn’t bother. I’d just grab the carving knife and lay into everyone at the table. But that’s just me.)
College Mockery
Mocking modern education — indoctrination, rather — is a good place to start. Many progtards are in college or have recently gotten out. (I’m not saying “graduated” because so many don’t, especially not within the old normal of four years.) This is in large part due to many people being soft-headed progs before they grow up and get the stupid knocked out of them. College is for most a prolonged childhood that allows them to avoid growing up. It certainly doesn’t educate them in any meaningful sense. And it costs an arm and a leg.
Thus, our first line of attack.
(Remember, we’re not trying to enlighten the progtards. That’s hopeless. All we’re doing is entertaining ourselves by getting them all riled up.)
“So, how much does your college cost per year? That much? Wow. How can you afford that?”
This can lead to criticism about mooching off of parents or taxpayers. That’s unlikely to impact the progtard directly, on account of an inflated sense of entitlement, but might help to get others on your side.
“How much are you having to borrow every year? Ouch. So you’ll be a hundred grand in debt. Oh, it’s taking you six years to graduate? A hundred fifty grand. Wow. That going to be, what, a grand a month for twenty years?”
“So, how are you going to make a living so you can pay that off and still have a place to live and get a car and stuff?”
“That’s a good goal, but how are you going to get there from here? How do you get your foot in the door to get started? Is your BA in Music History going to get you a job at all? Will it let you pay your school loans? ”
“Wouldn’t you have been better off not going to college? You could have lived at home, interned for minimum wage or even for free for a working musician, gotten some real experience, and not had any debt when you were done.”
“Does anyone really think that degree is worth anything? Why did you even bother getting it?”
“My nephew did two years of electrical tech in community college, lived at home, and worked part time to pay for it. He got a job with the power company straight out of school. He didn’t have any debt and he just bought his first house. He’s twenty-three years old.”
There’s meat left on those bones, but that’s enough to start the poo flying.
Communism, Socialism, and Progressivism
Don’t miss the chance to bring up the repeated failures of socialism and its inbred kin. You can’t quite say that every progtard truly believes that socialism et al would make the world a better place, but if you did say that you’d be off by only a few. Note the comment above about getting the stupid knocked out of you — socialism and such are stupid ideas that sound like they should work, and they sure do appeal to the lazy and untalented and envious, and you don’t realize they don’t work until you’ve had the stupid knocked out of you by the real world. Students, educators, bureaucrats, and some other so-called adults who have lived their lives as hothouse flowers never quite learn that a lot of nice-sounding ideas don’t actually work.
“You know the amazing thing about socialism? It’s so good at destroying wealth that it doesn’t matter if everyone’s equal. They’re poorer than even the poor people in the oh-so-unequal capitalist countries.”
“No, I take that back. The most amazing thing about socialism and communism is the number of people they’ve killed.”
“Tell me, how many more times does socialism need to be tried before it’s ‘real’?”
“Have you ever noticed how often socialist countries have to be bailed out by capitalist countries after natural disasters? Why doesn’t it ever go the other way?”
“Socialized medicine. What a cute idea! Too bad it never works for long. Back in the 1980s, American socialists pointed at England’s national health system as the best example of how nationalized medicine would work for everyone. Then when that started to show problems, they started pointing to Canada. Canada’s socialized medicine had just started and looked good … until rationing and problems became obvious a few years later. Now anyone wanting to show an example of socialized medicine done right has to just lie about all the problems it has everywhere. But next time for sure, right?”
Keeping the Poo Flying
There are a few miscellaneous poo bombs you can throw if the conversation and acrimony are slowing down.
Che really was a cowardly murderer, you know.
Wouldn’t it be neat if the global warming scientists would show their data and algorithms so it could be peer reviewed?
Yes, that short, blue hair does make a statement. It says, I’m going to be a lonely cat lady before I’m forty.
Aw, competition isn’t fair because it means that not everyone will be a winner? Aw, let me call you a wambulance.
You’re right, things are different than when I was young. When I was your age, it was almost impossible to make a living unless you worked for someone. Going into business for yourself took a lot of money to open a store front or you had to be in a big city or be willing to travel all the time. Now you can write software or books or make videos or do odd jobs all over the world for basically no money down. You have it so much easier now.
I wish that women only were paid 79 cents on the dollar. I’d fire all my male employees, hire all women, and save big bucks on payroll.
Why is it cultural appropriation for me to eat tacos, but it’s ok for Mexicans to wear blue jeans and use cell phones?
And lots and lots more, but we’re up to 1200 words, and that’s plenty enough.
I’m stuck at a family dinner that I thought I’d get out of, but no, I have to be there.
MASSIVE news: Walmart is ending their woke policies. I can now exclusively tell you what’s changing and how it happened. Last week I told execs at
@Walmart that I was doing a story on wokeness there. Instead we had productive conversations to find solutions. Below are the changes Walmart committed to. I have to give their executives major credit because this will send shockwaves throughout corporate America. This is the biggest win yet for our movement to end wokeness in corporate America. Here are the changes Walmart committed to: • Surveys: Walmart will no longer participate in the HRC’s woke Corporate Equality Index. • Products: Monitor the Walmart marketplace to identify and remove inappropriate sexual and / or transgender products marketed to children. • Funding of Grants: Review all funding of Pride, and other events, to avoid funding inappropriate sexualized content targeting kids. • Equity: We will not extend the Racial Equity Center which was established in 2020 as a special five-year initiative. • Supplier Diversity: We will evaluate supplier diversity programs and ensure they do not provide preferential treatment and benefits to suppliers based on diversity. We don’t have quotas and won’t going forward. Financing eligibility will no longer be predicated on providing certain demographic data. • LatinX: Walmart will no longer use the term in official communications. • Trainings: Walmart will discontinue racial equity training through the Racial Equity Institute. • DEI: Walmart will discontinue the use of DEI as a term while ensuring a respectful and supportive environment. Our focus is on Belonging for ALL associates and customers. Remember, Walmart is the #1 employer in America with over 1.6 Million Employees and they have a market cap of nearly $800B. This won’t just have a massive effect for their employees who will have a neutral workplace without feeling that divisive issues are being injected but it will also extend to their many suppliers. We’ve now changed policy at companies worth over $2 Trillion dollars, with many millions of employees who have better workplace environments as a result. I’m happy to have secured these changes before Christmas when shoppers have very few large retail brands they can spend money with who aren’t pushing woke policies. Companies like Amazon and Target should be very nervous that their top competitor dropped woke policies first. I think Target specifically will suffer serious sales problems as a result and Walmart will benefit.
there is more at the link above, but Walmart has been a bad actor in a lot of places, like China and this.
And in marketing failure news, the rest of the world pushed back on Jaguar because 99% of normal people are tired of Woke, DEI and LGBT crap being rammed down their throats.
Get this:
As the mockery of Jaguar’s massive brand relaunch continues, one company exec is speaking out against the “intolerance” from the public.
Managing director Rawdon Glover said in a recent interview with the Financial Times that the campaign messaging was drowned out in “a blaze of intolerance” on social media. Glover also claimed that the colorful new ad was not meant to be “woke.”
“If we play in the same way that everybody else does, we’ll just get drowned out. So we shouldn’t turn up like an auto brand,” Glover told the outlet.
“We need to re-establish our brand and at a completely different price point so we need to act differently. We wanted to move away from traditional automotive stereotypes.”
The Jaguar exec said there have been “very positive” reactions to the campaign but that he’s been dismayed by “the level of vile hatred and intolerance” to the viral ad.
Glover added that the rebrand was done in part to attract new customers. “This is not a depiction of how we think our future customers are,” he said. “We don’t want to necessarily leave all of our customers behind. But we do need to attract a new customer base.”
Guess what? Your customers aren’t perverts or racists. They want a good product (something Jag needs to work on since the 60’s). This won’t turn out well
No Republican has ever done what Donald J. Trump has done. Not even close.
Simply because no Republican has ever won three presidential elections, just to officially win two!
Yes, Trump won the presidency three times.
And he did it up against the entire world! Trump had to beat the entire Democratic Party, the entire deep state and D.C. swamp, globalists, communists, fascists, pretty much every corporate CEO and billionaire on earth, the mainstream media, social media, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, Wall Street, the entire judicial system, the entire education system (from teachers unions, to public schools, to colleges), even the RINOS in his own party, and at times, even Fox News.
Holy cannoli!
Wait, it gets better. Superhuman Trump single-handedly defeated, knocked out of power and forced into early retirement the Clinton Crime Family, Biden Crime Family, Obama Crime Family, Harris Crime Family, Bush Crime Family, Cheney Crime Family, Romney Crime Family and McCain Crime Family.
Not to mention the humiliating beatings he’s given to Nancy Pelosi, Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell.
Holy crap!
These political brand names dominated and ruled America like royalty for decades. They ruled the Democratic Party and Republican Party. They took turns running the government. They dominated media headlines. They amassed power and wealth. Everyone bowed and genuflected in their presence.
And then along came Trump.
Trump vanquished every one of them. He slayed them like child’s play. He sent them packing. He left the most powerful, connected, vicious and cunning establishment “insiders” in history, sitting dumbfounded and speechless, on the outside looking in.
He made them so impotent, even Viagra couldn’t save this group from humiliation.
Now back to my contention that Trump won the presidency three times. Let’s actually look at what Trump accomplished in his three runs for president, because it’s crazy, wild and unimaginable! This guy is the G.O.A.T. (greatest of all time).
First, in 2016, Trump ran a long-shot campaign, with very little money or staff, against the most powerful, well-funded and famous brand name in U.S. political history – Hillary Clinton.
They lost to a convicted felon they ridiculed as a racist, misogynistic fascist — and an existential threat to democracy.
And they didn’t just lose to President-elect Trump. They lost the Senate … likely the House … many Hispanic men … all three Blue Wall states … both Southern swing states … even substantial support in the bluest of states and cities.
Why it matters: Top Democrats, including Harris advisers, tell us they feel like a lost party. Come January, they’ll have scant power in the federal government, and shriveling clout in the courts and states.
The traditional media structure sympathetic to their views, and hostile to Trump’s, was shattered.
The big picture: In our volatile, 50-50 America, where voters seem to swing fast and hard against the ruling party, resurrection and resurgence are often an off-year election away.
But the road to the Democrats’ Damascus requires deep, honest self-reflection — and, many party insiders tell us, entirely new leadership.
President Biden, 81,has faded even before his job is done. Harris’ team didn’t even want him to campaign. Impossible to imagine Democrats turning to him for sage advice on what’s next.
Harris just lost what Democrats considered an eminently winnable race, despite relatively light scrutiny and more money than any candidate in U.S. history. Hard to see her guiding Democrats out of the wilderness.
The party’s two most popular figures — Barack Obama and Michelle Obama — are happy to help in the waning moments of elections but aren’t going to lead a revival.
Look to the states, Democrats will say: Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania … Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan … Andy Beshear in Kentucky … newly elected Josh Stein in North Carolina.
Other Democratic future faces: Senator-elect Elissa Slotkin in Michigan, and Ruben Gallego, who leads in the race for U.S. senator in Arizona.
All are from states Trump just won. They’re certainly politically smarter than the Washington crew. The evidence: They didn’t lose.
Democrats will now start the predictable cycle of blame-casting and bellyaching. Every losing party does it. Then, they’ll turn to a more serious autopsy: why they’re bleeding support virtually everywhere.
The Biggest Loser? After Tuesday, it’s not just the title of the long-running reality TV weight-loss show anymore.
The biggest loser of the Nov. 5 elections, undeniably, was Vice President Kamala Harris. Despite raising and spending a staggering $1 billion in campaign cash and having the sycophantic support of the Hollywood glitterati, the now-lame-duck vice president was decisively defeated in her bid for promotion to the presidency.
Voters ensured she wouldn’t become the latest example of 1970s bestselling author Lawrence Peter’s “Peter Principle” theorem that people get promoted in a hierarchy until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent. Voters on Tuesday apparently concluded Harris had reached that point four years ago and resoundingly voted not to make that mistake again.
Harris demonstrated “Peter Principle”-level incompetence with her very first independent executive decision; namely, the choice of loopy leftist Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her vice presidential running mate.
Walz, a self-described “knucklehead,” brought to the Democratic ticket the frumpiness of George Costanza combined with the charisma of Elmer Fudd.
But while Harris and Walz were the biggest losers, they were far from the only big losers Tuesday night.
In no particular order, here are some of the many others who lost bigly:
Sen. Chuck Schumer: Voters demoted the New York Democrat from Senate majority leader to minority leader by kicking (at least) three longtime liberal Democratic senators—in Montana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—to the curb. (Republicans also picked up an open Senate seat in West Virginia.)
Once and future President Donald Trump makes a joke about Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., (right) at the annual Alfred E. Smith Foundation charity fundraising dinner on Oct. 17 in New York City. Schumer was not amused. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
Suddenly, but not surprisingly, abolishing the Senate filibuster is no longer a Democratic talking point. Talk of also abolishing the Electoral College has likewise gone away postelection, after the once and future President Donald Trump also won the popular vote in a nearly 5 million-vote landslide.
Liz Cheney: The Trump-hating former Republican congresswoman—resoundingly repudiated by Wyoming voters in 2022 after she cast her lot with Democrats on the kangaroo court Jan. 6 committee—campaigned extensively for Harris. Cheney’s dream of being tapped as defense secretary in a Harris administration is now kaput.
The “Blue Wall”: Even Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin couldn’t save Harris’ train wreck of a candidacy.
Political lawfare: Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith; New York state Attorney General Letitia James; Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis; and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg will now have to find someone not named Trump to prosecute.
Hollywood: Cher and Barbra Streisand, Alec Baldwin and Robert De Niro, Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar, et al., your flight to Canada is now boarding at Gate 3. Make them one-way tickets, please.
How long can you talk shit about half the country before they get fed up? How long can you brag about the stock market while many Americans struggle at the grocery store and gas pump? How about hurricane victims getting ignored while illegals are put up in luxury hotels? I guess we found out.
Former NBC journo Brian Williams appeared on the Seth Meyers show this week and suggested that Democrats have completely lost the working class, which is true, and that it happened because Democrats kept gaslighting the public which was insulting.
He points to the way Democrats kept insisting that the economy was great while prices kept rising to ridiculous levels. He mentions the fact that the border was completely overrun while Democrats insisted that it was under control.
He cites other examples, but it’s all the same theme.
Seth Meyers Goes Quiet as Ex-NBC Anchor Torches Democrats for ‘Insulting’ the Working Class
“It is tough love time for the Democratic Party. I think it needs to be stripped down and rebuilt.”
Here’s how they alienated working-class voters, according to Brian Williams:
1. Ignoring Rising Costs: “A 12-pack of Bounty [paper towels] is $40. Rich folks don’t feel that. Poor folks already switched to Sparkle during the COVID lockdown.”
2. Touting Stock Market Success While Ignoring Economic Hardship for Regular People: “I think telling them that the Nasdaq is gangbusters is further insulting. It’s insulting.”
3. Downplaying Border Issues: “I think the biggest unforced error of the Biden administration by far was the border…. To tell people it’s not a problem is insulting.”
4. Providing Benefits to Migrants While Ignoring Citizens: “For the working class to see incoming migrants getting welcome bags, debit cards, and motel rooms is probably insulting as well.”
5. Failing to Address Biden’s Cognitive Decline: “I want to know who thought it was a good idea that Joe Biden stand for another four years at 80 years of age and 37% popularity.”
Liberals who are in the throes of capitulation and despair after Donald Trump’s crushing electoral and popular vote win can lay blame for their disastrous loss at the feet of one man: Barack Hussein Obama.
Obama built the Trump wave. His failure to live up to the promises of his populist 2008 run has cursed the Democratic Party, probably for a generation. The Washington DC establishment in just two short months is going to get “scholonged” by an angry and vengeful Trump, ready to rain executive hellfire on the bureaucrats and institutions that have spent the last nine years fighting him tooth and nail.
All of this could have been prevented. In 2008, Obama swept into power with a crushing electoral college and popular vote majority. He won Iowa, Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina. He even won Indiana. Democrats swept into power in Congress with a 74-seat lead in the House, nearly 59% of seats, and were gifted with a magical 60-seat filibuster-proof supermajority in the Senate.
This was a generational victory, a sign that voters were fed up with politics as usual and the failures of the GOP and the Washington and Wall Street establishment as such. This victory wasn’t just about electing the first Black president, though that was important: The policies and platform at stake appealed deeply to voters.
It is worth remembering what exactly those policies were.
Obama promised to end the war in Iraq, end the Afghanistan war with honor, help the economy by reducing health care costs (prioritizing “Main Street” over Wall Street), and bring about a new era of racial harmony. Moreover, Obama explicitly eschewed radical leftist politics. He explicitly defended traditional marriage. In his DNC nomination speech, he condemned employers who “undercut American wages by hiring illegal workers.”
Obama ran a campaign on bringing “change” to DC. He made much of his status as a newcomer who lacked the “typical pedigree” of a candidate for the nation’s highest office.
Put another way, Obama won a decisive victory in 2008 by campaigning as a Washington outsider bent on ending foreign wars, boosting the economy by helping ordinary people, and being a moderate on social issues like abortion and gay marriage. Does this message sound familiar? It should.
The raw facts are these: As of 1960, 51 percent of black females between the ages of 15 and 44 were married and living with their husbands, another 20 percent were divorced, widowed, or separated, and only 28 percent had never been married. Twenty years later, only 31 percent of black women in these age brackets were married and living with their husbands, while 48 percent had never married.
By 1994, an absolute majority—56 percent—of black women in these age brackets were never married and only 25 percent were married and living with their husbands.186 Accordingly, while two-thirds of black children were living with both parents in 1960, only one-third were by 1994. While only 22 percent of black children were born to unmarried women in 1960, 70 percent were by 1994.
White liberals, instead of comparing what has happened to the black family since the liberal welfare state policies of the 1960s were put into practice, compare black families to white families and conclude that the higher rates of broken homes and unwed motherhood among blacks are due to “a legacy of slavery.” But why the large-scale disintegration of the black family should have begun a hundred years after slavery is left unexplained.
A House committee report revealed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ $900 million “We Can Do This” COVID campaign was flawed and claimed COVID shots prevented transmission despite FDA stating there was no such evidence
CDC’s shifting mask guidelines and reversals on recommendations damaged public trust, with changes appearing politically motivated rather than based on scientific evidence
The government aggressively promoted COVID shots for children despite low risk levels, using emotional manipulation and fear-based messaging through the Fors Marsh Group PR firm
Clinical trial studies showed significant bias in measuring COVID shot effectiveness, with case-counting window bias making ineffective shots appear 50% to 70% effective
Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trials revealed higher risks of serious adverse events than initially reported, with Pfizer showing 36% higher risk compared to placebo groups
The U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee released an assessment of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) COVID-19 public health campaign, revealing it was fraught with miscalculations that set the stage for widespread public distrust.1
In December 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the first COVID-19 shots, yet these authorizations clearly stated there was no evidence the shots prevented viral transmission. Despite this, the administration launched the “We Can Do This” Campaign, spending over $900 million to promote vaccine uptake and public health measures.
However, foundational issues plagued the campaign from the beginning. Past contracts and fiscal mismanagement within HHS raised red flags about the effectiveness and integrity of their public relations efforts. As the campaign aimed to shape public behavior around masking, social distancing and vaccination, the reliance on flawed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance undermined its credibility.
By allowing CDC recommendations to drive public messaging, the administration sowed confusion and mistrust. These early failures were not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of inconsistent and politically influenced public health strategies that ultimately eroded the very trust needed to effectively manage a public health crisis.
Overstating COVID-19 Shot Efficacy — A Critical Misstep
When COVID-19 shots were introduced, Americans were told to believe they were not only preventing illness but also halting the virus’ transmission. However, this narrative quickly unraveled, as there was no evidence that vaccines prevented transmission. Despite this, the CDC and the “We Can Do This” campaign promoted the idea that only vaccinated individuals could safely forego masks and social distancing.
This overstated efficacy became a significant issue as breakthrough infections began to rise, especially with the emergence of more transmissible variants like Delta. The administration’s insistence that vaccines stopped transmission contradicted the FDA’s original EUA terms and created a false sense of security.
When real-world data began to show that vaccinated individuals could still spread the virus, the CDC was forced to retract and revise its messaging, further damaging its credibility. This disconnect between official statements and emerging evidence betrayed the public’s trust.
Meanwhile, the report highlights how vaccine mandates became a contentious tool in the government’s strategy to control the pandemic.3 You saw federal, state and private employers enforcing COVID-19 shot requirements, often without clear, evidence-based justification. These shot mandates targeted millions, demonstrating the extent of overreach and coercion.
With Donald Trump’s explosive victory Nov. 5, there should no longer be any doubt: The Age of Obama is finally over. But it’s not just that his charm and influence have waned, as was evident in the almost unrecognizably grumpy old man who took the stage in the final days of the Harris campaign. The legacy of his entire political project has now been thrown in the ash heap of history.
Will Democrats learn their lesson? Color me doubtful. I don’t see how they can step it up much from the “Trump is literally Hitler” line of attack, but I trust they’re creative enough to figure it out over these next four years. At least we can now be quite certain that it won’t work; Obama’s poisonous legacy has finally met its rightful end. If your idea of “progress” requires aggressive censorship, fomenting racial hatred and tearing apart the fabric of society, perhaps you should consider that it’s you who is on the wrong side of history.
The biographer and historian added that he believes the disastrous election result for Democrats means they will no longer want the Obamas front and center in future campaigns.
‘The conclusion for Democrats is that they’ve got to dispense with these people from the past, including Hillary Clinton too, and move to a new generation of figures who are not in the AOC club at all,’ he said, referring to left-wing firebrand Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
But the writer predicted that Barack still has enough ‘star-power’ to pull in large speaking fees – such as the $400,000 he was paid for a single 2017 speech by Wall Street firm Cantor Fitzgerald, according to the New York Times.
‘I’m not sure that would necessarily decline. He still has the celebrity factor of being an ex-president,’ Garrow said.
The author said he expected the Obamas to ‘continue to hang out with celebrities and live on Martha’s Vineyard’, the millionaires’ playground island off the coast of Massachusetts.
‘I certainly expect them to be spending less time in Washington after early January,’ he said.
Garrow wrote the 2017 biography Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama. He won his Pulitzer for an earlier book on Martin Luther King.
He predicted that the Obamas will now largely vanish from the political scene to hang out with celebrities on Martha’s Vineyard’.
Garrow said Tuesday’s electoral rout has left Obama, 63, ‘nervous’ about the impact Trump could have on how he is seen by future generations.
‘He has been and remains extremely concerned and nervous about his historical legacy,’ he said.
‘That has certainly taken a big hit with Trump once again triumphing.’
JOE ROGAN: OBAMA “STRAIGHT UP LIED”. You’ll have to click on the link as my X-Twitter fight to embed with WordPress continues, but it is a good piece of work.
With Republicans sweeping to a red trifecta in last week’s elections, stunningly capturing the White House and majorities in the House and Senate, Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is cutting a different tone, compared to his pre-election hype where he posited a Democrat win in the Senate and then potentially getting rid of the filibuster, among other radical proposals.
Ending the filibuster rule – which requires 60 votes to pass bills – would have made it easier for Democrats to supercharge their agenda and essentially railroad any Republican opposition.
Schumer and the Democrats tried to kill the filibuster in 2022 when they had 50 votes – the vice president could have broken the tie – but Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema refused to toe the Democratic party line. They eventually became Independents.
With Manchin and Sinema leaving the Senate, Schumer was confident of having at least 50 Senate seats after this year’s election with a then-potential Vice President Walz breaking the tie on a filibuster vote.
“We got it up to 48, but, of course, Sinema and Manchin voted no; that’s why we couldn’t change the rules. Well, they’re both gone,” Schumer told reporters on Tuesday during the week of the Democratic convention, according to NBC News.
Levi’s is as woke as they come. They are everything left and are in Bud Light territory for being hard to take.
Then this….
Going into the election, I was scolded by people telling me why what I was prioritizing in my voting choice was wrong. COVID-19 is over. Boys in girls’ sports isn’t happening. No one is getting censored. You’re getting it all wrong. Subtext: You’re an idiot influenced by far-right loons, and you’re a bigot to the core. What happened to you, Jen?
Here’s what happened to me. I get to care about what I want to care about. And for the last 10 years, the far Left has been not only telling us what we need to care about but smearing us and canceling us if we don’t agree.
We dissident former lefties have been called racists, misogynists, Nazis, grandma-killers, transphobes, bigots, and fascists and generally cast aside as unworthy of employment or membership in polite society. The election was a big middle finger to all of that.
The Left canceled too many of us.
The outcasts spoke up and rejected the crazy on Nov. 5. Sure, we may have chosen our own brand of crazy. But, that brand of crazy knows men and women are different, boys don’t belong in girls’ sports, inflation is real, free speech is the most fundamental right in a democracy, and Vice President Kamala Harris was installed, not elected, as the Democratic candidate.
Scientific Americanbills itself as an outlet that “covers the most important and exciting research, ideas and knowledge in science, health, technology, the environment and society. It is committed to sharing trustworthy knowledge, enhancing our understanding of the world, and advancing social justice” that “reaches more than 10 million people around the world each month.” On Thursday, editor-in-chief Laura Helmuth resigned after calling Donald Trump voters “fucking fascists.”
“The Board of Education is united in finding the teacher’s behavior reprehensible and unacceptable, and we are horrified and deeply offended by statements made in the video,” the statement reads in part. “As representatives of this community, we demanded an immediate response and are grateful to Superintendent, Dr. Solan and all parties involved for their swift actions to ensure a resolution. This incident has been treated with the utmost care, and every step taken has aligned with legal and ethical standards.”
First lady Jill Biden’s former press secretary blasted Democrats who label opponents of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) as racist this week after an MSNBC guest called President-elect Trump’s Secretary of Defense nominee a “White supremacist.”
“This s— has to stop,” Michael LaRosa, who served as the first lady’s press secretary from 2021 to 2022, posted on X in response to an MSNBC guest calling President-elect Trump’s Defense Secretary nominee and former Fox News host, Pete Hegseth, a “White supremacist” in response to his opposition to DEI policies.
“Opposing DEI initiatives does not make you a white supremacist. Conversations and demonization like this are a big part of the reason we got our a–es kicked,” he continued.
As always, Woke destroys everything it touches including liberals and the election in 2024.
Get woke, go broke, get fired, lose the election.
The examples like this keep rolling in. America is tired of this shit and just because we don’t agree doesn’t make anyone Hitler. It just makes the one calling someone Hilter an idiot
Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy said Friday that Special Counsel Jack Smith proved the prosecutions of President-elect Donald Trump were intended as political weapons.
“They’re taking the position that the long-standing office of legal counsel guidance at the Justice Department [that] basically says that you can neither indict nor prosecute a sitting president,” McCarthy told “America Reports” co-host Sandra Smith. “They are conceding that President-elect Trump will be certified, that is, at the joint session of Congress which as we all know now, will be January 6th. His victory will be ratified, state-certified electoral votes will be ratified, he will for all intents and purposes be a sitting president as of January 20th. And they are taking the position that under those circumstances, the cases shouldn’t go forward.”
In the wake of President-elect Donald Trump’s victory, many liberals have announced they are leaving X. Tired of all the “disinformation” they encounter on the platform, they are convinced the time has come to delete their accounts.
It was all OK before Musk bought the biased and censored version of Twitter that discriminated against and banned conservative speech. Once it became a platform for free speech, it was not usable for liberals. They’re really Marxists now but identify as liberals.
NBC News reported that the day after the election, “115,414 accounts were deactivated,” the biggest one-day exodus since Elon Musk bought the platform.
Let’s see what Aristotle said about it:
Aristotle: ‘It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.’
In other words, you can listen, but don’t have to believe the other side. You could also be a critical thinker and know they were wrong, but not let it change your POV or be so butt-hurt that you had to act like a child and leave X for attention.
“Meanwhile, daily traffic to competitors Bluesky and Threads have jumped since the beginning of October.” NBC reporters spoke to six people who have left X for these platforms since Election Day. These individuals cited “growing issues on X, including bots, partisan ads, and harassment” as their reasons for leaving. Harassment likely means they were hit with a community note or someone on the platform disagreed with them.
Importantly, all six said the aforementioned issues “reached a tipping point when Trump won the election.”
In a separate article, NBC recounts the experience of former X user Kara Wurtz, a 39-year-old finance director in St. Louis. For Wurtz, “the day after the election was the ‘final straw.’” She claimed that, “under Musk’s leadership,” … X “became a place where I wasn’t really getting what I wanted out of it anymore.”
What she “wanted out of it” was validation of her own world view. Following Musk’s takeover, she was forced to hear opinions that differed from her own for the first time. That didn’t happen before Musk took over the platform.
“Every time I opened it up,” she said, “it would throw things at me that put me in a bad mood.”
Yes, the truth is like that.
Anyway, as the flight continues, some users are still on the fence. But there is one trait they all seem to share: their egos are the size of the Grand Canyon.
Joy Ried leaves X – because she can’t handle the negativity. Let’s not forget that she was 100% negative on Conservatives, Trump and Whites before leaving
They act like children who don’t get their way and take their ball and go home. In case they didn’t notice, they have no audience and cellar-dwelling ratings due to lying and disparagement.
I’d advise them to grow up and act like adults, sort of like half the country did for the last 4 years.
I often say that everything that Woke touches goes to hell, broke, or both. It is tough to stomach these people trying to ruin Western Civilization – also the definition of Marxism.
There were many reasons that President-elect Donald Trump won in such a resounding victory this week: inflation, the bewildering open border policy, the Afghanistan withdrawal humiliation, the world on fire, etc. But let’s not forget one of the top ones: This was a resounding defeat of wokeism.
Voters have rejected wokeism—defined here as an unhealthy obsession with viewing all of life as a struggle between oppressors and oppressed, or, as the woke would put it, being “awake” to the misfortunes of the marginalized.
Throughout her long public career, the vice president has embraced all the woke nostrums. She was particularly adept at describing equity—the government and the private sector treating Americans differently depending on their race—and how it is different from equality.
“So, there’s a big difference between equality and equity,” she voices over in a 2020 animated video. “Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place.”
President Joe Biden spoke the word “equity” constantly, but he struggled with it, at times starting to say “equality” before catching himself. And he never described or defined in any way the thinking behind it—probably because he lacked the knowledge.
Harris, however, completely abandoned her views during the three months she ran for president, and the media, of course, never held her accountable.
This was a tacit admission that she understood how much the country hated the use of race to justify dismantling society or the promotion of the idea that the United States is systemically racist. Voters also happen to disagree with allowing males to use women’s bathrooms and allowing minors to surgically or chemically castrate themselves or remove other healthy body parts.
It is, of course, an open question whether Harris’ sudden march to the center on these issues was a political ruse and whether she would have turned around and promoted these policies once elected.
Who is biased now? Who discriminated against because of politics? Who weaponized government agencies. Well, here comes the truth.
North Carolina was hit as hard as any state. Whole towns were wiped out. I saw the damage personally as I was in one of them. Thank God for Samritan’s Purse because that is who helped people, not FEMA.
Now this.
Avoiding helping Trump supporters was a nationwide policy, according to the woman who was fired for putting it in writing.
The purpose of doing so, we are told, is that Trump supporters are dangerous to FEMA workers, and therefore should be avoided.
The FEMA official who was just fired for telling workers to avoid homes impacted by the hurricanes in Florida if they had Trump signs says that it was not "isolated" and that FEMA workers were instructed to do it in the Carolinas too. pic.twitter.com/BpBdZFSSPR
I don’t know to what extent the accusation that Trump supporters are any more likely to be hostile to FEMA workers, but if so, I am pretty sure that cause and effect are reversed. Obviously, Trump supporters who suspect that FEMA was doing its best not to help them were right, and since that is the case, they have every reason to be less than friendly to FEMA workers.
However, I seriously doubt there is much to the accusation in the first place. After all, there are countless videos of people in hurricane-ravaged areas begging for help. No doubt there is some Trump supporter somewhere who was nasty to a FEMA worker after being left to suffer for days, but the claim that this was a trend is…doubtful.
FEMA is, after all, part of the Department of Homeland Security, and under DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas nothing good has happened, and lots that is evil has. This is the man who controlled the porous border, is the boss of the Secret Service, and who has presided over disasters aplenty.
I doubt there will be justice and the people who suffered are still recovering. It’s not because of FEMA, it’s because of their neighbors and church organizations. We can’t clean house fast enough of these haters.
Cut the crap with the misogyny vote and especially racism. The liberals ran a very flawed person as a candidate. It was Hillary 2.0, minus a few points because at least Hillary is smart.
Kamala Harris was a terrible candidate. Democrats brought this on themselves. Joe Biden was a weak candidate, and his vice president was worse. Biden should have had serious challenges in the 2020 primaries and should never have been allowed to run again. Harris couldn’t even get 1% support from her party in 2020. Installing her as the candidate four months before the election, and crafting a campaign about “vibes” and her gender and ethnic background to cover for her inability to articulate a single coherent policy position, was madness. Democrats deserved to lose.
No, Harris didn’t lose because she’s a woman, or black, or biracial. Nor did she lose because of bigotry or white supremacy or Christian nationalism, whatever these might mean. Rather, she lost because she was attached to policies opposed to common sense and, when she tried to distance herself from them, it looked more like pandering than a principled change of heart. When flipping on issues, she didn’t actually seem to believe that her past positions were wrong, only that they wouldn’t get her elected. Ultimately, she came across as inauthentic and evasive and, like Hillary Clinton, entitled. And that’s on her and the establishment media that enabled her, not on Trump or the bogeymen of patriarchy and systemic racism.
Enough, then, with the Hitler comparisons and the doomsaying about the death of democracy. Enough also with the claims of fascism and white supremacy. Many citizens, frankly, are sick and tired of history and race being exploited to keep dysfunctional politicians in power, or to make Americans feel bad about their country, which by and large has been exemplary for its integration of people from all over the world of different races, ethnicities, and religions. They’re also sick, for that matter, of race and identity categories being exploited generally, whether by establishment media, college DEI programs, or the entertainment industry.
The rhetoric is the problem. For decades, Democrats in the punditocracy have ramped up their attacks on every single Republican candidate for president (Reagan, Bush 1 and 2, McCain, Romney, and Trump). More recently, these condescending elites have turned their fire on the American public, calling Trump supporters “deplorables,” “garbage” and “racists” who were willing to elect a fascist dictator (Trump). Whether or not the talking heads in the press believe their own shtick, their followers clearly do. Social media is now filled with people flailing, crying, and screaming that their lives are in danger. This is nonsense that borders on mental illness, and those who promote and encourage it deserve to lose their jobs.
The Trump candidacies of 2016 through 2024, if nothing else, have exposed the snobbery of elites—be they at universities, in the media, or in government—and their general disdain for the concerns of ordinary Americans.
Much was made of Trump as a “strongman” or “dictator” and so those in the echelons of power and influence could write him off as another Hitler or Mussolini and, in turn, excoriate his followers as “anti-American,” “deplorables,” or “garbage,” or as people who “cling to guns or religion” in times of stress. What these elite failed to see, fundamentally, is that Trump spoke to their common-sense values and beliefs – sometimes crudely, yes, but clearly and authentically.
What sorts of values and beliefs? For starters, that the nation’s border should not be wide open as long as lawful immigration avenues exist. That the government should take care of its citizens first and foremost, rooted in basic ideas of social contract. That males don’t belong in women’s sports and that gender is essentially biological, not “fluid.” That criminals should be punished, regardless of race or ethnicity, and that crime should be brought and kept under control. That American jobs and industry should be fostered, not exported. And that America should be energy independent and not beholden to hostile nations abroad.
An angry black woman is not going silently. She’s going to rat out the whole FEMA for being Anti-Trump. This should be interesting.
FEMA is now facing a massive scandal—one so explosive it threatens to shake the foundation of this clearly weaponized organization. The scandal involves an anti-Trump supervisor who ordered her team to avoid helping hurricane-ravaged homeowners with “pro-Trump” signs. Well, there’s been a turn of events, and this story has officially gone nuclear.
The black female supervisor was ultimately fired, and FEMA issued one of their typical ‘outraged’ statements, claiming shock that something so racist and inhumane could happen on their watch. But the bigwigs at FEMA might regret those words soon enough, because this supervisor is singing like a canary.
As it turns out, this supervisor isn’t planning to take the fall alone. She’s claiming that the anti-Trump, politicized atmosphere runs through the entire organization and comes straight from the top. Essentially, she’s using the old “I was just following orders” excuse, but in doing so, she’s blowing this scandal wide open in ways that could be unimaginable—and could spell the downfall of this weaponized federal organization.
After everything we’ve been through these past four years, does this story really surprise anyone? Is there a single organization left in the US that hasn’t been weaponized and bastardized by the left?
No one mentioned being incompetent, a tremendously poor candidate, unlikeable, and not doing anything of note other than being a DEI hire, but here is what they said:
An exit poll released by Democratic polling firm Blueprint outlined the top three reasons voters nationwide gave for not supporting Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, in her 2024 bid for U.S. president.
Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris speaks on stage as she concedes the election, at Howard University in Washington on Nov. 6, 2024. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
The leading issue for voters was that inflation is too high. This was followed by the Biden–Harris administration allowing in too many illegal immigrants, and that Harris focused too much on cultural topics like transgender issues rather than the middle class.
The poll asked 3,262 national and swing state voters in the two days following the 2024 election to rate the importance of potential reasons for their decision to vote for President-elect Donald Trump instead of Harris.
In addition to inflation, illegal immigration, and Harris’s focus on transgender issues, the next three factors named by all voters were that debt rose too high under the Biden–Harris administration, that Harris is too similar to President Joe Biden, and that Harris would let in even more illegal immigrants. One choice that scored high among swing state voters in particular was that “Democrats did a bad job running the country.”
“In the end, Harris couldn’t outrun her past or her party—perhaps it was a lack of time, but it was certainly a vice grip that proved impossible to escape,” the polling report’s authors wrote.
The factors of least concern to voters were that Harris was too pro-Israel, too conservative, or not similar enough to Biden.
The poll’s findings were published as top Democrats reel from Tuesday’s election results, point fingers, and assign blame for who’s responsible for Trump’s sweep of the seven battleground states.
“In this election, Americans have made their voice clear: Democrats need to focus more on issues Americans care about, like wages and benefits, and less on being politically correct … Democrats have been too intimidated to speak up for the same values that many of us hold dear—the American Dream, public safety, and a common sense of right and wrong among them,” Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) wrote in a Nov. 7 post on X.
The eventual collapse of the Harris-Walz campaign can be partly traced back to many things. The Dems ended up showing Biden the door and replacing him with a far-Left nominee with a record and past comments they worked hard to hide. The whole campaign was fake and that was obvious, but then they brought Tim Walz aboard to win over midwestern men. Yeah, we’re still laughing at that one too.
Harris also avoided tough interviews and even botched the softball ones. That brings us to what James Carville blames to a large degree for Harris getting wiped out on election day, which was her answer to a question from Sunny Hostin on “The View” about what she’d do different from Biden. You might remember Harris’ answer: “There is not a thing that comes to mind in terms of — and I’ve been a part of most of the decisions that have had impact.”
James Carville said that was a turning point:
James Carville on how Sunny Hostin ended Kamala Harris' campaign: "When we go back and history unearths this, it's going to be right there on the View. Sunny Hostin, Houston, whatever asked the question. That's the most devastating answer you can imagine."
Think about it: The legacy media is wondering why they’ve lost their influence and all they need to do is realize that the most telling question that exposed Harris’ lack of preparation came from one of the panelists of Kamala cheerleaders on “The View.”
After dispatching the Clinton’s and Bush’s, Obama has almost self-destructed. After weaponizing the DOJ/FBI/CIA against Trump, he still couldn’t stop him and it has come back to haunt him. He’ll be known as the Marxist he really is and how he tried to destroy America through his and Biden’s terms.
Here’s How:
Obama’s biographer reveals ex-president fears for his legacy after ‘tone-deaf preaching’ harmed Harris campaign
Barack Obama and his wife Michelle have been slammed by his biographer for ‘talking down’ to voters in ‘tone-deaf and clueless’ preaching that harmed Kamala Harris‘ ill-fated presidential campaign.
The effect was so bad that – combined with Donald Trump‘s victory – it is likely to reduce the 44th president’s political relevance to ‘Bill Clinton levels’, David Garrow said in an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com.
‘People do not want to be talked down to, no matter who they are,’ the 71-year-old Pulitzer Prize winner said.
‘I thought it was tone-deaf and clueless for them to preach as they did,’ he told DailyMail.com.
‘I would expect that perception will be shared by lots of people. If so, I think it reduces their relevance to Bill Clinton territory.’
Barack Obama drew criticism for comments he made to a room of black men on October 11, saying he detected a lack of ‘energy’ that was ‘more pronounced with the brothers’ – and added that ‘it makes me think that, well, you just aren’t feeling the idea of having a woman as president’.
Michelle Obama gave a speech on October 27 railing against Trump’s stance on abortion, admonishing men considering voting for the former president that ‘a vote for him is a vote against us’.
Besides being the single greatest comeback story – political or otherwise – in American history, there are at least two other crucial takeaways from Tuesday’s romp.
First, it is evident that the 2008 Barack Obama Democratic Party intersectional coalition has died. It is not that the coalition is wounded or endangered; it is that it is dead. Trump made historic inroads with Hispanic voters, Black voters, young voters and other demographic subgroups that have been vital to the Democrats since 2008. Trump won the nation’s single most Hispanic county – 97% Hispanic Starr County, Texas – by 16%. Queens County, New York, famously one of the most ethnically and racially diverse counties in the country, moved over 20 points toward Trump from his 2020 performance. Overall, Trump won just under half the national Hispanic vote, and he made historic inroads with black men. Voters under the age of 35, such a core Democratic constituency in the not-so-distant past, are now a swing voting bloc.
Obamaism is dead. Trump was right. Americans don’t want Marxists or Commies.
The discussion is below, but from my point of view, it is having a terrible candidate, calling half of the voters names like Nazis and fascists, not using new media (X and Podcasts) that people listen to, and having an incompetent staff running things. Oh, let’s not forget that the 2 prior democratic regimes were Marxists who hated America. Letting in illegals that made the country unsafe and destroying a good economy didn’t help either.
They could have listened to the people and we would have told them, but the media don’t listen to anyone, to the point of irrelevance.
Being woke and bowing to the trannies being in the girls’ locker rooms and sports teams was a line voters drew in the sand.
Anyway, here is the analysis from those smarter than me.
In the wake of Donald Trump’s crushing presidential victory over Vice President Kamala Harris, the major media are indicting all the usual suspects, beginning with claimed “disinformation” from conservative sources. But these targets, though falsely accused, do point to the true culprits.
Morning Joe’s Scarborough, for example, blamed the failure to elect Kamala Harris on misogynistic black and Hispanic males. Other commentators claimed that it was the uneducated females who were not true to the cause. Sunny Hostin of The View noted that Trump’s victory was one of “cultural resentment,” because America could not elect a mixed-race female married to a Jewish man. David Axelrod said that racial bias and misogyny could not be ignored in this election.
The media have projected a dark turn for the country. The New York Times editorial board called the election result a “perilous choice,” with America on the “precipice” of an “authoritarian style of governance.” Historian John Meacham cited the treasonous attempted “coup” of January 6 as proving a fascist victory.
Now to more specific finger-pointing from the media. Many media commentators are criticizing Harris, citing her failure to name Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro as her running mate. Of course, Joe Biden hampered Harris, they write, by waiting so long to drop out, after stubbornly staying in a race he should not have entered to begin with. And don’t forget the awful performance of Tim Walz, an attractive target for many in the media.
In all of these discussions, the media do not point to a prominent element common to each of the perceived problems: the media themselves. Of course, the media were too compromised by partisan motives to report what they had known for most of Biden’s term: he clearly suffered from advanced dementia. As Axios political reporter Hans Nichols recently noted on Fox’s America’s Newsroom, the media came down hard on any reporter who proposed a well sourced story on Biden’s lack of acuity, because that would help Trump.
Publicizing this infirmity would have had several salutary results. Obviously, as all disappointed Democrats now appear to admit, Biden should have dropped out of the race earlier. But the same media relaying this judgment do not point a finger at themselves for aiding and abetting his clueless clinging to power.
Perhaps more significantly, there was no media voice questioning the president’s fitness for office per the 25th Amendment. This amendment was explicitly meant for the exact situation this country faced these past four years: presidential senility. This issue is important in a world exploding into war, from Ukraine to the Middle East to the Taiwan Straits. But the media put partisan politics above world peace and national security.
After Biden was forced to drop out of the race when Nancy Pelosi finally brandished the 25th Amendment, were the media truthful about their past dereliction? Of course not. A typical reaction is from MSNBC’s vaunted media guru, Brian Stelter. His apologia’s headline says it all: “Did the media botch the Biden age story? Asleep at the wheel? Complicit in a cover-up? The real story is more complicated — and more interesting.” Clearly, the media could not be honest even when their dishonesty was apparent to all.
When vaunted reporter Bob Woodward received undeniable evidence of Biden’s disturbing mental deficits in June 2023, clearly not a recent development, he refrained from publicizing his sources’ observations (which would have helped our country) so that he could instead monetize them in a bestseller, published only after Biden withdrew from the race.
The media did far more than hide Biden’s condition and thwart the Democrat primary process. They themselves became a big motive for the electorate to rebel against the conventional wisdom promulgated regarding Donald Trump. There can be no doubt that the partisan lawfare campaign against Trump, criminalizing political differences, can have caused its resonating backlash only if voters believed that the media were attempting to thereby “Watergate” Trump unfairly. Indeed, the Biden forces behind these charges would have made them only if they knew that the media would jump to magnify this thin gruel of questionable claims.
When the media rambled incessantly about Trump’s alleged criminality, they certainly provided talking points that cemented the opposition already disfavoring Trump. But to citizens of common sense, who do not wish to be told what to think, the media simply were revealing their true partisan colors. Most citizens are not so dumb as to fail to see through these weak charges, quickly realizing that snake oil was being sold to them. No one likes to be defrauded. No one wants to be insulted. And citizens who feel insulted and defrauded are highly motivated to vote.
The media could not be content with smearing Trump. Rather, they went so far as to shame his supporters. Not satisfied with Hillary Clinton’s slurring Trump-supporters as “deplorable,” the media in 2024 ratcheted up the defamation by comparing Trump and his supporters with Hitler and his Nazis. Three major left-leaning publications displayed covers with Trump’s countenance morphing into Hitler’s. Those attending a raucous, joyful Madison Square Garden rally were compared to Nazi enthusiasts at Nuremburg. As the New York Times put it, melodramatically, the voters gave “a permission slip” to an “authoritarian.”
The understandable gloating of Trump-supporters did not, interestingly, strongly focus on Kamala Harris or Joe Biden. There were numerous Trump voters, however, who delighted in the tearful recriminations of the televised media talking heads. Numerous Trump voters tuned in to The View just to watch the meltdown.
The media kept Biden on stage far beyond his shelf life. The media ridiculed Trump as Hitler. They falsely assured the country that Harris’s vacuous campaign was excellent, which served to convince her advisers that it needed no course correction. The Democrats, wishing future victories, will engage sincerely in soul-searching in hopes of improvement. But so long as the media do not act similarly, the Democrats will continue to deceive themselves in this postmortem.
The left completely missed it. They ignored the platforms that people get their information from. They couldn’t trust Kamala to be anywhere unscripted so that opportunity was a whiff. Instead, they wasted $1 Billion and got nothing. There has been a culture shift and the old candidate understood it and got elected.
Elon Musk took to X following the results of the 2024 election to highlight the decline of legacy media, asserting that citizens on social media now hold the reins as the new media. Responding to a post on X that claimed legacy media is dead, Musk told users, “You are the media now.”
“The reality of this election was plain to see on X, while most legacy media lied relentlessly to the public,” Musk wrote. “You are the media now. Please post your thoughts & observations on X, correct others when wrong and we will have at least one place in the world where you can come to find the truth.”
Since acquiring X (formerly Twitter), Musk has committed to transforming it into a hub for free speech, often commending journalists who have transitioned to the platform. Among those he has supported is former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who moved his show to X after leaving the network.
In a separate post on X, Musk argued that “News should come from the people” and “From those actually on the scene and those who actually are subject-matter experts!”
Joe Rogan got over 38 million views in 3 days with his Trump Podcast. JD Vance and Elon Musk went on also. Kamala refused Rogan and went on a Porn site podcast and relied on the MSM who are all but dead now. No one believes their lies anymore.
Winning political campaigns now run through Podcast Nation.
Vice President Kamala Harris learned that lesson the brutal way.
Former and future President Donald Trump chatted with some of the biggest podcasters to secure Tuesday’s electoral victory. Trump and/or Vice President-elect J.D. Vance sat down with the following audio superstars:
The GOP ticket subsequently scored big with young male voters, which The Hollywood Reporter notes isn’t a coincidence.
NBC News’ Gadi Schwartz said on election night that many college students during informal exit polling in Arizona cited Rogan’s interview with Trump as critical. “It’s been surprising how often the topic of the Joe Rogan podcast has come up,” Schwartz said. “We’ve talked to several students now who say they listened to that podcast with the former president and that was the deciding factor for them. And they also said that if Kamala Harris would have appeared on that podcast, they may have had their vote [changed].” One of NBC’s election night panelists echoed they had also heard young voters citing Rogan’s interview.
“What I heard from many [young male voters] as we got closer to the election was that they appreciated the fact that Trump was able to say what he wanted in a way that really flew in the face of cancel culture — which many of them have grown wary of or resentful of. And the fact that he was going on these platforms, providing an unfiltered, personal look into who Trump is, and not just the issues he cares about, but some stories about his life and his experiences in business and in politics, that resonated with young men.”
Vice President Kamala Harris did chat with the popular “Call Her Daddy” podcast (800,000 YouTube views, according to Axios) along with smaller programs. She didn’t sit down with “The Joe Rogan Experience,” though. Rogan said she demanded the Spotify superstar come to her turf and limit the show to an hour-long chat.
The media shifted this election. Going on podcasts that people listen to has a much larger audience and is far more influential. The winners recognized this pattern and the losers never saw it coming and relied on their propagandists in the media.
If the 2024 presidential contest proved anything, it’s that the mass media no longer drive the national conversation. They can no longer stoke fear and outrage in average voters. They can no longer prop up terrible candidates. And, like him or not, President-elect Donald Trump’s success with black, Hispanic and Jewish voters, if exit polls are even close to correct, proves that the entire “fascist” scare was a flop.
Indeed, the establishment press are less trusted than virtually any major institution in American life. It’s a well-earned ignominy. It’s also a tragedy for a free nation that we have a barely functioning press. Reporters probably tell themselves they’re disliked because they’re fearless truth-tellers. But, far more likely, it’s a referendum on their deceit.
The MSM is dead. Amazingly, the “more educated” left missed it completely. They wasted a billion dollars on the legacy media and advertising that Trump was Hitler when they could have sat down for free and talked to the American public.
Instead, they spent $1 million on Oprah, an unknown amount on Concerts, and had Beyonce show up to talk instead of sing. Outstandingly bad judgment and misuse of campaign funds.
Worse, it showed poor judgment of staff and how to run a campaign. They ran an entertainment show that wasn’t entertaining.
Running one of the worst and least qualified candidates is also a problem, but that’s another story. She couldn’t speak extemporaneously for 3 hours or 3 minutes. Everything was scripted on a teleprompter, just like Obama. That indicates their promises and the things they said weren’t sincere. They also had no clear vision of what they would do or how they would lead, and it would be exposed on a podcast.
The left are politicians, not leaders.
REPORT: @KamalaHarris Campaign PAID Oprah Winfrey $1,000,000 To Do The Interview With Her! They Presented It As A Journalistic Endeavor… THAT WAS A LIE! HARRIS DID NOT PRESENT IT AS A PAID POLITICAL AD, WHICH IT WAS, A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW! pic.twitter.com/5swJpiLLaf
Steve Bannon talked about the legacy media’s decline on Friday morning. Bannon’s thoughts included giving priority to podcasters and independent journalists over the legacy media when it involves access to the President.
The video opens with footage of MSNBC contributors whining about why they lost the election. Bannon with his brilliance had some great things to say about them.
“You have to have content. If you have great content, it will find its audience,” Bannon said.
Bannon said that it is very important to focus on the next two years to secure a future for the MAGA movement.
“We got a lot of work to go through and if we don’t get these next two years right, forget ’28. You gotta chop wood now,” Bannon said.
Bannon said that it would be a great idea to move the media access outside of the West Wing and the White House.
“In ’17, my plan was to shut down that press thing where they do the briefings, put them across the street in the EOB, in the big auditorium,” Bannon said.
“Put the media over there. Get them out of the West Wing,” Bannon declared.
“The first three rows are all the podcasts, and the bros and all that. The first three rows are that new media, alternate media, the streaming services,” Bannon said of a shift in media priority.
Bannon plainly and directly called out the legacy media for their corruption and dishonesty.
“The legacy media is the enemy of the people. We just proved that. The people spoke after President Trump for four years, even his first term, has been vilified, vilified by these demons for years. You think we are going to reward you?” Bannon said.
“Put them in the fifth row, put them in the sixth row, hell, don’t even let them in the building, they are just gonna make up stuff anyway,” Bannon continued.
“Look at the polling, don’t take it from me, look at all their long faces every day,” Bannon said.
…. and it certainly has delivered, including these main highlights.
The Taiwanese election in January 2024
Indian elections in April/May
European Parliamentary elections in June
The US Presidential Election in November.
So with the main events of 2024 now in the rearview mirror we can conclude that this has been a catastrophic year for incumbents at elections.
And not just in the US where Democrats have lost ground relative to four years earlier, but incumbents have also lost ground in the UK, France, India, Japan and South Africa as well this year.
It gets worse: an even more amazing stat comes from the FT, which reports that every governing party facing election in a developed country this year lost vote share, the first time this has ever happened!
Fortunately for the rest of us, we’ve gotten past race. We’ll see about the left
The Left (which includes the legacy media) paid no attention to the desperation of the people when they cried out about the economy and inflation. Kamala Harris made some pathetic promises in her campaign to help the people, but at that point, I think that no one believed her.
The distress of citizens about having illegal migrants dumped in their cities all over the nation were discounted. Whole communities of these migrants were collected and relocated to cities that were ill-equipped to house, school, and employ them.
The country might be moving past its obsession with race and ethnicity, but the Left hasn’t realized it. These beliefs were superficially identified by the Left, but I don’t think most people believed them. Our own lived experience told us that we were genuinely moving into a post-racist era. People want to live in peaceful communities, love their neighbor, work in a job they enjoy, and feed their families.
Appealing to specific groups, such as blacks and Latinos, fell flat. The greater desire to live happily as Americans took precedence over group favoritism. Some people in these groups may have even realized that the condescending promises made to them were unlikely to come true.
People could see Trump’s playful side demonstrated at his rallies and couldn’t reconcile his demeanor there with the image of a dictator; after all, dictators don’t have much of a sense of humor. The garbage truck and Trump’s orange vest probably sealed the deal.
Lawfare was probably disregarded as one step (or steps) too many. How convenient that all these cases emerged just before the election. The Left not only ignored the people, but held them in disdain. They still think we’re stupid.
At least two states with radical abortion legislation were voted down. Having laws with no limits on abortion is simply not acceptable to most people: the people said “no.”
Given the sound rejection of the Left’s agendas across the country, has the Left learned anything? The answer is a resounding “No!”
Even if the Left realized that they had made a huge mistake in not listening to the people, that fact will be irrelevant to them. The radical Left or progressives have always seen themselves as the experts in governance, and the people simply do not know what is good for them. So, the Left will try to be patient and persist in reaching their goals. Acknowledging this reality on our part — that the progressives will never give up — allows us to arm ourselves with powerful and effective strategies to stop them. I’m also assuming (and I would love to be wrong) that the legacy media will follow the Left’s agenda.
Do they actually think that their plan will work? During this election, women overwhelmingly supported Kamala Harris and men overwhelmingly supported Donald Trump. So now some liberal women have decided that it is time for a nationwide sex strike in order to punish men for voting for Trump. Yes, they are quite serious about this…
Liberal women have sworn to go on sex strike over Donald Trump’s election win.
Mr Trump swept to victory in Tuesday’s presidential race that Democrats cast as a referendum on abortion rights and protections for women.
So let me get this straight. In order to “punish” us, these women are going to quit engaging in sexual immorality and start acting like chaste conservative Christian women?
And since they won’t be having sex, liberal women won’t be having as many abortions either. I think that we can all live with that.
JFK, MLK, Epstein’s clients, P Diddy’s Freak offs. I want to know all the names. I bet half of congress and Hollywood is on Epstien’s list
With JFK and MLK, I want to know if it was the FBI/CIA
BREAKING: Kash Patel just announced that massive declassification will occur in Trump's Administration from the Epstein to the Diddy list. It's all going to be made public.
"He's going to come in there and maybe give them the Epstein list, maybe give them the P Diddy list and… pic.twitter.com/UBDbIDMg6y
Hollywood Star Promises She’s Leaving U.S. With Trump Victory
Hollywood star America Ferrera is reportedly “sick” that former President Donald Trump won the election against Vice President Kamala Harris and will be moving to the United Kingdom.
The 40-year-old actress reportedly said after the results of Trump’s victory that she was making plans to relocate herself, her husband Ryan Piers Williams, and their two kids overseas in order to give them the “best opportunities,” the Daily Mail reported.
I’ve never even heard of her.
And take a lot of other whining celebtards with you. They are a bunch of spoiled brats who think anyone cares about them.
We’re better off with you gone.
Hint: they aren’t going anywhere. It’s like the podcaster who was going to drink cyanide if Trump one. They are full of it.
It’s too bad they are liars. I’d love to see them gtf out.
My friend George’s Sister and BIL said they are leaving. I doubt it but as much as they whined, I’ll be glad to see them go also.
Cardi B: Red-State Trump Vote Is ‘Why Some of Y’all States Be Getting Hurricanes’
Rapper Cardi B posted and then deleted a video on social media Tuesday night, exhibiting anger toward Southern states over Tuesday’s Election Day results.
Tone-deaf Cardi B expressed her anger as the states quickly turned red for President-elect Donald Trump.
“This is why some of y’all states be getting hurricanes,” she said in the short clip, in which she used a face filter.
The rapper did not name any specific states. However North Carolina, Louisiana, Texas and Florida were already called for Trump before the video was posted, according to Variety.
Longtime Democrat Supporter Diddy Allowed to Vote from Jail
Rebecca Sapp/WireImage for Citizen Change
2:50
Rap and fashion mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs was prepared to vote in the 2024 presidential election even though he sits in jail awaiting trial on a slew of charges, including sex trafficking.
Hollywood shames America for electing Trump again: ‘AmeriKKKa is showing,’ ‘deep nihilism’
The nation’s TV, film, music and literary stars took to their digital pulpits Wednesday to condemn the sin of Americans for making Republican Donald Trump president again, as cataloged by the New York Post.
Rapper Cardi B lashed out at a fan on Instagram Live who wrote “we need you at the Trump inauguration.” The Grammy winner, whose real name is Belcalis Cephus and who campaigned in Milwaukee with Democratic nominee Kamala Harris last week, responded “I swear to God I’m gonna f*** you up, get away from me” and told Trump voters to “Burn your f***ing hats motherf***er.”
Actress Christina Applegate, who is fighting multiple sclerosis, wrote on X that her daughter is “sobbing because her rights as a woman may be taken away” and asked followers who disagree to “please unfollow me.”
Actress Yvette Nicole Brown spurned her sweet demeanor on cult sitcom “Community” by calling Trump’s win a “disgrace at a level I can’t even quantify” by “choosing a criminal. AmeriKKKa is showing out tonight,” she wrote on X.
“The fact that the country would choose to destroy itself by voting in a convicted felon rapist and Nazi is a sign of deep nihilism,” actor John Cusack wrote on X in a display of his high fidelity to unabashed progressivism.
“Glee” actor Kevin McHale despaired that “Supreme Court gone for the rest of my lifetime. Ultra-conservative evangelical bigotry, xenophobia, racism is the mandate.”
Author Stephen King compared American democracy to a shop that sells “beautiful but fragile items,” where whoever breaks it buys it, apparently accusing more than 70 million Trump voters of ending democracy.’
Jimmy Kimmel is a one trick pony. He hates Trump, but now he has new material daily. Do you think the loser is grateful? No, the once great Man Show host crumbled to tears because his insulated bubble of a world in Hollywood didn’t get it’s way on election day. It used to be girls jumping on trampolines. Now, he’s butt hurt because a real man is in the White House.
At least Adam Carroll, the other half of The Man Show kept his testicles.
This is why the real world should look at celebtards and do the opposite of what they say. I’m looking at you Taylor Swift
Jimmy Kimmel literally cried on TV last night because Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris, pussy.
Kimmel mentioned everyone except Israel and Jews.
Everyone point and laugh:
Let’s be honest. It was a terrible night last night. It was a terrible night for women, for children, for the hundreds of thousands of hardworking immigrants who make this country go. For health care, for our climate.
For science. For Journalism. For justice, for free speech. It was a terrible night for poor people, for the middle class, for seniors who rely on Social Security. For our allies in Ukraine. For nato, for the truth. And democracy and decency, and it was a terrible night for everyone who voted against them.
It must be tough to go through life making millions and being that miserable.
The rest of the country suffered for the last 4 years with the effects of inflation on our less than millions a year paychecks.
Special Counsel Jack Smith, overseeing two federal cases against former President Donald Trump, has considered a possible pathway to end the cases, according to two sources familiar with the matter who spoke to NBC News. This news from the MSM outlet comes hours after Trump won the US presidential election.
Here’s more from NBC News:
The latest discussions stand in contrast with the pre-election legal posture of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who in recent weeks took significant steps in the election interference case against Trump without regard to the electoral calendar.
But the sources say DOJ officials have come to grips with the fact that no trial is possible any time soon in either the January 6th case or the classified documents matter—both of which are mired in legal issues that would likely prompt an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, even if Trump had lost the election.
Now that Trump will become president again, DOJ officials see no room to pursue either criminal case against him—and no point in continuing to litigate them in the weeks before he takes office, the people said.
The outlet continued:
The sources said it will be up to Smith to decide exactly how to unwind the charges, and many questions remain unanswered. Could the prosecutions resume after Trump leaves office or would they be time-barred? What happens to the evidence? What about the two other defendants charged with helping Trump hide classified documents? Will Smith write a report, as special counsels usually do?
The sources say all those issues require study and research.
At the same time, Trump’s legal team is weighing their own next steps for how to resolve the outstanding federal cases in the former president’s favor now that he is the projected winner of the election. The ultimate goal is to get all of the federal and state cases wiped out completely — the strategic call is how best to accomplish that task, according to a person familiar with the discussions.
Joe Rogan got 35 million views of his interview with Trump. The paradigm of media is changing and the old guard no longer controls the airwaves.
Kamala Harris is only the second-biggest loser of the night. Her media shills are nursing wounds that will take far longer to recover from.
In the early hours of Wednesday morning, legacy news networks were already sliding toward 2016 levels of melting down about the increasingly definite prospect of a presidential victory by Donald J. Trump. For them, Harris’ stinging defeat is personal — because it’s just as much a defeat for them as it is for her.
The corporate media industrial complex has spent Donald Trump’s entire political career trying to destroy him. Hand-in-hand with triple-letter government agencies and Democrats, they ran a hoax painting Trump as a Russian stooge based on ridiculous rumors commissioned by his opponent’s campaign in 2016. They continued to spread the lie for the duration of his presidency, awarding each other Pulitzers for it. And they’ve only ramped up their efforts since then.
The problem they’re reckoning with tonight is this: those efforts didn’t work. They’re no longer able to control Americans by controlling their information intake, because their credibility is farther deep-sixed than the Clinton family’s enemies list.
A TV executive anonymously fretted last week that “If half the country has decided that Trump is qualified to be president, that means they’re not reading any of this media, and we’ve lost this audience completely. A Trump victory means mainstream media is dead in its current form.”
America has decided. Maybe it was that they’d had enough. Maybe it was the Covid scam, the illegals, the democrat cities that have been run into the ground, or maybe a combination of the above.
America voted to Make America Great Again. To get gas and grocery prices down. To stop paying for non-Americans and helping victims of disasters like the recent hurricanes.
Either way, it was a decisive win. So much that they can’t cheat or pull some legal mumbo jumbo.
Also not really being talked about is that the Senate flipped. That means Trump can put in more judges who will be fair and stop the ruination of the legal system.
Most of all, I hope he can really drain the swamp. It started by getting rid of the Clinton and Bush dynasties and now the poison that was Obama. He probably was the puppeteer behind Biden and Kamala anyway. No one hated America more than Barry O and Big Mike.
What’s left now is to see the protests from the left and the liberal single women. We can now see who really is the problem with the country.
Vindication is indeed sweet. This is a complete and total rebuke of the failed Deep State, Joe Biden, Obama, social media censorship, the Fedsurrection op, mass immigration, and neocon foreign wars abroad.
President Trump should immediately pardon all political prisoners on Day One and send in the Feds to the swing states to arrest all of the 2020 riggers.
It is also now time to appoint another Supreme Court justice if the great Clarence Thomas retires.
The GOP will win the Senate, and they are now the slight favorite to win the House.
One of his biggest supporters was an African-American, Elon Musk. How ironic. He picked up a large portion of the black and hispanic vote, proving he’s not the racist that the real racists tried to make him out to be.
Mostly, Harris was a flawed and vapid candidate, kind of like Hillary in 2016. There was no Covid to hide behind and cheat with so America spoke that they are tired of woke.
Put another way, voters want a new economic policy that emphasizes smaller government, deregulation and lower taxes. They want the wall completed and illegal immigration eliminated as much as possible. And they want the crime problem addressed fundamentally and systemically.
The election results also suggest the limitations of the abortion issue as a motivating force. Put simply, the fact that the Democrats put virtually all their firepower behind the choice issue suggests the weakness of that appeal.
Despite numerous examples of Democrat-involved political violence in Washington over the past decade—2017 Trump inaugural riots, 2018 Kavanaugh protests, 2020 BLM/antifa riots, post-election confrontations with Trump supporters during “Stop the Steal” events in November and December 2020, and recent incidents tied to pro-Hamas demonstrations—the media now claims Republicans, not Democrats, will start tearing down major cities including the nation’s capital if Trump does not win the election.
Police across the country reportedly also are bracing for post-election violence. Why? Politico reporter Betsy Woodruff Swan of course blames Trump. “[As] Trump once again promotes falsehoods about election fraud and denigrates election officials, law enforcement officers worry that the floodgates to violence are open,” Swan claims. Swan then used a few thousand more words to detail alleged threats to election workers and other incidents that solely targeted Democrats and Democratic jurisdictions in the post 2020-period.
So here is a little refresher about what went down following Trump’s shocking victory on November 8, 2016 when Democrats, NeverTrumpers, and the media exploded into a full-blown fit of rage:
The New York Timesdocumented days of protests spanning 52 cities following Trump’s election. Anti-Trump demonstrators blocked traffic in Miami, Portland, Las Vegas, and Madison, Wisconsin; protesters burned an American flag in front of the Georgia Capitol building.
Democrats in Los Angeles burned a pinata resembling the president-elect.
After three days of intense violence, Portland police declared a riot on November 10, 2016. Anti-Trump thugs attacked police, vandalized business, and set buildings on fire. The following day, the Portland police department announced the use of “pepper spray, rubber ball distraction devices, [and] rubber baton rounds” to halt the rioting.
More than 7,000 protesters took to the streets of Oakland, California on November 9. A local Oakland newspaper described the chaos: “Protesters hurled Molotov cocktails, rocks and fireworks at police. Some protesters set off fireworks. Others burned a Trump effigy, and someone set a pile of cardboard on fire in the middle of a downtown intersection. A group of protesters wearing clown and Guy Fawkes masks used bricks, their feet and a large stick to smash the glass windows of the Oakland Coin and Jewelry Exchange at 1725 Broadway. Other storefronts on that block were covered in graffiti as well. Multiple trash and cardboard fires were started in the middle of the street and a much larger fire was raging at the intersection of 17th Street and Broadway.” At least three Oakland police officers were injured that night.
Confrontations with police in Omaha, Nebraska resulted in the deployment of mob control munitions on November 10, 2016; at least two people were arrested for obstructing justice.
Protesters began shouting “kill the police” during an anti-Trump demonstration in Indianapolis on November 12, 2016. Some protesters threw rocks at police; at least seven protesters were arrested and two officers received minor injuries.
Gov. Kathy Hochul on Saturday called New Yorkers who vote for Republican House candidates “anti-American” and “anti-women” — a smear that sparked furor across the Empire State and beyond.
“If you’re voting for these Republicans in New York, you are voting for someone who supports Donald Trump and you’re anti-women, you’re anti-abortion and basically you’re anti-American,” Hochul said on MSNBC.
“You just trashed American values and what our country is all about — over and over.”
But Republicans said it was Hochul doing the trashing — and even Democratic strategists said demonizing a large segment of voters as anti-American was not helpful to their candidates.
“This is about as helpful as a severe migraine. It’s never a good thing to identify a large segment of voters as un-American,” said ex-Democratic Rep. Max Rose, who is aiding Democrats in House races.
“Kathy Hochul doesn’t represent a majority of Democrats — anywhere,” said Rose, who served one-term representing Staten Island and parts of southern Brooklyn.
State Republican Party chairman Ed Cox fumed, “She’s smearing at least one half of American voters and all Trump voters.”
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-Hudson Valley) told The Post, “Governor Hochul has once again disgraced herself and the state of New York by calling supporters
Actually, I’m so old that it’s not going to affect me as much as it will younger generations. They will either have a chance to prosper or know what socialism is. That is what is on the table today.
I’ve slayed most of the dragons that I will in life already. I’m hoping that the nation can continue as the greatest, like the one I grew up in. We are setting up the next generation for prospering or suffering depending on who gets elected
We’ll see when they sort out the cheating and the legal stuff. A lot is on the line in this election.
Instances of censorship are growing to the point of normalization. Despite ongoing litigation and more public attention, mainstream social media has been more ferocious in recent months than ever before. Podcasters know for sure what will be instantly deleted and debate among themselves over content in gray areas. Some like Brownstone have given up on YouTube in favor of Rumble, sacrificing vast audiences if only to see their content survive to see the light of day.
It’s not always about being censored or not. Today’s algorithms include a range of tools that affect searchability and findability. For example, the Joe Rogan interview with Donald Trump racked up an astonishing 34 million views before YouTube and Google tweaked their search engines to make it hard to discover, while even presiding over a technical malfunction that disabled viewing for many people. Faced with this, Rogan went to the platform X to post all three hours.
Navigating this thicket of censorship and quasi-censorship has become part of the business model of alternative media.
Those are just the headline cases. Beneath the headlines, there are technical events taking place that are fundamentally affecting the ability of any historian even to look back and tell what is happening. Incredibly, the service Archive.org which has been around since 1994 has stopped taking images of content on all platforms. For the first time in 30 years, we have gone a long swath of time – since October 8-10 – since this service has chronicled the life of the Internet in real time.
As of this writing, we have no way to verify content that has been posted for three weeks of October leading to the days of the most contentious and consequential election of our lifetimes. Crucially, this is not about partisanship or ideological discrimination. No websites on the Internet are being archived in ways that are available to users. In effect, the whole memory of our main information system is just a big black hole right now.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out … without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.”
– H. L. Mencken
If the three-ring circus that is the looming presidential election proves anything, it is that the Deep State’s plot to destabilize the nation is working.
The danger is real.
Caught up in the heavily dramatized electoral showdown between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, Americans have become oblivious to the multitude of ways in which the government is goosestepping all over our freedoms on a daily basis.
Especially alarming is the extent to which those on both sides are allowing themselves to be gaslighted by both Trump and Harris about critical issues of the day, selectively choosing to hear only what they want to hear when it casts the opposition in a negative light.
This is true whether you’re talking about immigration and border control, health care, national security, the nation’s endless wars, protections for free speech, or the militarization of the U.S. government.
For starters, there’s the free speech double standard, what my good friend Nat Hentoff used to refer to as the “free speech for me but not for thee” phenomenon in which the First Amendment’s protections only apply to those with whom we might agree.
Despite her claims to being a champion for the rule of law, which in our case is the U.S. Constitution, Harris isn’t averse to policing so-called “hate” speech. In this, Harris is not unlike those on both the Right and the Left who continue to express a distaste for unregulated, free speech online, especially when it comes to speech with which they might disagree.
Then there’s Trump, never a fan of free speech protections for his critics, who has been particularly vocal about his desire to see the military vanquish “radical left lunatics,” which he has dubbed “the enemy from within.”
If it were only about muzzling free speech activities, that would be concerning enough.
But Trump’s enthusiasm for using the military to target domestic enemies of the state should send off warning bells, especially coinciding as it does with the Department of Defense’s recent re-issuance of Directive 5240.01, which empowers the military to assist law enforcement “in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated.”
This is what martial law looks like—a government of force that relies on the military to enforce its authority—and it’s exactly what America’s founders feared, which is why they opted for a republic bound by the rule of law: the U.S. Constitution.
Responding to concerns that the military would be used for domestic policing, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878, which makes it a crime for the government to use the military to carry out arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other activities normally handled by a civilian police force.
The increasing militarization of the police, the use of sophisticated weaponry against Americans and the government’s increasing tendency to employ military personnel domestically have all but eviscerated historic prohibitions such as the Posse Comitatus Act.
Yet sometime over the course of the past 240-plus years that constitutional republic has been transformed into a military dictatorship disguised as a democracy.
Unfortunately, most Americans seem relatively untroubled by the fact that our constitutional republic is being transformed into a military dictatorship disguised as a democracy.
The seeds of chaos that have been sown in recent years are all part of the Deep State’s plans to usher in martial law.
The propaganda campaign labeling Donald Trump as an aspiring dictator determined to use the military and national security apparatus against his political opponents is designed not to affect the upcoming election but rather to shape the post-election environment. It is the central piece of a narrative that, by characterizing Trump as a tyrant (indeed likening him to Hitler), establishes the conditions for violence — not just another attempt on Trump’s life, but political violence on a massive scale intended to destabilize the country.
As I write in my forthcoming book Disappearing the President, Democratic Party research and media reports show that many senior party officials and operatives are preparing for the possibility of a Trump victory. Accordingly, planning is focused on undermining the incoming president with enough violence to rock his administration. Prominent post-election scenarios forecast such widespread rioting that the newly elected president would be compelled to invoke the Insurrection Act. With some senior military officials refusing to follow Trump’s orders, according to the scenarios, the U.S. Armed Forces would split, leaving America on the edge of the abyss.
By vilifying Trump as a despotic madman who must be stopped before he can commence his reign of terror, the regime’s propaganda apparatus not only slanders Trump but also pre-emptively threatens the reputation, as well as the livelihood and perhaps the liberty, of current military personnel. The point is to push the military against Trump: When the time comes to act, will you stand for democracy or side with a tyrant who sees the military only as an instrument to advance his personal interests?
For instance, last week the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, quoted former Trump administration officials claiming that the Republican candidate is contemptuous of America’s armed forces and, according to Trump’s former chief of staff, John Kelly, wishes he could command the same respect that Hitler commanded from his general officers.
This is not the first time that Trump has been compared to Hitler or that Kelly, a retired Marine general, turned on his former commander-in-chief. Kelly was the key source for a story published before the 2020 election, also in the Atlantic and also by Jeffrey Goldberg, that alleged Trump had called American WWII soldiers buried in French cemeteries “suckers and losers.”
The veracity of Kelly’s latest revelation that Trump admires Hitler must of course be judged against the fact that he waited five years to disclose it, even if it is unlikely to have much effect on the current election cycle. The military, and veterans of the Global War on Terror in particular, overwhelmingly support the candidate opposed to waging endless and strategically pointless foreign wars. Moreover, Trump has weathered far more damaging fabrications — like the false allegations that he had been compromised by Russian intelligence — that only galvanized support for him.
The purpose of the Hitler narrative is not to alter the electoral preferences of left-wing media audiences already solidly in the anti-Trump column, but rather to justify taking extreme measures against the Republican candidate and the America First movement and ensure that the bulk of the military sides with the anti-Trump plot. Thus, it is best understood in the context of recent accounts promising, or urging, violence after the November vote.
For example, last week the New York Times published a long interview with a scholar of fascism who declared that Trump is a fascist. The paper of record followed up with another long article by two Harvard professors calling for mass mobilization in the event of a Trump victory. The proposal suggests that private industry join civil society organizations to ostracize Trump and his supporters and engage in large public protests to provoke a crisis. Kamala Harris herself, commenting on Kelly’s allegations in the Atlantic story, claimed that her opponent “is a fascist” during a CNN town hall.
These stories are only the latest in an ongoing series of media reports warning of a Trump dictatorship. Beltway insider Robert Kagan was out of the gate early, writing even before Trump wrapped up the nomination that, without mounting resistance against the Republican candidate, America is “a few short steps, and a matter of months, away from the possibility of dictatorship.” A January story from NBC claimed that Trump was exploring ways to use the military to assassinate political rivals.
The propaganda meant to establish a predicate to employ violence to stop Trump has been reinforced at the highest levels of the Democratic Party.
When Joe Biden was asked by a reporter if he was confident that there would be a peaceful transfer of power after the 2024 election, he answered, “If Trump wins, no I’m not confident at all.” Then, seemingly correcting himself, the president said, “I mean if Trump loses, I’m not confident at all. He means what he says, we don’t take him seriously. He means it, all the stuff about, ‘If we lose there will be a bloodbath.’”
Biden was referring to a comment Trump made in March about Chinese efforts to build auto manufacturing plants in Mexico. The export of those cars to America, Trump said, would result in a “bloodbath” for the U.S. auto industry. Naturally, the Biden campaign used the figure of speech to accuse Trump of inciting “political violence.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) advertised a more specific scenario leading to violence when he promised that Congress will remove Trump by invoking Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits anyone “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” from holding federal office. “It’s going to be up to us on January 6, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he’s disqualified,” Raskin has said. “And then we need bodyguards for everybody in civil war conditions.”
But the most significant post-election scenarios were drafted by Rosa Brooks, a former Obama Pentagon official whose 2020 wargaming with the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) has been credited by the left-wing press for its “accuracy.”
Ahead of the last election, Brooks and TIP, according to the Guardian, “imagined the then far-fetched idea that Trump might refuse to concede defeat, and, by claiming widespread fraud in mail-in ballots, unleash dark forces culminating in violence. Every implausible detail of the simulations came to pass in the lead-up to the U.S. Capitol attack on 6 January 2021.”
That’s a fanciful way of obscuring the truth. TIP anticipated that Trump would contest the results because party operatives knew beforehand that election irregularities resulting from new voting procedures, like mass mail-in voting, designed to facilitate fraud would be glaringly obvious. Thus, because of Brooks’s past performance and her central role in a network comprising the media and current and former defense officials, her work is widely acknowledged as the Left’s roadmap for post-election contingency planning.
The left always claims the conservatives will do what they already are doing. Who had the riots in 2017? Who wore the stupid ass pink pussy caps? Who started, then blew the January 6 out of proportion (the FBI, or the left, they are the same).
Publisher and columnist Adam Kelly is in the West Virginia journalism hall of fame despite being the most conservative man I ever met. He asked me once if I knew what the purpose of a newspaper is.
His answer: To make money for its owner.
What was true in 1982 is true today. The Pulitzer-laden staffs of the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post discovered this over the weekend when their owners vetoed endorsements of her majesty, Queen Kamala.Likewise, the Hill reported, “Over 200 American outlets under USA Today parent company Gannett will not back candidates in presidential or national races,” according to USA Today.”
This sudden attempt to restore their virginity by newspapers may be because of the dumb-as-the-B-in-dumb Democrat candidate. But it could be the fact that all these rags have failed Newspaper Rule No. 1, which is to make money for the owner.
I hope that the latter is true because that gives me hope that the problem can be fixed. AM radio was once hopelessly obsolete until Rush Limbaugh revived it as a source of clean information untainted by liberalism.
Jeff Bezos lost $77 million last year as the owner of the Post. He decided to reintroduce objective journalism to the paper on the Potomac that flushed its reputation down the Porta-Potty long ago. He decided to return to the pre-Watergate era when the Post did not endorse in presidential races.
The press coverage of this decision is as expected.
“This is a very crucial moment in history and a man like this does not appear to have the character and integrity to do one of the most important jobs in the world.”
Jenna Wang, 58, told The Daily Mail she had a secret fling she had with Democrat VP candidate Gov. Tim Walz when he taught in China.
Walz and Wang had to keep their fling a secret because her father, CCP official Bin Hul, would have disowned her for being with a Westerner.
Kamala Harris’s vice presidential pick, Tim Walz, had a clandestine romance with the daughter of a high-ranking Chinese communist official during his overseas teaching stint in 1989, DailyMail.com can reveal. He is pictured above in China with his now wife Gwen
The mother-of-one says she is coming forward now because she feels Walz behaved selfishly towards her and put her reputation and career at risk with his fickle behavior.
‘Tim lied about Tiananmen Square and he’s lied about other things,’ she told DailyMail.com
‘This is a very crucial moment in history and a man like this does not appear to have the character and integrity to do one of the most important jobs in the world.’
‘Tim was very passionate and very romantic. I can still remember dancing with him to our favorite song, Careless Whisper,’ she told DailyMail.com in an exclusive interview.
‘The fact we couldn’t touch or kiss in public just made it all the more exciting and intense when we were finally alone.
However, Wang felt “angry and suicidal” when she realized Walz was not going to propose to her and start a new life in America.
“We were deeply in love and I wanted to marry him and start a family,” explained Wang. “When it didn’t happen, I felt very unhappy and sad. Tim’s behavior was very selfish.”
Walz fell for Wang after being in China for several months:
Good riddance. They were the poison on both social media and at their schools.
Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, or X as it’s now called, has brought an abrupt shift in the dynamics of the platform. For years, X functioned as an echo chamber where progressive academics freely exchanged ideas, often without much opposition. It was an exclusive club, and Musk’s open-door policy shattered it. With censorship dialed back and banned accounts reinstated, Musk’s version of free speech drove many academics away, leading to a marked decrease in engagement among their ranks.
This article addresses a narrower empirical question: What did Elon Musk’s takeover of the platform mean for this academic ecosystem? Using a snowball sample of more than 15,700 academic accounts from the fields of economics, political science, sociology, and psychology, we show that academics in these fields reduced their “engagement” with the platform, measured by either the number of active accounts (i.e., those registering any behavior on a given day) or the number of tweets written (including original tweets, replies, retweets, and quote tweets). We further tested whether this decrease in engagement differed by account type; we found that verified users were significantly more likely to reduce their production of content (i.e., writing new tweets and quoting others’ tweets) but not their engagement with the platform writ large (i.e., retweeting and replying to others’ content).
The data points to a familiar pattern: when left-leaning narratives lose control of the conversation, proponents either cry foul or flee. Now, if you combine this exodus with the insights from Mitchell Langbert’s 2018 study on the political affiliations of elite liberal arts college faculty, the story becomes even clearer.
Langbert’s study from 2018, Homogenous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty, reveals a staggering imbalance: liberal arts faculties are overwhelmingly Democratic, with many departments having zero registered Republicans. Across 51 colleges, the average Democratic-to-Republican ratio was 10.4:1. Excluding the two military colleges in the sample (West Point and Annapolis), the ratio jumped to 12.7:1. In the most ideologically driven fields, like gender and peace studies, there were no Republicans to be found.
Why Political Homogeneity Is Troubling
Political homogeneity is problematic because it biases research and teaching and reduces academic credibility. In a recent book on social psychology, The Politics of Social Psychology edited by Jarret T. Crawford and Lee Jussim, Mark J. Brandt and Anna Katarina Spälti, show that because of left-wing bias, psychologists are far more likely to study the character and evolution of individuals on the Right than individuals on the Left.2 Inevitably affecting the quality of this research, though, George Yancey found that sociologists prefer not to work with fundamentalists, evangelicals, National Rifle Association members, and Republicans.3 Even though more Americans are conservative than liberal, academic psychologists’ biases cause them to believe that conservatism is deviant. In the study of gender, Charlotta Stern finds that the ideological presumptions in sociology prevent any but the no-differences-between-genders assumptions of left-leaning sociologists from making serious research inroads. So pervasive is the lack of balance in academia that more than 1,000 professors and graduate students have started Heterodox Academy, an organization committed to increasing “viewpoint diversity” in higher education.4 The end result is that objective science becomes problematic, and where research is problematic, teaching is more so.
Go Tucker, tell the NYT what we all want to tell them.
Tucker Carlson is going nuclear on a New York Times reporter who sought comment about alleged election misinformation by the conservative champion, telling him to “f*** off.”
Carlson shared a text exchange late Monday night from Nico Grant, a San Francisco-based technology correspondent for the newspaper, who indicated: “We rely on an analysis conducted by researchers at Media Matters for America,” a left-wing-minded media watchdog.
Grant said he was working on an article where researchers found 286 videos Carlson posted on YouTube between May and August supposedly containing misinformation, including a clip of Carlson mentioning a “clearly stolen” election.
Grant also sought to know if Carlson was a member of the YouTube Partner Program, and if so, “How often does YouTube demonetize your videos?”
Carlson responded: “So the New York Times is working with a left wing hate group to silence critics of the Democratic Party? Please ask yourself why you’re participating in it. This is why you got into journalism? It’s shameful. I hope you’re filled with guilt and self-loathing for sending me a text like this. Please quote me.”
The reply from the reporter stated: “Thank you for your prompt response. Would you like to address any of the points or questions above?”
Carlson then responded: “Would I like to participate in your attempt to censor me? No thanks. But I do hope you’ll quote what I wrote above and also note that I told you to f*** off, which I am now doing. Thanks.”
FDA’s war on public health is about to end. This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything…
All we needed was the HCQ and Ivermectin and the Covid Jab would have never been necessary. Oh, and Covid wouldn’t have been a problem either, or masks, or lockdowns.
A new report from the United Nations reveals that almost 900 medals that should have gone to female athletes have instead been awarded to biological men who believe themselves to be “transgender.”
UN Report: Women Have Lost 900 Medals To ‘Transgender’ Athletes
The findings were titled “Violence against women and girls in sports.”
Alsalem reveals that over 600 athletes failed to receive medals in over 400 competitions across 29 different sports, with the total amount of lost medals being just over 890.
“The replacement of the female sports category with a mixed-sex category has resulted in an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities, including medals, when competing against males,” his report states.
The information collected for the study goes up to March 30th of this year.
For those who jumped on Trump’s Ass about how he treated women (most of it made up), I give you the real abuser. Let’s call a spade a spade here and stop making up stuff.
Not only did he cheat on wife number one and knock up the Nanny, but he also beat the shit out of his girlfriend before Kamala.
Earlier this month it was reported that Kamala Harris’s husband Doug Emhoff “forcefully” smacked his ex-girlfriend over a decade ago after a drunken-filled night during the Cannes Film Festival in France.
This is the same guy who lectured American men on the so-called pitfalls of ‘toxic masculinity.’
According to a report by The Daily Mail, Doug Emhoff reportedly slapped his ex-girlfriend for ‘flirting with another man’ so hard that she “spun around” while they were in a valet line.
The woman, identified as ‘Jane,’ broke her silence to The Daily Mail.
Doug Emhoff’s ex-girlfriend has spoken exclusively to DailyMail.com claiming that he slapped her in the face so hard she spun around at a 2012 celebrity event in France.
The woman, a successful New York attorney, is remaining anonymous, but decided to speak out after Emhoff, Kamala Harris’s husband, denied the claims through a spokesman.
Emhoff’s accuser, who DailyMail.com is naming only as ‘Jane’, initially declined to comment on the record. But Emhoff’s denial, and his alleged hypocrisy by claiming to be a feminist in media interviews, finally became too much for her.
‘What’s frightening for a woman that’s been on the other end of it, is watching this completely fabricated persona being portrayed,’ Jane said.
‘He’s being held out to be the antithesis of who he actually is. And that is utterly shocking.’
Daily Mail; Doug Emhoff and ex-girlfriend at a 2012 celebrity event in France
Earlier this month Joe Scarborough asked Doug Emhoff about the ‘tabloid’ stories alleging he beat his ex-girlfriend and cheated on his ex-wife with the nanny.
“[Trump’s] spreading it about you,” Joe Scarborough said of the Daily Mail’s stories, “saying it should be front and center, he’s saying it about your wife and making incredibly crude and lewd suggestions about her past life.”
A nervous Emhoff swallowed hard as Scarborough asked him about his personal life. He did not deny the domestic abuse allegations.
“We don’t have time to be pissed off,” Emhoff said. “We don’t have time to focus on it. It’s all a distraction. It’s designed to try to get us off our game.”
“Does it get you off your game?” Scarborough asked.
“No,” Emhoff said. “All we are doing, all we talk about is this election. We understand the stakes. We understand the responsibility.”
In other words, he didn’t really care as he’s a Democrat willing to do anything for power and to be elected.
I ask, where are the feminists, the MeToo crowd, and the men hating bitches who have a conniption fit when Trump looks the wrong way at a girl? Crickets.
Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas is a former sheriff, Army National Guard Major, and the recipient of 2 bronze stars. Nehls vocally criticized Nancy Pelosi, the J6 Committee, and Capitol Police leadership for their handling of January 6. Soon after, under Nancy Pelosi’s authority, on November 20, 2021, Capitol Police illegally entered his office and photographed confidential legislative materials. Two days later, while Congress was in recess and Nehls’ office was supposedly vacant, they returned dressed as construction workers; however, they were caught by Nehl’s staffer who chose to work through the holiday weekend. Congressman Nehls believes this was an attempt to blackmail him into silence on J6.
Instead of standing down, Rep. Nehls doubled down. On September 24, he hosted a congressional screening of the film The War On Truth. Nick Searcy and I made The War On Truth as a follow-up to our 2021 film Capitol Punishment: Everything They Told You Is A Lie. I didn’t win a Best Director Oscar for that film, but I did get investigated by the FBI. That was part of the reason why we decided to make The War On Truth.
The screening was an emotional and informative event that left the audience stunned.
They are homogenous. It’s a bunch of liberals indoctrinating students to hate America and turn against it. What about learning? The Test of a First-Rate Intelligence Is the Ability To Hold Two Opposed Ideas in the Mind at the Same Time. There is only one way in colleges now, the liberal view.
Honestly, this number seems a little high, given all we know about the political culture of higher education.
Professors will overwhelmingly vote for Vice President Kamala Harris in the coming weeks, according to a new survey.
Inside Higher Ed surveyed more than 1,000 professors, mostly “tenured or tenure track,” and found significant support for the Democratic presidential ticket.
“Seventy-eight percent support Kamala Harris and running mate Tim Walz, while only 8 percent of the respondents back Donald Trump and JD Vance, according to the survey, which has a 2.9 percent margin of error,” the publication reported.
“But while their personal support for Democrats was overwhelming, almost no respondents said they plan to tell students which party or candidate to vote for,” Inside Higher Ed reported.
Most respondents said they keep their personal political beliefs out of the classroom. Only four percent said they would tell students who to vote for, but 30 percent plan to “discuss the election” in class.
The weekend brought a startling omission from the venerable, politely left-wing magazine The New Yorker, courtesy of staff writer Jay Caspian Kang: “How Biased Is the Media, Really?” (New Yorker style apparently treats the plural word “media” as singular.) Kang’s answer: Pretty biased toward Democrats, if not the far-left.
His question was hooked to Gallup’s annual poll, “Americans’ Trust in Mass Media,” a trust which has declined from over 70 percent in 1976 to 31 percent today.
You don’t need a Gallup poll to tell that the public’s trust in the mass media — which for these purposes we can define as the major broadcast and cable networks, newspapers, and a handful of high-profile magazines — has fallen, and, although the reasons for this decline aren’t as immediately clear as they might seem, the fallout from decades of growing suspicion and contempt toward the press litters the political discourse. Much of the criticism aimed at the media is both fair and accurate, and, even if I don’t believe the scale of the harms to be as large as some say, I do think the attacks carry added significance in an election year….
Kang offered up a hypothetical question, then answered it:
Every news organization that feigns objectivity is actually heavily slanted toward the left. Not only that; the media is actively working with the Democrats to defeat Donald Trump.
Kang’s “reply” references former NPR editor Uri Berliner, who revealed his company’s intolerant brand of tax-funded leftism:
As we approach the November 5, 2024 election, we reflect on the past four years and consider how history might have played out if Trump had won the 2020 election. We do not intend to relitigate that election. Instead, let us assume that 20,000 votes across three states had gone the other way, resulting in Trump’s reelection. We set out to explore what the country and the world might look like, and, more importantly, what the future would have held if that had happened. The answers we discovered may be surprising.
Imagine a world where, on November 3, 2020, officials in swing states did not stop counting votes at midnight. Instead, they continued counting, and by 2 AM on November 4, Trump was declared the winner of the election. Trump’s presidency would likely have continued much as it had during his first four years, with him attempting to implement his ideas and policies while the Deep State, for want of a better word, vigorously pushed back. Things would have progressed steadily, but it is unlikely that there would have been any significant change in overall outlook.
While there would have been no January 6, there probably would’ve been a second Trump impeachment on some other contrived grounds. Would Trump have released the infamous Russiagate binder that might have brought accountability for the treachery perpetrated against both Trump and the country? Given that the Deep State bureaucracy would have used the same dirty tricks to stop it from being released that they used during Trump’s final days as president, it is likely we’d have never seen the binder. We could go on and on. At every twist and turn, the cat-and-mouse playbook of the first four years would simply have been replayed, over and over.
While a Trump presidency from 2021 to 2024 would likely have continued along the same trajectory it had been on, several outcomes would certainly have differed from what eventually happened. The first that comes to mind is the 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan. Trump has consistently stated that, while the withdrawal would have proceeded, he would have retained control of the sprawling Bagram Air Force Base, strategically located near Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, and not far from China’s nuclear facilities. This approach would have addressed killed two birds with one stone, and it is unlikely that the Taliban would have been able to advance so quickly on Kabul had the United States maintained the base instead of abandoning it without even informing the then-Afghan government.
The war in Ukraine, particularly the conflict that began in 2022, might have been averted. Trump would likely have also attempted to resolve the earlier conflict that began in Donbass in 2014. However, given that he would have faced the same obstacles as during his first term—chief among them the criminalization of diplomacy with Russia due to the Russia collusion hoax—it is uncertain whether he would have been any more successful. In other words, that situation too would likely have remained at a stalemate.
There are numerous other examples we could discuss, ranging from the Middle East to the border to the ballooning deficit. But let’s face it: while things would have been far better under Trump instead of Biden and Harris, there is little likelihood that there would have been any fundamental change in direction.
Did you know that the average annual cost of in-home care in the United States has now surpassed $60,000? It’s a staggering figure that’s leaving many families scrambling for alternatives. But what if I told you that an unlikely solution might be just around the corner?
Enter the world of humanoid robots. Chinese company Fourier Intelligence’s latest creation, the GR-2 humanoid robot, is pushing the boundaries of what we thought possible in elderly care and assistance for people with disabilities. This advanced machine isn’t just about replacing human caregivers – it’s about enhancing the quality of life for those who need assistance the most.
Think about it: with the global population of adults aged 65 and older expected to double by 2050, we’re facing a potential care crisis. Humanoid robots like the GR-2 could be the solution we need, offering a level of consistent, personalized care. So, are you ready to explore how this futuristic technology could revolutionize home care and potentially save families thousands of dollars a year? Let’s dive into the GR-2 and see what the future of caregiving might look like.
As reported, Kamala Harris held a rally fearmongering over abortion this past week. She mocked two young Christians. When two Lacrosse University students called out “Jesus is Lord,” she said they were at the wrong rally.
They were kicked out as she laughed at them and mocked them. The audience jeered at the college students. These people hate Christians, and Harris encourages this divisiveness.
I’m very tired of atheists bashing us. Christians aren’t doing anything to them.
So she’s no different from the rest of the liberals and democrats. They hate God, just like the Communists. They keep trying to take God out of the picture so that the Government can become the God of the people.
As the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) carries out widely criticized responses to Hurricanes Helene and Milton, officials say the agency’s Disaster Recovery Fund is incapable of handling a third major storm. While some are circulating false accusations that disaster funds have been diverted to immigrants or poured into the proxy war in Ukraine, a review of the agency’s 2024 outlays reveals a different, ongoing drain on FEMA’s coffers: Long after the end of the declared Covid-19 emergency, FEMA is still pumping out billions of dollars to pay for pandemic expenses — including, believe it or not, up to $9,000 each for funerals.
Under Administrator Deanne Criswell, FEMA is still paying out billions of dollars in Covid-19-era reimbursements (screenshot from ABC News)
As previously detailed here at Stark Realities, governments’ response to the Covid-19 pandemic was disastrous on many fronts. While the Pandora’s box of collateral damage included widespread harm to the physical and mental health of individuals, it also dealt a blow to the nation’s fiscal well-being, as the federal government recklessly showered trillions of dollars it didn’t have on people, businesses and state and local governments — with much of that money intended to offset the effects of government’s own tyrannical and counterproductive policies.
Yes, the horse de-wormer they tried to propagandize away from treating COVID-19, which it successfully cured. It’s amazing the depths of depravity of Big Pharma, the government, and doctors went to preventing this practically miracle drug.
Now this:
A new cancer treatment protocol involving repurposed drugs Ivermectin (commonly known as a ‘horse dewormer’), Fenbendazole (a ‘dog dewormer’), and Mebendazole has recently passed peer review and is being heralded as a potential breakthrough in cancer therapy.According to the Public Library of Science (PLOS), a research protocol is a detailed study design or set of instructions for carrying out a specific experimental process or procedure.The hybrid orthomolecular protocol, featured in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine (Vol. 39.3), targets the mitochondrial-stem cell connection (MSCC), a key mechanism believed to drive cancer stem cells and tumor progression.
Dr. William Makis, a nuclear medicine physician and researcher specializing in multiple medical fields, including cancer and one of the first doctors to warn about the danger of the COVID shot, shared this news in a post on X.
BREAKING NEWS: First-in-the-World Ivermectin, Mebendazole and Fenbendazole Protocol in Cancer has been peer-reviewed and published on Sep.19, 2024!The future of Cancer Treatment starts NOW.My thanks to lead authors Ilyes Baghli and Pierrick Martinez for their incredible inspired work, FLCCC’s Dr.Paul Marik for his extensive work on repurposed drugs and every co-author who worked hard to bring this paper to life.I hope that this peer-reviewed paper lays the groundwork for a brand new future for Cancer Treatment.
This is a sign of desperation. When you can’t get blacks to support you and you are black, throwing out programs like Santa Claus won’t work. That was the old-school way of fooling the masses. The world has figured out that Democrats only care about blacks every 4 years, or if it helps them when a black man dies and they can scam money.
A prominent black Detroit pastor slammed Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris for “virtue signaling” and “exploiting” his community, saying that “black men are not political infants.”
“We will not allow virtue signaling. We will not allow identity politics. Black men are not political infants,” Pastor Lorenzo Sewell of Detroit’s 180 Church said during an appearance on Fox & Friends, referring to Harris’s recent outreach to black voters. “We know exactly what’s happening with the Democratic Party. We know that they’ve exploited us for over six decades, and we are saying, just like Moses said to Pharaoh, ‘Let my people go.’”
Sewell’s remarks come in response to Harris’s planned interview Tuesday evening with black podcaster and comedian Lenard Larry McKelvey, known professionally as Charlamagne tha God, in Detroit. The interview is part of Harris’s campaign effort to regain support from black men in a key swing state as recent polls indicate her backing is slipping.
“I have never been so offended in my life,” Sewell said. “She’s bringing a man here who is Charlamagne, a false god, to a community that has 4,500 churches, all people of faith. We are extremely offended that she’s bringing a podcaster here to talk to black men about politics.”
The Detroit pastor also criticized two other high-profile events the Harris campaign organized in recent weeks to bolster support among black voters in Michigan. […]
With the entire Media propaganda machine working against him, here’s the other side of the coin for fairness’ sake. Ackman is a heavyweight investor, worth listening to whether you agree with him or not.
Prominent hedge fund manager Bill Ackman provided one of the best lists of reasons to vote for Donald Trump. What would you do differently if you wanted to destroy the United States?
While the 33 actions I describe below are those of the Democratic Party and the Biden/Harris administration, they are also the actions and policies that, unfortunately, our most aggressive adversaries would likely implement if they wanted to destroy America from within and had the ability to take control of our leadership.
These are the 33:
(1) open the borders to millions of immigrants who were not screened for their risk to the country, dumping them into communities where the new immigrants overwhelm existing communities and the infrastructure to support the new entrants, at the expense of the historic residents,
(2) introduce economic policies and massively increase spending without regard to their impact on inflation and the consequences for low-income Americans and the increase in our deficit and national debt,
(3) withdraw from Afghanistan, abandoning our local partners and the civilians who worked alongside us in an unprepared, overnight withdrawal that led to American casualties and destroyed the lives of Afghani women and girls for generations, against the strong advice of our military leadership, and thereafter not showing appropriate respect for their loss at a memorial ceremony in their honor,
(4) introduce thousands of new and unnecessary regulations in light of the existing regulatory regime that interferes with our businesses’ ability to compete, restraining the development of desperately needed housing, infrastructure, and energy production with the associated inflationary effects,
(5) modify the bail system so that violent criminals are released without bail,
6) destroy our street retailers and communities and promote lawlessness by making shoplifting (except above large thresholds) no longer a criminal offense,
(7) limit and/or attempt to limit or ban fracking and LNG so that U.S. energy costs increase substantially and the U.S. loses its energy independence,
(8) promote DEI ideologies that award jobs, awards, and university admissions on the basis of race, sexual identity and gender criteria, and teach our students and citizens that the world can only be understood as an unfair battle between oppressors and the oppressed, where the oppressors are only successful due to structural racism or a rigged system and the oppressed are simply victims of an unfair system and world,
(9) educate our elementary children that gender is fluid, something to be chosen by a child, and promote hormone blockers and gender reassignment surgeries to our youth without regard to the longer-term consequences to their mental and physical health, and allow biological boys and men to compete in girls and women’s sports, depriving girls and women of scholarships, awards, and other opportunities that they would have rightly earned otherwise,
(10) encourage and celebrate massive protests and riots that lead to the burning and destruction of local retail and business establishments while at the same time requiring schools to be shuttered because of the risk of Covid-19 spreading during large gatherings,
(11) encourage and celebrate anti-American and anti-Israel protests and flag burning on campuses around the country with no consequences for the protesters who violate laws or university codes and policies,
(12) allow antisemitism to explode with no serious efforts from the administration to quell this hatred,
(13) mandate vaccines that have not been adequately tested nor have their risks been properly considered compared with the potential benefits adjusted for the age and health of the individual, censoring the contrary advice of top scientists around the world,
(14) shut down free speech in media and on social media platforms that is inconsistent with government policies and objectives,
(15) use the U.S., state, and local legal systems to attack and attempt to jail, take off the campaign trail, and/or massively fine candidates for the presidency without regard to the merits or precedential issues of the case,
(16) seek to defund the police and promote anti-police rhetoric causing a loss of confidence in those who are charged with protecting us,
(17) use government funds to subsidize auto companies and internet providers with vastly more expensive, dated and/or lower-quality technology when greatly superior and cheaper alternatives are available from companies that are owned and/or managed by individuals not favored by the current administration,
(18) mandate in legislation and otherwise government solutions to problems when the private sector can do a vastly better, faster, and cheaper job,
(19) seek to ban gas-powered cars and stoves without regard to the economic and practical consequences of doing so,
(20) take no serious actions when 45 American citizens are killed by terrorists and 12 are taken hostage,
(21) hold back armaments and weaponry from our most important ally in the Middle East in the midst of their hostage negotiations, hostages who include American citizens who have now been held for more than one year,
(22) eliminate sanctions on one of our most dangerous enemies enabling them to generate $150 billion+ of cash reserves from oil sales, which they can then use to fund terrorist proxy organizations who attack us and our allies. Exchange five American hostages held by Iran for five Iranians plus $6 billion of cash in the worst hostage negotiation in history setting a disastrous and dangerous precedent,
(23) remove known terrorist organizations from the terrorist list so we can provide aid to their people, and allow them to shoot rockets at U.S. assets and military bases with little if any military response from us,
(24) lie to the American people about the cognitive health of the president and accuse those who provide video evidence of his decline of sharing doctored videos and being right wing conspirators,
(25) do nothing about the deteriorating health of our citizens driven by the food industrial complex, the fraudulent USDA food pyramid, and the inclusion of ingredients in our food that are banned by other countries around the world which are more protective of their citizens,
(26) do nothing about the proliferation of new vaccines that are not properly analyzed for their risk versus the potential benefit for healthy children who are mandated to receive them,
(27) do nothing about the continued exemption from liability for the pharma industry that has led to a proliferation of mandatory vaccines for children without considering the potential cumulative effects of the now mandated 72-shot regime,
(28) convince our minority youth that they are victims of a rigged system and that the American dream is not available to them,
(29) fail to provide adequate Secret Service protection for alternative presidential candidates,
(30) litigate to prevent alternative candidates from getting on the ballot, and take other anti-competitive steps including threatening political consultants who wish to work for alternative candidates for the presidency, and limit the potential media access for other candidates by threatening the networks’ future access to the administration and access to ‘scoops’ if they platform an alternative candidate,
(31) select the Democratic nominee for president in a backroom process by undisclosed party leaders without allowing Americans to choose between candidates in an open primary,
(32) choose an inferior candidate for the presidency when other much more qualified candidates are available and interested to serve,
(33) litigate to make it illegal for states to require proof of citizenship, voter ID, and/or residence in order to vote at a time when many Americans have lost confidence in the accuracy and trustworthiness of our voting system.
On March 22, 1987, the barge Mobro 4000, loaded with six million pounds of garbage and towed by tugboat Break of Dawn, departed Islip, New York. It was bound for Morehead City, North Carolina — but never did dock there. Instead, it spent the next five months at sea, turned away by multiple states and three foreign countries. It became big news when journalist Dan Rather called it “the most watched load of garbage in the memory of man.” But another load of garbage was the story the media spun about it. In reality, no one would accept the Mobro because of a rumor that it was carrying medical waste. But that’s not the narrative the media pushed.
It advanced the notion that the Mobro’s fate was a result of a lack of dump space.
The “solution,” of course, was recycling. The timing was perfect, too, as there already was increasing public concern about waste. Oh, never mind that, as Reader’s Digest reported decades ago, 1,000 years of America’s trash could fit in an area 50 miles square (one m2 per state) and 200 feet high — the average modern dump’s height. “Never let a crisis go to waste,” and this one wasn’t wasted: The story helped catalyze the recycling movement. The Mobro 4000 might have been adrift, but recycling proponents’ ship had come in.
Of particular concern, too, is plastic, with stories of the material polluting our oceans. But what if plastic recycling is a myth, if not a scam, that is not only wasteful but environmentally damaging?
Yes, it is one of the biggest scams in history and you can read about how little it really matters at the link above.
Don’t forget that getting the guilty to recycle is no different than lining up the sheep for a jab. It is to get a group to behave the way the government wants them to act. In other words, it’s just another step toward socialism through behavioral acts of perceived service. Socialism is just one step away from communism, what the assholes in DC want anyway.
Don’t be a sheep. Throw it away, just not on the street. It’s cheaper to treat it as garbage than as recycling as you can read and you are not helping the environment by recycling.
Prominent black Trump booster Rob Smith has responded to the former president’s condescending screed over ‘brothas’ who are afraid to vote for Kamala Harris. In a now-viral reply, Smith tells Obama: “There is no amount of lecturing or bullying or shaming that you can do that is going to make me change that decision [to vote for Trump].
Sorry Obama!
I’m a BLACK MAN
I am voting for DONALD TRUMP on November 5th!
And NO amount of LECTURING or SHAMING is going to change that.
.@BarackObama should be ashamed for berating, rebuking and scolding Black men, because they won’t vote for Madam Lock Up A Brother…@KamalaHarris. As if we are too stupid to vote our interest and what best for ourselves and our families.
Having exhorted black men to embrace racism in the voting booth, Obama then suggested the same group’s sexism was at the heart of Harris’ problem with them:
“You’re coming up with all kinds of reasons and excuses, I’ve got a problem with that. Because part of it makes me think— and I’m speaking to men directly— part of it makes me think that, well, you just aren’t feeling the idea of having a woman as president, and you’re coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for that.”
“…And now, you’re thinking about sitting out or supporting somebody who has a history of denigrating you, because you think that’s a sign of strength, because that’s what being a man is? Putting women down? That’s not acceptable.“
Obama’s remarks seem to reflect a growing sense of desperation— and they seem likely to backfire. It’s bad enough for him to publicly spotlight Harris’ weakness compared to his own performance, but it’s even worse that he felt the best way to remedy the situation was to publicly shame black men — to the point of saying, “you’re lucky Michelle’s not here” — and to accuse black men of sexism.
Americans across several states are suffering and attempting to survive under unimaginably harsh conditions, without food and water, in that aftermath of Hurricane Helene which tore across ten states in the Southeast last week, leaving a path of destruction in its wake. And a week later, these people have found that they are largely on their own, as all the real help that has arrived has come through the efforts of individuals and nonprofit groups such as Samaritan Purse, Mountain Mule Packers Ranch, Save Our Allies and Aerial Recovery, which has exposed the fact — to anyone who didn’t already know — that the Biden regime doesn’t give a good damn about them, as Biden and his minions have engaged in not just dereliction of duty but the worst betrayal of the American people ever witnessed, since the birth of the nation.
Joe Biden, the placeholder-in-chief, showed up in Georgia [10-3-24] to give lip-service to the disaster and made promises of money to come, some twenty million dollars, and a recovery that will supposedly be totally undertaken by the federal government. No one should hold their breath waiting on that help to arrive, but if it does, they can bet the farm it will come with the intent of helping Biden special interest groups and supporters first.
Americans should note: $20 million for the victims of Helene and well over $640 million for illegal aliens and approximately $180 BILLION for Ukraine. When does THIS Damned MADNESS Stop!?!
It’s an astounding matter that despite assertions of nineteen thousand National Guardsmen and FEMA workers already being on the ground in those states most severely affected, from Florida to Tennessee and Georgia and on to the horrific situation near Asheville, North Carolina, no one can find them, as FEMA workers are simply sitting in their trucks and sending out mass emails with an app for the victims of Helene to use to apply for financial help, rebuilding their homes, and most importantly finding a way to have food and water and medicines sent their way as soon as possible — THIS in areas where there currently isn’t electricity or any cellphone reception and internet.
It’s a curious thing to witness this tragic situation compounded by the inaction of the federal government and federal workers, agencies and the U.S. military all missing in action as the victims keep asking where all these mysterious government workers are supposedly delivering aid and much needed necessities to anyone.
Where is the federal government? No one has seen much of an inkling from it yet.
For survivors in the Asheville, North Carolina area, Mountain Mule Packer Ranch has left this number — 910-885-1402 — for anyone who knows of specific needs and areas where they can be of assistance with their mule trains.
The military should have been brought up immediately and released under Title 10 to immediately render aid throughout all regions devastated by Hurricane Helene which has killed over 224 people and counting to date, with thousands of more people missing and their whereabouts unaccounted, especially with Ft Bragg right there in North Carolina and Ft Benning in Georgia. Several individual volunteers like John Howard, with Aerial Recovery, have told of speaking with various military units that were on the ground but awaiting authorization and orders to release them to act, including two Air Force helicopters that were simply sitting idle at the Asheville Airport.
First, Hillary worries about losing control. Really? Losing control, what like a dictator?
Twice-failed presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton said the quiet part out loud during an appearance on CNN on Saturday.
Hillary Clinton appeared on CNN to discuss social media regulations.
Clinton said social media platforms must censor content or else “we lose total control.”
“We should be in view repealing something called Section 230 which gave platforms on the internet immunity because they were thought to be just pass-throughs that they shouldn’t be judged for the content that is posted. But we now know that is an overly simple view that if the platforms whether it is Facebook or Twitter/X or Instagram or TikTok or whatever they are. If they don’t moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control,” Hillary Clinton said.
Let’s not forget the traitor John Kerry, the one who met with enemy to conspire against the USA.
Former presidential candidate and Obama Secretary of State John Kerry has gotten the most attention recently, mainly because of how bluntly he railed against our most fundamental freedom. But former Clinton Secretary of Labor Robert Reich has been just as repressive—and more detailed. And Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., has been her usual self as she demands censorship without much specificity.
Kerry made his comments at a World Economic Forum panel on green energy on Sept. 25. A conservative comedian trying to satirize the views of the haughty ruling class could not have come up with better material.
As Kerry put it, “The dislike of and anger over social media is just growing and growing and growing, and it’s part of our problem, particularly in democracies, in terms of building consensus around any issue,” Kerry lamented, apparently referring to abhorrence of freedom by members of his ilk.
The Corporate Transparency Act — The Most Aggressive Domestic Spying Program Since the Patriot Act
So in addition to “defund the police” and the “thought police”, we now have the “pre-crime” police housed under FinCEN at the Department of Treasury. Didn’t the IRS Union, also under the same Department of Treasury, just endorse Kamala Harris for President? What could possibly go wrong?
Does anyone remember the Lois Lerner IRS scandal? The IRS was forced to admit that it, specifically, targeted conservative non-profit groups for added scrutiny, with the intent to punish and/or deny their non-profit status based on the whims of an unelected partisan bureaucracy operating out of the Department of Treasury.
The IRS was, ultimately, forced to admit that it used political partisanship to target Americans, and they entered into a settlement with the non-profit groups they targeted.
Did I mention that no one was ever held accountable or served any jail time for the unlawful targeting by a federal agency of American Citizens on the basis of political affiliation? But you, as a small business owner, will surely go to jail if you fail to comply with the Corporate Transparency Act.
These assholes think that they rule over us rather than the people electing them both in and out. This is just history repeating itself. As Nicolae and Elena Ceaușescu
Given the sound rejection of the Left’s agendas across the country, has the Left learned anything? The answer is a resounding “No!”
Delusions of Adequacy 
