The used to be main hero turns into a woke loser with no sense of reality. Disney already made it so woke that it’s impossible to watch for those of us who knew the real story.
Some fans were shocked upon seeing the unhinged, anti-Trump diatribe delivered by Star Wars star Mark Hamill who went into a spittle-specked rage over Trump while defiantly claiming he does not care how many fans he upsets with his hate for the President-elect.
Hamill cemented himself into pop culture fame with his role as Like Skywalker in Star Wars and later as the voice of Batman’s The Joker in a series of hit animated movies. But in his interview on a recent episode of the Politickin Podcast hosted by extremist Democrat California Governor Gavin Newsom, Hamill seemed more like a crazed Joker than a serene Jedi Knight as he went into a rage over Trump.
As he continued, he seemed to find it hard to spit out his words because he was becoming so unhinged with Trump Derangement Syndrome. But he eventually admitted that he does not care how many fans he might upset with his demented vitriol.
“I was devastated,” he said with his hands shaking as he recounted how he felt when Trump won the White House for a second time last month.
If you’ve read this blog for a while, you know I disdain both reverse racism as well as the Marxist indoctrination at Universities. Here, you have both. As you read the list, you can see that it’s against things that make people better, smarter, wealthier, and don’t break the law. I think you can see the pattern here.
Racism is the intentional mistreatment of someone on the basis of their race – at least in the normal world. But in academia, racism is anything producing disparities, according to Professor Ibram Kendi.
What follows is a long list of people, places, actions, and other things declared racist this year by higher ed, though a few came from K-12. If something needs “anti-racist” action or “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” it follows it must be racist, or else it would not need correction.
Academic disciplines: Chemistry Classics Evolutionary biology Engineering Immunology Math STEM in general Twenty different departments at Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Actions: Accusing a black student of plagiarism Banning DEI Being Asian but romantically interested in white people Course evaluations Criticizing a black female reporter Criticizing plagiarism Marriage/being married Mentioning a black female congresswoman has fake eyelashes Murder Not pronouncing Kamala Harris’ name right Not voting for Kamala Harris Opioid crisis Opposing DEI Opposing oil and gas restrictions to fight climate change Pollution Questioning Kamala Harris’ racial identity Romance “Traditional grading” Voter registration Voting for Trump White people running in shorts White people rapping
Beliefs: Being pro-life/pointing out high abortion rates for black women Christianity Colorblindness Nostalgia
Career fields: Counseling Ecological farming Education Dentistry Disaster response Geology Law enforcement Medicine Ocean sciences Nursing Surgical oncology
Entertainment/culture: Dolly Parton’s free book program Dressing as a Native American at a Kansas City Chiefs game Liking Taylor Swift Michaelangelo’s “Creation of Adam” Paintings of British countryside Porcelain Telling a Japanese professor about a good sushi restaurant
Food: Fried chicken Milk
People: Ben Shapiro Conservatives Donald Trump Duke University sports fans Nikki Haley Rapper Tom MacDonald Vivek Ramaswamy White people
Places: Coeur D’Alene, Idaho Columbia University Greenhouses Israel Lake Merritt, California parking lot Northern Idaho Pennsylvania public universities Sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms Swimming pools Thousands of streets that use allegedly offensive terms University of Michigan
It happens every year around December, a predictable flurry of pseudo-psychology articles from low-IQ progressives expounding on the negatives of Christmas. On top of that, there’s been a pipeline of anti-Christmas films coming out of Hollywood the past decade, including some real woke bombs depicting Santa as a corporatist, a racist and a woman hater.
It’s been going on so long that in the early 2000s conservatives dubbed the annual practice the “War on Christmas”. However, at that time people on the political right assumed the vitriol was aimed at Christianity in general. What many didn’t realize is that the hatred wasn’t only about religious differences.
Around 70% of atheists identify as Democrats according to surveys, with 15% identifying as Republican and another 15% having no party affiliation. It makes sense that the majority of Christmas critics are on the political left and that their distaste of the holiday season is driven by their anti-Christian views.
After all, the political left is so obsessed with destroying Christianity that they continue to repeat the false narrative that Christmas is a “pagan holiday” and that all the traditions are stolen and repurposed. This claim is debunked every year and yet every year they keep trying to bring it back.
The pagan celebration of “Yule” often associated with Christmas by ignorant academics has always been a completely separate tradition with separate practices. As Christianity became the dominant religion in Europe, pagan groups would meld elements of their previous traditions with newly introduced Christian holidays. Every serious study of Yule admits the distinct separation between the pagan celebration and Christmas.
The Christmas tree is also a purely Christian idea, based on the stories surrounding Saint Boniface. Boniface sought to convert the pagan tribes of Germany in 725 AD and chopped down what was known as “Odin’s Sacred Oak”, a tree used by the pagans as a site for human sacrifice. A small fir tree grew in its place and was dubbed the “Tree of Christ”.
By extension Santa Claus is often wrongly associated with pagan characters; he is in fact based on the very real Saint Nicholas, a monk who traveled the known world around 280 AD, giving away his wealth and helping children in need. His good deeds became legendary and by the Renaissance he was the most popular saint in Europe. His feast day was celebrated on the day of his death (December 6th), and it was common practice to buy large gifts or get married around this time every year.
The name “Santa Claus” comes from the Dutch, who first brought the celebration of Nicholas over to the American colonies in the 1700s. They called him “Sinter Klaas”, short for Saint Nicholas. And, if you look at some of the very old fresco paintings of Saint Nicholas you’ll find he looks rather similar to the modern day folk character version of Santa Claus.
When the claims of pagan co-option failed to yield any results, leftists turned to more woke methods to undermine the Christmas holiday. Going beyond religion, progressives have even sought to take down Santa Claus.
You would think a guy that goes around giving away his wealth and helping the poor would immediately appeal to socialist leftists who claim to be the guardians of the underclass, but that’s not really the case. They say the biggest problem is that Santa is “white” and that he represents the western world’s habit of making white people the “default”. I would argue that this is a smokescreen for other problems the leftists don’t want to fully admit to, but let’s start with race…
Black Santa Claus
The leftist trend in recent years has been to hijack Santa Claus and make him non-white (as they have tried to do with almost every other icon of the west). They pushed hard to make “Black Santa” a thing over the past few years and it’s not working out for them.
This is not to say that black people can’t dress up as Santa Claus; they can do as they please. However, the idea of taking a centuries old western figure based on a real person and then co-opting their image and pretending like this doesn’t matter – Isn’t this the evil practice of cultural appropriation that leftists accuse white people of doing all the time?
Let’s be clear, the default of western culture IS white. White people created it and built it and so most of our celebrated figures are going to be white people also. Leftists are never going to successfully sell Black Santa as a cultural norm, just as it would be impossible to steal African folk heroes and turn them white.
Santa Takes Credit Away From Parents?
Another common argument I hear against the idea of Santa Claus is that parents are pressured to purchase gifts for their children on Christmas while telling them that those toys are coming from a fantasy figure (and a white fantasy figure, too! Oh, the horror!). Progressives want their children to give THEM credit for the money spend on gifts, not a magical white guy in a red suit.
Not surprisingly, these people have missed the point of gift giving on Christmas, though it is funny to see leftists essentially arguing in favor of meritocracy and individual recognition.
I see the idea of Santa Claus as very useful, not only as a way to bring a little wonder into the tradition for children, but also as a way to keep adult egos in check. Giving Santa credit for a gift is a valuable exercise in humility that every parent needs. The gift should not be about you, it’s about the happiness that the gift inspires.
Gift giving is not a trade for adoration, but that’s exactly how narcissists see it. And since the political left is absolutely infected with narcissism these days it’s not surprising that they hate Santa Claus for taking attention away from them at Christmastime.
Santa Has A Naughty List, But What If You’re A Moral Relativist?
Keep in mind that a lot of progressive academics that write criticisms of the holidays don’t have any kids. They are childless cat ladies and beta males with no experience in creating and caring for a family. Their opinions are worthless when it comes to child rearing (and most other things). That said, this doesn’t seem to stop them from giving advice on the trappings of teaching kids the value of morality and the consequences of their actions.
It might be a fading tradition but for the longest time parents have told children to be on their best behavior around Christmas because if they don’t they could end up on Santa’s naughty list and get coal in their stockings. Leftists argue that this punishment and rewards system should not be a part of Christmas.
Firstly, people without kids don’t understand that when the youngsters are on a school break for two weeks straight and everyone is stuck together in close quarters in a house in winter there is a need sometimes for extra policing. You use whatever tools are at your disposal because reasoning with children only works half the time. Their brains aren’t fully formed yet (like woke activists), and they tend to act out wildly based on impulse and emotion.
I really don’t think that lefties are particularly upset by the idea of Santa having a naughty list (I’ve never met a well adjusted parent that went beyond the threat and didn’t have presents for their sons and daughters on Christmas). I think they are upset by the idea of moral compass and discipline. They seem to think that children simply raise themselves and that the parents never need to do anything to mold them into proper adults.
This is exactly why our society is in a death spiral today; because progressives have convinced so many parents to stop parenting.
Santa (Like Christ) Represents Individual And Voluntary Charity
Leftists are socialists (or communists) – It’s the foundation of almost all their beliefs, and the root of socialism is the sacrifice of the individual for the sake of the collective. Meaning, the government in the name of the majority must intervene in the affairs of individuals in order to force them to serve the interests of the group.
In other words, leftists believe that the environment determines everything and people will not do good for society unless they are extorted into it by the system. In a way they fulfill their own prophecy by making it almost impossible through the legal environment to do good for others unless you have permission from the authorities.
Over the years I have noticed that one highly destructive side effect of socialism is the exponential decline in personal charity. If the government handles everything, why should the average person take action to help others? Why even care? And if you do still care, it doesn’t matter because the system will punish you for acting on your own accord.
There’s a reason why socialist and communist regimes are mostly atheist and seek to eliminate Christianity through history; the government must become god and they can’t allow any alternatives to exist. When you see progressive governments ban private charity activities or prosecute people who go out on their own to help the homeless, you might be confused and wonder what the motivation could possibly be?
It makes perfect sense when you realize that leftists see voluntary charity as competition with their own god (government). In the past they have even tried to misrepresent Jesus as an early socialist figure, when in fact Jesus promoted individual acts of compassion, not deferring to a government authority.
The underlying impetus for socialism is forced wealth redistribution, but in a world of voluntary charity there is no need for governments to control wealth or property. That is to say, socialists exploit the existence of poverty as an excuse to take control of all personal wealth (and thus control the population). They can’t do that when Christianity, Christmas and symbols like Santa Claus show people there’s a better way.It happens every year around December, a predictable flurry of pseudo-psychology articles from low-IQ progressives expounding on the negatives of Christmas. On top of that, there’s been a pipeline of anti-Christmas films coming out of Hollywood the past decade, including some real woke bombs depicting Santa as a corporatist, a racist and a woman hater.
It’s been going on so long that in the early 2000s conservatives dubbed the annual practice the “War on Christmas”. However, at that time people on the political right assumed the vitriol was aimed at Christianity in general. What many didn’t realize is that the hatred wasn’t only about religious differences.
Around 70% of atheists identify as Democrats according to surveys, with 15% identifying as Republican and another 15% having no party affiliation. It makes sense that the majority of Christmas critics are on the political left and that their distaste of the holiday season is driven by their anti-Christian views.
After all, the political left is so obsessed with destroying Christianity that they continue to repeat the false narrative that Christmas is a “pagan holiday” and that all the traditions are stolen and repurposed. This claim is debunked every year and yet every year they keep trying to bring it back.
The pagan celebration of “Yule” often associated with Christmas by ignorant academics has always been a completely separate tradition with separate practices. As Christianity became the dominant religion in Europe, pagan groups would meld elements of their previous traditions with newly introduced Christian holidays. Every serious study of Yule admits the distinct separation between the pagan celebration and Christmas.
The Christmas tree is also a purely Christian idea, based on the stories surrounding Saint Boniface. Boniface sought to convert the pagan tribes of Germany in 725 AD and chopped down what was known as “Odin’s Sacred Oak”, a tree used by the pagans as a site for human sacrifice. A small fir tree grew in its place and was dubbed the “Tree of Christ”.
By extension Santa Claus is often wrongly associated with pagan characters; he is in fact based on the very real Saint Nicholas, a monk who traveled the known world around 280 AD, giving away his wealth and helping children in need. His good deeds became legendary and by the Renaissance he was the most popular saint in Europe. His feast day was celebrated on the day of his death (December 6th), and it was common practice to buy large gifts or get married around this time every year.
The name “Santa Claus” comes from the Dutch, who first brought the celebration of Nicholas over to the American colonies in the 1700s. They called him “Sinter Klaas”, short for Saint Nicholas. And, if you look at some of the very old fresco paintings of Saint Nicholas you’ll find he looks rather similar to the modern day folk character version of Santa Claus.
When the claims of pagan co-option failed to yield any results, leftists turned to more woke methods to undermine the Christmas holiday. Going beyond religion, progressives have even sought to take down Santa Claus.
You would think a guy that goes around giving away his wealth and helping the poor would immediately appeal to socialist leftists who claim to be the guardians of the underclass, but that’s not really the case. They say the biggest problem is that Santa is “white” and that he represents the western world’s habit of making white people the “default”. I would argue that this is a smokescreen for other problems the leftists don’t want to fully admit to, but let’s start with race…
Black Santa Claus
The leftist trend in recent years has been to hijack Santa Claus and make him non-white (as they have tried to do with almost every other icon of the west). They pushed hard to make “Black Santa” a thing over the past few years and it’s not working out for them.
This is not to say that black people can’t dress up as Santa Claus; they can do as they please. However, the idea of taking a centuries old western figure based on a real person and then co-opting their image and pretending like this doesn’t matter – Isn’t this the evil practice of cultural appropriation that leftists accuse white people of doing all the time?
Let’s be clear, the default of western culture IS white. White people created it and built it and so most of our celebrated figures are going to be white people also. Leftists are never going to successfully sell Black Santa as a cultural norm, just as it would be impossible to steal African folk heroes and turn them white.
Santa Takes Credit Away From Parents?
Another common argument I hear against the idea of Santa Claus is that parents are pressured to purchase gifts for their children on Christmas while telling them that those toys are coming from a fantasy figure (and a white fantasy figure, too! Oh, the horror!). Progressives want their children to give THEM credit for the money spend on gifts, not a magical white guy in a red suit.
Not surprisingly, these people have missed the point of gift giving on Christmas, though it is funny to see leftists essentially arguing in favor of meritocracy and individual recognition.
I see the idea of Santa Claus as very useful, not only as a way to bring a little wonder into the tradition for children, but also as a way to keep adult egos in check. Giving Santa credit for a gift is a valuable exercise in humility that every parent needs. The gift should not be about you, it’s about the happiness that the gift inspires.
Gift giving is not a trade for adoration, but that’s exactly how narcissists see it. And since the political left is absolutely infected with narcissism these days it’s not surprising that they hate Santa Claus for taking attention away from them at Christmastime.
Santa Has A Naughty List, But What If You’re A Moral Relativist?
Keep in mind that a lot of progressive academics that write criticisms of the holidays don’t have any kids. They are childless cat ladies and beta males with no experience in creating and caring for a family. Their opinions are worthless when it comes to child rearing (and most other things). That said, this doesn’t seem to stop them from giving advice on the trappings of teaching kids the value of morality and the consequences of their actions.
It might be a fading tradition but for the longest time parents have told children to be on their best behavior around Christmas because if they don’t they could end up on Santa’s naughty list and get coal in their stockings. Leftists argue that this punishment and rewards system should not be a part of Christmas.
Firstly, people without kids don’t understand that when the youngsters are on a school break for two weeks straight and everyone is stuck together in close quarters in a house in winter there is a need sometimes for extra policing. You use whatever tools are at your disposal because reasoning with children only works half the time. Their brains aren’t fully formed yet (like woke activists), and they tend to act out wildly based on impulse and emotion.
I really don’t think that lefties are particularly upset by the idea of Santa having a naughty list (I’ve never met a well adjusted parent that went beyond the threat and didn’t have presents for their sons and daughters on Christmas). I think they are upset by the idea of moral compass and discipline. They seem to think that children simply raise themselves and that the parents never need to do anything to mold them into proper adults.
This is exactly why our society is in a death spiral today; because progressives have convinced so many parents to stop parenting.
Santa (Like Christ) Represents Individual And Voluntary Charity
Leftists are socialists (or communists) – It’s the foundation of almost all their beliefs, and the root of socialism is the sacrifice of the individual for the sake of the collective. Meaning, the government in the name of the majority must intervene in the affairs of individuals in order to force them to serve the interests of the group.
In other words, leftists believe that the environment determines everything and people will not do good for society unless they are extorted into it by the system. In a way they fulfill their own prophecy by making it almost impossible through the legal environment to do good for others unless you have permission from the authorities.
Over the years I have noticed that one highly destructive side effect of socialism is the exponential decline in personal charity. If the government handles everything, why should the average person take action to help others? Why even care? And if you do still care, it doesn’t matter because the system will punish you for acting on your own accord.
There’s a reason why socialist and communist regimes are mostly atheist and seek to eliminate Christianity through history; the government must become god and they can’t allow any alternatives to exist. When you see progressive governments ban private charity activities or prosecute people who go out on their own to help the homeless, you might be confused and wonder what the motivation could possibly be?
It makes perfect sense when you realize that leftists see voluntary charity as competition with their own god (government). In the past they have even tried to misrepresent Jesus as an early socialist figure, when in fact Jesus promoted individual acts of compassion, not deferring to a government authority.
The underlying impetus for socialism is forced wealth redistribution, but in a world of voluntary charity there is no need for governments to control wealth or property. That is to say, socialists exploit the existence of poverty as an excuse to take control of all personal wealth (and thus control the population). They can’t do that when Christianity, Christmas and symbols like Santa Claus show people there’s a better way.
An amazing video circulating on social media follows three suspected thieves in Orange County, Calif., who were arrested this week after a law change now classifies shoplifting as a felony offense.
The video, released Sunday by Seal Beach Police on Instagram, features surveillance camera footage of three young black women walking into an Ulta Beauty Supply store and stealing $648 worth of product, before heading to a Kohl’s retail store and walking out the door with $1,188 in merchandise.
All the while, a police cruiser is making its way to the reported thefts and the women are ultimately intercepted, confronted by officers and thrown into the back of a squad car.
Footage from a camera in the back of the patrol vehicle captured the moment one of the thieves informed the other that shoplifting was now classified as a felony, saying, “Bitch, new laws.”
“Stealing is a felony,” the thief tells the other adding, “And this Orange County, bitch. They don’t play.”
On Instagram, Seal Beach PD explained the arrests were part of new laws passed under Proposition 36, which “went into effect Wednesday morning in California.”
“It undoes some of the changes voters made with a 2014 ballot measure that turned certain nonviolent felonies into misdemeanors, effectively shortening prison sentences and leading to a spike in retail theft and crime.”
Fox Los Angeles reports the Prop 47 measure previously in place led to a spike in shoplifting during the Covid pandemic.
…[D]uring the pandemic, the rate of shoplifting and commercial burglaries skyrocketed, especially in Los Angeles, Alameda, San Mateo and Sacramento counties. Statewide, reported shoplifting of merchandise worth up to $950 soared 28% over the past five years, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. That’s the highest observed level since 2000.
The world is slowly healing and common sense appears set to make a comeback following Donald Trump’s re-election victory.
Widespread mistrust of the US government, media, and “experts” didn’t go mainstream until President Trump splashed onto the scene. That’s why they hate him so much. He’s the cog in their machine. The disruptor who yanked back the curtain and exposed just enough to jolt the country awake. Thanks mostly to Trump’s America First movement, we now know the truth: many so-called “experts” are just political pawns, there’s one big “uniparty” screwing us all over, and the fake news media is running a giant CIA psyop on the American people.
That’s right—we thought those CIA “mind control” tricks were reserved for foreign hellholes. Turns out, they’re using those same nasty tactics on us.
Ready to have your minds blown? I know what’s going on with the drones, and I will share it with you. But I’m also to give you the secret to seeing through all the nonsense we’ve been peddled for 60+ years.
What I am about to reveal to you is the Rosetta Stone for interpreting every major news event. I will give you the secret to unlocking the mystery. One simple assumption will reveal everything. Are you ready?
“The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.”
That’s it. That’s all you need to assume, and you will be correct. Think I’m crazy? That it couldn’t possibly be that simple? That it could never be that obvious? Let’s try it out and see how it works.
Who killed JFK? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
How did the cartels manage to get so many drugs into and so much cash out of the U.S.? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
Why were all those women and children at Waco burned to death? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
Who let the 9/11 hijackers into the U.S.? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
Why were there no WMDs in Iraq? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
What caused the housing market collapse and the massive devaluation of the U.S. dollar? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
What happened with all that Russian collusion stuff in 2016? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
Where did COVID originate? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
Why was discussion of Hunter Biden’s laptop banned in 2020? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
Who blew up the NordStream pipeline? The U.S. government was behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.
And finally: what’s going on with all those drones in the Northeast? Say it with me: “The U.S. government is behind it and is lying to you to cover it up.”
Every time there is some major new story that everyone is fixated on, assume that the story exists because your government is trying to manipulate you for its own purposes, and you will be correct at least 9 out of 10 times. Maybe even 99 out of 100.
Follow this simple rule, and you will know what is actually happening before anyone else. You will appear to be clairvoyant. And you will have a superpower that no one in corporate media has: the ability to see the truth.
When Barack Obama won the U.S. Presidency in 2008, there were claims of an insidious plot to turn America into a Communist-run nation, which was initially labeled as a “conspiracy theory.” Mike Adams, known as the Health Ranger, raised concerns about this plot during Obama’s first term in office, which later gained attention and credibility. Biden’s time in office has been likened to Obama’s third term, suggesting a continuation of the alleged Communist agenda. Various “conspiracy theories” have allegedly come true over the past four years, pointing to a government run by Democrat-Communists aiming to destroy America and the middle class. Many maniacal plots are attributed to Democrats, Liberals, and Globalists that include issues like vaccine push, assassination attempts, election corruption, and the replacement of Americans with illegal immigrants.
Top 10 maniacal plots conjured and propagated by Democrats, Liberals and Globalists over the past 4 years to try to wreck America and wipe out the middle class
#1. The deadliest vaccine push ever propagated on Americans – mRNA clot shots
#2. Two assassination attempts of President Trump
#3. The “mysterious” Drone-Gate psyop happening right now
#4. The coverup of the Hunter Biden “laptop from hell”
#5. The most corrupt election in U.S. history that put Biden in the White House and the FBI-created “insurrection” that falsely imprisoned hundreds of peaceful conservative protestors from January 6th, 2021
#6. Hiding Biden’s senility from the whole nation while he has the nuke codes
#7. Running a proxy war through Ukraine to funnel trillions of U.S. dollars using the Military Industrial Complex while instigating World War III with Russia
#8. Killing thousands (if not millions) of Americans in U.S. hospitals during the plandemic using “protocol” of isolation, Remdesivir, ventilators, and more clot shots.
#9. More than 4 MILLION ABORTIONS, many in the third term of pregnancy and some even on the day of birth, were performed to add to the genocide of Americans
#10. Replacing Americans with over 20 million illegal immigrants over the past 4 years
A bombshell 17,000-page report was just dropped, detailing specific instances where the Biden administration has weaponized the federal government for political gain. The extensive document, compiled by the House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, outlines claims of misuse of federal agencies to target political opponents, suppress dissent, and influence public opinion. This raises serious questions about the integrity of the federal bureaucracy and the Biden Administration’s four years in office.
During the nearly two-year investigation, exposed a “two-tiered system of government,” with the committee finding several cases of censorship, whistleblower retaliation, and the politicization of federal agencies and top law enforcement.
The report notes that the objective of the committee is to “protect and strengthen the fundamental rights of the American people.” Although its work is not done, the report assures the American people that this was the necessary first step to stop the weaponization of the federal government and to make sure it no longer works against the United States.
Here are the 20 of the most nefarious and diabolical activities revealed by the report.
1. Censorship by Big Tech: The report alleges that the Biden administration pressured companies like Meta (formerly known as Facebook) to censor American speech, with Mark Zuckerberg reportedly admitting to this pressure.
2. Weaponization of Federal Law Enforcement: The subcommittee claims to have found instances where federal law enforcement agencies were used against American citizens, highlighting a pattern of what they describe as government overreach.
3. Collusion with the Intelligence Community: There are allegations of the Biden campaign working with former intelligence officials to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation, which the report suggests was part of a broader effort to manipulate voter perception.
4. FBI Targeting Parents at School Boards: The report points to an Attorney General memo directing the FBI to investigate threats against school board members, which critics argue was used to target conservative parents speaking out at meetings.
5. Suppression of Conservative Voices: It’s claimed that there was a concerted effort involving government agencies and tech companies to suppress conservative viewpoints, including through the manipulation of content moderation policies.
6. FBI’s Handling of the Mar-a-Lago Raid: The report discusses the FBI’s search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, suggesting political motivations behind the action.
7. FBI Whistleblower Retaliation: The subcommittee heard from FBI whistleblowers who claimed they faced retaliation for exposing perceived biases within the agency, including the suspension of security clearances.
9. Legal Actions Against Pro-Life Activists: Allegations that the DOJ disproportionately targeted pro-life activists under the FACE Act, suggesting a two-tiered justice system.
10. Targeting of Traditional Catholics: An FBI memo from the Richmond field office labeled certain traditional Catholics as potential threats, which was later retracted but highlighted in the report.
11. IRS and DOJ Targeting: The report alleges that these agencies were used to target political opponents, echoing previous claims made during the Obama era regarding IRS scrutiny of conservative groups.
12. Misuse of National Security Tools: There are claims that surveillance powers were misused to spy on political adversaries, linking back to controversies around the 2016 election.
13. Government Influence on Media: Accusations that government officials influenced media narratives, especially around sensitive political topics like the Hunter Biden laptop and the origins of the COVID-19.
14. Operation Choke Point: An alleged Obama-era initiative where federal agencies pressured banks to cut off services to certain sectors, impacting conservative businesses.
15. Influence Over Social Media Algorithms: Assertions that the government had an undue influence on how social media companies prioritized and displayed content, affecting political discourse.
16. Use of Disinformation Campaigns: The report suggests that elements within the government were involved in creating or supporting disinformation to manipulate public opinion, especially in foreign policy contexts.
17. Involvement in Election Integrity: Claims that government agencies played roles in influencing election outcomes through misinformation management and voter suppression tactics.
18. Weaponization of Climate Change Policies: Allegations that environmental policies were used to target industries and individuals not aligned with administration views.
19. Manipulation of Public Health Information: During the COVID-19 response, there are claims of government agencies influencing what information was disseminated by health organizations, possibly to fit political narratives.
20. Protection of Political Allies: The report hints at the administration protecting allies through selective enforcement of laws or lack of investigation into potential wrongdoings.
[The] founding documents of the United States articulate the ideals of the American republic and guarantee to all American citizens fundamental rights and liberties. For too long, however, the American people have faced a two-tiered system of government—one of favorable treatment for the politically-favored class, and one of intimidation and unfairness for the rest of American citizens. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, the contrast between these two tiers has become even more stark.
One of the most alarming parts of the report are emails between DHS/CISA, Stanford University, the Atlantic Council, and Big Tech, in which they colluded to create the “Election Integrity Partnership’s” censorship machine.
An email from Graham Brookie of the Atlantic Council’s DFR Labs read: “We just set up an election integrity partnership at the request of DHS/CISA,” while another— now redacted from Facebook— exposes a phone call with DHS, saying, “DHS cannot openly endorse the portal.”
“We already have partnerships with Facebook, Twitter, and Google, and we would love to chat with you and your team,” Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory emailed NextDoor executives.
“Throughout the Biden-Harris administration, multiple federal agencies, including the White House, have engaged in a vast censorship campaign against so-called mis-, dis-, or malinformation,” the report states, noting that the subcommittee revealed the extent of the “censorship-industrial complex,” the report continues.
In another finding from the report revealed that the subcommittee probed alleged cased in which the federal government weaponized the use of law enforcement resources, which led to fraud and abuse of the FBI. Several whistleblowers spoke out and detailed how the agency “brutally retaliated” against them for coming forward.
The bureau suspend the whistleblowers “without pay, preventing them from seeking outside employment, and even purging suspected disloyal employees.”
The investigation also found that the Biden Administration teamed up with 51 former intelligence officials to interfere in the American electoral system just weeks before the 2020 presidential election by signing the statement calling Hunter Biden’s laptop disinformation.
story
Of course they did. It started with Obama covering up all the illegal stuff they did to Trump. This has to stop. I doubt they’ll get the top dogs, but they could put a dent into the machine
from Introvert Dear, but I can relate and I bet other Introverts can also. I don’t go if at all possible and am better for it.
Because introverts don’t just get ready for a holiday party — they gather strength for one.
Oh no, oh no, oh no. It’s today, isn’t it? The holiday party. And there’s another one tomorrow. A red-and-green glitter bomb of social obligation has exploded all over your calendar. Sure, you love your family, but the truth is, you’re an introvert, and big parties are utterly exhausting — even on those rare occasions when you actually enjoy them. Loud, crowded rooms and yet another round of “So, what’s new with you?” probably leave you dreaming of a white Christmas at home in your pajamas.
But the holidays only come around once a year, so you’ll rock around the Christmas tree anyway. That said, you’ll probably have some thoughts like these. Introverts, can you relate?
Saying yes to the big holiday get-together seemed like a good idea when you RSVP’d. You even threw in some exclamation points (soooo excited to see everyone!!) and offered to bring your famous apple dumplings. But that was two weeks ago — you were younger then, full of hope. Now, in a moment of panic and desperation, you’re seriously considering canceling because you’re “sick.” Besides, didn’t you promise your dog you’d binge Netflix together tonight?
2. Sigh. I’m going.
It is your family we’re talking about. And it is the holidays. That’s the double-edged sword of being an introvert — just thinking about skipping the party makes you feel guilty, even if it would be better for your mental health. You don’t want to let anyone down, even if saying yes means draining your energy completely.
3. I’ll just go for a little while.
Yes, that’s it — the perfect compromise! You’ll say your hellos, grab some food, and even give nosy Aunt Gladys the most basic updates about your life, complete with a polite smile. Then you’ll make a swift exit, just like a certain snowman who knew better than to stick around when the sun was hot that day.
4. I can do this, I can do this…
You’re doing this. You’re really doing this. You take a few deep breaths, savor the last moments of peace and quiet, and silently swear on Aunt Gladys’s fruitcake that you’ll be back home soon.
5. It’s so loud!
You’re at the party, and it’s SO LOUD. Christmas carols are blaring, everyone is talking at once, and your inner introvert is screaming for an escape to somewhere quieter. The noise feels like a physical force, crashing over you and draining your energy. You’re no Grinch, but suddenly his decision to live alone with his dog on a mountain makes perfect sense — it was quiet!
6. Small talk, whyyyyyy…
Let’s face it — small talk has never been your thing. Gossip and chatter about weekend plans? It all feels so, well, boring. As an introvert, you’d rather dive into big ideas or, at the very least, something that feels authentic and meaningful. At the party, you do your best to stick to socially acceptable chitchat, but somehow, it always veers off into… something else entirely.
7. This is getting awkward…
…so, so awkward.
8. There’s so much going on that I’m zoning out.
Marzi Wilson/Introvert Doodles
Despite how it might look to others, you’re not angry, bored, or depressed — you’re simply turning inward to block out the overwhelming stimulation. The noise, the flurry of activity, and the endless social cues to process can be too much for introverts, who naturally thrive in calmer, more low-key environments.
9. But seriously, how long?
This quiet moment alone is bliss. No small talk, no noise — just you, recharging in peace.
10. It’s not that I don’t like you, it’s just that…
Marzi Wilson/Introvert Doodles
…there’s waaay too much fake smiling happening at this holiday party.
11. A pet! I’m saved!
Gemma Correll
Many introverts are devoted animal lovers because our four-legged companions are the perfect match for us. They offer unconditional love without expecting small talk or fake smiles in return (see above). And unlike some extroverts, they’ll never talk your ear off or complain that you’re too quiet.
12. “Hey, sorry, can’t talk — too busy checking my phone!”
Buzzfeed
Pulling out your phone and pretending to be completely absorbed in it? A classic introvert move.
13. I’m actually having fun! And then…
Sometimes, even we introverts surprise ourselves by enjoying a social event. There’s something comforting about feeling included — even if half the time was spent dodging personal questions from family and quietly checking your phone. And let’s be honest, the holidays bring a certain warmth and nostalgia that’s hard to resist. Maybe you even found another introvert to chat with — or an extrovert who respected your quiet vibe. It feels good to connect, even for us fiercely independent introverts.
But then, the inevitable happens. No matter how much fun you had, you’re still an introvert — and that means your social battery only lasts so long. Time to head home and recharge!
14. Seriously, I have zero energy left.
Debbie Tung/Where’s My Bubble
And that’s okay — it’s nothing to be ashamed of. It’s just the way you’re wired.
15. If only extroverts understood what it’s like to be completely “peopled out”..
Aaron Caycedo-Kimura/INFJoe
…but let’s be real, a lot of them just don’t.
16. I’m so exhausted I don’t even want to say goodbye.
Kayla Yandoli/Sally Tamarkin/Will Varner/Buzzfeed
Dang, you forgot to pack your invisibility cloak. But it’s time to make your escape. Fingers crossed no one hits you with a “You’re leaving so soon?” as you quietly slip out the door.
17. I’m home! Hallelujah, I’m home!
College Humor
On the left: What it looks like.
On the right: What it feels like.
18. And I am completely and utterly exhausted.
The party might be over, but that doesn’t mean your energy magically returns. In fact, this is when the real exhaustion sets in. Cue the dreaded introvert hangover. For many introverts, social burnout isn’t just mental and emotional fatigue — it’s physical, too. The symptoms are real: headaches, muscle aches, and an overwhelming sense of feeling unwell. It’s your body’s way of saying, time to rest.
19. Because this is how my brain works:
Sarah’s Scribbles/Sarah Andersen
A WHOLE DAY.
20. Me:
Can we make it 12?
21. Just back away slowly and close the door.
You shut your bedroom door and breathe in the sweet, glorious relief of solitude. If you have kids, you might try to pass them off to your spouse for a little while — because let’s face it, the only cure for an introvert hangover is downtime. Alone in your room, free from everyone’s expectations, you’re finally in your most comfortable, natural habitat. This time to decompress isn’t just nice — it’s necessary. Seriously, it’s for everyone’s safety!
I was at an analyst conference and George H. W. Bush was the speaker. The first thing he said was that he hated the press. The second was that the stupidest question he ever got asked was by Lesley Stahl as to why he wasn’t dancing when the Berlin Wall came down.
Now this:
Newscaster Lesley Stahl claims she “doesn’t know what to do” about the embarrassing demise of the legacy media.
She was lamenting to her colleague, Peggy Noonan, that “we are at the point where even the president,” then corrected herself saying, “Elon Musk,” asserted that legacy media is dead. She appeared extremely worried, spilling her deepest concerns, in front of an empathetic audience gathered at the 92nd St. YMCA studio in New York.
It was as if Stahl was having an out-of-body experience, where she failed to factor in herself, in accounting for the reason why audiences were abandoning network news in droves. You know you’re in trouble as an award-winning reporter when the show “Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives,” on the Food Network manages to pull in higher ratings than the 24-hour news coverage, CNN.
“I don’t know how it (media) recovers,” Stahl confessed: “It is sort of… kind of hobbling along.”
There was some editing in her statement: She didn’t require the qualifier of “sort of,” “kind (of)” hobbling along. Sounding like sorority sisters, Stahl then confessed to Noonan, “I’m in a very dark place about it.” The gal-pal team then proceeded to engage in a hug-fest to lift up each other spirits, never hinting at they might be part of the problem.
“We’re talking about something so essential,” Noonan offered in her media overview. “You don’t want to say we’ll see. Or, maybe the world will end. We’ll see.” Wow! Noonan, in a moment of candid reflection, had actually compared something “so essential” as corporate media, and it being thrown on the trash heap of cancelled programing, with the world ending.
Such serious contemplation negates the wider view of just how they got into such a “dark place.” Still, they went along their merry way, as two titans in the media, seemingly oblivious to the fact that their smugness and Trump-bashing served as an integral part of the toxic behavior that fueled the rot in the “legacy media.”
Noonan proved it didn’t matter how nonsensical a joke or outright lie at Trump’s expense was — it was still worth working into the conversation. She made an off-the-cuff quip, shortly after the November election, when President-elect Trump was at the top of news reports in more than 100 countries, saying: “We haven’t been seeing much of Mr. Trump,” and “I’m enjoying that.”
The audience laughed appreciatively. So what if the joke indicated the speaker appeared clueless about an avalanche of news overtaking every newsroom in the nation? You must say this — Stahl and Noonan know their audience, no matter how much it may be shrinking.
Once the laughter stopped, Stahl may have found it productive to engage in some good-old fashioned reporting to figure out what she “could do” to better understand the media’s abysmal ratings. And even more concerning, the loss of public trust. In her 53-year journalism career, she never thought she’d witness her once-premiere news program, “60 Minutes,” becoming increasingly irrelevant in a post-Trump election world. Ratings stayed in the toilet bowl, as one CBS executive noted, as the show pulled in a pitiful five million viewers in mid-November.
It wouldn’t take much digging for Stahl to find out what’s going on in audienceville. She, like her colleagues, would have to get up out of their chairs, leave their network buildings and stop relying on corrupted news sources. (That would include themselves.)
The best — and obvious — place to start would be for Stahl and Noonan to review comments made by viewers watching their unscripted exchange. Reactions from the audience is merely a click away on the accompanying YouTube comment thread: The media titans may have appeared untroubled by their intense partisanship, but viewers were taking a dimmer view.
One viewer identified as “@CharlieWhitmore,” was diligent enough to perform Stahl’s job for her: He reviewed one of her most startling Trump-bashing moments on “60 Minutes.” “I went back and reviewed Leslie’s interview with Trump in October 2020,” he wrote. “Leslie you are the problem…” He referred to Stahl’s pathological tendency, like her colleagues, to disbelieve and discredit (then) President Trump and their refusal to report on the Hunter Biden laptop story. This, in turn, would have opened the door to investigating the “Biden crime family’s behavior,” President Trump claimed, and their influence peddling to negotiate lucrative contracts.
The snippet below speaks volumes about Stahl acting more as a White House spokesperson as opposed to a working journalist.
“He’s in the midst of a scandal,” President Trump said referencing Hunter Biden’s lap top’s incriminating content.
“He’s not,” Stahl interrupted. “He’s not. No.”
Later in the interview, Stahl claimed the Delaware computer contents had been “investigated and discredited.” This attitude of nothing-to-see-here-folks has become an integral part of the legacy media. They never failed in their efforts to come to the defense of the Biden Family along with Democrat operatives’ criminal activities.
“It can’t be verified,” Stahl repeated numerous times of the laptop. She was relying, of course, on her anonymous sources, corrupted intelligence contacts and biased news outlets. Nothing in the interview indicated that Stahl would divert from her political ideology and runaway bias.
“What can’t be verified?” Trump asked.
“The laptop!” Stahl responded as if confirming the obvious.
“The biggest scandal,” Trump continued, ‘was when they spied on my campaign.”
“There’s no real evidence of that,” Stahl said never wavering from her ludicrous and now embarrassingly false version of events. Owning up to this shameful chapter of reporting wasn’t on Stahl’s agenda, nor was correcting her distorted worldview.
Other viewer reactions were equally revealing, and not very sparing in their comments of Stahl and Noonan:
“Madame Stahl, you reap what you sow,” wrote @I.marciago5030, “Just listening to you (makes it) easy to understand why the corporate media (has) lost all credibility.”
“Lesley, thank you for all the good work you put into helping destroy legacy media,” responded another @woodyharrelson2624.
“Lesley Stahl just doesn’t get it. No wonder legacy media is dying,” wrote @Grad1067.
A few of the remarks were dripping in sarcasm including: “Big shout-out to these two ladies for helping Trump get elected. Bravo,” wrote @neildepoy77320
It might prove useful, for Stahl, to juxtapose the “60 Minutes” sparring match between herself and President-elect Trump in the wake of viewing the irrefutable facts. Sadly, Stahl appeared unwilling to take a moment of introspection to understand her personal responsibility — after all, she’s a big-deal journalist — for a media that has become corrupted by its own bias.
Instead, she spent a moment fawning over herself and offered up a different interpretation of the exchange between herself and President Trump. She recounted, without a hint of irony, that she asked the president in October 2020: “Why do you keep pounding on the press?”
Trump, being Trump, offered a pragmatic answer: “I do it and I repeat it because that way fewer people are going to believe you.”
It’s almost like clockwork. Terrorist attack – Muslim perp. SSDD for the last 1700 years
1 – Well, it looks like all the Merkel Legos and knife checks were of no avail in the German city of Magdeburg. Even confiscating corkscrews didn’t help.
An attacker reportedly deliberately drove his car at high speed into a dense crowd at the Christmas market in Magdeburg. According to the most recent reports, at least eleven people were killed and sixty wounded.
Unfortunately for the devotees of political correctness, the alleged perpetrator of this atrocity isn’t a Potato German named Heinz or Hans, but rather a Saudi doctor.
Sixty to eighty people have been injured in an attack at the Christmas Market in Magdeburg, and at least one is dead. A suspect has been arrested. According to Welt‘s information, he is a man from Saudi Arabia.
2 – Cambridge, Ontario resident Uwais Motala threatens to kill Christian white people & Jews in this very racist rant directed to those who question the “Free Palestine” movement.
“We’re coming, you won’t be able to handle all of this, there’s not enough bombs to kill all of us, you better do it, because we are going to get you for all those dead babies you fucking pieces of shit.”
“Fuck you, fuck your little white race mother fucker.”
“Fuck your country, fuck your race, fuck your culture, fuck Christmas.”
“Because the Master Race says so, you keep killing babies, we’re going to get you mother fuckers.”
“Fuck you & your rights, fuck you & your free speech, fuck you & your free thoughts, your free conscience, all that fucking freedom bullshit, we’re going to get you.”
3 – A Muslim student who attends George Mason University has just been arrested for planning a mass casualty attack on the Israeli consulate in New York.
The terrorist is from Egypt and his name is Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan. A tipster led the FBI to him and now he’s in the process of being deported.
Here’s more from AOL:
Egyptian national Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan faces a slew of federal charges tied to distributing information related to explosives,
The FBI has arrested a student at George Mason University in Virginia for allegedly plotting a mass casualty attack on the Israeli consulate in New York, according to a federal court filing.
Americans don’t trust public health institutions, the virologist who used to head the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says.
“We have lost public trust, there’s no doubt about it, and it really harms public health in a big way,” Robert Redfield said Wednesday during an event at The Heritage Foundation, adding, “We’ve lost, I think, trust in science.”
The lines between public health institutions and politics became blurred during the pandemic, Kulldorff said.
The National Institutes of Health is a government research agency and “their role is not policy or public health policy,” he said.
Yet, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who directed the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for nearly four decades until 2022, became quite involved in health policy while an adviser to two presidents during the pandemic.
NIH “should have focused on doing the studies to find out, for example, about genetic drugs, if they can help against COVID,” Kulldorff said. But instead, he added, Fauci “sort of took over that public health policy, which doesn’t make any sense.”
Schools shouldn’t have been closed and lockdowns shouldn’t have been widespread, Kulldorff said, but the “biggest chunk of the infectious disease research money was controlled by Dr. Fauci, so he took a very active role about the pandemic policy.”
Instead of a health system, Americans “pay for illness,” Redfield said, adding: “As long as you’re sick, the system works. We need to flip the switch … so that we pay for wellness.”
One of the “root causes” of the public health crisis is that doctors are “at the bottom of the treatment pyramid,” Johnson said.
Doctors “should be at the top,” he said, but are being “crushed by the agencies” in a third-party payer system in America.
I don’t want to fly anymore because I don’t trust that they are hiring the best at Boeing, The FAA, Air Traffic Controllers, the Airline Pilots or any aspect of travel.
I want the best pilot and an airplane that stays in the air with all of it’s parts. I don’t want some ATC to ram 2 jets together because they can’t read a radar screen.
American just lost and has to get rid of DEI, but the remnants are there. Hire on talent and ability, not on quota and skin color
American Airlines (AA) will no longer be recruiting and hiring based on the dictates of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies. The company admitted that the policy is a violation of federal laws that protect equal access to employment, America First Legal announced Tuesday.
So then why did they do it in the first place? Did they think leftist priorities were immune to federal laws?
The US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) informed America First Legal about the decision. “American companies must return to using merit—not the desire to check a DEI box—to select the most skilled and qualified employees. American Airlines’ agreement with the OFCCP is AFL’s latest victory in our fight to put illegal discrimination on the no-fly list,” said Will Scolinos, America First Legal Counsel.
Wow. Who would have guessed that hiring based on merit rather than skin color is the moral way to go?
Question: Are they stopping this racist hiring practice because they suddenly realized how evil it was? Or are they just doing it because they got caught?
The decision came as a result of a complaint filed by AFL against AA with the OFCCP, which accused the company of not complying with federal law even though the airline does a massive amount of business with the federal government and has been the beneficiary of $140 million in federal contracts since 2008. In order to qualify for those contracts, AA had to promise to adhere to the Executive Order 11246 that prohibits discrimination in hiring, promotion, or employee training based of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It has failed to do so and has embraced discrimination based on race and sex in its hiring practices, Cadet Academy program and promotional activity.
Additionally, given that air travel is a huge deal, how could they have thought box-checking was the best way to hire people? Sounds like someone who was hired by checking a box made this policy the status quo.
It’s unclear how leftist corporations can get away with breaking such laws; if the roles were reversed and a certain skin color they do not prioritize was uplifted, they would never let it go. And while both are equally immoral, only one barely gets a slap on the wrist when the act is committed. And to say these people have double standards would be an understatement.
To begin with, it’s a Marxist idea and very few ideologies in history have killed more people than Marxism.
Specifically, this is what is happening.
I’m old enough to remember when health insurance was affordable. It wasn’t all that long ago; it was before Obamacare passed. Despite being officially called the Affordable Care Act, nothing about it has made health insurance more affordable. The question is, for the higher premiums and larger deductibles we have, are we even getting better coverage? The answer, which shouldn’t shock you, is a big fat “no.”
That’s right, despite paying more, you are also getting less. Health insurance denials and delays have hit record highs, and while many point the finger at insurance companies, accusing them of prioritizing profits over care, they’re not to blame. As Betsy McCaughey points out, the real culprits are the politicians who sold us Obamacare on a pile of lies.
“In 2013, before Affordable Care Act regulations kicked in, insurers denied roughly 1.5% of claims, according to the American Medical Association,” McCaughey points out. “But under ACA rules, denials increased tenfold. Now nearly 15% of claims are denied,” and some insurers are denying a third or more of claims.
Doctors and patients aren’t just battling denials — they’re also tangled in a bureaucratic nightmare of preauthorizations. As McCaughey notes, these delays force doctors to get insurer approval before providing care. And here’s the kicker: the person giving the green light is often unqualified to make those decisions. The AMA warns that an OB-GYN might be the one overriding your neurosurgeon’s recommended treatment.
And the consequences can be deadly.
McCaughey cites the example of a doctor who had a patient with metastatic breast cancer who needed a specific drug combination. But thanks to prior authorization delays, she had to settle for standard chemotherapy, which failed, and the patient died.
Obamacare is killing people.
It’s not just anecdotes. A House Committee on Energy and Commerce investigation found that Cigna overturned 80% of its Medicare Advantage preapproval denials upon appeal, proving that legitimate care is being withheld. And, as McCaughey reports, Cigna’s algorithm, PxDx, denies authorizations in bulk without considering individual cases.
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. That and everything else that came out of his mouth was an effing lie.
They found 3 people frozen in tents last weekend. FEMA is an agency the DOGE should eliminate. Samaritan’s Purse did more for the people than they did
The last time we checked on North Carolina, it dealt with the after-effects of the deadliest tropical storm in the state’s history – Hurricane Helene.
Much has happened in the nation and the world since then, but I thought doing a status check would be worthwhile.
Recovery efforts are ongoing, but many challenges remain. As we approach Christmas, the state is grappling with how to fund $53 billion worth of repairs to recover from the storm damage.
North Carolina expects the federal government and other private sector funding to provide about $19.9 billion in financial assistance, leaving over $30 billion in damages still uncovered.
On Oct. 9, North Carolina lawmakers passed a $273 million relief bill and a subsequent $604 million package that N.C. Gov. Roy Cooper signed into law Oct. 25. Legislators promised these packages would represent only the first steps toward disaster relief for North Carolinians suffering from the effects of Helene.
But as the immediate impacts of the storm fade, the ongoing recovery efforts have been met with political and financial struggles.
…According to Pryor Gibson, now-interim chief operating officer, the [North Carolina Office of Recovery and Resiliency (NCORR)] needs at least $40 million for each of the next three months to fund its projects. Without these funds, NCORR may not have the ability to continue supporting rebuilding efforts in still-recovering areas throughout the state.
Recently, a spokesperson for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, apologized for the agency failing to deliver dozens of travel trailers and manufactured homes to North Carolina residents displaced by Hurricane Helene. The “apology” came in response to Charlotte station WBTV grilling the representative about the lack of trailers being delivered to impacted families.
Our questions came after a FEMA spokesperson told WBTV the week of Thanksgiving that the agency would deliver a total of 103 temporary travel trailers and manufactured homes to families in North Carolina by the end of that week. At the time, FEMA had delivered 27 homes.
By Wednesday, Dec. 4, FEMA had still only delivered 46 homes — well short of the number of promised temporary homes.
WBTV learned that more than 500 families have been approved for a FEMA travel trailer or manufactured home in the wake of Helene. The agency’s slow deployment of the homes means hundreds of families are weathering the snow and freezing temperatures currently hitting the North Carolina mountains.
Despite that, a FEMA spokesperson initially struck an upbeat tune in an interview with WBTV on Nov. 26. The spokesperson then doubled down on a promise to deliver homes to the more than 500 families who have requested one.
“There could be 500 of these eventually given out?” a WBTV reporter asked.
“Here’s the beautiful part about it, the answer is ‘yes,’ and we’ve done even more. So we can handle it,” said FEMA Media Relations Specialist La-Tanga Hopes.
One suspects the agency’s response will be more robust after January 20th. Let’s hope the good people of North Carolina can hold out by relying on their neighbors.
As temperatures begin to drop for the season, residents told Bender that there are still people in need of a warm place to sleep.
Jenica Grooms owns a local auto body shop. But since Helene, she said she has shifted her focus to building temporary climate-controlled homes for people who are displaced.
“There has been a lack of temporary housing. There’s not a lot of places for people to go. Their hotel vouchers are running out. So our goal is to place these on people’s property.”
They come for the free money, housing and food. Biden has shipped them in and shipped them around the US. All the while, Hurricane Helene victims are freezing to death while FEMA does nothing.
In Europe, they suck off of the hind teat of socialism. Free money for being there, except for the legal residents who foot the bill
Germany’s Christian Democrat Union (CDU) candidate for chancellor Friedrich Merz says that Germany cannot accept more Syrians from Syria and that those Syrians who are not integrated should return to Syria.
Notably, Merz is pointing to the sky-high levels of unemployment among many of the country’s Syrian population. The chancellor candidate, during an appearance on ARD, said the “one-third” who “work and are integrated” in Germany can stay, “but the two-thirds do not work, they are overwhelmingly young men, many of them can go back, and many must go back.”
He said that a push to return many of these migrants must occur, saying:
“We must now speak very openly with them and say: You have no place in Germany in the long term… We have long been of the opinion that at least people could have returned to the north a long time ago, and now to other parts of the country as well.”
There are currently 1 million Syrians in the country, and those not working have become a major burden for German taxpayers. According to government data, 210,000 are employed, while 250,000 are currently “looking for work.” Another 150,000 are unemployed.
Following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government, there is a European-wide push to return Syrians to their country; however, the ruling German government has expressed caution about the security situation in the country.
The WEF and global government types know they can break down civilizations, customs, traditions and hundreds of years of history by bringing in illegals to ruin the economies and enact the Cloward-Piven strategy.
The shooting of United Healthcare’s CEO, Bryan Thompson, has engrossed the public. The shooting itself was a well-planned and audacious act. But when police apprehended the handsome, Ivy League-educated killer, many were disappointed. They were rooting for him to escape.
The killing has proven more popular than I would have expected. Moreover, this popularity is not confined to the left wing. People across the spectrum have shared their frustrations with the healthcare system and found themselves sympathetic to the killer.
An All-American Murderer
When Luigi Mangione’s background and manifesto were revealed, he appeared to have a good life and a promising future. His social media suggested an intelligent freethinker, whose views and motives were neither clearly left- nor right-wing. He had his first significant encounter with the health system after a serious back injury, and the experience seems to have radicalized him.
His crime is a classic example of “propaganda by the deed.” People who acknowledge intellectually that murder is wrong seem totally unemotional about that conclusion. There’s widespread support for the shooter, while the victim has been dehumanized and reduced to a symbolic avatar for the industry and its sins.
Almost everyone has some story of being abused by the modern health insurance system. It’s even worse for the self-employed, who pay out of pocket for insurance. After paying premiums for years, the injured find themselves in a Kafkaesque battle with their insurance company over coverage, copays, and approved care.
The False Promise of Obamacare
It was not supposed to be this way.
Obamacare was supposed to provide universal coverage and make health care more affordable. After all, the law was called the Affordable Care Act. When the Obama administration proposed the law in 2009, it made many promises to sell it to the public and Congress.
One of the more famous ones was that “if you like your doctor, you can keep him.” Another was that if you like your insurance, you can keep that too. Finally, we were told this law would make us all healthier, as uninsured people would no longer wait until health problems became catastrophic before seeking care, typically in the emergency room.
This was the signature initiative of the Obama presidency, and the law has done none of these things. Care has become significantly more expensive. The quality of care has also gone down, with out-of-pocket expenses rising because of higher deductibles and out-of-pocket limits. Doctors are frequently dropped from plans, leaving patients unable to maintain continuity of care with those whom they have come to trust.
The country has not gotten any healthier, in spite of the enormous amount of money changing hands. The complexity of Obamacare has also led to the proliferation of highly paid billing specialists, administrators, and other overhead, none of which contributes directly to better care, but all of it costs money.
That MF looked right into the camera and lied to us. It’s what Marxists do. I’ve seen in the UK, EU and Canada that socialized or Government run healthcare just means less quality, longer waits for worse coverage and care. Obama only lied to the believers in him. I knew almost everything he said was a lie
Maybe we can stop Marxists like Obama and Kenji Brown from destroying America based on their free ride.
After the Supreme Court’s decision to axe unfair, DEI-driven, race-based admissions, some law schools are seeing a sharp decline in black and Hispanic students. The steepest drop is happening at Harvard. The so-called “pinnacle of excellence” sacrificed its reputation to prop up the left’s DEI charity agenda. Now, thanks to the Supreme Court, Harvard will be forced to admit students based on merit, not skin color—which is a win for everyone. After all, no one should want a handout they didn’t earn.
However, not everyone sees it that way. The folks over at The New York Times are tied up in knots over the decline in racist school admissions. Apparently, they’d rather universities pick students by skin color than by excellence—and they’re perfectly fine watching greatness take a nosedive across business, education, medicine, and beyond. And by the sound of their new article, it seems NYT is terrified there will be fewer Barack Obamas and Ketanji Brown Jacksons in the ranks.
We’ve covered the DEI disaster from every angle, and it all adds up to the same failed equation: your business, country, hospital, or university can’t be the best if you’re hiring subpar candidates just to fill a progressive “guilt quota.” We recently published a fascinating article exposing the truth about DEI Black students at Penn State. It’s a real eye-opener.
Isn’t it ironic how the left touts itself as the champion of fighting “disinformation,” yet they’re the ones silencing the truth and punishing anyone brave enough to speak out? This is especially true when it comes to topics like black crime statistics and DEI students who aren’t cutting the mustard. So, if you dare to talk about real, raw issues, especially involving black students, you’re instantly labeled a “racist,” blacklisted, and shut down. That’s exactly what’s happening to University of Pennsylvania Professor Amy Wax, who dared to discuss the fact that no black students made it into the top quarter of Penn Law School’s class of 2023.
Of all of Professor Amy Wax’s myriad sins against the Woke worldview, the one that seems to have gotten the Penn Law School administration most obsessively angry with her was what she told Brown U. economist Glenn Loury during a 2017 podcast discussing the “downside of affirmative action. According to CNN:
“Here is a very inconvenient fact Glenn, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a black student graduate in the top quarter of the class and rarely, rarely in the top half,” Wax told Brown University professor Glenn Loury in a video of the interview that recently gained attention.
They’ve turned out robots instead of critical thinkers. They are restricting school choice, harming millions of kids. Not one accomplishment on behalf of the students since it was created. The NEA and Teachers Unions are going strong and pay themselves well for incompetence though.
The New York Times reported December 4 that math and science test scores for U.S. fourth and eighth graders have been essentially stagnant since 1995. Nor have they have been stagnant near the top — lots of countries outrank us — but rather in the middling middle. American elementary/middle school students perform behind Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, England, Ireland, and Poland.
“’This is alarming,’” opined a Department of Education commissioner.
Yes, it is, but perhaps not just for the reasons the article identifies.
The spin of the article is that scores are down and American kids have lost significant ground as a result of the pandemic. Author Dana Goldstein says the results corroborate “a large body of research showing significant academic declines since the Covid-19 pandemic began.” “Experts are debating potential causes,” reports Goldstein, including maybe the fact that American public schools were shuttered comparatively longer than in other countries.
Let me argue that spin is far too limited and selective.
While the “experts” debate, American kids continue to move through the public-school industry, advanced perhaps more for social promotion than mastery of skills. Eventually, they’ll hit college where freshman year will be spent in math remediation before they can undertake a required general education math or science course. I know. I worked as an associate dean at a private, tuition-driven Catholic university. One year, a fifth of the freshman class was in math remediation prior to regular college-level math classes.
You can argue the young people shouldn’t be admitted and it’s not a college’s role to make up deficiencies in elementary and secondary schooling. But somebody’s got to do it. These kids relied on what their schools told them, credentialing them with diplomas after going through multiple “proficiency tests” (that more often were “teaching to the test” than teaching). At some point, somebody’s actually got to teach them.
“may have several negative impacts on the local environment and economy”
See the post below about Germany being dumbasses about the same thing. Use gas. It’s cheap and it isn’t killing whales or the environment. Those are lies made up by hypocritical zealots whose religion is green (money, not sustainability like Al Gore and John Kerry).
Drill baby drill and bring down the cost of energy, bringing down the cost of everything else. For those who worship the planet, watch and see that it won’t harm a thing. It will actually be better for everything except their wallets
Everyone knows this has been a boondoggle, even the left, but they’re so committed to supposed ‘green’ energy that they can’t let go.
A government regulator recognizing offshore wind’s destructive environmental effects is as rare as a North Atlantic right whale. But a recent, 600-plus page report from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) admits that the offshore wind development planned for the New York Bight—the triangular area bordered by the New Jersey and Long Island coastlines—may irreversibly harm whales, commercial and recreational fisheries, and seabirds.
The BOEM report is the agency’s first to evaluate the cumulative impacts of offshore wind development. Its authors cite a wide range of potential effects, from negligible (or even beneficial) to major. Acknowledging potentially “major” harms is a radical departure from the agency’s previously accepted Environmental Impact Statements for offshore wind projects, which have always focused on the impacts of individual projects, rather than the cumulative impacts of multiple projects.
The report, which BOEM bills as a “programmatic environmental impact statement,” admits that the proposed offshore wind projects on the New York Bight may have several negative impacts on the local environment and economy. The authors note, for example, that the effect on the North Atlantic right whale could be “major,” defined as having “severe population-level effects” that would “compromise the viability of the species”—in other words, potential extinction. The report also concedes that the projects could have major effects (“substantial disruptions”) on commercial and recreational fishing, which contribute billions of dollars to the New Jersey and New York economies.
While the report discusses the consequences of these wind turbines on ocean views and even on local housing prices, it makes no mention of these projects’ adverse effects on electric ratepayers and economic growth. These effects are substantial, as New Jersey’s experience reveals. The state’s Board of Public Utilities estimated that its two approved offshore wind projects in 2024, with a total capacity of 2,400 MW, would raise the monthly electric bills of a typical residential customer by about $7, a commercial customer by about $59, and an industrial customer by over $500. Those estimated costs, which don’t include what those customers will pay for new transmission lines and the backup generation needed to offset wind’s inherent intermittency, cumulatively amount to more than a $750 million annual increase in electric bills for the state’s 8.5 million electric ratepayers. , based on the numbers of these customers. If the Garden State succeeds in its goal of developing 11,000 megawatts of offshore wind electricity, despite mounting costs and the cancellations of two major in-state projects, ratepayers alone will end up paying an additional $3 billion to $5 billion more each year for their electricity.
What is it with Europe right now. The UK has gone Bats**t crazy and is converting to Islam faster than Iran, not this.
Another wind drought has led to soaring electricity prices across Europe. Norway, which exports power to its European neighbors, has seen enough.
Europe’s electricity prices soared on Thursday amid a wind drought. Source: Alexander Stahel on X.
For the second time in a month, Germany’s electric grid has been hit by a wind drought, known in German as a Dunkelflaute. The lack of wind sent Europe’s electricity prices soaring to their highest levels since the end of 2022, when Europe was in the midst of an energy crisis due to concerns about supplies of Russian gas. That’s saying something since Europe — and Germany in particular — now appears to be amid a permanent energy crisis.
Yesterday, German consumers paid an average of $400 per megawatt-hour for electricity. During peak times, prices in Germany’s wholesale power market came close to $1,000 per MWh, the highest level in 18 years. Here’s how a reporter with Spain’s El Pais newspaper explained the situation:
Dunkelflaute is a cursed word in the German electricity sector. The combination, typical of cold anticyclones, of low temperatures (which increase demand) and the almost total absence of wind (which hinders wind generation) configures one of the worst possible scenarios for the price of electricity: it forces the burning of more gas in combined cycle plants, which are much more expensive, and that substantially increases the bill…The main factor behind this escalation is the lack of wind. While at this time of year Germany’s powerful wind power sector (onshore and offshore) usually averages almost 20 gigawatts (GW) of power, according to data from the specialist portal Montel, thus becoming the country’s main source of electricity, on Wednesday it will just exceed 3 GW. With the cloudy skies, solar photovoltaic power is also operating well below its potential and forces combined cycle plants — in which gas is burned to obtain electricity — to operate at a higher rate than usual, driving up prices.
The wind drought isn’t just hitting Germany. As shown in the graphic at the top of this article, electricity prices across Europe soared amid the wind drought. In response, Norwegian politicians are promising to dismantle the undersea power cables that connect Norway’s grid to mainland Europe to protect Norwegians from Europe’s tumultuous electricity market. Electricity prices in Norway, which gets 90% of its power from hydro, hit record prices this week despite having full hydro reservoirs.
According to the X account of Visegrád 24, a Norwegian news outlet, the two links that connect Norway to Europe will reach their technical lifetimes in 2026 and 2027. The two cables have 9 GW of exchange capacity, of which 5.1 GW connects to Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, and the UK.
Getting fired for some snatch. He hasn’t learned the big red pilled answer. None of them are worth getting fired over. I told a girl who thought she was all that and a bag of chips that there is no golden pussy. There is always some girl that some guy is willing to not screw.
The case involves an Army four-star general who has been fired for improperly trying to rig an Army command screening process so that the general’s favored subordinate, who he happened to have an inappropriate relationship with, got command when she didn’t deserve it.
Army Secretary Christine Wormuth has fired a four-star general — one of just 12 in the entire service — following an investigation into accusations that he attempted to use his position to push a subordinate officer’s promotion forward, Task & Purpose has confirmed.
Gen. Charles Hamilton was relieved as the commander of Army Materiel Command, a position he had been suspended from during the investigation. The probe focused on whether Hamilton tried to pressure Army officials into promoting a lieutenant colonel that he mentored. Task & Purpose is not identifying the lieutenant colonel because there is no evidence she violated any Army policies.
“Based on the findings of a Department of the Army Inspector General investigation, the Secretary of the Army has relieved General Charles Hamilton of command,” the Army said in a statement.
Now, I had the privilege, in the latter years of my 31-year Navy career, as a Navy active duty Captain, to be appointed to about a dozen promotion and command selection boards, which were all held at the Navy Personnel Headquarters in Millington, Tennessee, from about 2002 to 2008. During every one of those boards I never saw one thing that even remotely hinted at undue influence or anything remotely wrong. Keep that in mind as we continue.
And, I would not bring up the race of the two officers involved, but Task & Purpose reported it because it was the General’s key defense in trying to explain away his actions:
In his classic book, Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification, economist Timur Kuran notes how governments, and social movements, do their best to enforce this sort of ideological uniformity. People tend to hide unpopular views to avoid ostracism or punishment; they stop hiding them when they feel safe.
This can produce rapid change: In totalitarian societies like the old Soviet Union, the police and propaganda organizations do their best to enforce preference falsification. Such regimes have little legitimacy, but they spend a lot of effort making sure that citizens don’t realize the extent to which their fellow-citizens dislike the regime. This works until something breaks the spell and the discontented realize that their feelings are widely shared, at which point the collapse of the regime may seem very sudden to outside observers — or even to the citizens themselves. Kuran calls this sudden change a “preference cascade,” and I believe that’s what’s happening here.
In America, the left spent years bullying people into accepting “woke” ideas on race, gender, and politics. There’s considerable reason to believe that a majority of Americans never accepted these ideas, but between constant media repetition, and the risk of being mobbed and canceled if you disagreed with them, most people for years were afraid to stand up.
But two things put a stop to that. One was Donald Trump’s election. The other – and the two are related – was Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter, now X, which is now a free-speech platform with roughly equal representation of Democrats and Republicans. Both had the effect of blowing up the lefty bubble and letting people realize that they, not the woke, were the actual majority.
Let’s start with some of the highlights. First, the FBI IG report acknowledges the presence of multiple CHS’s (informants), some of whom were sent to DC for Jan 6 by the FBI, and some of whom went on their own accord and reported to their handlers in the FBI.
We found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6. We reviewed the documented CHS reporting that the FBI had prior to the riot and breach of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. We determined that three CHSs had been tasked by FBI field offices in the days leading up to the January 6 Electoral Certification, with the required approval of the WFO, to travel to DC for the events of January 6 to report on domestic terrorism subjects who were possibly attending the event. Specifically: One FBI field office tasked a CHS to travel to DC to report on the activities of a predicated domestic terrorism subject who was separately planning to travel to DC for the January 6 Electoral Certification; a second FBI field office tasked a CHS to travel to DC to potentially report on two domestic terrorism (DT) subjects from another FBI field office who were planning to travel to DC for the events of January 6; and a third CHS, who had informed their handling agent that they intended to travel to DC on their own initiative for the events of January 6, was similarly tasked by their field office to potentially report on two DT subjects from other FBI field offices who were planning to travel to DC for the events of January 6. Our review 5 concluded that none of these three FBI CHSs were authorized to enter the Capitol or a restricted area, or to otherwise break the law on January 6, nor was any CHS directed by the FBI to encourage others to commit illegal acts on January 6.
In other words, we see that there were at least three informants who had been tasked directly with following specific targets and informing on their plans in relation to January 6th.
In addition to these three informants who were asked to track specific people well in advance of January 6th, the FBI IG report acknowledges 23 additional informants who traveled to DC on January 6 and reported on the events to their respective FBI handlers:
They are as guilty as the day is long. The crime committed was authored by the FBI to cover up a stolen election. The FBI solves the crimes they commit
My wife’s dumbass relatives in Denmark can’t brag enough to me about their free healthcare, to which I say you pay 70% taxes, so it’s not free. They try to make America into Denmark and what sort of works for 5 million doesn’t translate to 330+ million. They don’t get it because they mostly want to trash the US. Plus, they are socialist and we’re not.
Well, here’s the facts. It doesn’t work, the doctors are crummy, you have to wait for months and you can’t sue for malpractice, which at least 4 of her relatives have received for healthcare and are now injured.
Now this story:
Advocates for “universal health care” love to use Finland as an example of a system that works. That is an absurd comparison. Finland has a culturally homogeneous population of 5.6 million; that is just over half the population of Los Angeles County (9.6 million).
Better examples are England and Canada.
England has government-funded “universal health care” in the form of the National Health Service. The population of England is around 57 million people. Wait times for nonemergency care average 14 to 18 weeks, and thousands of people have been waiting more than 18 months. As of June of this year, 7.5 million Brits were waiting for already scheduled procedures and surgeries requiring hospital stays, more than 300,000 of whom had been waiting for more than a year.
Keep in mind that these scheduled – and delayed – procedures include diagnostic tests and treatments for illnesses like cancer. Shortages of physicians and treatment facilities force cancer patients to wait weeks – or months – for radiation or chemotherapy.
These delays have life-and-death consequences. In 2009, British medical journal Lancet reported that 51.1% of British cancer patients were alive five years after their diagnosis. By contrast, 91.9% of American cancer patients were alive five years after their diagnosis.
England’s problems are not limited to cancer care. Last year, Bloomberg News published a report analyzing the NHS’s own data. The results were shocking. In most areas of England, medical care failed to meet government goals in things as basic as minimum wait times for an ambulance to arrive in an emergency (goal: 30 minutes; reality: up to three hours) or the availability of hospital beds.
In Canada – another country with “universal health care,” the situation is nearly as bad. Canada has a population of nearly 40 million. The average wait time for treatment in Canada for a condition requiring a specialist’s care is more than six months. But in some provinces and for some procedures – like orthopedic surgery or neurosurgery – the wait is closer to a year, or even longer. Canadians face long waits – six weeks to three months – even for simple but vital diagnostic procedures like MRIs, CT scans or ultrasounds.
By contrast, in the United States – a country with 330 million people – the average wait time for a nonemergency appointment with a specialist is only 26 days (a situation that medical journal STAT called “a public health crisis”). The median time between diagnosis of cancer and commencement of treatment is 27 days. The average wait time for an ambulance here is seven minutes.
The red flags used to be tattooed (especially helter-skelter instead of artistic), hair dyed an unnatural color (green, pink, purple), excessive piercings, and cats.
The problem was that some of these girls might actually have been ok (all right, single digits).
Now, there is a 100% test for a girl who is certifiably nuts and you should avoid
I was living there when it happened. We knew she was lying the whole time, but she still ruined the lives of some Duke students. I have no love for Duke, having had to work with their graduates, but I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.
Here goes:
Former stripper and convicted murderer Crystal Mangum admitted Thursday that she lied and “made up a story” that three Duke University lacrosse players raped her at a team party in 2006.
“They trusted me that I wouldn’t betray their trust, and I testified falsely against them by saying that they raped me when they didn’t, and that was wrong,” Magnum told the independent media outlet Let’s Talk With Kat at the North Carolina Correctional Institution for Women.
“[I] made up a story that wasn’t true.”
Mangum, 46, said she made up the allegation because she “wanted validation from people and not from God.”
The exotic dancer, who is in prison for the second-degree murder of her boyfriend in 2013, asked former players David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann for forgiveness.
“I hope that they can forgive me,” she said, referring to the men as her “brothers” in the biblical sense. “I want them to know that I love them, and they didn’t deserve that, and I hope that they can forgive me.”
Mangum had never publicly stated that she fabricated the rape allegation before Thursday’s revelation.
As you likely know, race hoaxes are so common these days, it’s hard to keep up. You know the drill: the media breathlessly reports something like a “burning cross” on the lawn of a Baptist church, hinting that “white nationalists” are at it again. Then, surprise—it turns out some black guy did it because he hates white people.
Rinse and repeat.
The left and their media pals churn out race hoaxes, lies, and twisted stories to keep the “us vs. them” mentality alive and well in America.
The NAACP is getting in on this hoax game, too. They recently got busted trying to peddle this type of nonsense regarding the Daniel Penny not-guilty verdict. It all started when the NAACP responded to an X post by CNN that announced Daniel Penny’s fair and just acquittal – that case should’ve never gone to trial. And of course, instead of doing so professionally, the NAACP did what they do best: they sunk into the gutter, lied, and spread a fake racism hoax.
Thankfully, X’s Community Notes was there to crush the NAACP’s lie, and set the record straight.
Here’s what the NAACP lied about when responding to the CNN post. There were black people on the subway helping to restrain him, and who testified on behalf of Penny during the trial. This had nothing to do with race. It was very clearly a mental health/violence issue.
The left thrives on pushing these phony “race war” narratives. Why? Well, let’s face it, they can’t afford to have black Americans feeling happy, accepted, and successful—because the day that happens, the Democrat Party goes out of business for good.
Even the left’s politicians are getting in on the “race hoax” action.
The truth is, white people just aren’t producing the number of “hate crimes” the left needs, so they have to invent them. It’s a real supply and demand problem, eh?
The left and their media pals churn out race hoaxes, lies, and twisted stories to keep the “us vs. them” mentality alive and well in America.
The NAACP is getting in on this hoax game, too. They recently got busted trying to peddle this type of nonsense regarding the Daniel Penny not-guilty verdict. It all started when the NAACP responded to an X post by CNN that announced Daniel Penny’s fair and just acquittal – that case should’ve never gone to trial. And of course, instead of doing so professionally, the NAACP did what they do best: they sunk into the gutter, lied, and spread a fake racism hoax.
Thankfully, X’s Community Notes was there to crush the NAACP’s lie, and set the record straight.
Here’s what the NAACP lied about when responding to the CNN post. There were black people on the subway helping to restrain him, and who testified on behalf of Penny during the trial. This had nothing to do with race. It was very clearly a mental health/violence issue.
What Obama fears is that Biden might be persuaded to issue a sweeping set of Deep State pardons to a list that would include various top-level Obama administration officials like former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former Attorney General James Comey who potentially could be forced to provide damaging criminal testimony against him.
A presidential pardon does not waive a person’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination for future crimes. But a person accepting a pardon (including Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and Hunter Biden, or anyone else so pardoned) can be forced to testify truthfully about the pardoned crimes since they are no longer at risk of prosecution under federal law. Once pardoned, the Fifth Amendment privilege does not apply to giving testimony against others for the pardoned crimes since the pardoned individual no longer needs Fifth Amendment protection from a self-incrimination risk that is no longer relevant.
In other words, just to be clear, please understand that by accepting a pardon, a person has admitted guilt to the pardoned crime, a precedent the Supreme Court established in 1915’s Burdick v. United States. This fact, without any other evidence, gives the DOJ and the FBI a probative cause to start a new investigation by interviewing and interrogating the pardoned person under oath. All a DOJ or FBI official would have to do is to put a piece of paper in front of the pardoned person and ask that person to enumerate all crimes committed, plus requiring the pardoned person to give the names and details of all criminal accomplices involved.
That’s right, we get find out everything they did and who they are. They are going to get away with anyway, they already did. This is a pre-emptive strike for next time
While the 78-year-old made it clear he doesn’t believe his wife did “anything wrong,” he suggested if members of Trump’s administration were “determined” to “make” up a crime, it could probably be done.
During the 2016 election cycle, former secretary of state found herself in hot water after she was accused of using a private server to send classified correspondences. However, Bill pointed out Hillary had been cleared of any wrongdoing.
“She followed the rules exactly as they were written,” he said on the Wednesday, December 11, installment of The View. “Remember how the emails were such a big issue in 2016? Trump’s State Department found that Hillary sent and received exactly zero classified emails on her personal device.”
Bill claimed the scandal was nothing more than a “made-up phony story.”
The Clintons are dripping with crime, as are a lot of others like ex-FBI, DOJ, Eric Holder, the Obama’s, Liz Cheney, Schiff, Nadler, Maxine Waters, Fauci and a long list of others.
FBI Director Chris Wray will resign at the end of the Biden administration, the agency said Wednesday, as it became clear he would be forced out by President-elect Donald Trump.
Trump, who originally nominated Wray after firing the previous FBI director, previously announced he will nominate Kash Patel for the role, although Wray still had three years remaining on his 10-year term. Patel has been meeting with senators to build support for a confirmation vote next year.
Wray had wrestled with whether or not to resign given Trump’s stated desire to replace him, sources say, and wants to facilitate an orderly transition. But some in the FBI worried his departure would normalize Trump’s penchant for replacing FBI directors he doesn’t like, as the position is supposed to straddle administrations and be insulated from politics.
Wray took the helm of the agency after Trump fired Director James Comey following investigations under his watch into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Wray took office after Comey, whose FBI also investigated Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, left the bureau in May 2017.
As the incoming director, Wray was seen by many lawmakers as a solid choice to stabilize a rocky ship, but he ultimately suffered a similar fate as his predecessor, after he too oversaw an FBI that investigated Trump, probes resulting in two separate federal cases against the former president.
“Electricity bills in New England are poised to experience a sharp increase driven by the clean energy mandates in five of the six states, which require duplicative, overbuilt renewable energy.”
Connecticut ratepayers suffered sticker shock this summer when they opened their July electric bills. While their energy consumption was relatively flat, the “public benefits” component doubled for some and tripled for others. The culprit was not hard to find given a legislative requirement for utilities to itemize the cost components of monthly bills.
“Public benefits” cover the cost of subsidies the state provides for low-income electricity customers and energy-efficiency programs. They also include solar, electric vehicle, and other renewable energy incentives.
The wide array of renewable energy subsidies and aid to low-income residents who cannot afford high-cost electricity, growing everywhere, is an increasing cost burden for power users in the Northeast.
Connecticut: Worst of the Worst
The Northeast has become the most expensive region in the continental United States for electricity. Connecticut has the most expensive electricity in the 50 states outside of Hawaii. Connecticut’s overall electricity price for this September, according to the Energy Information Administration, was 27.08 cents per kilowatt-hour (ȼ/kWh), compared to Hawaii’s 35.46 ȼ/kWh.
When I worked in sustainability at IBM (a joke in itself there), the Northeast was the most smug and misguided about the whole energy/carbon/climate issue. Never have I seen so many smart people (inside and analysts paid by IBM) get an issue so wrong because of ideology.
Well, take your smugness to the electric company and out of your bank account.
Gas is cheap and efficient. It’s not the bogeyman that you made it out to be. You picked your poison, now drink it.
This writer regrets to inform you that leftists and Democrats were actually right.
Rampant racism and deeply embedded bigotry are alive and thriving in this country. The left has been tragically correct on this matter.
They just haven’t been particularly forthcoming about where all that racism and bigotry is coming from.
Spoiler alert: The call is coming from inside the house.
Soon-to-be former Democratic New York Rep. Jamaal Bowman — perhaps best known as an emasculated member of the progressive and anti-Semitic “squad” and/or Captain Fire Alarm and/or the jabroni who lost “the most expensive primary race ever” — took to the social media platform X on Tuesday to launch a vile (and yes, very racist) screed against white people.
Full disclosure: Not sure if you could tell by my last name, but I’m not white, so Bowman’s attack isn’t even directed at me. I still find it utterly abhorrent.
“Dear White People,” the defeated representative began. “I don’t know why I feel the need to keep talking to you. I don’t know why part of me still has hope for you and for us.
“Some of you are too far gone. But maybe enough of you aren’t and will join us in fighting to end white supremacy.”
“White supremacy,” you say? Surely Bowman has some concrete examples of this.
To give you an idea of Bowman’s room temperature IQ, his first example was immediately slapped with a Community Note:
go read it for yourself. It just goes to show you that if you discriminate based on skin color, any color, you are a racist
Fox News host Harris Faulkner (who is black) called out Black Lives Matter (BLM) and left-wing rhetoric that claims America “hates black people” on Monday, after Daniel Penny was found not guilty.
A Manhattan jury acquitted Penny, a 26-year-old former Marine, of criminally negligent homicide in connection with the death of 30-year-old homeless man Jordan Neely. On “The Faulkner Focus,” the host began by noting that BLM leaders were outside the courthouse following the verdict, advocating for “black vigilantes” to avenge Neely’s death.
“We don’t know what the road home would have been like right after this, but I’m sure they get some protection for some period of time during the trial. But you go back to your life and you’re part of that community that potentially is going to jump on the subway in the next few days and how can you – just think about that. There are threats outside to take people out because this hinged on race suddenly, like suddenly this hinged on race. Black Lives Matter group getting together and saying, ‘If you do this you’ — what did the woman say?” Faulkner asked. “She said, ‘America hates black people.’ I mean that was so far afield from what we’re watching here I can’t even imagine how we got there.”
“When you say that you want to burn stuff that affects everybody, and you’re gonna hinge because you think people who have my skin color are so hated in America that you [have to] set New York on fire? That puts everybody in victim mode,” Faulkner continued. “I mean how is that even tolerated? Where is Alvin Bragg? He should come out on the steps of the courthouse right now and say, ‘You will be protected. Justice has been adjudicated in this building so you will not riot tonight. We will come after people who do.’ Like where is his voice?”
An Arab Muslim woman who sued the prominent law firm Foley & Lardner for revoking its job offer over her anti-Israel activism just had part of her case dismissed by an Illinois federal court.
Georgetown Law School grad Jinan Chehade claims the firm’s director of diversity and inclusion promised her they “valued and supported” her Arab Muslim heritage—a promise she says she relied on when she accepted a job there.
But U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman, an Obama appointee, ruled that those assurances didn’t amount to an “unambiguous promise” that her job offer would not be rescinded over her pro-Palestinian activism.
Chehade had worked as a summer clerk at Foley in 2023 and was to begin as a full-time associate at the firm’s Chicago office in late October. In the interim, and following the October 7th attacks on Israel, she began speaking out against the Jewish state on her social media accounts and at an October 11th Chicago City Hall meeting.
Chehade appeared at the meeting wrapped in a keffiyeh to oppose a resolution condemning the Hamas massacre. Though “the Western Zionist-controlled media machine would have you believe” it was an unprovoked attack, she raged, Hamas’s murderous rampage was justified: it was their “legal right” and a “natural response” to “75 years of occupation” by Israel’s “apartheid regime”:
He’s got enough Fentanyl in him to kill a horse. Let’s not overlook the Meth. He was a criminal committing a crime, not a hero.
They just needed a victim to set up the money laundering by a Marxist group. Who else is Marxist? Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, and other mass murderers in history who stole governments, laundered money, and tried to take down Western Civilization starting with God, the family, free speech, and private property.
What did BLM do with the money? Bought houses, cars and bling. They started no groups or agencies that actually helped blacks get on their feet.
An OnlyFans porn star broke down in tears after sleeping with 100 men in a single day in order to gain social media clout.
Actually 101.
Lily Phillips thought that having sex with so many men would catapult her to viral fame, and it did briefly, but she’s now counting the cost.
In a documentary made by YouTuber Josh Pieters titled I Slept With 100 Men in One Day, Pieters almost vomits at the sight of a bedroom littered with lube, used condoms, wrappers and tissues after Phillips had spent a nauseating 14 hours fornicating.
By the time the 30th man rocked up, the porn star said she began to “disassociate,” remarking, “It’s not like normal sex. I can only think of five, six, 10 guys that I remember and that’s it. It’s weird.”
Phillips said she began to feel “robotic,” but ‘felt bad’ about not giving every man at least the promised five minutes.
“When I started making this documentary, I wasn’t too sure of what to expect, I certainly didn’t expect to see Lily so upset at the end of it all,” said Pieters, as Phillips goes to hug her friend while sobbing.
I’m just glad that I found out she was sleeping around after I broke up with her, and that I didn’t catch anything. I’m glad I got out when I did, just not soon enough.
Top Kamala Harris Staffer Admits What We Knew All Along
Kamala Harris’s deputy campaign manager, Rob Flaherty, admitted at a Harvard politics event Dec. 6 that the Democratic Party’s media outreach strategy is not only failing but failing miserably.
During a panel discussion at the school’s Institute of Politics, Flaherty lamented his party and campaign’s failure to find voters who are not paying attention to corporate networks — CNN and MSNBC — and Hollywood A-listers from Diddy’s orbit. He also made an interesting comment about the Democratic Party being the “party of institutions,” which I think is true. The Democrats have become the staunch defenders of the status quo, whereas the Republican Party, under the leadership of President-elect Donald Trump, has become an insurgent force of change in the capital.
They don’t live in the real world and really don’t know anything. Actors pretend for a living and the press are just people that try to sell advertising by sensationalism. They are shallow, vain and will sell you out in a second
Months before police identified Luigi Mangione as the man they suspect gunned down a top health insurance CEO and then seemingly vanished from Midtown Manhattan, another disappearing act worried his friends and family.
The 26-year-old scion of a wealthy Baltimore family who was a high school valedictorian and an Ivy League graduate, Mangione had maintained an active social media presence for years, posting smiling photos from his travels, sharing his weightlifting routine and discussing health challenges he faced.
He publicly kept track of nearly 300 books he had read or wanted to read, even posting a favorable review of the Unabomber manifesto on a book website.
story
Those institutions of indoctrination turn out losers. He’s just one in a line of many. I’m not saying they are murderers, but they are losers each in their own way.
Look at the last line before the story link. It says that the BLM activist racists are trained Marxists. The worst type of person we could have right now. (Look up Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot, Obama)
Black Lives Matter leader Hawk Newsome called for “black vigilantes” to descend into major cities Monday to retaliate against 26-year-old former Marine Daniel Penny’s acquittal over the death of Jordan Neely.
A Manhattan jury found Penny not guilty of criminally negligent homicide after he held 30-year-old homeless man Neely in a chokehold to protect surrounding passengers on a New York City subway train in May 2023. Newsome called on “black vigilantes” to avenge Neely’s death and fight against white people who allegedly want to “choke” and “kill” black people for “being loud.”
“Like everybody else has vigilantes, we need some black vigilantes,” Newsome said. “People want to jump up and choke us and kill us for being loud, how about we do the same when they attempt to oppress us? I’m tired. I know you’re looking for us to be like, ‘Oh, go and march. Go and march.’ No, this weekend, I want you to hold a community event, everywhere from the Bronx, to Houston, to Seattle, to Florida. Black people hold community events and talk about what you need.”
Passengers who witnessed the incident said Neely behaved in an erratic and threatening manner by screaming at commuters, throwing his jacket on the ground, and saying that he did not care if he went to jail. Penny then came up from behind Neely and held him in a chokehold for about 15 minutes, where Neely eventually lost consciousness and was pronounced dead.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Braggcharged Penny after a medical examiner ruled Neely’s death a homicide in May 2023. The manslaughter charge, which was dismissed prior to the jury’s verdict, came with a potential 15-year prison sentence, while the negligent homicide charge comes with a maximum four-year sentence.
Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy said during a Monday Fox News segment that the jury was in a “deadlock,” likely due to many jurors buying into Bragg’s alleged “racialized” narrative of the incident.
Protesters supporting Neely gathered outside the courtroom prior to and following the verdict, chanting, “No justice, no peace,” and warning that the public “will hear [them] tonight.”
BLM executives have publicly identified themselves as “trained Marxist[s],” including co-founder Patrisse Cullors, who confirmed in 2020 that she and her fellow organizers are Marxist ideologues
At the center of it is the race hustle – a hustle being the attempt to get something for nothing – in this sense, seeking respect and approbation for people engaged in uncivilized behavior.
It kicked off in 2012 when one Trayvon Martin, 17, got shot while bashing the head of a neighborhood watch coordinator, George Zimmerman, against the pavement in Sanford, Florida. The news media dishonestly portrayed Martin as a skittle-munching child when police reported him as six-feet-tall. Zimmerman, five-foot-eight, was eventually acquitted of all charges on grounds of self-defense. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement was born.
Next up in 2014 was Michael Brown, 18, in Ferguson, Missouri. After robbing a convenience store, Brown was stopped on the street by Police Officer Darren Wilson. According to Wilson’s account, Brown reached into his patrol car trying to seize his gun. Brown’s DNA was later found on Wilson’s gun, and Brown’s blood was detected on the car’s door, suggesting a struggle. Following the incident, riots, arson, and looting broke out in Ferguson for days after. A local grand jury declined to indict Officer Wilson, and he was eventually exonerated of civil rights violations when investigated by the US Department of Justice. The case amplified the Black Lives Matter (movement.
Other incidents followed in 2014: one Eric Garner, 43, was stopped in Staten Island for selling individual cigarettes on the street. Garner resisted arrest and was put in a choke hold. He repeatedly said, “I can’t breathe,” before dying of an asthma attack. In November, same year, Tamir Rice, 12, was brandishing a toy gun that looked like a real firearm in a Cleveland, Ohio, park, when police trainee Timothy Loehmann responded to a 911 call and shot the boy. A Cuyahoga County grand jury declined to indict Loehmann. The city of Cleveland settled $6-million with the Rice family in a wrongful death suit.
In May, 2020, George Floyd, 46, a released felon, resisted arrest after trying to pass a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill in Minneapolis. Officer Derek Chauvin eventually subdued Floyd with a restraint, knee-on-back, recommended by the city police department’s training guide. Floyd died at the scene with 11 ng/mL of fentanyl, 19 ng/mL of methamphetamine, and cannabinoids detected in his blood at autopsy, plus heart disease and hypertension. Officer Chauvin was convicted on several counts of murder and manslaughter and three other officers at the scene also went to jail on lesser charges. Riots, arson, looting, and murder ensued in Minneapolis and many other American cities. Statues of George Floyd were erected around the country and the city of Minneapolis settled a wrongful death suit for $27-million with the Floyd family.
Penny was saving people being threatened by a drug induced criminal. This was not a White on Black issue. What if the schizophrenic was a white dude or an Asian and Penny choked him out?
No, some people see things through the color of race making it impossible to stamp out racism.
I’m at the point where if it’s a deep subject or means something, I can go deep and listen and discuss until the subject is exhausted.
When I hear about shopping, what other people said, and the various examples of small talk, not only do I tune out, my social battery starts draining immediately.
Other introverts will relate to this one. It’s when the extroverts get going and talking is sort of a competition, where they wait for a break so that they can get in their point or part of the story that may or may not have anything relevant to what is being discussed.
Pathological talkers are like that. They wake up and their mouth starts going. I literally hide in my own house sometimes to make it stop
I couldn’t agree with this writing more. It’s happening to me and I even crave it now. For example, I celebrate every time I miss another high school reunion. The 50th is next year for me and there is nothing or nobody that could drag me back to see people that I left behind decades ago. (see the last section).
I’ve got family within driving distance and I don’t text or call for fear that there might be a get-together that I’d have to suffer through. There just isn’t enough there for me to want to suffer through that anymore.
We all become more introverted as we get older, even the most extroverted among us.
I’m a classic introvert, but in my teens and twenties, it was normal for me to spend almost every weekend with friends. Now, in my thirties, the perfect weekend is one with zero social plans.
And I’m not the only one socializing less these days. My extroverted friend, for example, used to run through her entire contact list, calling friends whenever she was alone in the car. She told me she hated the quiet, the emptiness, because being alone felt boring.
You know, for the whole 10–15 minutes it took to drive to the grocery store. Oh, the horror.
These days, I can rarely get her out for brunch or coffee. She’s content spending most nights at home with her husband and two kids. And I haven’t gotten one of her infamous calls in years.
So, what gives? Do we get more introverted as we get older?
In a post on Quiet Revolution, Susan Cain confirmed my suspicions: We tend to act more introverted as we get older. Psychologists call this “intrinsic maturation.” It means our personalities become more balanced, “like a kind of fine wine that mellows with age,” writes Cain.
Research also shows that our personalities do indeed change over time — and usually for the better. For instance, we become more emotionally stable, agreeable, and conscientious as we grow, with the largest change in agreeableness happening during our thirties and continuing to improve into our sixties. “Agreeableness” is one of the traits measured by the Big Five personality scale, and people high in this trait are warm, friendly, and optimistic.
We also become quieter and more self-contained, needing less “people time” and excitement to feel a sense of happiness.
Psychologists have observed intrinsic maturation in people worldwide, from Germany to the UK, Spain, the Czech Republic, and Turkey. And it’s not just humans; they’ve observed it in chimps and monkeys, too.
This shift is why we slow down as we get older and begin enjoying a quieter, calmer life — and yes, it happens to both introverts and extroverts.
Becoming More Introverted Is a Good Thing
From an evolutionary standpoint, becoming more introverted as we age makes sense — and it’s probably a good thing.
“High levels of extroversion probably help with mating, which is why most of us are at our most sociable during our teenage and young adult years,” writes Susan Cain.
In other words, being more extroverted when you’re young might help you form important social connections and, ultimately, find a life partner. (Cue the flashbacks to awkward high school dances and “welcome week” in college.)
Then, at least in theory, by the time we reach our 30s, we’ve committed to a life path and a long-term relationship. We may have kids, a job, a spouse, and a mortgage — our lives are stable. So it becomes less important to constantly branch out in new directions and meet new people.
(Note that I said “in theory.” In my 30s, I still don’t have kids, a mortgage, or a wedding ring. These days, we have the luxury of not following evolution’s “script.”)
“If the task of the first half of life is to put yourself out there, the task of the second half is to make sense of where you’ve been,” explains Cain.
During the married-with-children years, think of how difficult it would be to raise a family and nurture close relationships if you were constantly popping into the next party. Even if you don’t marry or have kids, it would be hard to focus on your career, health, and life goals if you were always hanging out with friends like you did in your teens and twenties.
Once an Introvert, Always an Introvert
But there’s a catch: Our personalities only change so much.
In my book, The Secret Lives of Introverts, I like to say that our personalities may evolve, but our temperaments remain constant.
This means that if you’re an introvert, you’ll always be an introvert, even at 90. And if you’re an extrovert — though you may slow down with age — you’ll always be an extrovert.
I’m talking big-picture here: who you are at your core.
Research supports this idea. In 2004, Harvard psychologists Jerome Kagan and Nancy Snidman studied individuals from infancy into adulthood. In one study, they exposed babies to unfamiliar stimuli and recorded their reactions. Some babies got upset, crying and flailing their arms and legs; these were labeled “highly reactive” to their environment.
Other babies remained calm around the new stimuli; they were the “low-reactive” ones.
When Kagan and Snidman checked in with these individuals later, they found that the “highly reactive” babies often grew up to be more cautious and reserved, while the “low-reactive” babies tended to stay sociable and daring as adults.
The bottom line? Our core temperament — whether cautious or sociable, introverted or extroverted — doesn’t change dramatically with age.
An Example: Your High School Reunion
Consider, for instance, your high school reunion.
Let’s say you were very introverted in high school — perhaps the third-most introverted person in your graduating class. Over the years, you’ve grown more confident, agreeable, and comfortable in your own skin, but you’ve also become a bit more introverted. If you enjoyed hanging out with friends once a week in high school, maybe now in your thirties, you’re content with seeing them only once a month.
At your ten-year high school reunion, you notice everyone has slowed down a bit, enjoying a calmer, more stable life. But those who were very extroverted in high school are still much more extroverted than you.
You’re still approximately the third-most introverted person in your class — but now the whole group has shifted slightly toward the introverted side.
And that’s not a bad thing. In fact, it might be exactly what we need to flourish as adults. If there’s one thing we introverts understand, it’s the deep satisfaction of a quiet life.
Have you found yourself becoming more introverted as you’ve gotten older? Let me know in the comments below.
Woke, BLM, Muslim, Democrat, Illegal and Boston. I didn’t even include her breaking the law.
Boston City Councilor Tania Fernandes Anderson, a Democrat and the first Muslim elected to the council, was arrested on Friday by FBI agents.
Tania Fernandes Anderson, who served as Vice Chair of the Post Audit Committee, which oversees government accountability, was arrested on six felony charges (five counts of wire fraud and one count of theft concerning programs receiving federal funds) stemming from a kickback scheme.
“The charges stem from an alleged kickback scheme she orchestrated to obtain several thousand dollars in taxpayer money in exchange for bribes paid,” U.S. Attorney Joshua Levy said at Friday’s press conference, according to NBC Boston.
According to the indictment, Fernandes Anderson allegedly awarded a $13,000 bonus to a staffer, identified as “Staff Member A,” who is also a relative, on the condition that the staffer return a significant portion of the bonus—approximately $7,000—directly to her.
Anderson allegedly finalized the cash transaction in a bathroom at City Hall, receiving $7,000 in kickbacks from Staff Member A, as detailed by text message evidence included in the indictment.
My wife’s idiot niece Marian posted on Facebook that Elizabeth Warren is the bomb. I can pretty much count on her being on the wrong side of everything good for America. Here’s proof.
President Biden has overseen nearly four years of a two-tiered justice system, as his pardoning of Hunter Biden and the political persecutions of then-candidate Donald Trump make all too clear.
But there have been quieter attacks on justice, like “debanking” — and few people realize they could be the next victims because they are a “politically exposed person,” that is someone who disagrees with the liberal status quo.
Debanking is a kind of financial blackballing that has appeared within just the last 20 years.
It started under then-President Barack Obama as a war to punish those seen as political enemies, like firearm manufacturers. Government documents unsealed at the end of 2020 proved that the federal government used its regulatory authority over financial markets to attack political opponents.
Government regulators essentially make it impossible for certain people or businesses to make online transactions, or to have a bank account or a credit card.
…
The debanking scourge under President Biden has hit the crypto world particularly hard. The Securities and Exchange Commission has unleashed a plague of investigations, some real and some merely threatened, to force innovators and investors out of that space.
Dozens of tech and crypto founders have been debanked under Biden, and their inventions smothered.
On Joe Rogan‘s podcast, venture capitalist Marc Andreessen blamed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a group set up at the behest of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to go after crypto firms in particular.
“Basically every crypto founder, every crypto startup, either got debanked personally and forced out of the industry, or their company got debanked,” Andreessen said.
Their findings further verified theories about gain-of-function research in China and the lab leak theory; exposed waste, fraud, and abuse of COVID relief funding; revealed how federal and state agencies, including the CDC and NIH, enforced pointless, unscientific recommendations that damaged our country’s health and economy; and highlighted how the government “ignore[d] natural immunity” and mandated the ineffective COVID vaccine while it “failed to properly inform the public about vaccine injuries” and is still failing to provide compensation for the vaccine-injured.
The report also highlights how New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his Administration “worked to cover up the tragic aftermath of their policy decisions in an apparent effort to shield themselves from accountability” after forcing nursing homes to accept COVID-19-positive patients.
Joe Rogan reacted to the bombshell report with Canadian YouTuber and More Plates More Dates host Derek Munro, noting that the committee “basically said all the conspiracy theorists were correct.” He then slammed leftist MSNBC hack Rachel Maddow for helping to cover up the truth about the virus.
It can be recalled that Rogan came under intense scrutiny from the radical left and the fake news for questioning the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine and taking Ivermectin to treat his case of COVID.
WATCH:
Rogan: The House released a 500-page report on COVID-19 pandemic key findings: COVID-19 likely originated from a lab-related incident in Wuhan, China. Crazy! You get banned from YouTube for saying that, banned.
Over $200 billion in relief funds lost to fraud, with criminals exploiting weak oversight. Prolonged lockdowns and arbitrary mandates caused severe harm, economic devastation, mental health crises, and historic learning loss while lacking robust scientific support. Policies ignored natural immunity, pushing mandates that eroded trust and harmed public perception of science. Absolutely. WHO and CDC compromised by political interference, offering inconsistent, unscientific guidance that fueled public distrust, and the key players included federal agencies. And Cuomo’s administration actively obstructed oversight efforts and hid critical evidence.
Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic basically said all the conspiracy theorists were correct, every single one of them. No repercussions, no retractions, no apology from Rachel Maddow, none of it.
In addition to the House report, The Gateway Pundit reported that in another bombshell legal win, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in a high-profile case brought by the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT).
The decision mandates the FDA to release the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) file for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine no later than June 30, 2025.
They should have done nothing, prescribed ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine and nothing would have happened. Instead, they used it to cover up a stolen election and the would be 46th president is now the 47th.
We now can’t trust the government on healthcare, nor any of the agency’s recommendations.
Millions are vaccine-damaged, and a lot of old people died alone. It was malpractice by the government, the doctors, big pharma, congress China and America, not to mention countries like Israel and Denmark that made the whole country get jabbed.
Only Sweden and the Amish got it right. They had herd immunity.
The rest of us who saw through it and went un-jabbed are purebloods now.
“Everything was a lie from the beginning. The asymptomatic people don’t transmit. Kids were not harbingers of the disease. They don’t actually, they’re like a break on the disease. Lockdowns were a farce. Masks don’t work.”
“I tell people, I joke sometimes I say masks do work. A lot like bathing suits work to keep pee out of the pool. They’re not very effective. So that’s one of those things that, you know, it was a farce. Pretty much everything they said was a farce. I know we’re still recovering from it. Just yesterday we walked into a pharmacy and they were advertising COVID-19 vaccines.”
“Well if you want to destroy your immune system, take a COVID-19 vaccine. It will destroy your immune system. It distributes widely in your body. It can’t be broken down because it’s a genetically modified RNA. There are contaminants, process related impurities, what I usually call them, but contaminants for most people, that they haven’t gotten out of the vaccines.”
“The drug that I invented took eight years for us to get the process related impurities out. It’s hard to do and I knew this would be a problem early on when they were trying to push this so fast because nobody had ever made these vaccines in anything bigger than a blender. What we had is found is even worse.”
“They put an SV40 promoter in the vaccine, Pfizer did, that actually well known for the last five decades to bind P53 to Guardian the genome and cause cancers. They know that. We just kept them in the head of the Human Genome Project did this discovery with a few other molecular biologists.”
“This is really big news because the contaminants and the impurities in the vaccine are very dangerous and there’s design flaws like I just pointed out. Wide distribution to the brain, the bone marrow, the ovaries, the testes and long term production six months or more in the last study that we did. So there’s a lot to talk about. Do not get the vaccines unless you just want a crummy immune system. ”
“I think the main thing is these vaccines are dangerous. They have process related impurities. They cause cancer, strokes, heart attacks. The data is in 40% more deaths in 2021 between 18 to 64. This is just data we can’t ignore, so please stay away from the vaccines.”
Many queer and transgender Muslims said they’d felt isolated from traditions that emphasize togetherness, like praying at community mosques, fasting for Ramadan, or performing the Muslim pilgrimage called Hajj.
While over 30 majority-Muslim countries criminalize queerness in some capacity, many Islamic scholars disagree about whether Islam “accepts” queer and transgender people. Each scholar, institution, and government leads with their own interpretation of and perspective on Islam.
Sophia Uppal, a 28-year-old who’s nonbinary, described their relationship with Islam as complicated. Some of Uppal’s favorite childhood memories include waking up early to their mom preparing sehri, or the meal Muslims eat before sunrise to prepare for the day’s fast.
But they said they’d also felt disconnected from Islam for so long because of the expectation to adhere to a heterosexual and cisgender lifestyle. “My mom would dress me up in hijab and clothes that did not feel aligned with me at all,” Uppal said. “Now it’s sometimes a deep trigger when I see gendered Islam forced upon me.”
Both Uppal and Khan look back on their Islamic upbringings and recall feeling pressured to conform to generations of tradition and subjectively interpreted religious texts. At first, these teachings — like the interpretation that if a person was queer or transgender they couldn’t be a Muslim — made Uppal and Khan feel excluded from their communities. But infusing queer and transgender experiences into Islamic tradition has helped Uppal and Khan create new relationships with their Muslim identities.
The decision by a top soccer team to withdraw LGBTQ rainbow jackets after a Muslim player protested has drawn criticism from a woke former player. Tim Howard, a New Jersey-born ex-goalkeeper for Manchester United, attacked his old team for deferring to current player Noussair Mazraoui, who said he would not wear an LGBTQ jacket, citing his Muslim faith. This prompted the team to abandon the jackets entirely so Maraoui would not be “isolated.”
“Any team, any organization should always do what is right. And if one player chooses not to take part, they are entitled to do that, Howard complains. However, he warns players opting out of doing “the right thing” will have “eyes on them.”
“Teams don’t have to protect players. Teams should focus on the greater good, not the beliefs of one individual,” he insists, declaring he “tend[s] to have a problem with any faith or any religion that doesn’t put human rights first.”
In common with many leftists, Howard goes on to suggest people have to agree with his social politics to be good Christians—despite Mazraoui being a Muslim—saying, “Jesus knelt beside beggars and sinners and thieves—people from all walks of life.”
While this is true, Jesus disapproved of sin—saving a woman accused of adultery from being stoned but instructing her to “sin no more,” for instance.
Multiple New Testament texts affirm that homosexuality is a sin, according to the Christian faith.
We are told to fret that climate change is a threat not only to all life on Earth, but also to our mental health:
As temperatures rise, extreme weather events become more frequent, and natural disasters intensify, the psychological well-being of populations worldwide is increasingly at risk.
This mostly effects politically sacred “vulnerable populations” — for example, those who are already have mental issues and of course nonwhites:
For Indigenous communities, climate change-induced displacement from ancestral lands can cause profound psychological distress, as these communities often have deep cultural and spiritual connections to their environment.
Only “indigenous communities” are capable of appreciating God’s creation. That’s why you never see any garbage or pollution in Third World countries.
The global warming hoax really does damage not only the economy but also sanity:
[T]he Daily Telegraph reported on an epidemic of “eco-anxiety” among the children who are being treated for an overwhelming terror of “environmental doom” as climate alarmists spread fears of an impending climate disaster.
Creating hysteria as a means of manipulation is a deliberate tactic:
As Breitbart News has reported, activists have studied people’s emotional response to climate expressions and purposefully selected the terminology that elicits the strongest reaction.
The Guardian rejects “climate change” in favor of “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown.” Salon has explicitly proclaimed that we should “start panicking” because the weather continues to fluctuate like it always has. Every summer heatwave is portrayed as apocalyptic, with predictable effects on the mental health of the gullible. Alicia Finley calls it “climate hypochondria.”
Given that it helps to be a little nuts to buy into woke ideology in the first place, climate change has created a vicious cycle of insanity whereby the more moonbats believe liberal establishment lies about the weather, the crazier they become, the more likely they are to believe the lies.
In the autumn of 2019 a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, began to circulate widely but at a low level. In March 2020, as the influenza season in the Northern Hemisphere subsided, due to a drop in viral interference SARS-CoV-2 surged and became the dominant respiratory virus. COVID-19 spread from China around the world, suppressing influenza, whilst leaving the other human-infecting coronaviruses undisturbed. The vast majority of countries reacted to COVID-19 by imposing non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as lockdowns and facemask policies and, later, vaccination programmes.
It was a big effing hoax, all of it from the virus to the jab. Politicians and Pharma should fry for this. It was murder, perjury, money laundering, RICO and many other crimes
Do you have a favorite place you have visited? Where is it?
I’ve been around the world, to most of the continents. It was for both business and pleasure. I’ve stayed in the finest hotels and some dumps. I’ve eaten with the best chefs and at a choke and puke.
I don’t want to do that anymore. The sense of adventure isn’t enough to make me want to fight the people, the waits, the lines, and the crappy service.
The answer now is that I want to be Home or my place in the mountains. I have my stuff in my place and I don’t have to fight airports, and security lines, stay in places that aren’t mine and someone full of germs was just there before me.
It’s because I’m an introvert and getting old. I don’t care anymore. I don’t have to see everything and right now, there’s nothing I want more than to be in my place, preferably alone with my dog.
•Academic success is primarily based on one’s ability to memorize material. Unfortunately, the educational system rarely teaches students how to do that.
•Effective learning requires actively rather than passively engaging with the required material and being conscious of what is going on inside your body and mind so that you can determine which approaches are correct for you.
•Many of the same factors that determine overall health and neurological health (e.g., a healthy sleep cycle and adequate circulation throughout the body) also directly influence your capacity to study and memorize.
•In this article, I will review the various approaches and supplements that we have found to be the most helpful in improving memory retention and supporting academic success (along with increasing the lucidity of dreams if taken right before bed).
The primary mechanism our society uses to determine one’s eventual wealth and place in the social hierarchy is their academic performance. As such, many put forward an incredible sustained effort to succeed at each rung of the academic ladder, and in many cases, at the urging of their parents, begin that effort from a very young age. However, while a variety of justifications exist for the society adopting this convention, there are also major issues with it, such as:
•Far too many who go through it and put in a sustained effort to “succeed” end up with nothing to show for it.
•Because education has essentially established a monopoly on moving up the social ladder (which forces everyday citizens to participate in its rat race), it has no incentive to provide quality education to those it trains—particularly since unconditional federal support (e.g., student loans) subsidizes education and is allotted based on how many students attend each institution, not the quality of the education offered.
•Education primarily focuses on telling you what to do, not how to do it. As a result, those with inherent talent do much better than their peers, whereas many of those who simply try to do what they are told to do fall short regardless of how much effort they put in.
•By making people believe they need to be “taught to learn” through copying what the teacher does rather than encouraging the natural learning capacity of each student to emerge, the educational process makes students lose their inherent ability to learn or think critically.
Critical thinking, one of the indicators of intelligence is rarely taught in public schools anymore. Take your kids out of it and put them in private schools, or home school them. Get the Government out of our schools.
If you’re looking for the sharpest takes on just about everything—especially the chaotic mess of US politics—look no further than Revolver’s own Darren Beattie. It’s no secret that Darren has a unique knack for cutting through all the noise and revealing what’s really happening behind the scenes and beyond the propaganda. After all, this is a guy who worked in President Trump’s White House. He’s deeply connected, with a sharp eye for the nuances slithering through the DC Swamp and beyond. It’s that same insight that helped him blow the lid off the January 6 “Fedsurrection.”
Now, as the Biden regime inches us closer to World War 3 and the Deep State fights tooth and nail to survive, Darren is pulling back the curtain on what’s really happening in Ukraine and beyond. For Ukraine, Darren paints a picture of a lawless wasteland—basically, a modern-day Afghanistan, ruled by ruthless warlords where anything goes. It’s no wonder our politicians are so desperate to do business there; it’s a place where they can literally and figuratively get away with murder.
NBC Hails a Shift: ‘Journalists Flock to Bluesky as X Becomes Increasingly ‘Toxic’
Kat Tenbarge, tech and culture reporter for NBC News, filed an online story Saturday, “Journalists flock to Bluesky as X becomes increasingly ‘toxic’ — Journalists are finding more readers and less hate on Bluesky than on the platform they used to know as Twitter.”
As long as you follow the liberal line, that is.
Tenbarge opened with a journalist and Bluesky fan:
When Ashton Pittman, an award-winning news editor and reporter, first joined the app Bluesky, he said, he was the only Mississippi journalist he knew to be using it. Until about five weeks ago, he said, that was the case. But now, Pittman said, there are at least 15 Mississippi journalists on Bluesky as it becomes a preferred platform for reporters, writers, activists and other groups who have become increasingly alienated by X.
The same outlets who refused to see the clear evidence before their eyes of conservatives being throttled on Jack Dorsey-led Twitter are muttering about supposed suppression by Musk.
Since Elon Musk bought Twitter, has turned the platform into an increasingly difficult place for journalists, and many had come to suspect that the platform had begun to suppress the reach of posts that include links to external websites. On Sunday, Musk confirmed the platform has deprioritized posts including links, which was how journalists and other creators historically shared their work. But four journalists told NBC News that after millions of users migrated to Bluesky, an alternative that resembles a pared-back version of X, after the election, they are rebuilding their audiences there, too.
Surprise! Liberal media outlets are finding life more congenial in the BlueSky echo chamber, where there’s little conservative pushback or disagreement.
Story
Birds of a feather flock together. This time it’s in the cesspool. Bluesky will never be X or Truth Social. That is the relevant place to be. Just look at the views and downloads. Just because they are butt-hurt by the election and no one trusts them anymore, they go to a safe place.
That shields the rest of the world from their lies and misreporting during their Trump-hating rants against the USA. We are all better off with them gone.
There is a new paradigm in the media and the alphabet networks and NY Times have been left behind, they just don’t know it yet
Fernando, a hitman for a Swedish narcotics gang, checks his phone as it pings with his latest orders: collect the guns, go to the target’s front door and fire until he runs out of bullets.
“Yeah, I understand brother,” he replies casually. He collects two pistols, a Kalashnikov rifle and an accomplice, before hurrying to their target in a suburb of Stockholm.
But this is no ordinary gang hit. Fernando is 14, a teenage assassin who was playing the video game Fifa in his youth club when the orders arrived by text.
He is one among dozens of child contract killers in Sweden, recruited by gang middle-men on social media who pay as much as 150,000 kroner (£13,000) per job.
The number of murder cases involving child suspects in Sweden, which has the highest per capita rate of gun violence in the EU, has exploded over the past year. The figures rose from 31 counts in the first eight months of 2023 to 102 in the same period of this year, according to Sweden’s prosecution authority.
What has been happening in Sweden recently?
Swedish prosecutors and police say the use of children – many of them from an impoverished or foreign background – to commit murders on that scale is unprecedented. One recent case involved a boy of just 11 years old.
Children are the ideal catspaw for Sweden’s gangs: those aged under 15 are too young to be prosecuted, a quirk of Swedish law that critics say is in urgent need of reform.
Hmm, I guess they mean “most” if not all are imports to Sweden. Fernando isn’t exactly a Swedish name.
After two years of fawning press coverage and promises that the international war-crimes prosecutor would finally put Donald Trump behind bars, the special counsel today hammered the final nail in his own battered coffin by dropping his four-count J6-related indictment in Washington against the incoming president.
The move represents yet another failure by the Democratic apparatchik who once ran the Department of Justice’s public integrity unit under the Obama administration. Since then, Smith has been on a losing streak unmatched in DOJ history, suffering one loss after another before the Supreme Court and trial courts; in 2016, SCOTUS unanimously overturned the bribery conviction of Bob McDonnell, the former Republican governor of Virginia, a case Smith brought in 2014. Smith also failed to secure convictions in his prosecutions of former Senator John Edwards in 2012 and former Senator Robert Menendez in 2015.
This year, the highest court rebuked Smith on three separate occasions. First, the court rejected Smith’s rarely-used and desperate request to bypass the D.C. appellate court in considering the presidential immunity question and decide the matter quickly in an attempt to get the J6 case to trial before the election. The court a few months later reversed how the DOJ applied 18 USC 1512(c)(2), the post-Enron document destruction statute that represented two of the four counts in the J6 indictment against Trump. And on July 1, the court issued its landmark opinion in Trump v US, which gutted the J6 case by concluding most of the conduct cited in the indictment represented official acts protected by presidential immunity.
If the DOJ had a Hall of Shame, it would be named after Jack Smith.
A startling new investigation has revealed that the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an investigative journalism juggernaut with a hand in shaping global political narratives—including the first impeachment of President-elect Donald Trump—is majority-funded by the U.S. government. The report was published by Drop Site News in partnership with European investigative outlets.
The OCCRP, which has worked on high-profile exposés, received at least 52% of its funding from U.S. federal agencies such as USAID over the past decade. Since its inception in 2008, the organization has secured at least $47 million from American taxpayers, with an additional $12 million already committed.
The findings, drawn from budget documents, audit reports, and interviews with OCCRP leadership, paint a picture of a journalistic entity deeply tied to American financial support. The U.S. State Department, through various channels, has emerged as OCCRP’s largest single donor. While OCCRP has publicly acknowledged receiving some government funding, the full extent of its reliance on U.S. dollars had not been disclosed until now.
Drew Sullivan, co-founder and head of OCCRP, defended the funding arrangement, stating that the U.S. government has never exerted editorial control. However, Sullivan also confirmed that federal grant agreements allow the government to veto top personnel decisions, including editorial hires, a provision that critics argue could jeopardize OCCRP’s independence.
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.”
Donald Trump may have won the presidency, but Dr. Naomi Wolf isn’t resting on her laurels. Rather, the author of “The Pfizer Papers” is continuing her fight for freedom and truth while exposing the corrupt relationship between Big Pharma, health care, and the United States government.
However, her eyes weren’t always so open.
“I certainly, in the pandemic, saw that the people I’d voted for turned out to be horrible tyrants,” Wolf tells Rick and Bubba of “Rick and Bubba University.” “They censored me when I was trying to warn women accurately about damage to their fertility from the Pfizer injection.”
“I got deplatformed and ousted from that world,” she explains, noting that a successful lawsuit led by attorney Aaron Siri led to the release of Pfizer documents that opened her eyes even further.
“450,000 internal documents released under court order that the FDA had asked the court to keep hidden for 75 years,” Wolf says. “It turns out the FDA was waving through the biggest crime against humanity in recorded history, and you know, more investigations on our team’s part found that the White House knew.”
“There was a massive collusion by the very people I’d voted for, in ushering in an injection about which they lied to us, that was sterilizing and disabling and killing people in massive numbers,” she adds.
“Did you just find it strange that we rushed this in? Was the need and the panic by the public for an answer part of this that forced us to jump through so many hoops so fast?” Bubba asks.
“I was hoping when I went into this project that that’s what I would find. Just the usual story of greedy corporations cutting corners, rushing to meet a deadline, because of a putative, epidemic, emergency. That’s not what the Pfizer papers reveal,” Wolf answers.
“Unfortunately, they reveal months and months and months and months before the vaccine was rolled out, in which Pfizer was identifying many, many ways to injure, damage, and destroy the functions of the human body with, again, a special focus on reproduction,” she continues, adding, “It’s not a bug, it’s a feature.”
Global warming lies are finally running out of steam. None of the crisis scares ever came true. The climate is fine, the seas didn’t rise, the ice sheets are just fine and the only thing that really happened is the theft and laundering of a lot of money.
The fun has started at COP29!
For years successive COPs have papered over the cracks, but the cracks have now become unbridgeable chasms.
The West wants the world to give up fossil fuels. The developing countries want money, lots of it that the West can’t afford.
Meanwhile, China and the rest of Asia want a free pass both from cutting emissions and paying money out. And the major oil producing countries have said “On your bike!”
So far at Baku, the West has promised to pony up $250bn a year by 2035 in climate aid. But when inflation is taken into account, this is barely more than the $100bn agreed at Copenhagen in 2008. The third world wanted $1.3 trillion.
China still refuses to pay a cent, and Azerbaijan has made it clear that it will not abandon its God-given gift of oil and gas.
As for cutting emissions, the whole idea has had to take a back seat to this unseemly scrabble for money.
Meanwhile everybody knows the whole thing is a charade, because Trump won’t merely pull out of the Paris Agreement next year, he will take his money with him.
The whole thing is, of course, hilarious. All we need now is for Ed Miliband to try eating a bacon buttie again!
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.
A group of distraught Wisconsin women gathered Nov. 9 in Klode Park in Whitefish Bay to film themselves having a “primal scream” session to express their frustration with Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election.
The event quickly gained traction on social media and showcased roughly two dozen women screaming in unison in the direction Lake Michigan to vent their anger, according to WFIN.
The footage, originally shared on Facebook, shows the women standing on the shoreline to carry out their primal screams. The user described the gathering in her post. “What a gorgeous morning to gather at Klode Park in Whitefish Bay to engage in a Primal Scream in order to release our pain and frustration after the election,” the user wrote.
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.
People responded to Ferrari bragging about its commitment to ‘diversity and inclusivity’ by pointing out that the luxury car manufacturer forces customers to pass a ‘social status’ background check just to be able to buy a Ferrari.
Awkward.
In the wake of the Jaguar farce, when the heritage brand launched a new commercial featuring androgynous models, thereby alienating their core customer base, Ferrari appears to have said, “Hold my beer!”
It started with a post on X in which Ferrari boasted of its, “Commitment to equality, equity, and inclusion by endorsing the new Diversity and Inclusion Charter alongside @F1 and the @fia.”
However, that “inclusivity” doesn’t appear to extend to its own potential customers.
As Nick Sortor points out, Ferrari conducts exhaustive background checks on anyone who wants to buy one of their higher end vehicles to “ensure they fit the mold of the brand and its desired image.”
“Family background, social status and additional affiliations,” are also scrutinized before Ferrari will even consider taking your cash.
That doesn’t sound very inclusive!
“Nothing says “inclusivity” like requiring background checks and “social status checks” for ENTIRE FAMILIES before they’re allowed to purchase your cars,” commented Sortor.
Those cars breathe testosterone and Alpha male. This shit started as soon as they hired Lewis Hamilton as an F1 driver and he brought that diversity shit which brings down everything it touches.
I’ve always loved Ferrari, but will have a hard time liking a company with these principles. Grow a set and be the company Enzo created.
“Nobody has divided our country more than you and Obama,” one X user responded.
“Next book you can write – How to overcome the destruction and divisive culture you and your husband have left behind,” another quipped as many commenters offered similar sentiments. Those include the following comments:
“I would rather hug a grizzly bear or spend a day shopping at the mall than read that garbage book. ”
“Nobody cares. You and Barry destroyed this great nation.”
“Hard pass. Never ever not in million years. Not enough money.”
“What did you overcome exactly?”
“I can’t wait to not read that.”
“Does this book tell us how you overcome a personal chefs [sic] death?”
“This is a fabulous idea! Spend decades NOT teaching people how to cope, and then sell them a diary to help them cope. ”
“Peddle this shit on blue sky not X”
“No one is looking for life advice from an Obama, neither one of you dudes. You have tried to destroy our country for the last 16 years, no thanks, kick rocks.”
“If I wanted to waste money I’d burn it”
“Traitorous scum.”
“Just the person I need advice from or help increase their ever growing bank account, never happen. “
According to a description of the book, Overcoming includes “creative activities, reflective writing prompts, habit tracking tools, and more to provide the ultimate guide to unlocking your small power, sharing your whole self, showing up in relationships, and of course, ‘going high.’”
So here’s the deal – remember when “experts” kept telling us what to do during COVID?
Turns out they got pretty much everything wrong. Like, spectacularly wrong.
We’re talking 19 major things they completely screwed up, from how the virus spreads to whether masks actually work (spoiler alert: those cloth masks were basically fashion accessories).
Dr. Fauci is the patron saint of TERRIBLE COVID policies.
He was wrong on SO MANY POINTS. It’s time to set the record straight…
Did he get anything right?
Origin of the disease—wrong
Transmission—wrong
Asymptomatic spread—wrong
PCR testing—wrong
Fatality rate—wrong
Lockdowns—wrong
Community triggers—wrong
Business closures—wrong
School closures—wrong
Quarantining the healthy—wrong
Impact on youth—wrong
Hospital overload—wrong
Plexiglass barriers—wrong
Social distancing—wrong
Outdoor spread—wrong
Masks—wrong
Variant impact—wrong
Natural immunity—wrong
Vaccine efficacy—wrong
Vaccine injury—wrong
Last year the Norfolk Group just dropped a bomb of a document laying out all these failures. And it’s not just Monday morning quarterbacking – they’ve got the receipts. Real studies showing how natural immunity was actually legit (while Fauci pretended it didn’t exist), data proving schools could’ve stayed open (looking at you, Sweden), and evidence that maybe, just maybe, locking healthy people in their homes wasn’t the brilliant strategy they claimed.
Listen, I’m not here to say “I told you so” (okay, maybe a little), but we need to talk about this. Because if we don’t learn from how badly our “experts” messed up, we’re just asking for a repeat performance next time around. And honestly? I don’t think any of us can handle another round of plexiglass theater and double masking.
Let’s break down exactly how they got it wrong, and more importantly, why they kept doubling down even when the evidence said otherwise. Buckle up – this is gonna be a wild ride through the greatest public health face-plant in modern history.
Look at the money being waisted on salaries for worse race relations. This has got to go.
The University of Michigan’s (UM) multi-million dollar diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) program may soon be dismantled.
The university’s board of regents has reportedly asked UM president Santa Ono “to defund or restructure” the DEI office amid growing criticism and public pressure, according to emails shared on X. The board is expected to vote on the matter on Dec. 5.
Despite UM investing $250 million into DEI since 2016, students and faculty have reported a deteriorating campus climate since the program began and are less likely to interact with people of a different race, religion or political ideology, though these are “the exact kind of engagement[s] D.E.I. programs, in theory, are meant to foster,” the article stated. Attempts to create a more diverse campus also fell flat, with black enrollment at the university remaining a steady 5%.
The program also created a “culture of grievance,” with the office’s conception coinciding with an “explosion” of complaints on campus involving race, gender and religion, the NYT reported. Meanwhile, nearly 250 university employees were engaged in some form of DEI efforts on campus.
DEI staff cost the university approximately $30.68 million annually, with the average salary reaching $96,400, according to Mark Perry, an American Enterprise Institute scholar. Several DEI employees are paid more than $200,000 a year, while the department’s head makes upwards of $400,000.
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.
In a world fixated on quantity, fewer friends mean deeper connections with those who truly understand us.
In a world that often sings the praises of an extroverted lifestyle and the constant whirlwind of social activities, we introverts prefer to walk a quieter path — one that values solitude, introspection, and a select few meaningful connections. For us, solitude isn’t just a preference; it’s a sanctuary — a place where we find the clarity and peace we need to thrive.
When I entered my twenties — a decade traditionally associated with socializing and expanding your circle of friends — my introverted journey took a refreshingly different route. Instead of a jam-packed social calendar or always being surrounded by people who were the life of the party, I found solace in solitude and the company of a select few cherished friends. If you’re an introvert, I’m sure you can relate.
Here are 10 reasons why introverts often prefer having fewer friends.
Why Introverts Prefer Having Fewer Friends
1. Deep, meaningful connections
When we have fewer friends, we have more time and energy to nurture the relationships that matter most. These friendships are built on trust and shared experiences, creating bonds that grow stronger with time. They not only withstand the test of time but also offer unwavering support and comfort during life’s highs and lows.
In a world often obsessed with the quantity of connections, we understand that it’s the quality of these relationships that truly enrich our lives. We don’t consider everyone a friend, which makes each interaction a treasured moment of shared understanding and genuine care.
In her book Quiet, Susan Cain points out that introverts often thrive in more intimate, one-on-one interactions. Having fewer friends allows us to focus on building meaningful connections with those who truly “get” us and accept us for who we are. These authentic friendships are like warm, cozy blankets on a chilly night, providing comfort and genuine support when we need it most.
2. Time to focus on the friendships that really matter
For us introverts, having a smaller circle of friends can be a blessing. With fewer social obligations and less influence from a large social circle, we have the time and space to deeply invest in the friendships that truly matter. I find that with just a few close friends, I can truly invest in understanding them on a deeper level and being there for them when they need support.
Like many introverts, I am not one for small talk. I don’t want to just talk about the weather or what you saw on TV last night. I want to hear about your childhood and life experiences — the lessons you’ve learned that have made you the person you are today. I want to hear about your hopes, dreams, and goals. I want to know how your relationship is truly going — not just the surface-level “It’s good” you might tell others when that’s not the whole story. The busyness of a big social network doesn’t allow for that kind of deep connection.
Plus, as a result, we can focus on understanding ourselves better and on what truly makes our hearts sing and souls dance. This journey of self-discovery is a precious gift that can guide us toward a more fulfilling path in life.
3. Independence with a support system
As we grow older, we become more independent, exploring the world on our own terms and savoring the freedom and solitude that come with it. Alone time recharges our batteries, giving us the energy to spread our wings and pursue the adventures that resonate with our souls.
Having fewer friends creates space for us to develop our individuality. In a world that often pushes for constant social interaction, this independence becomes a sanctuary — a place where we can fully embrace who we are.
4. More peace and quiet
In busy social environments, we introverts often experience sensory overload — loud music, crowded rooms, and constant conversations drain us. We start to feel overstimulated and unable to focus as external stimuli compete for our attention.
Having fewer friends translates to more peace and quiet, giving us the calm we need to recharge. We retreat into the soothing sanctuary of solitude, embracing the silence that stills our thoughts and relaxes our spirit. The chatter and noise of constant social interactions are replaced by tranquil moments of reading, reflecting, or simply being. This quiet space becomes our safe haven amid life’s chaos.
For us introverts, peace and quiet are not just luxuries — they’re necessities. We thrive when we can turn down the volume of the outside world and tune into our inner landscape. With fewer friends and obligations, we create space to hear our thoughts, reconnect with ourselves, and let stillness restore our energy. The silence nourishes us deeply.
5. Energy for your own goals and passions
With fewer social distractions, we can channel our energy into pursuing our passions and goals, turning what might seem like “alone time” into a wellspring of productivity and creativity. The result? We often emerge as high achievers in various aspects of life, including career and personal growth.
Our alone time — or creative space — becomes the launchpad we need to reach for the stars at our own pace. It allows us to develop our talents, chase our dreams, and make a meaningful impact on the world.
6. Less drama
Smaller social circles mean less conflict and drama. There’s less politics, gossip, jealousy, and fewer fallouts to manage. My energy goes toward nurturing a few intimate friendships, not maintaining a large roster of dramatic relationships.
As introverts, we strongly dislike confrontation and arguments; we prefer peace and harmony. Navigating friend drama can be exhausting. I’ve come to value friendships that are drama-free, where my friends and I can support each other and communicate openly. This kind of acceptance is incredibly refreshing.
7. Quality time
When we do choose to socialize, we introverts treasure meaningful conversations and deep connections with our friends. With fewer friends, we can dedicate more time to truly enjoying their company — sharing heart-to-heart chats that leave lasting impressions. These moments of genuine connection nourish our souls, reminding us that when it comes to friendship, less truly can be more.
8. Emotional resilience
Difficult times have shown me that I don’t need constant external validation or a large support network. Instead, I rely on a few close friends who provide perspective when I’m overthinking and need clarity.
Over the years, the advice and support I’ve received from them have helped me tap into my own inner strength, process emotions through reflection, and grow through life’s ups and downs.
This emotional strength becomes an invaluable companion as we move through life, helping us weather storms with grace. We introverts don’t depend entirely on others for comfort or reassurance — we carry a quiet confidence in our ability to cope and thrive, even when facing tough times alone. We understand that our worth comes from within, not from the size of our social circle.
9. Comfortable with your own company
While we introverts aren’t fans of constant socializing, there are days when we crave a change of scenery or the chance to connect. We might want to chat with a friend over coffee or catch up over lunch. However, having a smaller circle of friends means they’re not always available when we’re looking for company. As a result, we learn to embrace solitude and use it as an opportunity for self-discovery.
Learning to be alone has been a blessing for me as an introvert. I’ve discovered that it’s where I find true happiness, independent of others. Whether it’s reading, writing, journaling, or simply enjoying nature, I’ve come to cherish and embrace my own space.
10. Your self-worth doesn’t depend on others
Basing self-esteem on friendships and social approval is fragile. As introverts comfortable with solitude, our sense of self-worth comes from within. We understand that our value isn’t measured by the size of our social network or the number of likes and followers on social media.
This inner confidence allows us to form authentic connections without relying on external validation. The older I get, the more I realize that my worth isn’t defined by others — it comes from loving and accepting myself first.
Having a few close friends who truly see and appreciate me has shown me that I don’t need a big circle to feel fulfilled. I now carry a quiet confidence that comes from embracing my introverted journey. This realization has been one of the greatest gifts of my introverted life.
As Jaguar cuts its’ own throat by being woke, the world looks on in disbelief.
Formula One racing legend Johnny Herbert has commented on Jaguar’s bizarre rebranding of itself into some sort of LGBTQ activist campaign, calling it ‘confusing’ and revealing that no one he’s spoken to in the auto world understands what the company is doing.
As we’ve highlighted, the move appears to be an astoundingly stupid one, yet the company has doubled down, even appearing to threaten critics.
Now, in comments made to to Prime Casino, former Jaguar team driver Herbert remarked “Oh my Lord, what have they done?!”
“You look at it and wonder what it is trying to achieve,” he continued, adding “Where is it pitching itself at? Who is it trying to appeal to? I am confused.”
Yes Johnny, the whole world is wondering the same thing. Look at a post below to find that everyone is getting tired of the woke shit being forced on us by 2% of the population.
According to the New York Post, transgender activists are “reconsidering their abrasive approach as public support slips.”
Citing a New York Times piece (itself titled “Transgender Activists Question the Movement’s Confrontational Approach”), it seems that some members of the LGBT community are none too pleased with the more hysterical fringes of the “trans” movement.
Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, executive director of Advocates for Transgender Equality, told the Times that shaming people into embracing transgenderism appeared to be backfiring.
“We have to make it OK for someone to change their minds,” Heng-Lehtinen told the Times. “We cannot vilify them for not being on our side.
“No one wants to join that team.”
The director added: “No one wants to feel stupid or condescended to.”
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.
With each election cycle, the same old questions resurface: Who should lead the party? How can Democrats reconnect with voters in the heartland? And why does the party keep bleeding support among working-class Americans?
Last week, David Axelrod tossed a name into the ring for the next DNC chair: Rahm Emanuel. Predictably, this suggestion set off a firestorm—none louder than from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, whose critique of the Democratic establishment feels more at home in a Tea Party playbook than in traditional Democratic discourse.
Ocasio-Cortez, better known as AOC, wasted no time attacking the idea of another Obama-era leader taking the reins of the Democratic National Committee.
Her argument? These establishment figures oversaw some of the party’s most devastating electoral losses. In fact, she called Emanuel and his ilk a “disease.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) launched a blistering critique of former Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel‘s potential bid for Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair, slamming the Democratic establishment’s donor-focused approach.
“There is a disease in Washington of Democrats who spend more time listening to the donor class than working people,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “If you want to know the seed of the party’s political crisis, that’s it.”
The sharp rebuke from the progressive congresswoman came after veteran Democratic strategist David Axelrod publicly pitched Emanuel, the current U.S. Ambassador to Japan, to lead the DNC when current chairman Jaime Harrison‘s term concludes in March.
And, honestly, she has a point. Under Barack Obama’s leadership, Democrats experienced some of their worst down-ballot performances in modern history. But is the party’s problem really the so-called Obama coalition, or is it AOC and her loud progressive faction that’s driving voters away?
The Ghosts of Obama’s Leadership
Let’s not sugarcoat it—Barack Obama was a political phenomenon. His 2008 and 2012 campaigns were masterclasses in coalition-building, bringing together young voters, minorities, and educated urbanites. But the success of Obama’s personal brand didn’t translate into lasting gains for the Democratic Party.
In fact, during his presidency, Democrats lost more than 900 state legislative seats, 13 governorships, 69 House seats, and 13 Senate seats. The working-class voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin who helped Obama win twice? Many of them jumped ship in 2016, frustrated by policies they felt prioritized elite academic interests over their needs.
Yet Democrats seem intent on avoiding this painful truth. Rather than reckoning with Obama’s shortcomings as a party leader, they continue to idolize his approach. The problem, though, is that the coalition he built wasn’t designed for longevity—it was built for Obama himself. His successors, from Hillary Clinton to Joe Biden, have struggled to revive that same magic, leaving the party floundering in its search for a winning strategy.
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.
Hulscher N, Alexander P E., Amerling R, Gessling H, Hodkinson R, Makis W et al. A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination. Science, Public Health Policy and the Law. 2024 Nov 17; v5.2019-2024
Here’s what we found:
Background: The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, combined with a high number of adverse event reports, have led to concerns over possible mechanisms of injury including systemic lipid nanoparticle (LNP) and mRNA distribution, Spike protein-associated tissue damage, thrombogenicity, immune system dysfunction, and carcinogenicity. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis.
A two-year-old paper exposing Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “vaccines” that the medical establishment would not allow to be published has finally made its way into the peer-reviewed journal Science, Public Health Policy and the Law.
It has been a long time coming for the so-called “sudden death” COVID jab autopsy paper to see the light of day. The Lancet and another Elsevier journal censored it when it first came out during the “pandemic,” but now the public can see its contents for the first time.
“This has never been seen in scientific publishing before!” tweeted Dr. William Makis, MD, about the paper.
(Related: Have you checked out our earlier report about the censored Lancet paper, which found that 74 percent of post-COVID injection deaths are, in fact, caused by the jabs?)
“We got them, finally!!” celebrates Dr. Makis
For the research, scientists looked at 325 autopsies from people who had recently gotten jabbed for COVID and who “died suddenly” not long after. This is the largest such autopsy series in the world, by the way.
Scientists discovered that it took an average of about two weeks from the time a person gets jabbed to the time they get loaded up into the freezer drawers at the coroner’s office.
“73.9% of deaths were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 Vaccination,” the paper explains.
Keep in mind that the two-week average is just an average. Some COVID jab recipients died almost immediately after the syringe contents were dispensed into their arms.
Dr. Peter McCullough and McCullough Foundation epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, are credited with making major contributions to the new research, which blows the lid on the COVID jab scam.
“This is a monumental achievement in the face of historically unprecedented scientific censorship,” Dr. Makis says.
Once the laughter stopped, Stahl may have found it productive to engage in some good-old fashioned reporting to figure out what she “could do” to better understand the media’s abysmal ratings. And even more concerning, the loss of public trust. In her 53-year journalism career, she never thought she’d witness her once-premiere news program, “60 Minutes,” becoming increasingly irrelevant in a post-Trump election world. Ratings stayed in the toilet bowl, as one CBS executive noted, as the show pulled in a pitiful five million viewers in mid-November.
Delusions of Adequacy 
