What's the real origin of oil and gas?

I wrote the article below in early 1999.  Seems to have weathered 27 years fairly well.

For almost a century the scientific consensus has been that oil, gas and coal were produced from biological material.  Specifically, the theory has been that dead plants (or perhaps tiny marine organisms), buried under thousands of feet of sediment for millions of years at just the right temperature, were eventually transformed into one of these three fuels.

This "biogenic theory" got started when British naturalists noted that peat--a combustible substance recognizably composed of compressed plant material--was often found above coal deposits.  And coal often contained plant fossils.  It wasn't much of a leap to conclude that coal was probably just peat that had been compressed at a higher pressure for a much longer time.

Oil, in turn, was often found under or near coal deposits.  Oil certainly looked like liquified coal, and burned even more readily than coal or peat.  Because of these similarities and the frequent proximity of oil to coal, it was reasonable to believe there might be some connection between all three fuels.  If so, then since peat was recognizably composed of biological material, and coal seemed to be like peat, then oil also probably came from biological sources.

This "biogenic theory" got a big boost about a century ago when it was discovered that decaying plant and animal matter gave off methane.  Since natural gas is mostly methane, the biogenic theory was looking better and better.

About 80 years ago the biogenic theory seemed to be further confirmed when researchers found that most crude oil contained a variety of molecules that were also found in the cell walls of bacteria.  Researchers also found that most petroleum can rotate polarized light--a well-known characteristic of biological molecules.  This discovery pretty much ended most debate on the origin of oil, gas and coal.

But from the outset a handful of scientists questioned this conclusion.  In 1877, Mendeleev (of periodic-table fame) published a paper explaining why most hydrocarbons probably didn't come from biological sources, but rather from a source below all sediment layers.  Since then other scientists have found bits of evidence that seemed to contradict the idea of biologic origin.  For the most part, though, anyone who openly questioned the biogenic theory was loudly ridiculed.

But gradually over the past century, evidence has been found suggesting that the conventional wisdom about the origin of oil and gas is wrong--that these substances don't come from biological sources after all.

If this is true, it could radically change world events for the better.

The first challenge to the theory that coal came from compressed plants was the discovery in coal beds of an occasional fossil that was three-dimensional and only slightly compressed.  If coal was produced by squeezing plant debris at high pressure for millions of years, everything found in coal beds should be squashed completely flat.  How had these rare fossils managed to remain three-dimensional?

In the 1870s the crushed-plant theory of coal was further confounded by the discovery of a large vertical crack filled with coal.  If the compressed-plant theory of coal formation was correct, coal should not have been able to form in a vertical crack.

The biogenic-source theory also has a hard time explaining why some geographic regions contain so much more oil and gas than others.  For example, in the Middle East a mere 2% of the Earth's surface contains 60% of all the oil discovered so far.  If the biogenic theory were correct, such a huge amount of oil would require unusually large volumes (or unusually high qualities) of both source and reservoir rocks.  But the subsurface formations actually found in the Middle East so far are no different--either in quality or amount--from those in other parts of the world.

Another problem with the biogenic theory is that although oil from shallow reservoirs contains molecules identical to those found in the  bacteria, oil from deeper formations doesn't.  If all oil came from biologic sources, why are these telltale biological molecules missing from deep oil?

Some of the other arguments for the non-biologic origin of most oil and gas are:

1. Oil and gas fields are often found in long lines or arcs stretching hundreds of miles.  Such long lines are on the scale of large crustal structures rather than the much smaller scale of
sedimentary deposits.

2. Most hydrocarbon-rich areas have vertically stacked deposits at many different levels all the way down to the "basement" rock, roughly a billion years old.  These different levels correspond to widely separated time periods.  For the biogenic theory to be correct, exactly the same small area would have to have repeatedly played host to large quantities of biological material at several different periods separated by millions of years, while areas just a few miles away *never* had similar luck.  This seems most unlikely.  [Of course one could argue that a single biologic source of oil or gas at great depth would diffuse upward and charge several different reservoirs above it.]

3. Methane is found in many locations where a biogenic origin is unlikely: in fissures in igneous and metamorphic rocks; in active volcanic regions even where there is little sediment; in fractures in basement rock, etc.  If methane, like oil, comes from biological sources, how did it get into these locations?

4. Oil from a given region of the globe often has a unique chemical "signature", regardless of the particular field or the age of the formation that produced the oil.  For example, oil from the Middle East is chemically distinguishable from oil from California.  This suggests that all the oil in the entire region came from a common source.  This is consistent with a deep source but inconsistent with shallow biologic origins.

5. Both oil and natural gas are often associated with unusually high levels of helium--an inert gas not associated with any compound.   Nothing in the biogenic theory accounts for this.  However, helium is produced by a common radioactive decay process deep in the earth.
 

Finding the true origin of oil and gas isn't just a matter of academic interest, because if most oil and gas DOESN'T come from biologic sources it would mean that huge areas of the Earth that are known to have little sediment--and have therefore been ignored in the search for oil or gas--might instead contain commercial quantities.  If true, this could radically alter the geopolitical situation.
 

So if oil, gas and coal don't come from crushed plants, where DID they come from?  Mendeleev and dozens of other scientists believed the source is carbon and methane deep within the earth, far below the crust and all sedimentary deposits.  This carbon and methane got there when the Earth was formed from the accretion of cosmic debris.

The best evidence that carbon exists below the crust is found in certain volcanoes.  Those associated with lava often expel huge volumes of CO2, while cooler "mud volcanoes" often vent methane.  Based on the current rate of methane flow from these mud volcanoes and the calculated age of some mud volcano areas, Gold calculated that the total amount of methane expelled in some of these fields is many times larger than the largest gas field ever discovered.  Yet the volume of sediment in those areas is far too small to have produced or contained even a fraction of the calculated volume of gas.

Another clue that large quantities of carbon are constantly coming to the surface from deep in the Earth is found by examining carbon dioxide (CO2) in the oceans and atmosphere.  At the ocean's surface, carbon dioxide from the air is continuously dissolving into the water.  Eventually this CO2 precipitates out of the seawater as various carbonates, which fall to the sea floor and ultimately form limestone and other rocks.

The rate at which dissolved CO2 precipitates out of seawater is known from experiment.  At this rate, all the CO2 now dissolved in the oceans would have precipitated out as carbonates in around 10,000 years.  Since the level of dissolved CO2 in ocean isn't falling, apparently the ocean is constantly being recharged with CO2 from the air.

But all available evidence suggests that, like CO2 levels in the oceans, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has also stayed fairly constant over the last few thousand years.  (We'll ignore the rise over the last century, which some scientists believe is the result of humans burning fossil fuels.)  If atmospheric CO2 is constantly being lost to the oceans, what's been keeping atmospheric CO2 levels relatively constant?  Gold thinks the answer is CO2 from deep inside the Earth.

(To get an idea of the scale for the processes being considered here, Gold estimates that the total amount of carbon in carbonate rocks is equivalent to about 17 kg for every square centimeter of Earth's surface.  By comparison, the carbon in atmospheric CO2 is barely 0.0001 kg per sq.cm.  Thus an infinitesimal annual rate of expulsion of "deep" CO2--made by heating carbonate rocks--would be enough to replenish all the CO2 in the atmosphere.)

But the most unusual argument for the presence both of unoxidized carbon and various carbon-containing gases at depths far below the basement is the existence of diamonds.  These can only be formed at the pressures found at depths of 100 to 300 kilometers.  Although the temperature at such depths is well above that needed to make diamonds change back to the more stable graphite form of carbon if they were at normal atmospheric pressure, the high pressures 100-plus km. below the surface keep the diamonds intact.

If the hot diamonds were slowly raised to the surface they'd change to the graphite form as the pressure decreased.  Since diamonds clearly exist, this can't be happening.  Tom Gold believed the only way diamonds can avoid this is if they're raised from great depth almost instantly, in gas bubbles. 

For 200 years scientists have known that when pressure on a gas drops, it cools instantly.  And going from a deep zone to any shallower zone--like the surface--pressure drops dramatically.  Since gases cool instantly when their pressure is reduced, an upward-exploding gas bubble would instantly cool the diamonds and prevent 'em from turning back into carbon.

This theory would explain a mystery:  Diamonds are often found in formations called Kimberlite pipes--funnel-like structures that look much like volcanic throats, but no lava is associated with them and their walls show no evidence of having been exposed to the heat of lava.  Gold believes these funnel-shaped structures were created when large quantities of high-pressure gas--sometimes containing diamonds-- blasted to the surface.  Although the gas would initially be very hot, it would cool instantly as it expanded, which explains why the walls of the pipe near the surface show no evidence of heat.

Interestingly, diamonds also provide direct evidence that gases containing carbon exist at depths greater than 100 km, because microscopic pores in diamonds have been found to contain both CO2 and methane.
 

Gold believed packets of high-pressure gas at depth work their way toward the surface in a series of short jumps.  Successive packets (which Gold calls "domains") are sporadically recharged from the next lower packet until they accumulate enough pressure to rupture the local rock and thus start the next jump.  As a packet of gas rises, it expands and its pressure drops.  Finally when the pressure of the gas falls too low to displace the surrounding rock, the jump stops.

Gold believed these upward jumps of deep gas may be the source of the frequent deep, small-amplitude earthquakes detected near many oil and gas fields.  If true, the great frequency of occurrence of these deep, non-damaging quakes shows that the upwelling phenomenon is still occurring in many parts of the world today.

This cascade effect would explain another enduring mystery: the existence of unexpected--and dangerous--"overpressured zones" sometimes encountered by drillers.  Drillers know from experience about how much pressure to expect at any given depth.  They then try to control this "formation pressure" by keeping the drill hole filled with dense drilling mud as they drill.  But if the mud is too dense, the hole will be damaged--sometimes so badly that it won't produce oil if any is found.  So the driller must control the density of the mud so as to just barely exceed the pressure at the bottom of the hole.

This works as long as the pressure at the bottom of the hole behaves in the predictable way.  But once in every few thousand wells the drill bit penetrates a region containing gas at a far higher pressure than should exist at that depth.  When this happens, the gas begins flowing into the hole and up toward the surface--expanding as it goes.

If the drill crew recognizes what's happening in time they can trigger a device that slams a thick steel blade across the top of the hole, cutting through the drill pipe but sealing the hole.  But if they're a fraction of a second late, the gas bubble bursts out the top of the hole with enough force to throw 20 tons of drillpipe hundreds of yards.  It's called a blowout, and the unchecked gas roars like a tornado.  Usually the gas finds a source of ignition and turns the rig into a charred, twisted wreck.  In a few cases the roaring flow of burning gas has continued for over a year, shooting a torch a hundred or more feet in the air.
 

If upward migration of mantle gas is an accurate model, large faults in basement rock should provide a path of lower resistance which would presumably be used by greater-than-average quantities of gas.  And indeed, geologists have found that once a discovery has been made, they're most likely to find additional fields by drilling along any deep fault that can be identified.  Supporters of the biogenic theory have never come up with a convincing explanation for this fact.

Upward migration of deep oil or gas would also explain the well-known fact that areas having oil or gas production at one level often have productive zones at many levels down to the earliest sedimentary rocks.  (In fact, it appears that in ALL areas with shallow production, the underlying formations at least show evidence of hydrocarbon passage, even if no commercial quantities remain.)

In the Hugoton field in southwestern Kansas one can see this vertical stacking not only down TO the basement rock (i.e. below the earliest sediment) but actually into it, with several wells producing commercial quantities from fractured basement rock.  When supporters of the biogenic theory are asked to explain this, they speculate about basement faults opening up and sucking gas down from shallower zones.  Since this would involve movement from areas of lower pressure to areas of generally higher pressure, this explanation seems a bit strained.

Continuing upward migration of deeper gas would also explain the observation that some coal fields produce much more methane than could be expected from gasification of the coal itself.  In fact, some coal mines in Japan have had to be abandoned because even with maximum forced ventilation, explosive quantities of methane kept flowing in.  Since no natural gas has been found adjacent to the mines, this would seem to suggest a deeper gas source.
 

As noted earlier, if the true source of most oil and gas is deep within the Earth instead of in sediments, a lot more areas are likely to be productive of commercial quantities of oil and gas.  But if the theory outlined above is true, the story has two other, wider lessons for us:  1) the "experts" aren't always right; and 2) a great deal that we *think* we know may not actually be settled after all.

In the author's humble opinion, the century-long misconception of the true source of oil and gas ranks with a handful of long-lived errors by the scientific establishment, like the official belief that the Earth was flat or that ulcers were caused by eating spicy foods.  As such, it's a story everyone should hear.

--sf, February 16, 1999

---

[For a full recounting of this theory see "Power from the Earth", Thomas Gold, 1987 (J.M. Dent & sons, London)]
 

Feds have demanded that Cali turn over voter registrations; state officials refuse

As tens of thousands of late votes in California mysteriously arrive with 70% for the socialist candidate Nithya Ramen, state officials have refused to allow a federal audit of its voter rolls.

The U.S. Attorney for southern California, Bill Essayli, said Sunday his office wants to scrutinize the state’s electoral system as eyebrows have been raised over a sudden surge in late votes for Democratic candidates.

“California allows first-time voters to register using forms of ID that most Americans would find surprising,” Essayli wrote, listing as examples health club membership cards, employee identification cards, credit or debit cards, prescription drug labels and insurance cards.

As even the dumbest Democrat can see, not one of these documents verifies that a would-be voter is an American citizen, eh?  But in Cali, no matter: dey lets non-citizens and dead pipo vote, cuz it helps Democrats steal elections. 

Federal officials have requested copies of all voter registration applications submitted between Dec. 1, 2023, and July 1, 2025.  California's Dem-ruled government has refused, claiming "privacy restrictions."  The feds countered that federal election laws preempt state privacy rules, whether those are laws or merely demands by state fraudsters.

Essayli said the case is now before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

California law requires voters to provide a California driver’s license number, state identification number or the last four digits of a Social Security number when registering. But if a would-be voter doesn't have either of those forms of identification, no problem: the "law"--passed entirely by Democrats--allows Democrat "election officials" assign a unique identifying number "to validate the registration."  And that's a "may" instead of mandatory.  And of course they're not actually required to validate anything.

The state’s "rules" (which Democrats claim aren't subject to the "supremacy clause" in the U.S. Constitution) list dozens of what the corrupt state has deemed acceptable identification documents for first-time federal election voters.

Those "rules" order election officials to interpret identification requirements liberally and resolve any doubts in favor of allowing would-be voters to cast "regular ballots"--meaning ballots which are immediately counted, without being subject to verification of the voter's legitimacy as so-called "provisional ballots" are.

SO...the Democrats have stolen two more elections--for governor of Cali, and mayor of Los Angeles.  But you don't live in California so why should you be concerned, eh deplorable?  See, dis beez "democracy" in action!

"Rising stars" in the Democrat Partei

Because you only pay attention to candidates in your state, you don't see the pattern: you rarely see anything about the dozens of "up-and-coming Democrat stars," like Darializa Avila Chevalier, Manny Rutinel, Chris Rabb, James Talarico, Mai Vang, Brad Lander, Graham Platner, Maureen Galindo, Shelby Campbell, Raymond Chandler who are total communists.  You simply never hear about 'em.

Some of 'em have already lost in the primaries, but some are headed for congress.  SO... save this post, for the list of "Dem stars" above, and let's see how they do in November. 

More to the point: These people are the new Democrat partei.  When they get elected they'll push the Partei further to the left.  But hey, you don't care, right?  Cuz dey iz frum some udder state, so dey don' affect you, right?

Geez.  

Moronic Democrat beta moonbats WAIL dat Trump haz RUINED duh reflecting pool!

Under bribem the proposal was $300 MILLION and two years to fix the reflecting pool.

The pool is now cleaned and painted, for $13 million, and took 4 weeks--and TDS-obsessed beta moonbats are WAILING dat dis is duh mos' awfullest thing EVAH!  "How DARE he doo dis?!  We loved it green and filled wif dat faaabulous natural algae!"

Beta moonbat wail #2: "He din' go thru the approved federal bidding process!  Sure, it would have taken two years to select a contractor (one of Nancy Pelosi's friends) but it wud have been totally 'by the book,' which is what we DEMAND.  Well, unless you're one of us, in which case corruption and kickbacks are totally fine!"

Watch the vid below.  Democrat: "Dat beez fake!  Dat beez AI!!  Duh guy is right, of course, but it's still FAKE!  We haz spoken!"

 

x 

New poll shows why all big Dem-ruled cities and states are shit

If you're a normal American, puzzled by why so many blue-haired trans are rioting in our streets, preventing the government from deporting illegal-alien criminals, fatally stabbing 66-year-old grandmothers and 23-year-old girls in commuter trains, raping and killing at will, stealing elections with vote fraud, the answer is buried at the bottom of this brand-new survey:

 

There ya go.  Now if we could just get those rat-bastards to go AWAY...

With Dems screaming about duh high price of gas, let me put ya some knowledge about oil

Most people know almost nothing useful about oil, which is understandable: I don't know squat about Taylor Swift or the Kardashians.  Problem is, Democrats cunningly exploit your ignorance to your detriment.  I'd like to try to offset that a bit.

Twenty-one years ago (2005) the U.S. imported an average of 12.55 million barrels of oil every DAY (imports minus exports).  If we had to do this today, America would be having to pay oil-exporting nations roughly $1.1 BILLION per DAY.

Fortunately, beginning around 1975, U.S. oil producers--at their sole risk and cost--began to use a drilling technology previously only used offshore, called "directional drilling."  To do it, drillers start a well normally, but then after a few thousand feet down, they manage to bend the pipe so the drill is now drilling horizontally instead of vertically.  This allows the borehole to intersect known faults that tap distant oil deposits.

This technology is both far more difficult and far more expensive than drilling straight down, but the extra productivity makes it worth the extra cost.

Then around 1985 a totally different technology--again developed by oil companies at their own cost and risk--increased oil production even more.  Oil is often trapped in upside-down U structures underground.  Companies had long used "seismic shooting" to map underground strata to find these structures.  This involved setting off dozens of small explosive charges on the surface, and 30 or more listening devices in a straight line to record the faint echo from different rock layers.

By 1985 computers had become powerful enough to enable major oil companies to shoot "3-D seismic," using hundreds of listening devices arranged in a grid.  Computer processing of the echoes enable companies to map the underground strata in three dimensions, letting them find more traps than before. 

Both techniques produced more oil, offsetting the annual decline in production from existing fields and discovering new fields.

So finally after slowly declining since 1970, U.S. oil production began increasing, and today the U.S. no longer has to import oil.
[graph]

This fabulous gift happened despite democrat morons like Obozo and bribem and their Democrats in congress trying their best to CUT U.S. oil production, mainly by declaring tens of millions of acres of federal lands (and offshore areas) off-limits to oil exploration.  In fact Obozo said--on video--"We can't just drill our way to energy independence."

When Obozo made that statement in May of 2011, the U.S. was producing 5.67 million barrels of oil per day.  Just seven years later--in June of 2018--U.S. oil production had risen to 10.67 million barrels per day.  So he and later his vegetable VP bribem put all but six percent of federal offshore waters off-limits for oil exploration.
 
As a direct result of ingenuity and capitalism, the U.S. is saving about $1.1 BILLION per DAY--which in turn enables U.S. consumers to buy gasoline at a far lower price than most other countries.  For example, in Canada the average cost of a gallon of gas before the recent rise in oil prices was about $4.80, when it was about $2.40 in the U.S.

Here's the average price in several EU countries, again before Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz, when the average price in the U.S. was about $2.40: 

• Netherlands: $9.00 - $9.20
• Denmark: $8.70 - $9.00
• Finland: $8.00 - $8.30
• Germany: $7.20 - $7.50
• France: $7.60 - $7.90
• UK: $7.00 - $7.50

So to all you whiny, ungrateful asshole Democrats and the U.S.  Mainstream Media bitching about now having to pay $4.17 a gallon instead of $2.40 : You're welcome.  

Of course you'll just sneer at this and find a way to complain.  You always do when a Republican is president. 

Source: 

Source for Obama quote 

Canadian govt-owned broadcaster shows how to spin a brutal murders

Ever read "state-run media"?

Sure ya have: NPR, NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times.  Same with broadcast media: all the alphabet networks, including PBS.  You can trust them to tell you what the Democrat/Leftists want you to hear, see and read--and only that.

Example: in the UK a Favored Foreigner fatally stabbed an unarmed 18-year-old college student six times.  The victim was still alive when cops arrived, and claimed he'd been stabbed and couldn't breathe (because his lungs were filling with blood).  Cop says "I don't think so, mate," and refused to examine him.  Instead he was handcuffed on the ground as the cops chatted amiably with his assailant.

After ten minutes or so the college student died.  

The UK Media didn't say a word.  But when police body-cam vid was finally released, everyone saw what happened, and citizens were outraged.

Now watch how Canada's state-owned broadcaster and media propagandists spun the murder: 

Canada’s CBC Blames the ‘Far-Right’ and ‘White Grievance’ for Outrage Over Henry Nowak’s Brutal Murder

Canada’s government-owned broadcast empire published an article arguing that the outrage over the murder of 18-year-old British student Henry Nowak is being perpetuated by the “far-right” and “white grievance.”

The article, titled “How Britain’s far right hijacked the murder of Henry Nowak,” claimed right-wing figures “pounced on body camera footage" showing police officers refusing to aid the stabbing victim (who died at the scene).  The article the "far right" was using the murder to push the narrative that white people are disadvantaged in the UK, which effectively has two different sets of laws: a harsh one for whites, and a lenient one for all minorities, at the order of "woke" Labour party politicians.

To the wokie Left--both in the U.K and Canada--the outrage isn't that a member of a favored minority group murdered a white college student, but that lots of citizens--sneeringly called "the far right"--is angry about the murder, and the utter indifference the woke cops showed toward the dying victim as he lay at their feet, bleeding to death.

Then it finally sinks in: that's what's been going on here.  Consider the outright assassination of a health-care CEO by Luigi Mangione, who creeps up behind the victim on the sidewalk and shoots him in the back three times.  "Your" mainstream Media is now playing this up as "Dis po' boy jus' bravely expressing his anger over the high cost of health care!" by showing endless footage of sign-carrying wokie wack-jobs supporting the killer.

In the U.K 30 people a DAY are being arrested for "offensive posts" on social media.  In this clip a gutsy American asks London cops what kinds of acts constitute "hate speech."  The cops are quite candid: "If someone feels offended by what you said, we'd arrest you."

Except that's a lie: The government only arrests whites.  No minority has ever been arrested for "hate speech" in the UK.  Cuz that's how the ruling wokie politicians have decreed it.  And all the judges follow those orders.   

The clean, painted reflecting pool has the Left/Dems FURIOUS!

Wow!  Wait...this MUST be fake!  Cuz every fucking, scum-sucking, America-hating, Trump-hating Democrat said "The new pool WILL NOT REFLECT!!" 

 

Seriously, stupid Democrats bleated that cleaning and painting it would prevent it from reflecting! 

Democrat commenter: "SEE, deplorable!  It's only barely reflecting!  So your stupid Orange Hitler tyrant RUINED EVERYTHING!  Yep yep yep!"

 

It's astonishing how much these insane Dem rat-bastards hate Trump, and will do anything to denigrate his accomplishments--like claiming "The U.S. military is losing the war with Iran!!!!." 

Another great AI video about a race in Cali

You aren't from California so you probably have never heard of Rob Bonta.  He's a Democrat, running for state attorney-general.  He's corrupt as hell.  How bad is he?  Well when he was a Democrat member of the state Assembly in 2013 he authored a bill to allow NON-citizens to work in ballot-counting centers.  

You read that right: people who (theoretically) aren't allowed to vote in federal elections are determining whether a given mail-in ballot should be counted--whether the signature matches and so on.  Brilliant. 

So below is another clever AI video about this corruptocrat. 

 

I don't know anything about Bonta's opponent in the race, just that anyone dumb enough, or corrupt enough, to allow non-citizens to count mail-in ballots is a bad choice for ANYTHING. 

U.S. House triggers War Powers resolution, forcing Trump to "surrender" in 60 days or be impeached

Every Democrat in the House--and just four treasonous RINOs--voted to invoke the War Powers resolution to force Trump to surrender in the fight against the Islamic dictators of Iran.  The Washington Post and NPR were absolutely giddy:  "We WON!"  The four RINOs enabled NPR to crow that the vote was "bipartisan."

 

CBS posted "The resolution approved Wednesday...directs the president to remove U.S. from hostilities with Iran unless Congress declares war or authorizes the use of military force. 

Yeah, I've heard all the caveats and loop-holes: "The resolution's constitutionality has never been tested."  And "Other presidents have ignored it without a problem."  Problem is, when Obozo ignored it, the Media didn't complain, and Republicans couldn't possibly try to impeach "Ouah First Black President."  By contrast, the Media hate Trump and the GOP with a passion, so if Trump ignores congress, the Dems will almost certainly take him to court.

What this means is that by triggering the WP resolution the Democrats have Trump in a dilemma: The U.S. military has done its job masterfully--and continues to do so.  But now all the mullahs have to do is wait 60 days and Trump will be forced either surrender, or defy congress (thus triggering a third impeachment.

The WP resolution also lets the prez "ask congress" for a 30 day extension before he's forced by its terms to begin withdrawing U.S. forces.  I guarantee the mullahs won't have signed a peace accord in 60 days, and that Trump will ask for the extension.  That puts us at 88 days from June 4th, meaning Trump would be forced to start withdrawing troops by September 4th.

That's about 60 days from the mid-terms, and Republicans in toss-up districts will be feeling pressure to vote with Democrats, while Dems will be grinning and gloating.

For weeks now, Democrat congress-whores have been saying the U.S. military is "losing the war against Iran."  Seriously.  Makes me furious.  And if Trump bows to congress and pulls U.S. troops out of the Straits, the Left will be absolutely crowing this same message--because it rubs the noses of Trump supporters in the *political win* for the Democrats. 

All Americans need to see how cunningly the Democrats have done exactly the same thing they did in Vietnam: forced the U.S. to withdraw--or as the Left crows, to surrender.

If you don't think China and Russia are seeing this, and taking notes, you're too stupid to breathe, let alone vote.  Democrats don't see it, and wouldn't care if they did.  The only things they care about are a) defeating Trump; and b) regaining total control of the government.

EU rulers are giving themselves more power to control what can be on the Net

Virtually every EU nation has laws giving that nation's government absolute power to prosecute citizens or orgs that post things on the internet that the government doesn't like.

Of course this sweeping, total power isn't stated like that, but soothingly, as the power to charge a crime for "any content that can be tied to national security, crime prevention, public order, public health, or the right to life and property."  Soothing.  Reassuring.

But as any rational person can easily see, this definition is infinitely elastic: *anything* a ruling party in a government doesn't like can be banned and the poster charged, under this definition--which is carefully crafted--designed--to seem totally helpful, eh?

And leftist countries add a judicial order that the government (prosecutors) don't need to identify which post the government considered offensive, or the exact nature of the offense.

And that's coming here when the Dems regain control.  You just don't believe it.

ALL laws to regulate the internet are inevitably used to ban posts the ruling partei doesn't like--and to prosecute the posters.  The Democrats have already tried this several times, with the "Disinformation Governance Board" (headed by the moronic despot Nina Jankowicz) and the so-called "Net Neutrality Act," to name just two.

In April of 2022--under the corrupt moron bribem--his DHS quietly created the cunningly named "Disinformation Governance Board," headed by Jankowicz.  Cuz no good American likes "disinformation," eh?  On a Sunday morning show on the Dem propaganda network CNN, bribem's head of DHS, Alejandro Mayorkas, called Jankowicz "eminently qualified, a renowned expert in the field of disinformation."

If you've forgotten, Mayorkas was the communist rat-bastard who repeatedly bleated on video "Our southern border is, like, totally secure.  Of course that was a brazen lie, and everyone knew it.  But Mayorkas was right in calling Jankowicz "an expert in the field of disinformation."

Jankowicz said she opposed censorship--and yet the ONLY purpose of the DGB would have been to ensure that Americans couldn't post anything the Dems didn't like--by decreeing that such posts were "disinformation."

And of course NO guuud 'Merican likes "disinformation," right?

The pushback was so intense that just one month after the bribem regime created the DGB, they quietly "paused" it, and three months later (August of 2022) they quietly eliminated it. 

Of course you've forgotten all that, and you don't believe the Dems will ever try that again, right? cuz...reasons, eh? 
 

School district in Massachusetts allows ONE group of students to carry a big knife in school

If you're a highschool student in the shithole of Massachusetts, think any school system would allow you to carry a knife in school?

Of course not.

Well, unless you're a member of a favored group, in which case you can carry one with an 8-inch blade.  Cuz "freedom of religion," deplorables! 

Hopkinton Public Schools in Massachusetts has a policy that specifically allows ONE religious exception to its strict no-weapons rule:  Sikh students are allowed to carry a big knife, because it's totally "ceremonial"--part of their religion.

No other students can carry weapons.  Just Sikhs.  Cuz..."Freedom of Religion," eh?

Here's an interesting thought experiment:  Suppose a group named "The religious society of hunters" made carrying a "totally ceremonial" knife an integral part of their religious ceremonies.  Think any school system would allow THAT group to carry a "ceremonial knife" in school?

Of course not.  

 

How the Dem-fellating shills at CBS tried to discredit the story of Hunty bribem's laptop

Recently a few egotistical leftist TV "journalists" at "60 Minutes" decided they really ran that show, not their bosses.  Astonishingly, they were fired.  The dismissal emails are...amusing, and the exchange reveals a LOT about how biased the leftists in the media are.

Got me thinking:  When powerful demons (disguised as human) brazenly lie, cheat and steal--and get away with it (as they always do)--good, honest, moral, hard-working people are dismayed, and often console themselves by saying "Eventually the truth will be known."

I get it:  We'd all like to think the brazen liars and cheats and scammers and killers won't get away with it forever.  It's a coping mechanism, and without it I suspect we'd see a lot more drug overdoses.

Problem is that it often takes so many years for the truth to finally come out that the demons are never held to account for their orchestrated lies.  Moreover, if enough years have passed, most people tend to believe the story can't possibly be true--because it doesn't seem possible that such a huge, brazen lie could have been hidden for so long," eh?  The lie would surely have been discovered within a year or two.  "Just impossible to have kept it hidden for this long."

All that seems very logical...but it's all utter horseshit.  And to show ya I'd like to give you a VERY well-documented example from just six short years ago, so you can see for yourselves how lying, America-hating demons can get away with brazen lies for years.  (And possibly forever.) 

This particular "Op" to cover up the truth was carried out by Lesley Stahl, with the full support of the CBS propaganda outlet "60 Minutes."  Lesley's mission (and that of CBS) was to make voters reject a story that broke just three weeks before the 2020 election, about a laptop left at a repair shop by joe bribem's crack-addict son Hunty. 

In the fall of 2019 a man walked into a computer repair store in Wilmington, Delaware, asking if the owner could repair his dead laptop.  The customer  claimed to be Hunter Biden, and filled out a repair ticket with a phone number that matched one of Hunty's.

The shop owner--a life-long Democrat--repaired the laptop, and called the number on the ticket to tell the laptop's owner his computer was fixed and to pick it up.  Each call went to voicemail, and though the shop owner left several voice messages, no one ever picked up the laptop.

Per the terms of the repair contract, and state law, after 60 days the laptop was considered abandoned, so the shop owner took possession.  In examining the files on it, he found hundreds of pics of a man who was apparently Hunty smoking crack with young women, often nude.  

Okay, odd but no big problem: consenting adults, probably outside the U.S. so no U.S. laws broken, right?

But the laptop also contained something far more disturbing: hundreds of emails suggesting that Hunty had been Joe's bag-man when Joe was Obama's VP, raking in tens of millions of dollars in cash and costly gifts, seemingly for bogus reasons.

The shop owner--a life-long Democrat--was scared, because it suggested the bribem family was totally corrupt.  And by late 2019 Joe was starting to look like the probable presidential nominee for the Democrat party. 

As a long-time resident of Delaware, the owner knew calling Delaware cops would be useless: they were all bribem loyalists.  But there was a chance the FBI was honest. 

So he contacted the FBI and told 'em the story.  They person he talked with seemed totally bored.  "Thanks for calling."  But a few days later, in December of 2019, two FBI agents showed up at the repair shop.  After hearing the story they took the laptop--and the repair ticket.

Remember that date: December of 2019.

The shop owner waited, expecting to see headline news any day.  But not a peep.  Nothing.  But the shop owner knew what he'd seen--hundreds of pics of Hunty smoking crack with whores--and hundreds of emails describing sleazy "deals" with China, Russia and others.

The owner initially thought the reason the news hadn't broken was that the FBI was carefully building a case, but after months of nothing, by June of 2020 he realized the FBI had decided to hide the story.

But the owner had something the FBI didn't know about: a copy of the laptop's hard-drive.

Whoops.
Whoopsie.

SO...a life-long Democrat finds what seems to be solid evidence that the nation's recent VP--and the likely Democrat nominee for the 2020 election--is thoroughly corrupt, and he's turned that evidence over to the FBI, and...it seems that they've chosen to bury the story.  

This seems unbelievable to average Americans, until you read transcripts of emails between top FBI and DOJ officials under Obozo, conspiring to prevent Trump from winning the 2016 election--published by the Department of Justice later.

So, fearing that an FBI coverup was a bad sign for the future if not exposed, in mid-2020 the shop owner gives a copy of the drive to a Trump advisor/attorney.

The advisor gives a copy to Miranda Devine, editor of the New York Post.  The Post authenticates several of the emails, and three weeks before the 2020 election, on October 14th, the Post gets ready to run the story.  But before running it they call the bribem campaign to tell 'em about the forthcoming story and ask for comment.

Campaign staff says "this is nonsense."

Now let's review: the campaign knows the story is true: that Hunty abandoned a laptop at a repair shop, and that the Post says it has lots of pics and possibly incriminating emails on it.  It's not clear if the campaign knows the Post has a copy of the laptop's hard-drive. 

SO..."The election is in just three weeks!  How can we get voters to ignore this story?" 

Bribem "senior advisor" Tony Blinken (who bribem would later name Secretary of State) called former CIA acting director Mike Morell, asking him to draft a letter to be signed by dozens of retired intel agents (all Democrats), saying the story about the laptop "has all the classic earmarks of a Russian 'information operation'--that is, that it was a fake, a plant by Russia, designed to make Biden look corrupt and so throw the election to Trump." 

Within days the letter has been drafted and signed by 51 former U.S. intel agents.  And then within hours of the Post publishing this as their cover story, every Mainstream Media outlet has posted--NOT the story of the laptop, but its story about the 51 former intel agents discrediting the story.

Not a single Mainstream Media defense story mentions that not one of the 51 signers has examined the laptop,* so have no idea what it contains.

Within hours of the Post's publishing the laptop story on their front page, censors at pre-Musk Twatter blocked the NY Post's account, to prevent the Post from publicizing the story.  Twatter also deleted user posts mentioning it.

Six days after the Post broke the laptop story, and just 12 days before the election, CBS's Lesley Stahl interviewed Trump for the network's top "newz show," "60 Minutes." 

In one exchange Stahl repeatedly insists that the reason the media aren't covering the story is that the Post's story about the abandoned laptop “can’t be verified,” and that "reporters don’t report unverified information."

Trump insists that it CAN be verified, and asks Stahl why she thinks it can’t be.  Her answer: “Because it can’t be verified.”

But of course it could have been--because the FBI had had the laptop for ten MONTHS.  And months after the election, when it was obviously too late, the Washington Post DID verify that the laptop and its emails were authentic.

To this day most Democrats have either never heard about Hunty's laptop, or else believe the cover story bleated by the bribem campaign that it was a Russian "op."  No one ever asks "Why would the Russians want pro-military Trump to win instead of brain-dead liberal bribem?" 

Now watch how cunningly Google's "AI" propaganda-bot spins the story about Stahl's interview when asked "When did leslie stahl claim the story of hunter's laptop was fake?"

Google AI replied: "Stahl never claimed the story was definitively fake, but rather insisted it "can't be verified."  During the interview...Stahl replied, "Sir, let me tell you something. This is 60 Minutes, and we can't put on things that we can't verify". 

Except "60 Minutes" could have done any of a dozen things to verify the story: they could have asked the FBI if it had in fact seized a laptop from a specific computer repair shop in Wilmington.  If so, when was it seized?  They could have interviewed the owner of the shop.  Could have interviewed Post editor Miranda Devine.  They cunningly chose not to do ANY of those things, all of which would have shown the utter, total corruption of Joe Bribem--the man the media wanted to make president.

Again, months after the election, and months after bribem was installed as prez, both the Washington Post and the NY Times admitted that the story about Hunty's abandoned laptop was true.  It was just another case of the Democrat-fellatiing Media protecting a Democrat candidate. 

Mission accomplished, again. 

How a corrupt Cuban conglomerate started by the Castros owns 40% of Cuban economy

Yesterday Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared before a congressional committee--and blew the lid off one of the longest-running scams in the world.

Cuba is supposed to be a socialist/communist country, right?  Rubio revealed the truth:

"Cuba is actually not controlled by the government. Cuba is controlled by a military holding company named GAESA. GAESA owns virtually everything, and not a penny of that money translates over to the public treasury.

WOW!  The U.S. Left did NOT like that, and immediately went into damage-control mode.  Shills popped up on every website: "Dis not true!  Dis FAKE news!  A lie to make duh leaders of ouah glorious communist state look bad!!"

Except it's totally true.  Take a look:

From "How the 'elites' in a supposedly "socialist" country ended up owning everything, via a stealthy conglomerate run by the military"

By Luis Flores, February 21, 2026

Cuba is supposedly a socialist country where the means of production belong to the people.  If so, how is it possible for a military company to
  * control 40% of the national economy
  * accumulate $14.5 billion in bank deposits
  * not publish financial statements
  * avoid paying taxes, and 
  * not be accountable to the National Assembly?

The conglomerate is called GAESA (Grupo de Administración Empresarial S.A.).  Translates "Group for Business Administration," which sounds totally benign, eh?  "S.A." is an acronym used by almost all businesses.  So from the outset, the owners are saying this is a business.

Except it's run by what we'd call the Defense Department--the civilian overseers of the military. 

Wait...in a country that constantly claims to be socialist, how does a "business" owning 40% of the economy exist?  And yet it does: the largest economic conglomerate in the country, running tourism, banking, commerce, ports, telecomms, fuels—is run by Cuban military, NOT as a state-owned enterprise subject to public control, but as a regular business that's not required to disclose ownership or profits.

GAESA's legal form was specifically chosen so it wouldn't be accountable to the Cuban people.  The people aren't allowed to audit its books, even though the empire is controlled by a branch of the socialist government--the military. 

So where do the enormous profits go, eh?  They won't say.  And don't ask.

And there you have the dirty secret of communist governments: citizens must sacrifice while the rulers reap the profits.  Always.

GAESA was created by Raúl Castro, Fidel's brother and head of the armed forces.  For 26 years it was headed by his son-in-law, and is currently overseen by his grandson.  And again, it owns or controls companies that account for at least 40% of Cuba's economy. 

Internal documents of GAESA were leaked in 2025 and analyzed by the Miami Herald and economist Pavel Vidal Columbia University.  They proved what many had long suspected:  Its total income was 3.2 times greater than the total government budget.  It controlled 95% of financial transactions in foreign currency in the country.  And Cuba's reserves of foreign currency were NOT in the country's central bank, but in GAESA's accounts.

How the monster was born

GAESA became a vast empire after the collapse of the former USSR, which had been giving Cuba between $4 billion and $6 Billion every year in various subsidies.  When the USSR dissolved, those subsidies ended, forcing Cuba to buy oil, food and most medicine at world market prices.

In other words, like so many socialist client states, duh faaabulous socialist Cuban government had never been able to support itself.

Without Russian food imports, Cubans suffered from higher prices--and hunger.  But Raúl Castro, then Minister of the Armed Forces, had a Plan--not to feed the population, but to enrich himself and his lackeys.

He tasked General Julio Casas Regueiro to create a holding company to generate foreign currency for the Armed Forces.  This would be based in Gaviota, which had been a vacation site for Cuban and Soviet military personnel since 1988.

By the late 90s GAESA-owned companies were making profits equal to 80% of the budget of the armed forces.  Soon the military no longer depended on the State.  Instead the socialist government started to be dependent on the military.

From 1996 until his death in 2022, GAESA was run by General Luis Alberto Rodríguez López-Calleja, son-in-law of defense minister Raúl Castro.  During those 26 years the conglomerate evolved from a modest currency operation to dominate entire sectors of the economy: tourism, retail, banking, port logistics, telecommunications, construction, import/export, and foreign-currency "remittances" (money sent to Cuban families by Cubans working overseas). 

A decade ago Bloomberg described him as the man in charge of "the largest business empire in Cuba, a conglomerate of at least 57 companies."  So it's not like this hasn't been known for years.  It's just that no one of Rubio's rank has mentioned it.  And of course the corrupt, socialist U.S. media ignored the story...until it couldn't. 

How GAESA came to control...everything

The map of GAESA's holdings is essentially the map of Cuba's economy.  The "crown jewel" was Gaviota S.A, which owns 121 hotels, 20 marinas, the airline Aerogaviota, the car-rental company Transgaviota, the agency Gaviota Tours, and more.  In the first quarter of 2024 this vast empire accounted for 72% of GAESA's total revenue.

Interestingly, the Gaviota hotel empire had a profit margin of 42%—almost four times the global average for that sector. 

"Wait, that has to be a typo, right?  How could the socialist Gaviota empire achieve a profit margin almost four times higher than the same sectors in the rest of the world?  Easy: Because the communist government of Cuba dictated all wages, the empire was able to pay hotel workers...wait for it...$11 a month. 

Starting to see how cunningly it all worked?

The hotel investment arm of GAESA ("Inmobiliaria Almest") has assets of 56.5 BILLION Cuban pesos.  But despite these vast assets, it still received 668 million from the government, and paid just 2 MILLION in taxes.  So from a citizen standpoint it's a money hole, eating 666 million MORE than it paid.  Totally normal for state-owned, state-run entities in Cuba.

In 2016 GAESA took over Habaguanex, the company that managed over 300 tourist facilities in Old Havana.  "Stroke of a pen," eh?

A GAESA company called CIMEX owns more than 41 companies operating supermarkets, 668 gas stations, currency exchange shops, and more. The leaked documents revealed astonishing figures: $3.4 billion in revenue and $1.2 billion in profits.  For the math-challenged that's a profit margin of over 35%.  Astonishing.

In 2016, GAESA took control of the Banco Financiero Internacional, which processed 95% of the country's import/export transactions. 

In short, GAESA was designed by Raúl Castro to enable his family to control the wealth of Cuba.

How GAESA captured every dollar Cubans overseas sent back to their family

Many Cubans living overseas abroad send money to their family in Cuba.  GAESA encourages this, because it keeps the dollars, exchanging them for a special government currency called "Freely Convertible Currency."  

When remittances collapsed by 70% in 2020 compared to 2019, GAESA opened over 85 stores that only accept dollars.  Prices are up to four times higher than a Walmart in the U.S, with profit margins exceeding 240%. 

The design was brilliant in its wickedness: every dollar sent to Cuban families from relatives living abroad ultimately ends up in the accounts of GAESA.  Meanwhile the communist government was asking international forums to pressure the U.S. to lift the embargo "because the Cuban people are suffering." 

GAESA not only owns and operates hotels, it also has foreign partners that pay GAESA a fee to operate its hotels.

Meliá Hotels International (Spain) is the largest foreign operator in Cuba, with between 33 and 38 Gaviota hotels under management contracts of 25-30 years.  Iberostar operates 20 hotels and is building a 42-story skyscraper costing €200 million.  Blue Diamond Resorts (Canada) manages 36 properties and more than 10,000 rooms.

Empty hotels, hospitals without medicine

The leaked documents show that between 2021 and 2023, a bit under 3% of all government investment went to agriculture.  Health care got two percent.  By far the biggest use of government funds was spent on hotel construction--36%.  

Over 15 years GAESA invested $24.2 billion in hotels —nearly 14 times more than the $1.75 billion allocated to public health. 

But hotel investment isn't just a matter of insane priorities.  Instead, building more hotels is a money laundering mechanism, with inflated contracts awarded to companies owned by the conglomerate.  Cuba is full of nearly empty hotels, and yet the conglomerate keeps building more. Whether any new hotel makes a profit is irrelevant, because the main goal has already been achieved.

The leaked documents reveal that despite its vast profits, in 2024 GAESA paid just 920 million pesos in tax--while somehow receiving 9.26 billion pesos from the state budget as "investment"--ten times what it paid in taxes. 

When Comptroller Gladys Bejerano was asked about this, she publicly stated she had no jurisdiction over GAESA--and was soon fired.

Last October--with shortages of everything growing worse--the regime proposed a "fiscal and monetary adjustment to reduce inflation and the deficit."  But the proposal doesn't mention GAESA--an entity that controls 40% of GDP.  So any sacrifice will be borne by ordinary Cubans, not by the generals.

You may have heard that Cuba has run short of oil to power electrical generation.  Economist Emilio Morales and Juan Antonio Blanco found that in 2024 and 2025, 60% of the oil Cuba was getting from Venezuela wasn't used either for electricity generation or transportation, but instead was re-exported to Asian markets by a GAESA company called Cubametales.  The money from those sales ended up in bank accounts in tax havens. 

To transport that oil, for more than a decade GAESA operated a at least nine tankers, registered under shell companies in Cyprus, Panama, and Liberia to evade international sanctions.
 
In February of this year [2026], after Venezuela stopped shipping oil to Cuba following Maduro's extradition to the U.S, Cuba's nine international airports were forced to close due to a lack of jet fuel.  This temporarily cut tourism—GAESA's biggest revenue stream.  Air Canada suspended flights to Cuba until May--significant because Canadians are Cuba's top tourist group.

In the streets of Cuba garbage accumulates, because the garbage trucks have no fuel. Hospitals are operating at half capacity.  And GAESA, the conglomerate that has amassed more money than the state, has not contributed a single cent to alleviate the crisis.  Instead the Cuban government gives the conglomerate ten times more money than the latter pays in taxes on its vast income.

This is the story that the Cuban dictatorship does not want American voters to know--the story of a military conglomerate that seized the economy of an entire nation, that gets more money from the regime than it pays in taxes.  A cartel that sold the oil that should have provided light to Cuban homes, and that sent its executives to operate offshore businesses with diplomatic immunity while the population lived with 18-hour blackouts.

Those were decisions made by the owners of GAESA—capitalist decisions made by an elite that claimed to be socialist.

Source: U.S. State Department

Source 2: Cuba 

In San Francisco, "Hondos" control the drug trade

In San Francisco Honduran rule the fentanyl market
  --extensively edited from an article in City Journal

San Francisco’s Tenderloin district, 3 a.m: The sidewalks are littered with trash and human feces. Addicts are slumped over, barely conscious.  Homeless encampments line block after block.

Drug dealers are everywhere.  Most are "migrants" (to use the careful, dainty nomenclature of the Democrat media and politicians) from Honduras--"Hondos"--who now control the local drug trade.  Night after night they turn the Tenderloin into a lucrative drug market.  And the Democrats who rule that city do nothing.

The Dem-ruled city’s drug policies--always called "progressive" by the local Democrat-fellating Media--have allowed drug gangs to take over an entire neighborhood in downtown San Francisco, tightening Democrat rule, poisoning the down-and-out and bringing Third World conditions to one of America’s wealthiest cities.

In the Tenderloin, the Hondos rule.

In a radio interview in 2022 then-San Francisco mayor London Breed slipped, saying “a lot” of the city’s drug dealers were Honduran.  As anyone could have predicted, her comments sparked a backlash from Latino activists who denounced her remarks as “xenophobic and racist.”  She was soon pressured into a public apology.

For the slow-witted: Democrat pols should know better than to blame foreigners for selling drugs in their cities.  Just not done, citizen!

But Breed was right:  Gangs of migrants, primarily from Honduras, supplied by Mexican cartels, run fentanyl sales in San Francisco.  Even the Democrat-fellating San Francisco Chronicle admitted that in 2023. 

Last year even the Harvard Law Review wrote that “nearly all” low-level fentanyl and meth dealers prosecuted by the feds were “Honduran men without legal status in the United States.”

For slow readers "without legal status" means illegal alien invaders.  But of course duh Hahvahd Law Review can't say it in those words, cuz too many Americans would understand it.

JJ Smith is a lifelong San Francisco resident who owns a café in the Tenderloin.  His brother died from a fentanyl overdose.  Since then, Smith has documented life in the Tenderloin and has tried to help get addicts into treatment.  He says the situation is worse than ever. 

He knows the Hondos well.

In 2023, Smith said that he saw a group of Hondos selling drugs in front of a school. He approached them and said they shouldn’t sell there.  They responded by beating him, including cutting him on the top of his head with a machete.

That same year Smith says he saw a “Hondo” hack another man to death with a machete.  The killer was never arrested or prosecuted, and is still selling drugs on the street.

Dealers say Mexican drug cartels send the Hondos to San Francisco where they quickly start selling product. 

Rational, thoughtful people (never Democrats) quickly realize something's wrong here:  Since every local knows about the open-air drug sales, the cops surely do too.  And if so, since it's both illegal and hugely destructive, why do city leaders--all Democrat--allow it to continue?

Great question.  My guess would be the same answer as in corrupt Dem-ruled eastern cities going back a century: payoffs, a.k.a. bribes.  But the unholy alliance between illegal "activists" and the Democrat-ruled Media has now made bribes unnecessary: Dem pols know any effort to crack own on sale of illegal drugs will have a thousand  violent foreign and minority-U.S. demonstrators in the streets in hours--something Dem pols aren't willing to endure.
 
In short, because of the so-called “progressive” policies of all Dem rulers.  For years Dem-ruled cities have ignored drug sales, and that seems to be fine with Dem voters.  The pols refuse to cooperate with ICE, making it almost impossible to deport illegal-aliens caught selling drugs.

Same for trying to remove homeless encampments  or ending giving free needles and syringes to IV drug users.  So this is the predictable result of deliberate choices by Dem rulers (though City Journal is careful not to say that).

The San Francisco police department gave us a copy of its orders on immigration enforcement. Officers aren't allowed to ask anyone if they're a U.S. citizen, and are barred from honoring ICE "detainer" requests. 

JJ Smith says arrested drug dealers are back on the streets within hours, usually with no fine or charges. 

Predictably, Democrat tolerance of drug dealers has helped drive an explosion of overdose deaths. In 2023 the city’s rate of overdose deaths was more than double the national average. 

In 2023, then-mayor Breed declared a state of emergency and asked the federal government for help, and federal officials began arresting drug dealers. 

You might think this sounds like progress, but so far the handful of Hondos deported for selling drugs have quickly returned to the city and are back on their usual corners.  In 2023, Jairo Mendoza Erazo, a Honduran, was deported after pleading guilty to a fentanyl charge. By early 2024, he was back in San Francisco and was arrested again, allegedly in possession of both cocaine and heroin. In another case, Anderson Medina was arrested and deported in 2023 after he and an accomplice were allegedly found with more than 350 grams of fentanyl. In 2025, he was reportedly arrested again—two blocks from the site of his arrest two years earlier in San Francisco.

The Harvard Law Review concluded, "A free trip home with no prison time is no deterrence.” 

In 2024 Daniel Lurie ran for mayor as supposedly a "moderate Democrat, promised to restore order to the embattled city.  He took office in January of 2025, but despite a flurry of press releases, nothing has changed.

San Francisco has devoted billions to cutting homelessness and drug sales.  It hasn't worked, because he doesn't dare allow cops to cooperate with ICE, or help deport illegals.  And deported drug sellers still immediately come back.  Without any punishment or penalty, there's no incentive to NOT sell drugs.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/tenderloin-san-francisco-drugs-gangs?skip=1 

Yet another incredibly creative video for Pratt

American Leftists can't meme...because they've never had to: they've always had the Mainstream Media doing all their work FOR 'em, so pro-Democrat news was all anyone saw.  And most of the time that was all the Democrats needed to win again and again.

The Mainstream Media constantly sneer at conservatives.  They're all Democrat-fellating, anti-White assholes, so virtually every story they run trashes Trump and the GOP.  With that level of control, our side has had to find another way to reach voters.  

At last, as if by divine intervention, the recent emergence of low-cost AI video-creating tools, combined with vast creativity of people seeking an end to Democrat/socialist madness, have created dozens of AI videos supporting Spencer Pratt.  One is below. 

 

The significance here is that Pratt didn't make ANY of the dozens of brilliant AI videos supporting him.  Instead every one was made by unpaid creators, working alone at their own expense.  The common thread is that all were totally sick and tired of Democrat corruption and shitty policies. 

Sadly, when you realize (duh) that every dumb-shit Democrat who voted for the even-farther-left socialist Nithya Ramen will vote for Bass in the general election, Pratt can't win.  But at least he offered Angelenos a clear alternative to the constant, corrupt rule by the Democrats.

Four giant social-media companies settle a lawsuit by a small school system

Breathitt County, Kentucky, is a rural haven, still fairly uncorrupted.  You can be excused for thinking nothing that would happen there would be of national interest, eh?

The school system noticed a big drop in student performance, which they believed was due to students spending a big chunk of class hours on their phones, consuming an endless flood of attractive garbage posted by every social media outlet (all owned by the big tech companies).

So the small school district (1,500 students) sued the big tech companies, seeking $3 million in "actual" damages and $60 million in punitive damages.

Astonishingly (to me, at least), a week ago the four giant multi-billion-dollar defendants settled the case before trial.  Documents released last week show giant Meta agreed to pay the school system $9 million, SnapChat and TikTok agreed to pay $8 million each.  Google agreed to pay $2 million.

Why is this modest settlement significant?  Because it's what lawyers call a "test case"--because the tech giants obviously didn't target only Breathitt County: their marketing has long targeted every kid in the country.  

By settling for less than $10 million apiece, the companies showed they'd rather pay a small amount (to them) instead of going to trial.  Question is, why did they settle?

Obviously all the tech giants already have vast in-house legal departments, so going to trial would have cost only a couple of million in extra legal fees, and could have resulted in a win for the companies.  Instead the companies named above chose to settle--meaning they'd probably concluded there was a good chance they'd lose in court, in which case a jury could have ordered 'em to pay the full $63 mill sought by the plaintiff school system. 

If this case were a "one-off" (one of a kind), the companies would issue a press release saying they'd chosen to settle to be good corporate citizens, or something similar.  But that's most assuredly NOT the case here:  Breathitt was just the first of several virtually identical cases.  Next in line for trial is the Tucson Unified School District, which has about 40,000 students--25 times more than tiny Breathitt County--and is suing for over a Billion dollars.

For the companies the problem is that company documents either leaked or uncovered during the discovery process show all the defendants deliberately targeted school kids,  encouraging 'em to use their apps during school to pass notes and keep up with what classmates were doing.  So the companies were clearly seeking to pull app users away from studying during school time.

Documents also show the companies knew that getting students hooked on their apps would likely make 'em customers for life.  Nice.

SO...where does that leave us?  Well there are over 13,300 school districts in the U.S.  If the tech giants settle on roughly the same terms as they did with Breathitt ($18,000 per student), a horde of lawyers will descend on all the small ones, encouraging 'em to join a class-action suit.  If we assume the tech giants will settle for about the same terms as they did with Breathitt, $27 million times 13,000 is a HUGE number.    

Oh, and for those who may think this is "fake newz:" it's from the NY Times, and since the Times constantly sucks up to the tech giants, this is an "admission against interest."  Hmmm... 

Source: New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/04/us/social-media-schools.html?unlocked_article_code=1.nlA.O8dQ.wDv5pf0EaONV&smid=url-share 

In 2020 the U-Cal system ended the use of the SAT and ACT. How'd that work out?

Six years ago--so in 2020, at the apex of wokie intimidation--the University of California ended the long-standing practice of requiring that applicants take either the SAT or ACT test.

This was because minorities complained that a) standard testing was raaacist; and b) that rich kids could afford pricey test-prep courses, which enabled 'em to do better on those tests..

The underlying theory was that kids who got good grades in school were probably all about equally smart, so a totally fair system would admit the same percentage of blacks and hispanics as their percentage of the population.

So how'd that work out, eh?

From the first class admitted under the new rules, professors recognized that a lot of members of the incoming class lacked the basic math skills needed to do college-level work.  Profs were having to spend time teaching middle-school math.

Now hundreds of profs at UC have signed an open letter urging the U-Cal system to return to using either or both of the standardized tests, at least for students wanting to major in math or science.

Problem is, the Cal board of regents will do whatever the wanna do.  If they wanna keep new  admissions 15% black and 22% Hispanic, they can easily create free remedial math courses taught by undergrad teaching assistants, so professors don't have to do it.  

You couldn't get a better experiment on the results of "woke" admission policies: without some sort of broad-based testing it's impossible to know if an applicant has the necessary skills to handle college.  But minority groups that pushed to abolish testing argue that this is better for them.  Wait..."more fair."  Yeah, that's what they meant.  

More demon violence you never heard about

The 19-second surveillance video below will make you sick to your stomach--if you're even remotely normal.  It's cut from a longer video, almost certainly because the city-owned transit agency (Miami) refused to release any more of it.  I suspect the agency had to be sued to force it to divulge this much.

An unarmed, defenseless woman is sitting in one end of a transit vehicle.  Only two other people are in the car: a muscular black male--identified by police as 25-year-old Joshua King-- and someone at the very opposite end.

Without provocation the black male walks up to woman and begins beating her face with a series of roundhouse punches, then begins kicking her visciously.  Throws her head-first into the wall of the car.  Continues beating her until the video ends. 

The demon was released the next day--no prison, no punishment--due to "mental issues."  He was supposed to be "monitored," but no officials seemed to know how that was to happen.  The judge theoretically "released him to the care of his parents, who live in Tallahassee, but that's far from Miami, and no one was monitoring the demon.  The judge didn't seem concerned that the demon would be back on the street until--if ever--his parents managed to get to Miami to pick him up.  

 

Now the surprise:  This happened on September 4th, 2020--almost six years ago.  But as with almost all such brutal attacks, you never heard a word about it--because the Lying, Scum-sucking, shit-eating, criminal-loving Mainstream Media was determined not to tell you.

CBS in Miami didn't report it until 26 days later, after word got around that they'd ignored the story.  And of course the network didn't see fit to tell you.

This kind of thing--and worse--happens several times a week in the U.S, almost always black males beating defenseless whites--usually women.

Just three days ago in Atlanta, in the middle of the day, 25-year-old John Elijah Matthews--a black male--fatally stabbed 66-year-old Margaret Swan on Atlanta's transit system. Surveillance footage shows the demon walking up to the seated woman and standing next to her.  Seconds later he pulls out a knife and stabs her in the throat.

She screams and tries to stand up as the demon continues stabbing her.  Surveillance footage shows him holding her head with one hand as he continues stabbing her with the knife in his other hand.

We don't have to live like this.  

Oh wait...we do...because of vicious blacks, and leftist judges and corrupt leftist liberal district attorneys who refuse to prosecute, or plea-bargain ghastly crimes like this one down to nothing.  So again and again the attackers--the monsters, demons--are back on the street in a day or two, to attack again.

Caught on video fatally stabbing 66-year-old woman

 

Rest in peace, Margaret. 

https://x.com/i/status/2061124975759614310 

 

Three fatal problems

If you're under 30, chances are you've never heard the phrase "Don't shoot the messenger."

The concept (though obviously not the exact phrase) seems to have first been noted by the Greek historian Plutarch, who wrote that when a messenger brought word to his Armenian king of an advancing enemy army, the furious king ordered the messenger executed.

The idea (obviously) is that no one likes the person who brings bad news--even though the messenger clearly has nothing to do with creating the bad news he brought.

So it is that I address you this morning (2 June, 2026) concerning three things you desperately don't want to hear--but desperately NEED to know.  If you refuse to listen and heed (act)--and most of you will indeed refuse--most of your children will be doomed to miserable lives.

(Of course this isn't universal:  children of the "connected" will continue to live faaabulously; the doomed ones are children of the "unconnected.")

To answer your unspoken question:  If you have to ask, you're not connected. 

The first problem is the U.S. national debt.  As I've warned for years, what began as a minor matter has constantly gotten worse--*as was inevitable, given the corruption and stupidity of the morons and corruptocrats you consistently elect to run things.*

To re-state that: If the lying, Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media had told your parents the truth back in 1963, this debt problem could have been avoided.  But the Media gleefully ignored warnings and reality to support the Democrat Partei [sic], so they carefully, deliberately hid the problem from your parents.

I use 1963 because after JFK was assassinated, Americans were so stunned--totally shell-shocked--that Dem voters (the majority of all voters) were willing to support whatever the corrupt Lyndon B. Johnson (Kennedy's VP, now elevated to prezzy by JFK's assassination) demanded that we do.

But why should we be concerned about any of that, eh citizen?  Cuz since the past obviously can't be changed, dere's no sense in trying to, y'know, blame any one party, right?  Cuz it's whut duh 'Meriken pipo wanted, eh?

If you thought that was good reasoning, you've proven a crucial point: See, the first goal of the Media is to get you to support Democrat policies, even if those can easily be predicted to destroy the country.  The second goal is to prevent you from ever examining which party's policies caused the dire straits we're in--cuz if you knew that, you'd never vote for another Democrat, nor for 70% of so-called Republicans (most of whom are socialist plants--RINOs).

So the first problem is our constantly-growing national debt.  I've covered that extensively in other posts so won't repeat here.

The second problem is Islam.  The Media coos that Islam is "The" religion of peace, and that Muslims would love to peacefully co-exist with non-Muslims.  Problem is that's utter horseshit: The Koran itself--Islam's holy book--says their goal is to conquer the world.  And to achieve that they've developed an elaborate system of justifying lying to non-Muzz.  

If you're unclear on this it's because you're not plugged into daily news from the UK and Europe, both of which are rapidly being taken over by Muzz.

Oh, y'say that's just a "right-wing scare story," eh?  So try this: what's the capital of the UK, and its largest city?  And who's the mayor of that city, eh?  If you know, say it out loud so we know you're not just bluffing.

How many of you know that he's held that office for over a decade--a record long time?  How does he keep getting re-elected, eh?  Of course: because London has record-low crime, including knife murders.

Just kidding: record HIGH crime, and virtually all knife murders are committed by Muzz.  But Londoners are willing to tolerate a handful of knife murders because the Brit economy is doing so well, right?  Right?

Just kidding again.  Body-cam footage has just been released of half a dozen cops arriving at the scene of yet another stabbing of an 18-year-old white non-Muz, stabbed over a dozen times by a Muzz, who casually stands there, unrestrained by cops.  Victim moans that he's been stabbed.  Cops ignore him--one literally says "I don't think so, mate."  Cops keep standing around, chatting, as the victim's lungs fill with blood and minutes later he dies at their feet.

In today's UK that's totally acceptable.  The cops are doing exactly what they've been ordered to do by the Muzz mayor.  But of course that's far away from us in duh U.S, eh?  Nuffin' to do wif us here, right?

So who's the mayor of the largest U.S. city, eh?  A Muslim communist.  How about the second largest?  A Musliim communist, Brandon Johnson.  How about the third largest?  A former card-carrying communist, Karen Bass.

So what was that about "Nuffin' to do wif us here"?

If you have a high enough IQ to breathe without assistance, you should have gotten the point.

Third problem: illegal invaders in the U.S.  After foreigners enter the U.S. illegally, rules imposed by Democrats demand that they all get free housing, food and medical care.  In Dem-ruled states they even get free college tuition!  And now thousands of Democrat/socialist protesters are turning up at ICE facilities DEMANDING that not one of 'em be deported.

If the results weren't so ghastly the hypocrisy would be amusing: Obozo boasted that he was "the deporter-in-chief," and the Media applauded.  But now that a Republican is prezzy, suddenly deporting illegals is "duh worst thing EVAH!"  The Media has constantly pushed the meme that it's AWFUL to deport deez po' pipo, who are merely "fleeing from oppression" in dere home countries.

Wait, are y' sayin' their home countries are lawless, corrupt shitholes?  Gosh, where have we heard that before, eh?  Of course when Trump said it, the Media screamed bloody murder, but when illegals imply it to be able to stay here, no one in the Media bothers to note that Trump was right.

So now that bribem and congressional Dems have allowed somewhere over 11 million new invaders in, why should any American be worried, eh?  After all, "your" Media constantly assures you that "undocumented Americans"--the Media never uses the term "illegals"--murder American citizens at a lower rate than U.S.-born males do, right?  So it can't be a big deal, eh?  

The Dem-fellating Media uses similar "logic" to dismiss evidence of massive welfare fraud, both by illegals and by foreigners given "temporary protected status" by Democrat presidents Obozo and bribem.

And to add insult to injury, leftist/socialist judges have RULED that once TPS is granted by a Dem prezzy, it can't be ended by a later president!

Is that cool or what?  If a Dem prezident does something, find, but if a Republican tries to un-do it, the same courts rule "Yew cain't doodat!"

SO...are there other problems that will kill us?  Of course, like leftist judges DECREEING that requiring either proof of citizenship or photo-ID to vote is illegal.  Or Democrats in congress--with the help of 20 or so RINO plants claiming every day on TV that "Iran has defeated the U.S." and trying to force Trump to surrender to Iran.

These morons have no idea what 60%-enriched uranium means.  They wanna kill Israel, and impeach Trump for his support of that nation.

If you're a Democrat you don't agree with any of this.  You can't refute it, but simply deny it's true.

The hoot is, I don't care how any of this turns out, because I don't have kids, and have enough money to be able to live well for the rest of my life regardless of anything likely to happen in DC.

But if you have kids--wait, if you're a Democrat you're more likely NOT to have kids, since you believe the Dem horseshit that CO2 causes Grobal Worming.  And of course American kids use more carbon fuel than other kids, so have a HUGE "carbon footprint."  So most of you are fine having either zero or one.

In that case nevermind.  Without kids, you're in the same position I am: we don't have a direct interest in how things turn out cuz we don't have kids who'll be affected, eh?

In that case, disregard all.  Re-elect the ghastly communist Karen Bass as mayor of LA.  Elect the equally corrupt, ghastly Xavier Becerra governor of California.  Elect the equally ghastly and corrupt current governor, "Greasy," as prezzy.

"Turtles all the way down," citizen.  And when it blows up--as it must--it's no skin off my teeth.  If you're a Democrat, your vote ensured the result I've described.  You couldn't be bothered to do your own research, instead eagerly believing whatever utter horseshit the Dem-fellating Mainstream Media fed ya.  Just couldn't be bothered, eh?