One author saw it all coming

"When you discover that to be allowed to produce anything, you must ask permission from men who produce nothing--and who don't know how to produce anything; when you see that money flows to people who deal not in goods but in arranging government favors; when you realize that men get far richer by graft and influence than by work, and that your laws don't protect you and your family against their rapacity, but protect them against you; when you see corruption lavishly rewarded...you know your society is doomed."
    --Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged" (slightly edited)  

Hugo Chavez: "Nation builder, comrade!" Che Guevara: "Hero of the Revolution"

Socialism!  Cuz it's FAAaaabulous, comrade!  Paradise on Erf!

 

And while we're on the topic of FAAAbulous communist "liberators," let us not forget the inspirational face below, eh?  The face that smiled out from millions of red T-shirts worn by American college students and working-class welfare queens and would-be dictators!  This WAS the face of what U.S. leftists truly believed was Utopia--communist rule!

 

But sadly, over decades after his capture and death the true story of this insane, murderous son of a bitch slowly began to leak out: as the caption says, he murdered teachers, artists, blacks and gays--personally.  And yet U.S. leftists absolutely adored Che Guevara, believing him to be a great liberator and leader!

Hard to believe.  Oh wait, it's totally believable, because the Left owns the Media, and strives mightily to prevent the dirty truth from getting out.     

And of course it helps that Leftists are morons who know nothing of history.

On a lighter note...

A discussion was underway on a website about men dating younger women, an angry woman posted this:

"Women dating older men is normal. Men dating younger women is just weird."  

So to her, younger women deciding to date older men--whether because they found older men more physically attractive or to gain a more luxurious lifestyle--was perfectly reasonable.  After all, the women were freely choosing who they wanted to date, eh?  Perfectly reasonable.

So women freely choosing to date older, wealthier men was totally different from men freely choosing to date younger women.  The first was fine, but men freely choosing to date younger women was "weird"--outrageous.  

By her "reasoning," whenever there was a big difference in ages between a couple, the female was perfectly normal, but the man in the same relationship was "weird," eh?

This is why most women are Democrats: they don't see a thing wrong with the reasoning that "It's fine if our side does X, but outrageous if your side does it." 

Double-standard, certainly.  Also illogical, lunatic...and far too common.    

Muslim mullah says women are animals, not human. Seriously

For those American liberal women (and cuck male liberals) who bleat that  "All cultures are equally valid," try this:  Watch a 43-second video of an Iraniah mullah saying "Women are animals, just like cattle and sheep.  They're not human, but animals.  Allah made them look pleasing so they wouldn't frighten men."

Seriously.

 

Now, what was that liberal horseshit about "all cultures are equal"? 

Democrats in Pennsylvania withdraw resolution honoring women after someone asks...

In Pennsylvania, Democrats who run the state introduced a "resolution" to name March national women’s month in the state.

That ran into an unexpected snag after a Republican representative introduced an amendment to the resolution to define "woman."  The Republican amendment proposed "a person with two X chromosomes."

Seeing the trap, the Democrat Speaker promptly withdrew the resolution.

To repeat: Democrat lawmakers pulled the resolution honoring women, rather than allow "woman" to be defined in a way that would anger the tranny mafia that always, reliably votes Democrat. 

If you'd told Americans 20 years ago that in just 20 years the overarching policy goal of one of the nation's two historic political parties would be to avoid allowing "woman" to be defined, you would have been ruthlessly mocked.  And yet here we are.

You cannot make this stuff up. 

Trump-hating Media say Trump is clueless, claim we're "losing" in Iran

Headline from the leftists at NBC: "Inside Trump's daily video montage briefing on the Iran war"

Sub-head: "The [videos], which typically last about two minutes, have raised concerns among some of the president’s allies that he may not be receiving the complete picture of the war."

Ahh.  So who are these unnamed, so-called "allies" who are so concerned, eh?

As you all surely guessed, NBC doesn't name them because they can't even remotely be described as "the president's allies."  But we have one clue: the "former official" is almost certainly Joe Kent, who is a scum-sucking Trump-hating piece of shit.

Every day since the start of the war in Iran, U.S. military officials compile a video update for Trump showing the biggest, most successful strikes on Iranian targets over the past 48 hours, three current U.S. officials and a former U.S. official said.

The daily montage typically runs for about two minutes, the officials said. One described the daily video as "clips of stuff blowing up.”

The highlight reel of U.S. Central Command bombing Iranian equipment and military sites isn’t the only briefing Trump gets about the war. He’s also updated through conversations with top military and intelligence advisers, foreign leaders and news reports, the officials said.

But the video briefing is fueling concerns among some of Trump’s allies that he may not be receiving--or absorbing--the complete picture of the war, now in its fourth week, two of the current officials and the former official said. 

First, note the cunning anti-Trump propaganda: NBC claims (via unnamed alleged "allies" of the president) that Trump may not be "absorbing" what's really happening.  The Democrats--and their Dem-fellating allies at NBC--brazenly imply that even if Trump was getting an honest briefing, he isn't able to understand it.

Imagine if NBC and the rest of the treasonous Media had said that about president Franklin Roosevelt in the middle of WW2, eh?   That would have been unthinkable, rightly considered treasonous.  But now?  Routine.

Overall, the official said, the information Trump gets about the war tends to emphasize U.S. successes, with comparatively little detail about Iranian actions.

Ahh, the briefings "emphasize U.S. successes, with little detail about Iranian..." successes?  Wait, there haven't been any, so NBC deftly substitutes "actions," knowing no Democrat will notice the deliberate false equivalence.  (And be honest: you didn't notice.)

Some of Trump’s allies view his frustration [not mentioned before] as a sign of a constrained flow of information, two of the current U.S. officials and the former U.S. official said.

Among their concerns is that Trump may not be equipped to make critical decisions about options he’s presented with for possible next steps in the war if he’s not receiving a full scope of information about the status of the conflict, the former official and a person familiar with the concerns said.

NBC is deliberately trying to sabotage Trump by making voters believe he's senile--like the vegetable bribem before him--or even that his top advisors (like Hegseth and Rubio) aren't telling him the truth!  And because the lying rat-bastards who run NBC are part of the once-trusted U.S. Mainstream Media, all Democrats eat this crap up as if it's totally true.

Concerns about the war among some Trump supporters surfaced publicly last week when Joe Kent, who until recently led the National Counterterrorism Center, said internal gatekeeping had limited Trump’s access to a wider range of dissenting views during the war. “Some key decision-makers were not allowed to come express their opinion to the president,” Kent told Tucker Carlson in an interview after he left the administration. “There wasn’t a robust debate.”

Kent is referring to himself, because he'd been suspected for months of leaking sensitive information.  To stop the leaks, Kent had been taken off the list of those invited to the classified briefings--which understandably infuriated Kent, who struck back.  Hmmm...

Days earlier Trump was asked about comments by his former "AI czar," David Sacks, who'd said the U.S. “should try to find the off ramp” and that “this is a good time to declare victory and get out.”  Trump told reporters that Sacks hadn’t shared his views with him.

Now, obviously there are different views among advisors about whether the Islamic regime was trying to make an atom bomb, and whether we should have struck Iran to prevent that.  The point is that the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media

• claims there is NO evidence at all that the Islamic regime of Iran--which constantly leads crowds of Iranian citizens in chants of "death to America--was trying to build an atomic bomb;
• apparently either don't believe or merely ignore that the Iranians admitted to having 440 kilograms (just under 1,000 pounds) of 60%-enriched uranium;
• either don't know or don't understand that the ONLY known use for enriching uranium above ten percent (the standard for nuclear electric powerplants) is an atomic bomb;
• claim that even if Iran was working on an atom bomb, the U.S. shouldn't have been concerned--because Iran didn't have a missile big enough to get a bomb to the U.S; and finally
• carefully don't mention the fact that it doesn't take a missile to get a bomb into New York harbor.

Conservatives:  Ask your moronic, unserious, airhead Democrat family members about the above points.  See what they know versus what they deny.
The Media--and the "leaders" of the shitty, anti-America Democrat partei--are fundamentally unserious: they're either stupid or lying.  But half the public believes their bullshit because they believe the Media tells the truth.

If we'd had this nightmarish combination of Dems and Media in 1941 they would have convinced the public that since "only" 2,900 Americans were killed by the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, and that going to war would surely cost 400,000 American deaths, we shouldn't declare war on Japan.

The Dems and Media would have convinced voters that there was no direct threat to us (sound familiar?) so going to war would be senseless.  Sure, Japan would take the Far East, and a few tiny Pacific islands of no strategic value, but how would that hurt us, eh?
   Dem apologists would bleat that Japan's huge population was "forced" to take Indonesia in order to ensure a supply of vital oil.  But why should Indonesia be any concern to us, eh?  "Not a direct threat, because we were protected by a vast ocean!  So we'd be FAR better off not fighting.
   And of course if we forgave Japan's attack, we certainly had no quarrel with Germany, right?   All smaaht Americans knew there we should nevah get involved in European wars.  After all, we'd done that in WW1, at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars and 116,500 deaths (53,400 in combat, and another 63,000 from disease and accidents), and that clearly hadn't accomplished much.

And here's the real kicker: If today's Democrats had been in power in 1940, and had succeeded in keeping the U.S. out of WW2--"not our fight, not a threat to us," eh?--and Germany and Japan had won easy victories and gone on to rule their empires for the foreseeable future, five years after their victories the same Democrats who had demanded that the U.S. not enter the war would have screamed that they had demanded that the U.S. join the fight and save the world, but that the Republicans were the ones who blocked Democrat efforts to intervene, probably to prop up the stock market! 

And you absolutely know that's true.  It's how the Democrats rock. 

So now for something completely different: in nature, what usually happens to animals that are slower or less intelligent and observant?  Sure. 

Democrats: "But humans are different.  The laws of nature don't apply to humans.  Really!  We smaaaht!"

If today's Democrat leaders and the left-wing Media shitheads had been in power in 1940 we'd all be speaking German or Japanese now.

Source.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-gets-daily-video-montage-briefing-iran-war-rcna263912
 

A murder in three acts in Minneapolis

Meet Melchizedek Erastuscorboi Kpaan.  (Name is popular in Liberia.)

 

Kpaan beez a guud boy.  Yep yep yep.  Oh shure, he'd had a couple of "involvements" wif what passes for a legal system in Minneaposomalia: a prior conviction for 1st degree aggravated robbery, then later two counts of "felon in possession of a gun."

But because Minneaposomalia is ruled entirely by Democrats, Kpaan's public defender was able to get the judge in the agg-robbery conviction to reduce the sentence to time served.  Then on the two counts of felon in possession of a gun, left/liberal wacko "judge" Sarah West--appointed by the equally left/lib Democrat former governor Mark Dayton--made a RULING: 

She ordered him released without making him post even a dollar of bond.

As rational people know, having to post bond normally keeps the average thug behind bars for at least a few more days, until they can post bond, then get released at trial.  Sarah West knows this, but "reasoned" (?) that he wasn't a threat to anyone, so she RULED--no appeal, no vote, just her amazing street smarts and legal background--dat dis guud boy needed to be out on the street. 

See, dis is how duh Founders intended ouah country to work: after thugs and murderers were arrested and charged, dey wanted judges to release 'em wifout bail, as fast as possible.  Cuz havin' to stay in jail til trial wuz hurtin' dere incomes!  Yep yep yep!  

Judge Sarah West, Minneapolis

West is alleged to have said "I recognized the 'spark of humanity' in his beautiful eyes.  He smiled at me, and I knew at once that such a beautiful soul didn't deserve to spend even a day in jail."

So...left/lib Sarah West released Kpaan so he'd be free to keep his rendezvous with the 17-year-old girl he'd murder.  Wait, not "murder," just "manslaughter."

Surveillance video shows the girl walking behind a man (identified as Kpaan) who's holding a backpack.  Kpaan then produces a gun, throws the backpack at the girl and shoots her.  She grabs her chest and doubles over, then picks up the backpack and runs a few yards away as the shooter flees.  A minute later the girl called 911 saying she'd been shot.  She was found and taken to the hospital where she died.

Now let's turn to the third player in this: the DA of Hennepin County (Minneaposomalia): Mary Moriarty is a lesbian who spent a staggering 31 years as a public defender.  She was so far left that she clashed with the state office of public defenders for her ultra-lenient treatment of criminals.  After 31 years she accused the state board of sexism, and they had taxpayers give her a $300,000 settlement, which included her resignation as a public defender.

 

Mary then realized she could do more damage if she could win the post of County Attorney (Minnesomalia's equivalent of DA), and in the leftist shithole she won handily. 

And the city's leftist voters got exactly what they wanted: She's notorious for reducing charges against blacks, and the murder charge against Kpaan followed that pattern: the first charge against Kpaan was 2nd-degree murder, but that was later reduced to the much less serious charge of manslaughter.  Kpaan pled guilty before trial in exchange for a lighter sentence.  As part of the deal the "felon in possession" charge was dismissed.

The killer's public defender bleated that "this was a crime of passion," apparently like a lover's quarrel?  And what was in the backpack that the killer was carrying before throwing it at the girl, that the fatally wounded girl thought so important that she picked it up before running around the corner and collapsing?

Not a word in the police report--even though the report included the detail that the fatally wounded girl bent over to pick up the backpack the killer had thrown at her.  She must have thought something in that bag was important, eh?

And of course nothing came out at trial because there wasn't one--the plea deal ensured that.

So what's the lesson here?  That "some" Liberians will murder Americans?  Nah, dat routine.  The lesson here is that two left/liberal women, in positions of power, released the future killer without bond on earlier charges, and thereby enabled the murder of the girl.  Then they allowed a plea deal that will get him out again in six years or less.  He'll be 31.  He'll kill again.

Thanks, Democrats.

 

Liberals, Democrats and the Mainstream Media are all crazy...and winning

If you think liberals are sane, consider this: In theoretically safe Iowa eight years ago, 20-year-old Mollie Tibbetts was abducted and brutally murdered by an illegal alien while going for a run.
  When her killer was found, tried and convicted, her liberal cuck father said this:

Sadly, some people have chosen to distort and corrupt Mollie’s tragic death [not "murder"] to advance a cause she vehemently opposed.  I encourage a debate on immigration; there is great merit in its reasonable outcome. But do not appropriate Mollie’s death [not "murder"] to advance views she believed were profoundly racist.
   To the Hispanic community, my family stands with you and offers its heartfelt apology: That you’ve been beset by the circumstances of Mollie’s death is wrong. We treasure the contribution you bring to the American tapestry in all its color and melody.

WHAT?  Apologizing "That you've been beset by the circumstances of Mollie's death," eh?  Lest we forget (and if you're a Democrat you already had), Mollie was abducted and brutally murdered, but the liberal cuck dad couldn't bring himself to say "You've been criticized for my daughter's murder by an illegal alien from Mexico," because he's a Democrat.  So instead he used the dainty, neutral phrase "beset by the circumstances of Mollie's death," as if she died by accident.  

"Circumstances."  What a worthless male.  But certainly this allows him to feel virtuous.  And certainly Christ urged forgiveness.

So let's examine that last part:  An obvious question is, did Christ--God's faithful servant--intend that good people should do nothing to physically fight evil, instead just trying to "understand it" and being good Christians?

That's not at all a facetious question.  Obviously Christ knew all about the eternal struggle between good and evil.  And when evil is in power, unless good people rise up and defeat it, they're doomed to either join the bad side or live in fear or be killed--like Mollie and so many others.  So unless God's plan is for all good people to eventually be killed off by evil ones, that means...wait for it...that good people have to do not just "some" fighting--and winning--but lots of it.

Yeah, war sucks, but sometimes it's better in the long run.  Think WW2. 

Apparently liberals and Democrats no longer believe war is ever necessary.  To liberals the only evil is...conservatives, Trump supporters, people who oppose open borders and sex-changes for 14-year-olds.  This is so obvious it shouldn't need explaining.  The rat-bastards openly brag about how faaaabulous all those things are, and that anyone who opposes even one of 'em is eeeeevil.  (Except they don't believe in eeeevil per se so they say "Orange Hitler" and "transphobic," and "Islamophobic" and "homophobic."

Congressional Democrats and their fellators in the corrupt Mainstream Media have convinced half of all Americans that all three of those "phobias" are hateful and irrational, and have gotten the Supreme Court to implicitly agree that it's a "hate crime" to make tire tracks over what the Media always calls "pride stripes" or tranny stripes painted on the street at intersections.  

It's a hoot: The court ruled decades ago that burning the American flag was totally legal, but then eight years ago ruled that state laws making burning a so-called "pride flag" a "hate crime" punishable by fines and jail time were perfectly Constitutional!

See any double-standard there, folks?  Of course.  Is that way beyond stupid?  Of course.  

Liberal Democrat: "Yew LIE!  Duh Supreme Court nevah agreed dat burning one of ouah faaabulous 'pride flags' was a hate crime!"  Except they did, by refusing to hear any appeal when American citizens were convicted and sentenced to PRISON for burning one, or for making tire marks on a street painted to look like a gay-pride flag.  Yeah, it's insane...and yet here we are.

You know almost none of this because the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media never tells ya, and you don't have time to keep up with court cases at every level.

SO...It's fabulous and uplifting that Mollie Tibbetts's father has been able to forgive the illegal alien who...maybe, perhaps, just possibly had some minor role in what he and the Mainstream Media absolutely ASSURE us is [her brutal murder] the almost certainly unintended loss of her life.

"Loss of life."  The way the Media and this cuck put it, it's like losing your car keys.  "Gosh, I know I had my life here just a few minutes ago, but I seem to have lost it.  Wonder where I put it?"

What you don't realize is that fully half of U.S. voters think like Mollie's dad.

This explains why ALL the polls [yes, they're fake, but they're rigged this way for a reason] claim a majority of Americans oppose the U.S. attack on Iran.  Liberals would side with the ghastly Islamic regime of Iran regardless of other facts, simply because Trump made the decision to attack--but would side with the U.S. if a Democrat president made the call, because whatever Dem presidents do must be faaabulous, eh?  (Like ORDERING all Americans "Yew vill take za experimental jab, or yew vill be fired!")

But even if a liberal Republican was prezzy, Dems would side with Iran due to a fundamental principle of psychology:  most people intuitively believe that other people have at least roughly the same beliefs and values we do.  It's the same principle that allows liberals to bleat--against all logic and evidence--that "All societies are equally good!"

If you believe that, you're a Democrat voter. 

While most "others" do have roughly the same values we do, most (not all) illegal aliens and Muslims don't seem to.  If you're hazy on that: 20 years ago Muslims began putting explosive vests--wired to radio detonators--on children, and telling 'em the nice Israeli soldiers manning a checkpoint would give 'em candy.

This worked for awhile, until the Israelis warned all soldiers about the tactic.

Would you do this to any child?  Of course not.  To most Americans it's literally unthinkable.  But some illegal aliens butcher teenage girls with machetes.  So as I said: we don't share the same values.

Of course we don't see illegal aliens strapping suicide vests on children, but just murdering several thousand Americans that you never hear about.  In rare instances a rape-murder is SO ghastly, like that of Laken Riley, or unprovoked throat-cutting, like that of the 23-year-old blonde Ukrainian refugee on the tram in Charlotte, NC, will be so heinous that even the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media can't ignore it.

You don't even remember the name of the blonde refugee murdered by the schizophrenic in Charlotte.  The killer--repeatedly released from jail without bond after numerous arrests--stood up behind her and without any prior interaction at all, stabbed her in her throat three times.  It was all caught on surveillance video--which the female Democrat mayor of that shithole tried to prevent from being released.  

The expression on the fatally wounded 23-year-old's face as she realized she'd been fatally injured, should haunt you...but because the Mainstream Media delayed showing the still frames from the video for so long, her ghastly, totally unprovoked murder made no impression on you whatsoever--which was exactly what the Democrats wanted.  And it worked: you don't even recall her name.

The point is that most citizens of shit-hole countries--and schizophrenic or drug-addled Americans--have radically different values from ours.  And ignoring that will get you--or your family--killed. 

So back to the earlier question: Does God want good people to simply forgive and surrender to evil?

Consider this: Most rational people believe the Nazis were evil.  Same for the WW2 Japanese military chiefs, and for Mussolini's fascists in Italy.  The U.S. and half a dozen much smaller nations took on all three and defeated all in a bloody 5-year war.  But today all three former enemy nations are totally delightful and civilized (except for millions of Muslims invading Germany and Italy).

So: was fighting those nations in WW2 ultimately a good thing for humanity, or not?

Rational people know the answer--but make Democrats declare, because I suspect that if we were faced with the exact same threat today, congressional Democrats would block any action, bleating that 

• It's not our concern;
• It'll cost billions of dollars and thousands of American lives, so no outcome would be worth that cost;
• The situation is far too "nuanced" for us to understand, so we're better off not intervening;
• Those three nations are just trying to throw off the chains of colonialism, or capitalist exploitation, or raaacism, or corrupt leaders, see?  Dere's a reeeally good reason fo' dem takin' over places!  Nuance, deplorable!

That's where we are today with the Islamic regime ruling Iran: The Democrats are using every media interaction to scream "Another endless war!"  (It's been going on for four whole weeks.) 
  And "Look at how the price of oil has skyrocketed!"  (The price was WAY higher under Obozo.)
  They're even bleating--literally--that the mullahs of Iran are winning!  Seriously!

Eh, no worries, citizen.  The Democrats and their Media allies have it all under control:  They've already convinced Americans that the five-hour waiting time for airport screening is Trump's fault (cuz he won't agree to abolish ICE), and if the Dems and Media can get away with that bullshit, everything else is easy.

So regardless of how well the war ends, the Media and their Democrat heroes will bleat that

• The war was illegal; 
• It wasn't worth the huge cost; 
• Iran was never working on making an atomic bomb!  Perish the thought!
• "Even if the mullahs had been able to build at atomic bomb, Iran was NEVAH a threat to the U.S. cuz dey din' haz any missiles dat could get a bomb to the U.S!  An' of course dat beez duh only way to get a bomb to the U.S."

Uh...ever heard of a "container-ship," cupcake? 

Democrat: "Of course--cuz unlike yew deplorables, we're smaaaht.  Whut's yo' point?"

Well Sparky, if I wanted to strike the Great Satan as devastatingly as the 9/11 hijackers destroying the Twin Towers, I'd put a nuke in a shipping container, surrounded by lead, strontium and cobalt, and ship it to either NYC or Baltimore--along with 11,900 others on the same ship.  We don't have the resources to inspect more than one percent or so--and in any case we can't inspect anything until the ship docks.

The beauty of that method is that unlike a ballistic missile--which can be traced back to its origin by mathematically working the radar track backwards--no one would ever know which of the 12,000 containers held the bomb--so we could never be sure who sent it, eh?  So there could be no retaliation.

But of course since Democrats and their allies in the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media are smaaaht, they (and Dem voters) already knew all that, right?  It's so obvious.  So you'd think the argument--already made by the leaders of the Democrat partei--that an Iranian atom bomb isn't a threat to the U.S. cuz they don't have a big enough missile--is totally irrelevant.  And yet the Mainstream Media broadcasts that piece of absurdity as if the lack of a large enough missile removed the threat.

Wait...ya say yew hadn't thought about that?  Sure ya had, cupcake!  Cuz y'all are as smaaaht and sharp as the guy you constantly ASSURED us was "sharp as a tack:" Joe bribem.  

So where does that leave us?

No matter how well the war ends, and how fast the price of gas drops, the Dems and Media will scream that Trump was Hitler and we should never have attacked duh po' Iranian regime.  Dems will win the House in November, and that'll end any possibility of any good laws being passed for the rest of Trump's term.  Hell, even today the Democrats have refused to fund TSA (DHS), and Repub senate leader Thune refuses to make the Dems vote on a "talking filibuster."  So as long as the public doesn't figure out they're the cause of the delays, Democrats will be able to block funding for DHS until Repubs finally give up.

See, citizens, when duh Founders wrote duh Constitution, they wanted 41 votes by the minority in duh senate to prevent any law from being passed.  (For college students on the beach: the GOP has a majority in the senate, but the filibuster allows the Dems to block a bill forever with just 41 votes.  It's called "democracy," dude.  You jus' thought that meant "majority wins," eh?  Clearly it doesn't.) 

Now surely it's five o'clock somewhere. 

Oh:  Does "Irina" ring any bells?  Nah, didn't think so.

Democrat politicians *brag* about prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens

Democrat pols actually brag that they prioritize illegal aliens over U.S. citizens.  As proof, we see that they demonize ALL efforts to deport illegal alien invaders.

The main targets of Democrats are ICE agents, and we've watched for over a year as congressional Democrats have used their Media allies to demonize ICE.

The newest attack has emerged after the Dems have refused--for 45 days--to pay TSA agents.  After missing several paychecks, TSA agents are quitting and calling in sick, resulting in 5-hour-long lines at airport security and causing frustrated Americans to miss flights.

To reduce these delays, Trump ordered ICE agents to the airports to take some of the workload off overworked, unpaid TSA agents. ICE agents showed up to hand out water bottles and replace TSA in crowd control.

The lying Democrats immediately claimed ICE agents at airports would "brutalize and kill" you and your children.

Seriously, Connecticut Democrat Sen. Richard Blumenthal, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate counterpart Chuck Schumer all claimed ICE agents helping TSA at airports were really there to “brutalize and kill” you and kidnap your children.

TSA workers just missed their third paycheck, *solely and entirely because for the past 3 months congressional Democrats have refused to fund DHS--in hopes of forcing Republicans and the president to submit to their demands to eliminate ICE.*  Democrat leaders have actually bragged that their goal in causing 5-hour delays in TSA screening is to punish Americans for voting for Trump.

Democrats always find a way to excuse the inexcusable, and flip the script.  They shamelessly lie, but get away with lying because the lying, Democrat-fellating Media never call 'em out on their lie, instead eagerly parroting every utterance, making Dems seem to beparagons of truthfulness.

The Media turn the American public against ICE agents by smearing them as ­Gestapo, white supremacists, ­Nazis and “secret police.” 

Trump putting ICE agents in airports to free up more TSA agents for screening--to cut waiting time for screening, thus ease the pain of travelers--is a challenge to the lies of the Media and Dem leaders, because now people can see the agents are not the monsters the Media has been claiming.

Democrat lawmakers like Jamie Raskin and Adam Schiff and their eager parrots in the Media tell the most brazen, outrageous lies, like "Iran is winning."  They cover up Democrat crimes like massive fraud made possible by non-existent oversight, and the most minimal controls.

Remember how the Media eagerly parroted the Democrat lie that “the border is closed,” and that the ghastly Afghanistan withdrawal was a success?  How about the  Democrat claim that defunding the police makes communities safer?  

Sheridan Gorman was walking with friends on the Chicago lakeshore.  A leftist city council woman  bleated that the murder victim and
her friends “might have unintentionally startled” a masked gun-toting Jose Medina-Medina into allegedly jumping out of the bushes and shooting Gorman in the back as she ran away.

In other words, you can’t blame Democrats for sanctuary city policies.  If you're murdered by an illegal alien, welcomed into the U.S. by the bribem regime, *it's your fault.*
 

What do all the creatures below have in common?

Recognize any of these strange creatures?  If you pay attention, you do. 

 

They're all Democrats and bribem supporters.  They ARE the Democrat party. 

After 18-y.o female college student is fatally shot in Chitcongo, Pritzker blames...Trump!

After the 18-year-old was fatally shot in the back by the illegal, governor Pritzker's office released this:

 

1. Conservatives warn Democrat rulers that allowing every third-world thug into the U.S. (faaabulously euphemized as "open borders") will result in thousands of innocent Americans being killed.

2. Democrats sneer and ignore the prediction/warning;

3. Thousands of innocent Americans are killed by illegal alien invaders allowed in by Democrats presidents and corrupt congresswhores;

4. Democrats sneer and ignore, claiming more Americans are killed by American citizens, so SEE?!

5. When families of Americans murdered by illegals beg Democrats to deport illegals (to prevent future murders of innocents), Democrat politicians sneer that conservatives are "politicizing a tragedy."

6. Moronic Democrat voters--who haven't had a family member murdered--keep electing the same Democrats to power for life (J.B. Pritzker, Brandon Johnson, Chuck Schumer, Eric Swalwell, Ilhan Omar, Hakeem Jeffries, Kathy Hochul, ad nauseum).

7. Innocent Americans (like the 18-year-old female college student recently killed in cold blood in Chitcongo by an illegal) continue to be murdered.  Democrats and the Media convince voters this is totally normal.

8. Murders continue; Democrats blame Trump.

9. Democrats take control of the House in November, threaten yet another govt shutdown unless borders are re-opened.

 

Mainstream Media: "Dis is whut duh Founders intended: anyone can come to the U.S, get on welfare, become a citizen and bring their relatives in.  And thank heavens we've now been able to block anything Trump wants!" 

Another young American girl murdered by an illegal. You'll never see it on the newz

Yet another 18-year-old American female college student murdered by an illegal alien criminal, this time in the utterly lawless Democrat-ruled shithole of Chitcongo.

 

Democrats: "Sad but your title beez totally unfair to undocumented Americans, since more Americans are killed by U.S. citizens den by undocumented Americans, deplorable!  Plus the REAL problem is...gunz!!!  What's important is that this young man not be punished by being deported back to his home country.  Instead he must be allowed to remain in the U.S. and become a U.S. citizen!  Yep yep yep!  NO 'undocumented Americans' should evah be deported!  ALL must be allowed to become U.S. citizens!  We need undocumented Americans!"

Source. 

36,500 innocent Iranians slaughtered by the mullahs' killers; U.S. media virtually silent

Those few of you who pay attention to things other than the ridiculous crap broadcast by the alphabet networks may have heard that in January Iranians were demonstrating in the streets, building the critical mass needed to re-take their country from the mullahs.

At that point the IRGC and their thug brownshirts--the basijis--killed somewhere around 36,500 of the demonstrators, typically by riding by on motorcycles and blasting away with shotguns or rifles at close range  Hundreds of women blinded by shotgun pellets to the face.  Watch the damn vid.

Still don't believe it?  Try this one, then another, then another. 

You never heard about this on U.S. Media, because it would have moved millions of voters to support Trump in his efforts to remove the threat the insane mullahs of Iran posed to the world.  The U.S. media hates Trump and fawns over morons like Chuckie Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, AOC and Bernie Sanders--idiot propagandists who would say and do anything to win power.

I watched an hour of video of endless body bags, in dozens of locations.  Yes, if you had weeks and hundreds of skilled AI fraudsters, that could probably be faked.  But this wasn't.  There are tiny telltales if you know how to spot 'em.  This was real--thousands of body bags.

So..."The Australian" is a reputable mag, and this was how it reported the slaughter.  But the U.S. media?  Crickets.  

 

The Australian also pointed out another fascinating thing: The usual so-called "human rights activists" were totally silent about the mass slaughter.  

Two anti-ICE, pro-illegal protesters killed in Minneapolis and the world's propagandists go crazy.  But 36,500 or so Iranian citizens slaughtered by thugs on motorcycles, and the bullshit "human rights" propagandists don't say a word.  And yes, it's because they didn't want Americans to support Trump.

Look at the cover above.  Study it.  Maybe the folks at The Australian got fooled, eh?  Yeh, dat probably it.  

The end of the game

One of the absolute, unequivocal signs of a doomed society is when politicians, looking to hand out money for votes, have passed laws that allow 40% of the population to live off dozens of types of welfare instead of working.

Oh, y'say that's NOT what's happening in the U.S?  Google "labor force participation rate."  It's the percentage of the civilian population aged 16 and older NOT in school who are either employed or actively seeking work. As of last month it was 62%. --slightly lower than the long-term average.  In other words, 38% of those who could get a job, don't.

Dem: "Dat not true!  Dat FAKE NEWZ!"  No, cupcake, it's not. 

Democrat politicians farm the stupid and lazy for their votes.  They bribe the dumb, the dependent, the easily led, the permanently aggrieved; those whose entire existence is funded by taxpayers--and money borrowed from China, paid back with interest.

It's a fatal trajectory because once Democrat voters/fraudsters/welfare leeches have a majority, there's no way to elect a congress that will fix it.  And if anyone tried, the Lying Mainstream Media would bleat one sob-story after another about po' innocents who are too traumatized to get jobs.  Scum would rather steal hundreds of millions, by opening fake daycare centers, or "autism treatment centers," or "hospices" (48 in one office complex--which was totally empty!).  SO much more lucrative than robbing banks, eh?  Cuz virtually no one is ever caught or punished.

If anyone tries to halt the fraud, Democrat pols and the Media scream bloody murder.  You've seen it, and will continue to see it, forever: "Dis talk of fraud beez RAAAaacis!  So it's wrong to investigate!"  And the Dems fire up their base to defeat any pol who tries to go after the fraudsters.

Eh, I don't really care. cuz I'm old and don't have kids, so I no longer have a dog in this hunt.  But you 50-year-olds who DO have kids and grandchildren should be absolutely furious, cuz the Democrats have doomed your nation in order to control the government.  The U.S. is circling the drain because of MASSIVE fraud and waste, funded by borrowed money (and ultimately by taxpayers).  You don't know a tenth of it, because your Lying Mainstream Media refuses to tell ya--cuz it would hurt the Democrat (communist) Partei [sic].

I actually get a laugh at the Media's lies, relying on your stupidity or lack of interest.

And here's the ultimate hoot: When the shit hits the fan--almost certainly within the next ten years--watch the Dems bleat "Duh 'situation' yew now see wuzn't ouah fault at ALL, citizen!  We've ALWAYS opposed fraud, and wasteful government programs!  If anyone was suspected of defrauding ouah faaabulous welfare programs, we always investigated and prosecuted, so others wouldn't do the same thing!  Yep yep yep!  We've always defended working pipo!

"So keep voting fo' us, cuz dat beez duh only way to keep duh gravy train rollin'!  See, yew don' need to worry about 'your' government constantly spending more than we take in, cuz we jus' borrow whutevah we need!  SEE?  We haz it all figured out, so yew don' hafta worry 'bout nuffin'!  So keep voting Democrat!" 

Of course the internet can prove they're lying, but they know voters won't bother trying to find the videos of ghastly corruptocrats like Kathy Hochul, J.B. Pritzker, Zohran Mamdani, Brandon Johnson (do you even know who that is?), AOC, Nancy Pelosi, Ilhan Omar, Eric Swalwell and hundreds of others.  They always escape punishment because they control the courts and the Deep State, and can quash any investigation they want.  Example: Judge Boasberg, DC.

One of the enduring mysteries of history is how the powerful Roman empire--which ruled the known world--crumbled.  Answer: just as is happening to the U.S.

Robert DeNiro supports communist mayor, sees his taxes rise, gets furious

This is truly heartwarming: Shithead leftist actor Robert DeNiro has a multi-million dollar home in New York City.  DeNiro is a total leftist who gave money to elect the Muslim communist mayor of that shithole, Mamdani.

And as anyone other than a Democrat could have easily predicted, one of the communist's first acts was to increase property taxes on wealthy city property owners. 

Predictably, DeNiro apparently believed donating to get a communist Muslim elected mayor would have no negative effect on HIM.

What a HOOT!  This is an absolute classic!  Stupid leftist virtue-signaler (DeNiro) has always supported leftist pols, without ever understanding what they really intended.  And when the utterly predictable happened, Bobby is left sputtering and fuming: "I nevah thought my gud fren' wud raise MY taxes!" 

 

This is the Democrat mind-set in a nutshell: "We wanna gibs mo' billions of dollahs to duh po'!  Cuz we iz compassionate, eh?  Cuz when a Democrat ruler orders that, duh money jus' magically appears!  We don' hafta pay nuffin'.  Instead we'll write duh laws so only Rethuglicans hafta pay more!  Cuz we are REALLY clever like dat!"  

Now, anyone wanna bet that NYC's "Board of Equalization" (may have a different name there, but it's the govt agency that dictates the tax on every dwelling every year) quietly reduces the assessed value of Bobby's mansion so his taxes don't rise?  Sure.  Then Bobby gets right back on the communist bandwagon.

Hell isn't hot enough for leftist morons like DeNiro. 

Wait, what am I thinking?  DeNiro will make a deal with Satan to get an air-conditioned apartment.  Cuz he beez "connected"!

Obama lie #457,970. And not a word of pushback by the Dem-fellating Media

Obozo lied.  Repeatedly.  Continuously.  And the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media never said a critical word, because they love the Democrat party, so simply refused to criticize a single thing Obozo did.

 

Watch this one-minute video of a woman being...um...

Watch this video of a woman tied with her arms above her head, forced to stand, helpless, as a man beats her with a whip in front of a huge crowd of men.

This isn't a street crime, like a mugging or rape, but instead is a punishment approved by that government, and that bullshit "How to conquer the world" manifesto masquerading as a religion that you know all too well.

The video of the beating of this helpless, tied woman has sound, so if you're a Democrat, turn the volume up loud so you and your wife and daughters can hear her screams.  You and your wives and teenage daughters need to see and hear her screaming to realize the ugly, horrible truth that "your" Lying Mainstream Media deliberately refuses to tell you.

The Media is hiding the truth about Islam for two reasons: First and foremost, because if they told the truth about Islam, it would cost the Muzz-fellating Democrats ten million votes.  And second, because the Mainstream Media hates Christianity.  And if Islam wins, Christians lose.  Simple as that.

Oh, I hear Democrats bleating that dis not true.  Read the fucking New York Times sometime.  They never miss a chance to lambast Christianity and praise Islam--which is why they supported the Muzz communist who is now the mayor of the largest city in the country.

In the video: Count the blows as the man beats the defenseless woman as hard as he can.  Your wife and daughters may demand that you turn it off, to make her screams stop.  But this poor woman didn't have that choice:  Instead the murderous fake religion of her country--a ghastly dictatorship masquerading as a religion, in which she and millions of other women and girls are forced to live--has sentenced her to obey every order by the mullahs or be beaten--or killed.

And the irony is, liberal American women--and virtually all Democrat women are liberal/socialist--support the brutal Iranian and Paki regimes, and scream that Trump is absolutely awful for trying to prevent the Islamic regime of Iran from getting an atomic bomb.  And if you're a Democrat, chances are your wife and daughters feel the same way.  

The man was already beating this poor woman before the video started, and was still beating her when the video ended.  We don't know how long it lasted. 

Imagine your daughter tied up, being beaten like this--sometimes for not wearing the mandatory face veil, or for showing her hair, or a wrist or ankle.

Moronic Democrat: "Dat jus' nonsense!  Dey wudn't nevah beat women jus' fo' doin' dat!"  Yes, they would--and do.  You just don't wanna believe it, because it would make you think.  And Allah forbid that you should think about what your vote is supporting! 

The all-male crowd watched the poor woman being beaten, but of course no one did anything to help her--because in their ghastly fake "religion" tying a woman to a tree branch with her arms stretched over her head and beating her with flails isn't just perfectly acceptable, but is explicitly prescribed in their book.

Think about what that implies.

Of course if you're a Democrat you refuse to think about what your party supports.  You'd rather claim this is fake, or ignore it.  Anything to make it vanish, eh?  "Dis can't be real cuz ebrywun know Islam is *the* religion of peace!"  

Horseshit.  This video reveals the essence of Islam.  You just prefer to ignore it--to pretend it's fake, or that it's not part of their ghastly "religion."  And they already run several U.S. cities.  And as everyone knows, the nation's largest city has a Muzz mayor.

Liberals support Islam.  That's stupid and naive beyond belief.  Democrats were--and are-- perfectly happy for Iran to have atomic bombs.  The excuses vary: "Dey weren't really working on a bomb!  Well no, I didn't hear about any '440 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium,' and I don't have any idea what that would mean if true.
  "And even if you claim it's somehow evidence against the Iranian government I wouldn't believe it, because dey sed dey wuz jus' tryin' to do nuclear powerplants!  Plus, the source of this claim is Trump's people!  Why would anyone believe a word Trump's people say?"

"SO...dere izn't no evidence Iran wuz tryin' to build an atomic bomb.  Besides, even if they made one, dey don't have a way to get it to the U.S!  We know dat cuz Joy Reid and Mika an' Andrea Mitchell an' Jimmy Fallon said dey din'!  No, I don't know anything about container-ships, or that the big ones can hold 12,000 40-foot shipping containers, or whether the government inspects every container.  Why would I care about that?  We were talking about the fact that Iran doesn't have a missile that can reach the U.S, so how are ships relevant to getting an atomic bomb on New York City?"

"Besides, the Iranian government doesn't want to kill Americans!  Such silly paranoia by you MAGGATS!  They've never been a threat to us.  Tulsi Gabbard sed dey weren't!  An' Joe Kent--appointed by Trump--just resigned cuz he sed Iran was nevah a threat to us!  Just because tens of thousands of Iranians gather in Tehran squares to chant 'Death to America' doesn't mean they actually mean it!"

You bet, moron.  And now for the liberals' final argument:

"Since WE have atomic bombs, how can we demand that another country can't have one too?!"

These are the same liberal morons who succeeded in getting the bribem regime to make taxpayers pay for sex-change operations for children under 18 (via Medicaid) and 70-year-olds (via Medicare) and prison inmates--even for illegal aliens!  

Democrat voter: "We support all doze things, cuz it's only FAIR, deplorable!  If poor people or inmates wanna change genders but can't afford it, why shouldn't the government pay for it?"

Hollywood and the U.S. media are working furiously to defeat Republicans seven months from now, and after November they'll almost certainly control the House.  Even with a minority in the senate, they already control that chamber because they can use the filibuster.  And the RINO called Thune won't even force 'em to do a "speaking filibuster," which would expose their stupidity and corruption to voters.

Top Democrat pols are now pushing the utterly absurd claim that Trump didn't anticipate that Iran would block oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz--and not ONE member of the Mainstream Media pushes back on that absurdity--because the lie helps the Democrat party by making Trump look incompetent.

The Lying Mainstream Media will parrot ANY lie that makes Trump and the GOP look bad.  Smartest thing Democrats did was to "dox" ICE agents--putting pics of their faces on "wanted" posters, with their names and home addresses.  To spare their families, agents quickly started wearing masks--which the Dems now use to call 'em "Trump's secret police"!

Of course protesters are free to wear masks to hide *their* identity, eh?  And not a single dipshit in the Mainstream Media has *ever* pointed out the hypocrisy, nor will.  

This, folks, is called "asymmetric warfare," and the Democrats have totally mastered it.  Of course this is easier when your party has the Lying Mainstream Media and Hollywood providing air cover.

SO...where does this leave us?   Last year Trump ordered the U.S. Air Force to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment facilities, which were deep underground--too deep to be destroyed by conventional bombs.  So we destroyed the entrances, and warned Iran not to try to recover their stock of enriched uranium.  Of course they immediately started trying to do just that.

Trump and Netanyahu were then faced with a choice: either do nothing, "kicking the can down the road" to leave the problem to a later president--the classic Democrat "solution"--or force an end to the Islamic regime in Iran.

Both chose the latter.

Now: today is 19 March.  The first day of military action was 28 Feb, so we're 20 days into this.  U.S. Democrats are already wailing that this is "another endless war."  (Try a google search for those three words in quotes.)  It's a very effective tactic that can't be countered until the Islamic regime either surrenders or is destroyed.  So Democrats have an "open field:" the ability to waltz to the endzone, ruling the airwaves with "another endless war."

And when it ends, all their claims of "another endless war" will conveniently be forgotten, morphing into "American consumers are still having to pay more for gas than before Trump's illegal, undeclared, cruel war!"

Then after another few months, with the oil situation returning to normal, the Democrats will be back to claiming "Republicans are responsible for shutting down TSA because they refused to agree to the Democrats' perfectly reasonable demand that ICE be de-funded or abolished.

Whatever good things happen, it's never enough:  the Democrats will always find something to scream bloody murder about.  And the Mainstream Media and late-night communist shitheads will continue to bombard Americans with withering "jokes" about Trump being a kang, or Orange Hitler, or a pedo, or a corrupt billionaire.

And so it goes. 

https://x.com/i/status/2033842796709224784

Watch this short video. What do you think it means?

Take a look at this video.   It's a compilation of responses by dozens of Americans who are asked if they prefer Muslims screaming 'Allahu Akbar' over MAGA supporters.  And they all say they'd prefer the Muzz screaming the Muzz war-cry.

Many Americans think this video is from Boston or Minneapolis or some other liberal shithole city where the vast majority of residents are just stupid.  But it isn't from a northern, majority-liberal shithole, but instead was filmed in... Tampa.  

This is what we're facing just over seven months from now: millions of U.S. voters saying they'd prefer someone screaming ‘Allahu Akbar’ over someone wearing a red MAGA hat.  This vid is a warning.  

Tens of thousands of Iranians--regime supporters, not the young trying to be free--gather and chant ‘Death to America,’ ‘Death to Israel,’ ‘Death to every Westerner who won’t kneel.’

Liberal Democrats couldn't care less--they keep saying "We think Trump supporters are more threatening than the 'Death to America' cultists." 

This is where we are today, thanks to the Mainstream Media--people like the four late-night talk-show hosts (Fallon, Kimmel, Seth Meyers and the moronic shithead Colbert) who blast Trump with every line.  And thanks to Democrat politicians who do the same.  

https://x.com/KaitMarieox/status/2033675929893937643 

How many people watched the Oscars? And where do most of 'em live?

In 1998 over 55 million Americans watched the liberal shit-fest called the Oscars.

In 2014 that number had dropped to a just over 40 million).

Last Sunday the Nielson folks claim just under 20 million (19.69, to be exact) tuned in.  

What does this tell ya?

If you're a Democrat, it's all great.  The committee fellated their leftist stars, leftist directors and leftist writers for their liberal bleats and roles, as they've done for the last 40 years.  The cock-sucking leftists at ABC aired dozens of interviews with Trump-hating leftist actors wailing about how AWFUL it was that Trump had attacked duh po' innocent bomb-builders of Iran, after he supported Israel attacking duh po' innocent Hamas killers in Gaza.  How dare he?

Here's a fun reality check for ya: How do ya think the Nielson ratings in big Democrat-ruled cities (a.k.a shithole cities) compare with the ratings in flyover country? 

Hollywood producer: "Why should we care about dat?  Our movies are hard-left for a reason, and we'd keep making leftist movies even if we didn't make as much money, because it keeps Democrats in power *even when Republicans have the White House and majorities in both chambers of congress!*  Yep, as long as we have 41 Dem senators the Republicans can't pass a single bill we unless we agree!
   "We can de-fund DHS--by claiming ICE are 'Trump's secret police'--and the Repubs can't stop us!  We can block all bills like the 'SAVE Act' that would require proof of citizenship to vote, and the Republicans can't stop us.  And as long as most big U.S. cities are ruled by Democrats we'll have at least 46 Dem senators.  What's not to love about that much power, eh?"
   "In fact we're slowly winning control of more states--and once they go Dem, we ensure they never go back.  For example, have you ever seen a Hollywood movie where a labor union was shown as corrupt and thuggish?  No, cuz labor unions vote Dem.  So every movie we make shows labor unions as 'fighting for the common man,'' eh?
   "Who's always the villain in our movies?  Sure: a white male, always.  That gets people to believe that white male politicians are corrupt--and that's not an accident.  By contrast, you'll never see a movie where a po' 'undocumented American' or a cute, adorable trans-gender is a killer, or a movie where an 'immigrant rapes a young American girl.  Never.  And you never will, cuz that hurts the Democrat party in their demand for open borders.
  "And the real hoot is that even lots of kids in flyover country eat this up, which wins us new Dem voters and makes up for the fact that conservative Americans have more kids than liberals.
  "But we're attacking that problem too, with movies like 'The Day After Tomorrow' warning of the dangers of 'climate change' due to Americans using so much oil and gas.  The 'cool kids' have always been rebels, so we've shown that opposing the use of oil and gas, and having fewer kids, is 'protecting the Earth' and really cool!  And sure enough, U.S. birthrates are continuing to fall, and we expect that soon the conservative advantage in births will vanish." 
   "And the hoot is that even though ALL of the above is totally obvious, no one (other than far-right groups) ever notices, let alone says a critical word.  We ensure that because our movies and TV shows ridicule conservative beliefs, and no cool kid--or adult commentator--wants to be ridiculed.
   "It's SUCH a hoot that maybe two thousand powerful Hollywood liberals, and another few thousand in DC and the liberal press, can control the entire country, even without having either the presidency or a majority in either chamber of congress!
   "Is this a great country or what?" 

China has been buying Venezuelan oil despite sanctions by EU and U.S.

After Maduro stole his most recent "election," MOST of the non-communist world imposed sanctions on Venezuelan oil.  So nations that agreed with the sanctions couldn't legally buy Venezuelan oil.  Even the moronic heads of the corrupt, thug-loving EU joined the sanctions.

But of course the communists LOVED Maduro--not only because he was a fellow communist but because he provided a huge foothold for them in the western hemisphere.  Prior to Chavez and Maduro taking over Vz the commies only had Cuba, which has been impoverished for decades.  

So Russia and China have been merrily defying the west's sanctions.  As a result, the main buyer of Venezuelan oil is China, and they've been buying about half a million barrels of Vz oil every DAY.

And because the Chinese know Maduro can't sell anywhere else, they've been able to strike a deal to buy Vz oil at about $9 per barrel less than the world price, saving them $4.5 million per DAY.

It's been such a lucrative deal that for the past year China has been buying far more oil than it needs and storing it for future use.  

Another telltale: The EU and U.S. have imposed sanctions on the sale of Russian oil due to its war on Ukraine.  In the past Russia has used tankers flying third-world flags to ship its oil, since the U.S. and EU are less likely to seize a ship registered in a 3rd-world nation. 

But in the last six months Lloyds of London reports that 42 such vessels have switched to sailing under the Russian flag, presumably on the theory that the U.S. would be less likely to seize ships openly owned or leased by Russia.

The Wall Street Journal reports that tankers filled with sanctioned crude oil totalling six million barrels per day are at sea but unable to find buyers.  That represents about six percent of the world's daily demand, which is a LOT.
====

In August of 2019, during Trump's first term, the U.S. and EU imposed sanctions on Vz selling oil.  China stopped buying Vz crude oil.  But Reuters reported that just over two weeks after the Democrats stole the 2020 U.S. presidential election for bribem--on November 24th of 2020--China resumed buying oil directly from Venezuela.

Yes, Trump was still president until Jan 20th of 2021, but China's leaders knew--as did Trump--that the courts and the Deep State would block any moves to punish either Vz or China for evading the sanctions.

Question is, why were the Chinese absolutely sure bribem wouldn't retaliate?

Ohh, that's right: $40 million in bribes, collected by Hunty for the whole bribem family.  Of course this was reported by Reuters at the time, yet "your" Mainstream Media totally ignored it: you never heard this tiny li'l tidbit until just now.

Porch pirates get glitter-bombed by booby-trapped packages

I never get tired of vids of porch pirates who steal booby-trapped boxes, with the glitter explosion caught on high-resolution doorbell cameras.  

Not only is it wildly funny, the videos give a great insight into the mindset of crooks:  Watch the number of thieves who are furious that they've been busted!

 

Watch how many scream "I'm calling the cops!"  Or "I'm an important public figure!"  They scream their outrage--as virtually every thief does.  The rest of us think, Dude, you were caught stealing and you're furious that you were caught?  Ah, of course.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Wk4_YNntSn4?feature=share 

How the communists are pitching the battle against Iran's Islamic regime

The text below is from "irannewsupdate.com"  I don't know who runs that site but they're clearly not in Iran--and while they're clearly against the ruling Islamic regime, about 8 'grafs down you see the classic slogan of the communist MEK: "Neither Shah nor mullahs."

For years the "Islamic state of Iran" regime and its supporters have constantly warned Iranians “If your government falls, the country will collapse.”

The regime constantly invoked fears of civil war, national breakup, or “becoming another Syria.”  Since everyone knew Syria was a total disaster, this threat was effective in scaring Iranians into passivity:  Any oppression by the regime was better than turning into Syria!

So predictably, the regime framed any protests as a dangerous step toward chaos. "Do you want to become like Syria?  Of course not!"  So no matter how oppressive the regime got, most Iranians saw it as better than the alternatives.

But as the regime became more oppressive, and the economy worsened, that began to change.  On the ground, the feared chaos didn't happen.  Instead of social breakdown, people showed solidarity across ethnic, religious, and social lines. Instead of disorder, a form of self-organization emerged—based on mutual care, trust, and practical cooperation.

Slogans such as “Neither Shah nor Mullahs” made this clear. Society was rejecting both forms of authoritarianism: monarchy and religious rule. Protesters were not looking backward; they were pointing toward a new idea—citizens governing themselves.

Of course this is the siren song of the communists: "You can govern yourselves."  And if true, that would be great--but the communists always rise to rule.

The mullahs have never tolerated protests, responding to protests with violence.  [The regime killed 36,500 Iranians in three days in January.]

Experience shows that when a regime responds to protests with force, it's a sign of declining legitimacy.

Slogans like “Death to oppressors, whether Shah or Supreme Leader” began appearing.

Another clue that this source is likely to be the communists.

While the regime's IRGC still holds all the weapons, the old fear stories that regime change will guarantee chaos are no longer persuasive.

What's emerging is a firm “No” to inherited power, religious rule, and authoritarianism in all its forms. 

"A firm no to inheirited power" is clearly a swipe at the son of the late Shah, which again suggests that the website that posted this is run by communists, since Reza Pahlavi is the biggest rival the communists have for ruling if the Islamic regime falls.

A reasonable question is, if you're trying to overthrow a repressive regime, should you ally with people who, if you succeed, are determined to seize total power?  Cuz history shows that the communists almost always win post-revolution power struggles because they're SO experienced at it.

One of the reasons they win is that the idealistic non-communist believers in freedom naively believe that other citizens want the same thing they do, so they're always surprised by how fast and ruthlessly the communists seize control--because the communists are totally organized, while the naive young men who have just overthrown the mullahs are still celebrating their historic win. 

Because the freedom-lovers are both naive and unorganized, they're easy pickins' for the disciplined, organized communists. 

And once the communists have flooded the new government with Party members, there's no way to ever get 'em out.  They steal elections, and use the courts to protect fellow communists and jail anyone who protests--much like the Islamic regime.

So...best of luck to the people of Iran.  Cuz IF you succeed in overthrowing the ghastly, murderous, totalitarian mullahs, you're in for another fight with new demons who are just as determined to rule as the mullahs.  And if they win, you're in for another 40 or 50 years of oppression.

Ahh, I see American Democrats don't believe that.  You ignorant bastards: look at Cuba or Venezuela, or what happened to all of eastern Europe after WW2.  Any questions?

Actually you still don't have the faintest idea what really happened there, cuz your schools never taught you real history (by design) and you never thought to study it on your own.  Why am I not surprised?

Search "Solidarity" in Poland.  "Hungarian uprising 1956."  "1989 Czech uprising."  "Vaclav Havel."  "Romanian revolution."  If you don't know about all those, you're too uninformed to be a leader.  

Of course it's not your fault: "Your" schools and Mainstream Media have deliberately made those things vanish--intentionally.   

But why worry, eh?  There's no threat here, citizen!  No problem at all.  Go back to your favorite TV programs!  I hear "Dancing with the Stars" is good this season, as is "Nashville 9-1-1."  Yep yep yep.  Everything is just fine, tovarisch.  Excuse me: "citizen."   

A late comment on the U.S. capturing Venezuelan dictator Maduro

In five minutes a 30-year-old Venezuelan man--now living in the U.S.--explains the reality of the Chavez/Maduro/communist dictatorship of his country.  Yeah, five-and-a-half minutes, but it’s well worth your time to watch it.

Now: some nations are screaming bloody murder about the U.S. military seizing Maduro.  Can ya guess?

Sure: China and Russia.  What a hoot!  China has been getting roughly half a million barrels of oil a DAY from Venezuela--for way less than world prices--so was saving about $2 Billion a year by buying oil from Maduro.

Russia immediately used the U.S. capture of the communist Maduro to scream that the U.S. was again trying to force "regime change" in a much weaker communist country.  And I don't doubt that was a goal.

But we left the communist regime in place: Delcy Rodriguez--a hard-core “Chavista,” meaning a total communist--was Maduro's VP.  And after U.S. troops got Maduro she neatly took over as pres.
 
Democrats immediately began SCREAMING that Trump’s action was illegal, and the Lying Mainstream Media broadcast those people without a critical word--because the Media will do anything to make the GOP lose elections.

At 9 a.m. Saturday--just six hours after Maduro was captured--shithead Democrat senator (and Hilliary’s VP running-mate in 2016) Tim Kaine appeared on TV to say "the entire purpose of this operation was to *LOOT Venezuela’s oil.*"

Seriously, this motherfucking Democrat son of a bitch actually said that, and a dozen other top Dems in congress quickly started bleating the same thing.

At one time in the past there was a principle that said "politics stops at the water's edge."  For young Americans that meant that when our president took action, any disagreement by the opposing party in congress would NOT be bleated to the Media but would be discussed quietly, so our foreign adversaries wouldn't be able to exploit the disagreement.

But like most things that were once agreed on by both parties as good for our nation, the Dems abandoned that principle decades ago.  So now every enemy on the planet knows every exploitable wrinkle in policy fights between congress and the president, just as in Vietnam decades ago.

Hmmm.... 
 

Dems in Washington State pass a LAW ordering men can use women's locker rooms

Wokie Democrats have turned Washington state into a Dem-ruled shithole.

Most people intuitively dislike discriminatory rules.  So "non-discrimination" has become an unquestioned good thing, eh?  And Democrats have made that an art form:  In 2021 the Democrat shitheads who rule the legislature rammed through a law ordering all businesses and school locker rooms that had previously been for women to allow males claiming to be women to use those facilities, nude.

Within months a tranny--Haven Wilvitch--wailed to the wokies at the state's Human Rights Commission, demanding that the state order two spas--owned by Korean Christians, explicitly for women only--to admit him.  The state lackeys threatened to prosecute the owner for violating the Democrats' new anti-sex-discrimination law--newly expanded to include "sexual orientation."

Faced with the threat of endless fines and legal fees, the spa owners complied.

The spas soon began losing their female customers, who were understandably put off by men seeing them undressed--let alone the tranny also being nude.  So in 2022 the owners of the spas sued the state, claiming the law ORDERING them to allow nude men claiming to be women into their women-only spa was unconstitutional.

The owner claimed the settlement violated his first amendment rights to free speech and religion.  He claimed his spa had lost business after some patrons had seen "male genitals" and no longer felt safe.  He also said allowing trans-identifying men at his establishment violated his Christian beliefs.

The case finally got to court in 2023, where a Carter-appointed judge dismissed the case saying neither the state law nor the enforcement violated any of the owner's rights.

The owner of the spa appealed to the Ninth Circuit.  In a 2-1 ruling a panel rejected the appeal, RULING that Washington state's Democrat-rammed law ORDERING all businesses and schools to allow men to use all women's locker rooms and showers "does not impermissibly burden the owner's First Amendment rights to free speech, [freedom of religion] or free association.

The problem--as with SO MANY issues today--is that the Constitution is totally silent about this question.  Totally understandable: the brilliant men who wrote that magnificent document never imagined for a moment that 230 years later some woke virtue-signaling politicians would pass a LAW forcing women to allow men to watch them undress and shower.  

The Constitution's understandable silence on this is the key to the outrage, and you need to understand it.  If you're fine with this law, we need to talk--with your 14-year-old daughter present--nude.  I will also be nude.  We'll take a couple of hours to discuss the issue.  And since you must be fine with that law--since you support it--let me know and we'll meet to have a nice long discussion.

See, this is what your moronic, woke Dem pols ORDERED when they passed their LAW.  And if you're a Democrat parent you're totally fine with it, eh?

Dem voter: "NOOooo!  I din' vote fo' dat!"

Yeah, you did, cupcake.  You just didn't see the inevitable result of electing woke Dems to make laws.  Like so many other Democrats, you didn't think about it--not for a second.

If you don't see the connection between your vote and the inevitable consequences, imagine me sitting across from your daughter, both of us nude, and her being FORCED--by the LAW passed by the dipshits you elected--to be there, nude.

(To avoid the inevitable claim by Dems: I don't seriously expect any Democrat to take me up on this demonstration of Democrat hypocrisy.)

SO...to overcome the dismissal by the woke lower court judge, the Christian, Korean-owned women-only spas had to show the Democrat judges in either leftist Seattle or at the equally leftist Ninth that the insane law rammed through by the woke Democrat shitheads who control the state legislature--was unConstitutional.

Problem is, since the Constitution doesn't directly address this insanity, the best the attorneys for the spa owners could come up with was "This violates our rights under the First Amendment."

A Dem/leftist judge in the Washington state--Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, appointed by the moronic Jimmy Carter on nomination by two Dem senators from the shithole state--dismissed the case (ruled against the spas).

Normally that would have been the end of it.  But in this case the spa owners appealed to the Ninth Circuit (based in California) on the grounds that the law violated their rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association.  

Most of the judges in the Ninth Circuit are ultra-left liberals, and by a 2-1 vote a majority-leftist 3-judge "panel" quickly affirmed the dismissal by the leftist lower-court judge in Washington state.  Case closed, and another win for leftists and trannies, eh?

Now read how the two leftists on the 3-judge panel rationalized their ruling:

We note that the Spa did not challenge [the law's definition of "sexual orientation"], nor the language of the statute.  They didn't argue that the law was vague or that the plaintiffs' conduct [refusing to allow nude men to use the womens' facility] was not within the statute’s definition of discrimination on the basis of gender expression or identity. Nor did they challenge the State's implementing regulations.
    Although the enforcement action is grounded in state law, the Spa sued on First Amendment grounds.  Because the enforcement action did not violate the Spa’s First Amendment rights, we affirm the district court’s dismissal.

Notice the italicized phrase above: the wokie leftists on the Ninth use "grounded in state law" as if it settles the matter, when the entire case was challenging the constitutionality of that law.

For those of you who don't track legal opinions: the courts have RULED that burning the American flag is "freedom of speech."  Lap dances are protected as freedom of speech.  Same for wearing a T-shirt bearing obscenities.

By stark contrast, the Ninth has ruled that schools can prohibit students from wearing T-shirts bearing the American flag--cuz dat could offend illegal alien invaders, and Lord knows we can't go doing that, eh? 

So as you all surely realize by now, freedom of speech is whatever a leftist judge on any given day DECREES it is--an infinitely elastic concept that judges can apply any way they wish.  

And the wokie judges ruled "freedom of speech" or religion or association does NOT bar woke Dem pols from passing LAWS ordering that men can use womens' locker rooms and showers.  See, duh Constitution doesn't explicitly prohibit such laws, eh citizen?  So because the Founders never imagined this needed to be addressed, wokie judges agree that pols can pass laws demanding it.  See? 

Wait, neither flag burning nor lap dances are explicitly allowed by that same document, yet woke judges RULED they're protected as freedom of speech.  Starting to get it yet?

Now, a longstanding legal principle is that laws are unconstitutional if they're "vague."  So the two woke leftists on the Ninth Circuit rationalized their upholding the dismissal by noting that the law passed by the Democrat rulers of Washington state was NOT vague.  So dat fine.  Then they noted the plaintiffs didn't claim the law didn't apply to them, so dat fine too.  Finally they noted that plaintiffs didn't challenge the "implementing regulations."  So again, fine.

So because those legal details were observed, everyt'ing beez fine, deplorables!

The two wokie judges of the Ninth never bothered to consider the fact that the Washington state law ORDERING that women-only locker rooms and Christian-owned spas MUST allow men unduly burdens women.  "Cuz duh Constitution duzn't explicitly bar such laws!"

Because the brilliant men who wrote that magnificent document never imagined for a moment that 230 years later some woke virtue-signaling dipshits would pass a LAW forcing women to allow men to watch them undress and shower.  

I'd ask if you're starting to understand what your moronic, woke Dem lawmakers have done yet, but if you're a Democrat, you'll deny that you understand the connection.  Cuz you're cool with your daughter being forced to be nude around nude men, eh?

At least you *claim* you're cool with it.  So again, let me repeat my offer that will let you know if you're kidding yourself.  Let's meet, with your daughter, nude.  Any takers?  Nah, didn't think so--and of course that's totally logical and reasonable.

And it gets worse:  After the two woke shitheads at the Ninth upheld the lower-court dismissal of the spa owners' lawsuit, the owners immediately petitioned for an "en banc hearing"--meaning they wanted the entire court to rule on the matter.  But of course most leftist judges don't want to go on the record pushing this woke bullshit.  So to keep their leftist friends from having to go on the record, the same judge who wrote the 2-1 opinion rejecting the appeal *also* denied the en banc rehearing.

The wokies here were Ninth judges Margaret McKeown--age 74--and Ron Gould, both appointed by Bill "cigar" Clinton, while the lower-court wokie was Carter-appointed Barbara Rothstein. 

(Seven years ago Margaret McKeown and Ron Gould ruled that a male prisoner who wanted to be a female had the absolute right to get sex-change hormones and surgery at taxpayer expense.  "Cuz dat whut duh Founders wuda wanted, citizen!  Dis po' prisoner iz entitled to sex-change, but don' gots duh cash t'pay fo' it, so yew gots t'pay fo' it--cuz duh Founders wanted dat!"
   Starting to see a pattern yet?  Sure: either the Founders DID envision this, or they didn't.  But you don't get to vote, citizen.
   And in February of last year Gould voted to overturn two proof-of-citizenship laws in Arizona.)

Now here's the ultimate test to prove that the three woke judges are corrupt (in the legal sense):  Ask 'em "Do you claim your ORDER is what the Founders intended?"

Obviously only two answers are possible:  Either the Founders intended this result, or they didn't. 

Clearly--at least to rational Americans--the Founders never imagined anyone  would demand that women be forced to undress in front of men.  So we're left with having to guess what the Founders would have said had they been asked this question back in 1789.

Democrat judges and voters:  "Easy!  Duh Founders wuz, like, *totally cool with dere wimmin bein' nude around men dey din' know!  My friend had a brother who once had a letter from Tom Jefferson to John Adams sayin' how he couldn't wait for the next sex party!  Unfortunately he lost the letter in a move, but yew kin believe him cuz he beez a judge!"

Of course that's a joke: There's no evidence at ALL that the Founders would have wanted this.  So we're left with having to guess.

Of course yew don' get to vote--cuz three leftist judges have decided that question FOR you.  Cuz dat how a cool socialist society works, right?  Dems rule, conservatives shut the fuck up and obey, eh?

Finally, to all you Democrats who claim to support this RULING: don't forget my earlier offer:  If you really support this insane RULING, bring your daughter to a meeting with me, all of us nude, eh?  But of course you don't support this at all--you just bleat that you do, cuz it's cool virtue-signaling.  And of course that's how Dems prove they're part of the team.

Source.

https://reason.com/volokh/2026/03/12/judge-vandyke-this-is-a-case-about-swinging-dicks/

"Someone" bombs an Iranian nuclear complex

You have no idea what the pic below is, because the Lying, Scum-sucking Democrat-fellating U.S. Mainstream Media won't show ya or tell ya.

Refusing to tell you what's really happening is how they're undermining Trump, which they hope will enable the Islamic rulers of Iran to win the war.  And of course Democrats will be delighted:  They're happy to pay any price if it gives them power and removes Trump.  It's how they roll.

So with that said, take a look: 

 

This is an Iranian nuclear research complex.  Fairly small--if you look at the vehicles in the parking lot you'll see it's barely 1,000 feet long--just a bit over 3 football fields, eh?  So how much of a threat can it be, right?

A few days ago "someone" dropped 3 "bunker-buster" bombs on this facility in Iran. 

The Lying Mainstream Media won't tell ya, but this war was not about Iran funding terror groups, or about the mullahs slaughtering 36,500 Iranian protesters, but about...nuclear weapons.  Always.  The pic above is of Iran’s Parchin complex, before and after U.S. strikes on 9-10 March.  

Way back in 2011--15 damn years ago!--the IAEA identified Parchin as the location of experiments consistent with nuclear weapon development.  In 2018 Israel released 55,000 pages from Iran’s Amad Plan archive showing Parchin’s role. 

In 2015 the IAEA made just one inspection of Parchin, and detected fissionable particles.  Iran then refused further access.  You don't do that if you're doing innocent things.

Short answer: the IAEA spent fifteen years trying to inspect Parchin, and Iran refused.  Obozo and bribem refused to act, allowing the mullahs to continue working on a bomb.  Trump (or maybe Israel) acted. 

Iran has two choices: surrender, or try to out-wait Trump, hoping the Democrats will force the U.S. to give up--which all Democrat congresswhores are trying to do.

The war cost $11.3 billion in six days. The only oil tankers using the Strait of Hormuz are carrying oil to China, nowhere else.  Dubai’s refineries burn from Iranian strikes.  

The war is about nuclear weapons.  Trump was determined Iran wouldn't get one.

https://x.com/shanaka86/status/2031993064756306055

 

Iran's new leader can't attend his inauguration, so regime presents a cardboard cutout

Last Tuesday Iran began showing photos of a large cardboard cutout of the new appointed head of the regime, Mojtaba Khamenei--son of the dead former ruler--at a ceremony celebrating his appointment as the country’s leader.

No one is sure why he didn't appear in person, but there's speculation that he was injured in the same strike that killed his father.

Of course the regime's other high officials understandably didn't want to admit the new ruler had been injured, since that might spur young Iranians to continue to protest.  So they needed Plan B. 

Their solution was...novel: The inauguration ceremony went on as planned, but without Mojtaba Khamenei.  Instead the high officials showed a full-size cardboard cutout of a man with a photo of Mojtaba’s face at the top.

This is what passes for strategic thinking by Islamic dictators.

But the cardboard stand-in doesn't mean the Islamic regime can't survive the U.S. attacks.  All American actions controlled by the "election cycle."  All adversaries know that as elections approach, the U.S. Left/Democrats/communists will scream that we MUST stop whatever the administration is doing to clean up the world.

So "Cardboard Khamenei" and his regime have a chance to remain in power for decades to come. All the need to do is survive for another two months, and Democrats in the U.S. will rescue them.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/cardboard-khamenei/ 

CBS headline says U.S. troops were killed *in Iran.* "SEE? Trump has invaded!"

Notice anything odd about this headline on the CBS "Newz" website? 

 

The Democrats are bleating that Trump is gonna put "boots on the ground," as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan.  They're counting on voter fear of another long war with U.S. troops on the ground in Iran.  So the headline is a "We WARNED you stupid Trump voters!"

But there aren't any U.S. troops in Iran.  The headline is a lie--deliberate, cunning.  "Oh we din' mean dey wuz akshually in Iran.  We wudn't wanna mislead voters by makin' em think Trump had already sent troops into Iran.  We wud NEVAH mislead voters!"  

Sure you didn't, lying sons of whores.

The Mainstream Media hates Trump and loves all Democrats, no matter how anti-American or just stupid.  The CBS headline is just another example.  

Source: CBS Newz 

Member of the British parliament: "Babies are born wifout sex and must decide for demselves."

Meet Dawn Butler.  Dawn has some...unusual ideas.  But dat okay, cuz ebrywun beez allowed to think anything dey want, right?  So Dawn's...unusual...ideas have no effect on you, eh? 

 

Oh wait...Dawn is a black member of the British parliament.  And she supports every nutty liberal position.  And the other liberals support everything she wants, because "Dere's strength in numbers, comrade!"

And in the U.K today if you criticize Islam or trannies, either verbally or on social media, you get thrown in jail.  Let that sink in for a minute. 

Source: 

"Atomic bombs for dummies"

Of course you're not a dummy!  You're a highly-educated, respected expert in whatever your field is...just like Katie Couric or Hakeem Jeffries or Chuckie Schumer, eh?  So you'll already know everything I've explained below, eh?

Nuclear physics is the key to atomic bombs.  And if you wanna understand what's going on with Iran, you need to understand nuclear physics.

Unfortunately the odds are 10,000 to one that you don't know jack-shit about nuclear physics--in which case your opinions about Iran are worth virtually nothing, because you know almost nothing relevant about nuclear weapons.

So read on to see how much you knew.  Trigger warning: If you're a Democrat you will deny every fact below, cuz "We reject any facts we find upsetting!"  Totally true.  And with that intro...

In highschool, or maybe freshman year in college, you may recall things called "isotopes," eh? Sure ya do!  They're atoms of the same element but with different neutrons, so different masses, eh?

Now: "natural" uranium consists almost entirely of two isotopes: U-235 and U-238.  The latter has 3 more neutrons.  About 99.28% of all the uranium on Earth is U-238, while less than one percent is U-235.  (If you're curious it's less than three-quarters of one percent.) 

Only one of those two atoms supports "fast fission" needed to make a bomb.  Fortunately for humans, it's the lighter U-235...the one that's less than one percent of all uranium atoms.

Humans also got another lucky break:  the *other* isotope--U-238--not only doesn't do "fast fission," it actually absorbs the particles that would have made the other isotope go boom.  So U-238 actually opposes the boom.

And in fact to build a bomb you have to remove almost all the "bad" isotope, so that your uranium is 90% U-235.

Econ majors: "What's the big deal?  Can't we just order U-235 instead of U-238?"

Fortunately you can't, cuz all uranium in the world is already pre-mixed to 99.28% unusable, less than one percent that'll go boom.

Journalism majors: "I din' take chem, cuz dat's fo' geeks, an' I wuz a cool kid, but lotsa pipo sed yew can do "chemical reactions" to do damn near anything!  So there should be a way to separate 'em using a simple chemical reaction, right?"

Thanks for playing, Katie Couric, but no, because even though one of the isotopes can go boom while the other can't, the two are chemically identical, which means they act exactly alike in chemical reactions.  (An atomic bomb is NOT a chemical reaction, unlike dynamite or TNT or gunpowder.)

So the only way to separate the two is to use their infinitesimal weight difference.

Film majors: "My nerdy sister dated another nerd (obviously) who had a really expensive scale that could weigh something to one one-thousandth of a gram.  Will that work?"

Not even close.  The difference in weights between the booming and boom-killing isotopes is 
0.0000000000000000000000005 (5 x 10^-24) grams.  That's not hyperbole, but literal.  Beginning to see the problem yet?

Since atom bombs exist, obviously there's a way to separate 'em, but it's unbelievably costly: you build thousands of expensive "gas centrifuges,"  turn U into gas, spin it at 100,000 revolutions per minute or so, and the heavier isotope gets thrown a thousandth of an inch wider than the lighter one.  But it's only slight, so you have to recover the "good" stream and do it again.  And again and again, to get it to the 90% U-235 to make a bomb.  Got it?

This process is called "enrichment," and the Islamic regime of Iran has been doing it for at least 15 years--deep under mountains where bombs couldn't reach.

Now: During the last round of negotiations between us and the Islamic regime, Iranian representatives told US officials they'd managed to enrich 460 kg of uranium to 60% of the explosive isotope.  They were reportedly proud of having evaded inspection "protocols" negotiated by the Obozo regime to prevent Iran from accumulating uranium enriched beyond 10%.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreed closely, reporting Iran had about 441 kg of 60% uranium, but that much of this material was reportedly buried under rubble after strikes in June 2025. 

Experts say it would only take about ten days to enrich 60% uranium to 90% (weapons-grade), able to produce about 11 atomic bombs.

And once uranium has been enriched to 90%, all physics people know making the actual bomb is trivially easy: you just slap two half-grapefruit-size hemispheres into each other.

SO...when Democrat morons on TV bleat that "Iran was no threat to the U.S, ask 'em 
   1) Has the Islamic state of Iran killed thousands of Americans in the past?
   2) They claim to be enriching uranium to fuel nuclear powerplants, which only need 10%. Have they been enriching uranium to way more than the 10% needed?
   3) Why do you think would they go to that huge expense and effort when powerplants only need 10%?

   4) Why do you think the Lying Mainstream Media hasn't made this clear? 

Source.

 https://www.google.com/search?q=did+iranian+negotiators+admit+to+having+400+kg+of+60%25+uranium