Australian court orders X (twatter) to remove video of Muslim stabbing priest at the altar of Sydney church

Last week in Sydney, Australia, a Muslim thug waltzed into a church, strutted up to the altar where a priest was conducting the service, live-streamed, and stabbed him multiple times.

The attack was all captured on high-quality video.

Now, in the manner we've all learned to recognize, a federal judge in Australia has ordered X (twatter) to delete every post containing videos of that stabbing.

The ORDER was issued after a worthless piece of shit government "official" named Julie Inman Grant, wearing the skin-suit of "the eSafety commissioner" went to court seeking an emergency injunction.

Ol' Julie asked the judge to order both X and Meta to remove posts containing the video.  See, ol' communist Julie didn't wail that the video would portray a Muslim walking up to a priest and stabbing him.  Oh no, cuz that bullshit has gotten really old.

Instead, Julie bleated that the material depicted “gratuitous or offensive violence with a high degree of impact or detail.”

Roll that around for a minute: if that's the new standard then NO video of ANY horrible attack by a Muslim (or other protected group) can be shown on the internet.  See, in Australia--as here--the gruberment can yank a broadcaster's license at will.  The internet once offered a way around the government/Media censorship.  But now the gruberment has taken over what you can post on the Net--exactly as it has here.  

(For young Americans: the FBI pressured Fakebook and pre-Musk Twatter to delete any posts the FBI and the biden regime didn't like.  And the two companies saluted smartly and did as ordered.  Free speech?  Nah.)

A leftist U.K. paper described the video as being of "the alleged stabbing" of bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel.  Nothing "alleged" about it, sparky.  But the Left loves Islam and hates Christianity, so "alleged" was totally predictable.

When the regime controls what people and companies can say on the net, you don't have freedom of speech, regardless of what you may think.

Source.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/australian-court-orders-elon-musk-s-x-to-hide-sydney-church-stabbing-posts-from-users-globally/ar-AA1npv8y
 

Socialists in the home of the EU headquarters shut down conservative conference

Freedom is rarely lost all at once, but rather by a series of small nibbles.

Of course if you get all your "newz" from the Mainstream Media you think this is just nonsense.

I'm referring to how the leftist tyrants who rule Belgium essentially shut down a conference on Conservatism that took place in Brussels last week.

Americans think "Belgium?  Dat beez in Europe, so mean nuffin' to us, right?

Be it ever thus.  Democrats:  "Dis far away, nudder country, so haz nuffin to do wif' us here." Yeah, you bet, sparky.  

The first hint that the Left was going to shut down the conference was when the socialist mayor of Brussels, Philippe Close, pressured the manager of the venue booked for the conference to cancel the booking just days before the event was scheduled.  

Of course there was a crappy, illogical excuse, as there always is.  Amazingly, the organizers were able to find another venue, the Sofitel Hotel.  But then just one day before the conference, the hotel canceled that booking too, claiming guests staying at the hotel had said they'd never stay there again if the conference was permitted.

So again amazingly, at the last moment organizers found a third venue, owned by a Belgian-Tunisian businessman.

The conference started at 9 a.m.  And before noon local police had surrounded the building, this time on the orders of another socialist, Emir Kir, mayor of the local "district."

If you're beginning to realize that socialists hate for opponents to be allowed free speech, you're right.  The police attempted to enter the building to drag the attendees out, but seeing many cameras trained on them they retreated.  The conference continued, but police prohibited anyone from entering.

For awhile the socialist regime's cops even blocked the caterers, apparently trying to shut the thing down by starving the participants.  The venue’s courageous owner and his wife received threats.

After a couple of hours Belgium’s prime minister, Alexander de Croo, made a statement in which he called the mayors’ action against the Conservative conference “unacceptable” and “unconstitutional.”  But de Croo’s statement didn’t change anything, as the cops continued to prevent people who wanted to join the conference from entering.

"Free speech?  Nah, nevah heard of it."

The cops argued—correctly—that regardless of what the prime minister said, it was just his personal opinion, NOT an "administrative decision."  So nothing changed.

Finally, hours after the conference ended, Belgium's "administrative court" ruled that the order to the cops to prevent anyone from entering was "invalid."   But of course by then it was too late--much like proving massive vote fraud in the 2020 election, eh?  "Sorry, too late."

This almost unnoticed incident illustrates how the Left is winning every confrontation in the West today, namely that no principle piously proclaimed by the Left as sacred is really sacred: Freedom of speech, freedom of  assembly, rights of private property--all the rules to which EU elites constantly pay lip service—are ignored when it comes to fighting conservatives.

Of course if a conservative government were to shut down a conference of liberals, socialists, environmentalists, LGBT activists, or other left-wing groups, protests would have undoubtedly exploded throughout Europe

For those of us who remember Soviet totalitarianism it was déjà vu. Three things in particular were familiar.  First, men with guns were ordered to shut down an event the ruling socialists didn't like.  Even though this was clearly illegal, the cops didn't care: they had their orders and obeyed them.  Arguing with them about freedom, or the illegality of their orders, was useless.

Some would-be participants described the sense of helplessness they felt when the cops refused to allow them to enter the building to attend the conference. They had naively believed this was impossible in "sophisticated" Europe!  Then suddenly the impossible happened.

The second type of déjà vu was seeing how the mainstream media reported events, describing the conference as “far right,” “fascist,” etc.  This shows how hard the media work to control how the populace views events.  People who believe the Media have no hope of avoiding their conditioning.

The third type of déjà vu had to do with how a totalitarian system--even though claiming to be all about freedom--instantly takes freedom away when it doesn't like something.

Now: as noted above, this happened in Belgium--headquarters of the vaunted EU--an organization the U.S. Left dearly loves.  And because the Mainstream Media love the EU, no negative publicity about that body is allowed.  So the average American never heard a word about the cops trying to shut down the conservative conference.

And if anyone did hear, the approved Dem bleat is "We not doze folks in duh EU so you shouldn't pay any attention to whut happens there!  See, dis could nevah happen here!"

Oh, absolutely, sparky.  You bet.  Ain't nuffin we kin learn from what happens over there, eh?  Rise of Hitler, rise of Stalin, appeasement.  Nah, nuffin ta see here, folks.

Source. 

https://www.compactmag.com/article/how-the-west-suppresses-dissent/

Maine passes law taking the U.S. a step closer to electing president by winner of the national popular

In my previous post I told you about how fast and completely the Democrats were trashing the Constitution.  Of course you just shrug, cuz that was just about allowing duh po' widdle boys who claim to be girls to use girls' locker rooms.  Of course it was far more than that but you don't care.  But here comes another wound you may care more about:

If you know fuck-all about the Constitution you know it explicitly lays out how we are to elect the president and VP--called the "electoral college."  The Founders hammered out this method instead of by the winner of the total national vote because they knew that if we elected presidents by the winner of the national vote, all presidents would come from the most populous states.  

Democrats: "SO???  Dat totally guuud!  An' it jus' coincidence dat we rule all duh big cities an' all but two of duh big-population states!  So naturally we support this!"

The electoral college method was designed to prevent this, because even though the big states still have far more electoral votes, all states have two senators.  So the EC does a tiny bit to allow less-populated states to occasionally play a role in electing the president.

So it's no surprise that the Dems want to abolish the electoral college and instead elect the president by the winner of the national popular vote, since that would guarantee that virtually all presidents would be from the big Dem-ruled states, giving them more power.  

SO...for decades the Dems have demanded the electoral college method by abolished.  But this has never gotten far because of another safeguard in the Constitution: for an amendment to pass, it must be "ratified" by two-thirds of the states.  And logically, no small state would vote to cut their throat, eh?

Oh wait...small states ruled by Dems already have.  The Democrats are within a hairs-breadth of abolishing the electoral college, and yet you've never heard about it--because the Lying Democrat-run Mainstream Media does NOT want you to know that the Dems are within a year or so of replacing that method by the winner of the national popular vote.

Stop right here and try to recall if you ever heard about any of this before this moment.  If you haven't (and 99.5% of you haven't), it shows you how totally the Democrats control the Lying Mainstream Media.

So...back in 2006 two Democrat "strategists" found a way to abolish the Electoral College without having to bother with trying to amend the Constitution.

Let the cunning rapacity of that sink in for a moment: obviously the bastards knew the EC is explicitly specified in the Constitution, and that it would be essentially impossible to get small states to ratify an amendment abolishing the EC since that would cut their own throats.  But they found a way to abolish the electoral college without having to amend the Constitution. 

The cunning plan relied on the fact that the Constitution specifically allows states to form "interstate compacts" for any purpose (presumably a *legal* purpose, though the Constitution is silent on that point, since the Founders never imagined states would form a compact to do anything NOT allowed by law, eh?)  Once such a "compact" is approved by congress, it has the effect of law.

The cunning Dem strategists realized that nothing in the Constitution require a state's "electors" to cast their electoral votes for the candidate who won their state's vote.  (That's the twist used by Hillary supporters in 2016 to try to get "electors" to cast their vote for Hilliary even if their state voted for Trump.  Yet Hilliary and the Dems were never charged with "election interference," eh?  Funny how that works.)

So 18 years ago (2006) the two cunning rat-bastards created a thing called the "National Popular Vote Interstate Compact."  It provides that states that join the compact (by passing a state law to do so) agree that when states with a total of 270 electoral votes have passed such laws, all members of the "compact" agree to order their electors to vote for the winner of the national popular vote--even though their state voted for the other party!  The Democrats call this "defending our precious democracy"!

Now, this is so outrageous that many normal Americans think it has to be horseshit--a "right-wing violent extremist conspiracy story."  It's just too "on the nose" to be true, eh?

If that's what you think, look it up yourself, you ignorant POS.  Not only is it real, the bastards have now gotten 17 states, with 209 electoral votes, to agree to join it.  So they only need states with 61 more EVs to join for the Democrats to win every presidential election forever.  

Here's the quote from the compact's own damn webpage:

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.  It has been enacted into law by 17 states and DC with 209 electoral votes (Status in the states). It needs an additional 61 electoral votes to go into effect.  
   Take Action Now – Tell Your Legislators to Pass National Popular Vote!

If you think that's a fake, here's the Wiki page.

This massive assault on the Constitution has been happening right under your nose for 18 YEARS, and yet you've never heard a word about it, eh?  Now how do ya suppose such a *massive assault on the "supreme law of the land" can have been going on for 18 years without you hearing a word about it until now?

Answer: the Mainstream Media hasn't wanted you to know.  Obviously they know all about it, and totally support it.  But neither the Media nor Democrat strategists want you to know--until the moment the rat-bastards get states representing 61 more electoral votes to pass a law joining the "compact."

And if being just 61 votes short of going into effect doesn't alarm ya, consider that lawmakers in Dem-ruled states with another 79 electoral votes have passed bills to join the thing, but the bills haven't been signed into law by the governor.  Thus if those states elect a Democrat as governor, and their legislature stays Democrat, those states will join the compact--which would instantly create a Constitutional crisis.

So here's a slobbering story by some dipshit foreigner at ABC who wants the electoral college to be abolished:

Maine just passed a law bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the winner of the national popular vote.

Earlier this week Maine governor Janet Mills allowed a bill to become law that would take effect once the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is able to gather pledges for at least 270 electoral votes -- the number of delegate votes needed to elect a president.

Seventeen states, with a total of 209 electoral votes, have now voted to join the compact, which would abolish the electoral-college method of electing presidents, without having to amend the Constitution.  The compact would automatically take effect when states with a total of 270 electoral-college votes pass a law to join it.
 
Democrats argue that under the current system not every vote is equal, and claim the compact will make elections fair by giving every vote equal weight regardless of where a voter lives.

The NPVIC's website says

"Under the current system a small number of votes in a small number of states regularly decides the Presidency. All-or-nothing payoffs fuel doubt, controversy over real or imagined irregularities, hair-splitting post-election litigation...and unrest."

Now, I've been warning y'all about this for years, but of course... And normal Americans (i.e. not Democrats) believe it's absurd to think that the Supreme Court would allow the electoral college to be abolished without a Constitutional amendment.  But a few of you may recall that when Texas sued Pennsylvania for violating their own election laws in the 2020 election (after the Dems stole the presidency), the Supreme Court dismissed that lawsuit, in an unsigned one-page opinion--without offering a single bit of legal reasoning.

They simply didn't want to risk stopping everything to investigate claims of election fraud, almost certainly reasoning that allowing the Democrat Party to get away with the steal was less risky than throwing the election into limbo for three months.

If you think that won't happen again, you're too damn dumb to breathe.

Source for the utterly pro-Democrat ABC story
 
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/state-law-takes-us-step-closer-popular-vote/story?id=109437887

biden regime RULE re-defining "sex" in Title IX to mean "or gender identity" is unconstitutional

Unless you pay close attention to the lies and abuses by the biden regime--apparently with the support of most Democrat voters--you have no idea what's happening, and how fast the Democrats are trashing the Constitution.

That magnificently-crafted document--which the Founders called "the supreme law of the land"--says the preznit canNOT make laws.  Got it?  Do I have to cite the clause in the document, since none of you seem to know jack-shit about this particular provision?  

So again: the preznit is NOT allowed to make laws.  Or amend laws.  Or ignore laws.

But as with EVERYTHING Democrat leaders see as preventing them from getting what they want, the cunning rat-bastards have found a "workaround"--a way to change the law without having to bother trying to get congress to do it.

Two years ago biden's handlers handed him an "executive order" to sign.  That EO DECREED that his regime would "interpret" Title IX of the Civil Rights Act's protection against discrimination on the basis of "sex" as meaning that every "educational institution" in the U.S.--including universities, museums and libraries!--were now ordered to pretend that males claiming to be females were real women.

Let the outrageous absurdity of that sink in for a minute.

Four days ago the corrupt, power-mad lackeys of biden's department of "Education" issued their "Final Rule" implementing that DECREE.  That "Rule" fills a staggering 1,577 pages, which the lackeys hoped would bury the infuriating core of the thing--which I've stated above--in enough word-fog that no one would be able to find the smoking gun.

Yes, they really think we're that stupid.

Now: it should be obvious by now that trannies are totally mentally ill--as are their supporters.  And it's an outrage for the Democrats to ORDER that males be allowed in girls' dressing rooms--which is EXACTLY what this rule orders.  But ironically that's not the most fatal effect of this DECREE.

Here's the fatal part:  biden's handlers are smirking that "We din' change no law!  We would nevah do sumpin' like dat, cuz we looooves duh law!  See, all we did was have ouah wunnerful preznit issue an 'Executive Order,' see?  Dat totally legal!  Not change law!  Den he ask duh DOEd to issue a RULE to enforce duh Executive Order.  See?  Not change law!  Nope nope nope!"

Apparently biden's handlers think that "reasoning" is legally sound, since they did it.

But least a couple of biden's gruberment attorneys know this DECREE has the same effect as amending a law, which preznits are NOT allowed to do.  That makes both the EO and this rule unconstitutional, and immediately impeachable.  (More on that below.)

So IF the Supreme Court allows this to stand, it will mean that any Democrat preznit can effectively make or change or ignore any law his party wants. 

Starting to get it yet?  (Spoiler: not one out of 10,000 Americans understands what's happened here.)

Democrats and their tranny mafia allies bleat "We din' change no law!  Dat beez nonsense!  Dis beez a guuud rule!  Uncle Joe not change law!  Yew jus' mad cuz we snookered yew yet again, as we always do!  We always smahtah den yew."

And the Mainstream Media will either cheer or say nothing critical of the regime for doing this--cuz they looove trannies, and the Democrat party.  And even though they know this cunning way of enabling a president to change a law could be used against them someday, they also know no Republican president would ever try it--because the Media would immediately scream that any decree he issued to change a law would be grounds for impeachment.  

Besides, Republican presidents still consider the Constitution to be the supreme law of the land, and would never consider such a brazen end-run around it. 

So why won't congress impeach biden for this?

Answers: First, even if the House did (and they won't), Democrats who control the senate won't remove him.  And second:  Cackles Harris.

biden's handlers' policy of "managed violence"--a.k.a. appeasement: how's that working?

biden has always been a dummy--a classic, stupid pol: glad-hander, storyteller, bullshit artist.  It's totally common.  And Democrats love it.

Being stupid, and never having served in the military nor studied military history, he doesn't understand war.  Specifically, he and his moronic handlers seem to be happy to tolerate a "low level" of killing by terrorist states.

What he (and his handlers) clearly don't understand is that tolerating a "low level" of attacks solves nothing.

If you don't understand why tolerating "low level" attacks is a problem, consider how different the world would look today if, after four years of WW2, instead of the U.S. and allies forcing both Germany and Japan to surrender unconditionally, the U.S. president had pushed for a "proportional response" and a ceasefire.
 
Instead biden's handlers apparently see terrorism as a totally reasonable response by "oppressed people"--in this case Iran and its proxies.  Given that viewpoint it would be unreasonable for the U.S. to say "If you do that again you'll be killed."

The "strategy" of tolerating endless "low-level" attacks by terrorist states arises from a handful of dumb but seductive assumptions by Dems: that all societies are equal; that "we must understand the 'root causes' that force deez po' oppressed pipo to do dis;" that there's no way to get a nation to STOP supporting terrorist attacks; and that in fact "equity" demands that we put up with the attacks.

The result is the demand by the Democrats that superior western technology be restrained, while allowing nations or non-state entities that lack advanced tech to attack as they please using "old" tech.

Of course if you're a Democrat you don't believe any of that.  Yeah, I get it.  Democrats believe there is NO link between the mullahs of Iran and the men ruling Hamas.

Really?  You Democrats seriously believe that?

Apparently biden's handlers either believe it or pretend to.  As a result, the biden regime lifts economic sanctions on Iran, allowing that country to sell billions of dollars worth of oil.

Think that might be a signal to the mullahs--which they pass on to their protege Hamas?

When the biden regime fails to respond to 170  attacks on U.S. installations in the mid-east by Iranian-backed terrorists in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, think that might be a signal to the mullahs?  But as biden's handlers see it, we simply cannot wipe out missile sites in those nations--with whatever casualty count that might entail--cuz...um...uh... America “can take the hit.”  "A few dozen dead U.S. troops is a small price to pay for not escalating things," eh?

That's called appeasement, and for well over a century history shows that appeasement only assures more hits.

If you wanna stop those hits, you tell Iran--openly, for all the world to see--"If there's one more attack from you or your proxies, you die."  And then if they ignore that warning, you do what you told them--massively.

For young Americans--who have never been taught any accurate history:  In WW2 Japan's military had a long tradition of "death before surrender."  And had U.S. and allied troops been forced to invade Japan to force them to surrender to end WW2, the consensus was that that would have cost 250,000 allied casualties, and at least that many Japanese--mostly civilians.  

What happened instead?  Parents, ask your highschoolers if they know.

The U.S. dropped two atomic bombs, three days apart.  Those bombs were so devastating that after the second one the emperor's cabinet was able to overcome the generals and Japan immediately surrendered.

That's how you end a war--and prevent an endless series of guerilla attacks afterwards.  And since then Japan has been a model nation.

Think the biden regime would take such decisive action today?

Of course not.  The Democrat handlers have decided that endless terror attacks are acceptable.  A dozen dead U.S. troops mean nothing to the regime, so there's no need for a "disproportionate response" to establish the iron-clad rule that terror attacks won't be tolerated.

Instead biden's handlers have a policy of "managed violence."

Most of you probably don't know what prompted Iran's leaders to launch roughly 300 drones and missiles at Israel ten days ago.  It was a strike by Israel on Iran's embassy in Syria that killed one of the planners of the October 7th attack by Hamas that killed 1,250 Israelis.

To put that number into perspective, since the U.S. as 34 times Israel's population, so to have the same effect here an attack would have to kill 35,000 people.
 
So Israel sought to kill one of the planners.  A reasonable response would have been for Iran to take out an Israeli embassy in some other nation.  But that wouldn't have killed enough people--would have been too reasonable.  So instead Iran launched over 300 missiles and drones at Israeli cities--clearly intended to kill civilians.

Because a combination of luck and great defense prevented any casualties, biden's handlers had him tell Israel "Do not retaliate."

Israel defied biden's handlers, but its retaliation was clearly just symbolic--reportedly just three missiles, targeting defenses around a major Iranian nuclear facility.

If the leaders of Iran were rational, they'd get the message--which is, "Don't do that again."  But does anyone think they did?

Really, Democrats, let's hear your take on that.

Would the Middle East be a lot safer if Hamas and Iran decided to forego terror attacks?  Seems overwhelmingly likely.  But as long as we put up with 'em, we'll keep seeing 'em.  In essence the U.S. has signaled to Iran and other terror states that we'll put up with attacks forever--as long as they're just "low-level."

"Low-level."  Very few Americans know that before Russia invaded Ukraine biden said the U.S. would not respond to what he called a “minor incursion.”  That was a clear green light to invade, as long as a Russian invasion was just a "minor incursion."

No reporter dared to ask biden or his handlers or his incompetent Secretary of State how they defined "minor."  And now that "minor incursion has cost roughly 200,000 lives per side, and closing in on half a trillion in destruction, not to mention $300 BILLION in direct U.S. cash and arms to Ukraine.

"Managed violence," eh?  "Less expensive than the lethal 'Don't do this again or you'll die' lesson," the Dems say.  And of course accompanied by the cunning propaganda “both sides are equally at fault,” and "root causes."

If the biden/harris/garland/mayorkas regime had been in power during WW2, what would the world look like today?  biden's handlers would never have invaded Berlin, or dropped the atomic bombs that made invading Japan unnecessary.  His handlers don't seem to know history and are incompetent, and their policies ensure endless war.  

But don't worry, it's all just "low-level" war.  Of course a few million Ukrainians might disagree.

H/T Victor Davis Hanson

"your" congress votes $61 BILLION for Ukraine. And this is gonna defeat Putin. Really!

Well I see that after all the posturing and hot air, your corrupt, worthless congress voted to give Ukraine another $61 BILLION.  Shortly thereafter biden got his ten percent.

Just kidding--those $100 bills aren't even out of the washer yet, and it'll take another hour to dry 'em.

In 1945 and 1963 an author predicted what we're seeing today

Every young American should be familiar with C.S. Lewis, who wrote half a dozen inspiring books like "The Chronicles of Narnia."  (Hugely popular but hated by the "sophisticated" Media.)

Shortly before the end of WW2 Lewis wrote The Screwtape Letters--a series of missives supposedly written by a "senior devil"--Screwtape--to his protégé Wormwood, telling him how to corrupt humans.

In 1963, shortly before Lewis died, he updated the Screwtape Letters to directly criticize the social trends he was seeing in the early 1960s.  And of course since then those fatal flaws have gone from mere whispers on college campuses 60 years ago to become the principles of the Democrat party of today--as intended.

In that update (full text here)–senior devil Screwtape describes how the normally benign term "democracy" could be used to destroy excellence, first in education, then in society at large.  That was to be done by pushing total equality not just of opportunity but of outcomes, regardless of effort.  As you could easily guess, slackers and morons LOVED this scheme, in which everyone stayed "totally equal” in outcome.
 
Screwtape tells his subordinate devils “Democracy is the term to use to lead them by the nose.  The most basic principle of the new education system must be that loafers and slackers must not be made to feel inferior to intelligent, hardworking students, because that would be ‘undemocratic.’”

Screwtape orders "Entrance examinations for universities must be made so easy that everyone can be admitted."  And then urges “University exams must be framed so that nearly all the students get good marks."

And of course that's what we see today, as progressive demagogues like Bernie Sanders insist that everyone should go to college "so we have the best-educated workforce in the world”–-willfully ignoring that a sham education has no value.

“Students qualified to proceed to a higher class may be artificially held back, because other students might get a trauma by being left behind.”

And sure enough, the wokiez who run most public schools are now eliminating gifted programs because they're afraid slackers and kids who don't give a damn about learning will have their feelings hurt.  And in California cunning leftists are already charging consulting fees of $5,000 per HOUR to tell school boards how to do this.

And what do liberal media outlets have to say about this?  Not a word of criticism--because criticizing any wokie program will get you fired.

It should come as no surprise to anyone with a functioning brain that a nation of dunces is far easier to rule.  As Screwtape explains: 

“Pure democracy leads to a nation without great men, a nation mainly of sub-literates, full of the cocksureness which flattery breeds on ignorance, and quick to snarl or whimper at the first sign of criticism."

Sound familiar? 

“We must encourage this behaviour, the manners, which arises naturally from 'pure democracy,' because these are the things which will ultimately destroy democracy.”

Finally Lewis notes that one of the key tactics of the devils is to re-define words so they now mean the opposite of their historic meaning--like moronic reporters (all Democrats) who describe mob violence as “peaceful protests."

Another example: For millenia, "democracy" meant letting citizens choose their rulers by vote.  But today the Democrat party claims that keeping Trump or Kennedy off state ballots is "defending our precious democracy."  Really?  And the Media print that utter horseshit without a word of criticism, leading dull people to think that NOT letting citizens choose their leader is actually...democracy.  

Re-defining words.

Yet another example: the NY Times style book hath DECREED that whenever "journalists" write stories about males claiming to be female, the writer must use female pronouns "she" and "her" when referring to the wokie nutter.  That cunning tactic gets weak-minded people to believe the absurd lie that men can actually become women by simply claiming to be so.

Changing the meaning of words.  Brilliant.

Source.

https://townhall.com/columnists/jaredwhitley/2021/03/27/how-cs-lewis-predicted-woke-education-could-turn-democracy-into-dictatorship-n2586801

http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/arts/lit/Toast_CSL.pdf

One-minute vid compilation exposes New York attorney-general as a brazen liar

For young Americans: Letitia James is the corrupt attorney-general of New York state.  She hates Trump, and is the person SOLELY responsible for ORDERING that he post $450 MILLION in bail.

For young Americans: The 8th Amendment to the Constitution--which the Founders called "the supreme law of the land"--says "excessive bail shall not be imposed."  $454 MILLION...think that's a bit excessive?

So...she's willing to do ANYTHING to jail Trump.  And yet when asked about her obvious agenda to do that, she lies--looking SOOooo fucking sincere--and says "That's just not true."

"The president of the United States [she's referring to Trump here] has complained that I've got some sort of personal vendetta against him--that I campaigned against him [when she was running for the attorney-general position].  That is not true."

Hahahahahahaha!  Fortunately for honest Americans, when lying pieces of dog-shit like James proudly, angrily make public speeches to rally anger against Trump, saying they wanna "get Trump" and "We're gonna get him" and "His days are numbered!", those angry rants are recorded on video--something James is clearly too dumb to realize.

Now someone has put together a one-minute compilation of James saying ALL those things, screaming and fulminating about getting Trump, and how she wants revenge against Trump for "the way he treated Obama."

And yet when she realizes that her clear, obvious personal vendetta against the former president has been exposed, suddenly she turns all sincere-looking and piously bleats "I don' haz no personal vendetta against Trump.  Absolutely not!  Dat not true!"

Watch for yourself.  What a lying sack of shit.  But of course you'll never see any of these clips in the Lying Mainstream Media.

This lying bitch is the fucking attorney-general of the entire corrupt state of New York.  Think her obvious bias results in her refusing to charge her "friends," while unleashing the power of the state on white conservatives?

Source.

https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1781873969563316463

Dem-ruled Maine passes bill that prohibits parents from "interfering with sex-change procedures"

Unless you monitor laws in every state (spoiler: you don't) you have no idea how far down the slide to hell this country is.  If you wanna see a faaaabulous example of how a Democrat-ruled state works, consider this:

Last week Maine's Democrat-controlled legislature passed a bill that would prohibit "interference" with all types of sex-change procedures, *regardless of how young the victim was.*

If you're a Democrat voter you think that's a "right-wing scare story," cuz you can't believe any legislature would be that stupid or tyrannical.  Mus' be "fake newz!" eh?  In that case do your own g*ddamn research: search for Maine bill LD 227.

If you're a Democrat, you won't, because you don't wanna believe this is real.  Tragically, it IS real.

The bill also DECREES that no one--*not even parents of victims*--may sue ANY "medical worker" for any medical procedure relating to sex-change, including prescribing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.  

For a legislature to pass a law *ordering* that surgeons who perform sex-change surgery on minors, or doctors who give puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to minors, *cannot be sued* is a breathtaking overreach.  But they did it.

The bill could also allow hospitals and doctors to refuse to turn over medical records of young patients who later sue for injuries they claim were injured by a "sex-change procedure."  

Let me repeat that for my Democrat siblings: Your kid goes to a hospital to start sex-change (or as the Dems put it, "gender-reassignment care."  The "care" causes ghastly damage.  Kid sues...and the hospital system says "Oh, you want your own medical records?  Tough.  We OWN your medical records and refuse to give 'em to you."

Maine's totally fucked-in-the-head Democrat governor Janet Mills is expected to quickly sign the bill into law.

The Democrats who rule Maine also passed a law allowing abortion until the moment of birth.  And last year the Democrat-ruled legislature approved drugs like puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones--for children as young as 16--*without parental consent.*

This is like the old Soviet Union: "We will do whatever we want with your children, because they're actually OUR property.  Your children belong to us."

Source.  

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-will-make-state-sanctuary-kids-gender-transitions-abortion-gop-protest
 

biden's Dept of "Education" issues RULE, adding "or gender identity" to Title IX

Okay, citizens, time to dust off your ancient learning about the three branches of gruberment.  Ready?

According to the Constitution ("Whut dat?"), which branches of the gruberment are given the power to draft and pass "laws"?  

If you're a Democrat you probably answered "All of 'em," cuz that's exactly where we are today under the biden/harris/garland/mayorkas regime.  Obozo was the same way: "I can make laws cuz I beez duh preznit!"  But the Constitution explicitly says only congress can pass laws, which the preznit can either sign or veto.

But as with everything in the Constitution that Democrats don't like, the Democrats have found a workaround.  Here's how it works:  Virtually all laws have a section saying "the department of [X] shall have the authority to make all rules necessary to implement this law."  And there's the trick: the Dem White House handlers simply ORDER one of the endless fed empires to make a RULE that the actual law never intended.  SOooo simple!  And you don't even notice.

Latest example:  Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 originally said schools that receive federal funds couldn't discriminate on the basis of "race, color, religion or national origin."  In 1972 congress amended this to add "or sex."  The actual amendment said "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance."

Then during the Clinton years the "Education" Department issued a DECREE that added "or sexual preference."  This seemed unnecessary because no one saw any discrimination in education on that basis, but then this was when the "same-sex marriage" craze was at fever pitch, and the Clintons wanted to milk that for millions of votes.  This was NOT part of the law or any of the amendments thereto, but no one objected cuz...the Media and Democrats were hot to ram same-sex relationships down everyone's throat, eh? 

May 15, 2020:  The Trump administration directed the Department of "Education" to roll back their DECREES on Title IX to what the actual LAW said about sex: "sex."  Nothing about  "gender identity" or sexual orientation.  But under Obozo's reign the wokie leftists who run Connecticut had decreed that males claiming to be girls could compete on girls' teams.  (Or as the Leftists who run Wiki deliberately and confusingly wrote, "allows transgender girls to compete in high school sports as girls," cuz who could possibly object to that logical proposition, eh?)  The Department of Education issued a letter stating that that state's insane policy violated the civil rights of female student-athletes, thus Title IX.  

March 8, 2021:  Following the wokie Dems, the insane biden regime demands that all of you agree that men can become "authentic, legal" women simply by saying they are.  Accordingly, just SIX WEEKS after the corrupt vegetable was installed as prez, in accord with the insane demands of the rat-bastard communists who run the Democrat party, Porridgebrain signed Executive Order 14021, titled "Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free From Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity."

If you doubt that, look it the hell up.

Now:  As you saw by reading the actual text of the amendment (copied earlier) that added "sex" to Title IX, you can see that the term "gender identity" was not, and is not, in the actual law.  And for the benefit of stupid Democrats who've NEVER read the Constitution, that document does NOT give the president the right to make or amend laws.  Got that?

Now: Dems bleat "Our faaabulous preznit din' make or change no law, he jus' decreed dat when congress passed Title IX, which said "sex," what duh congress really meant was that "sex" included 'gender identity.'  See?"

Yeah, well...the only problem with that was that the term "gender identity" wasn't known in 1972, and centuries of case law have held that later generations can't legally change terms in laws to give those laws meanings unknown to those who drafted and passed those laws, thus meanings never intended.  Got it?

June 16, 2021: the Department issued a decree saying it would interpret Title IX's definition of "sex" to prohibit discrimination on the basis of both "sexual orientation" and "gender identity."

Neat, eh?  "We din' change duh LAW, we jus' made a RULE dat utterly changed it.  Neener neener neener!"

So, acting as ordered by biden's EO, the fucking DOEd effectively changed the law, claiming this is perfectly legal because of that paragraph saying "executive agencies" can make all rules necessary to enact the provisions of the law.  Except this was NOT, and cannot have been, the intent of congress in saying "sex" back in 1972.

But the cunning leftists in the DOEd say "We kin doo dis cuz we din' really change duh law, eh?  See, we way smaht!  We jus' interpret duh law in a way duh congress intended!"

No, you didn't, and you know that.  The bullshit term "gender identity" was unknown in 1972, and has never appeared in the law.  Your leftist Dem party invented the term a couple of decades after the law was passed.  

In any case, the DOEd has now issued its "Final Rule" on the subject--a staggering 1,577 pages.  Here's the opening 'graf:

AGENCY: Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education.  

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Education (Department) amends the regulations
implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX). The purpose of these amendments is to better align the Title IX regulatory requirements with Title IX’s
nondiscrimination mandate. These amendments clarify...Title IX...to provide an educational environment free from discrimination on the basis of sex...

"Clarify"?  That's a lie.  Only in bizarro world would this be called a "clarification."  The rat-bastards have issued a RULE that utterly changes the meaning and intent of the law. 

And here's what it actually does:  By this decree ("rule" never voted by congress), ALL K-12 schools and universities will now be required to allow men claiming to be girls to compete as girls.  (Of course most want this, since they're insane leftists who care NOTHING for your daughters.)

All K-12 and universities will be forced to allow men claiming to be girls to use girls' bathrooms and locker rooms.

If you're a Democrat, you apparently love this!  You're fine with your precious 14-year-old having to undress in front of men claiming to be girls, cuz dat jus' fair, eh?  An' you prize fairness above everything, right?  Well, except you're fine with bigger, stronger males winning all the girls' races, right?  "Cuz dat jus' fair," eh?  Cuz doze snowflakes iz reeeally reeeally girls, right?  Authentic, real girls.

You people are certifiably insane.  And on some level you know it.  Let me make it simpler: Claiming you're the opposite sex does NOT make it so.  

Of course you and your woke friends don't believe that--which explains how the U.S. has reached its current state--including the stolen election.

In Houston, black teen steals, kills store clerk; grand jury dismisses all charges

In the lawless shithole of Houston a 17-year-old black--Mario Young--went into a convenience store and stole a bag of chips.

The 42-year-old clerk noticed and followed him outside, calling for him to come back and pay.

Minutes later Young fatally shot the clerk.

Yesterday a Houston grand jury voted dat duh po' teen shouldn't be charged fo' shootin' duh clerk, cuz he thought duh clerk might have had a gun.  The clerk was unarmed, and no gun was found in his car.

The Harris County DA had originally charged the killer, but apparently the grand jury vote overrules that.  The grand jury ruling means the killer won't even be charged with some lesser homicide like "wrongful death."  

So now, in Houston, if a member of a "protected" group steals something from a store and is pursued, the thief can shoot the clerk and get off *without even being inconvenienced by a trial*--by claiming he thought the clerk had a gun.

Can anyone explain why the perp wasn't even charged with "negligent homicide" or "wrongful death"?

Anyone care to predict the result of this ruling?

Source.

https://www.fox26houston.com/news/houston-crime-suspect-no-billed-in-murder-of-gas-station-clerk-over-bag-of-chips

Who can get ALL the networks to get their affiliates to say exactly the same thing on same day?

You're gonna have to think on this one for a bit:  

You won't be surprised to learn that big, bureaucratic (moronic) entities--like the CIA, FBI, DOJ, the entire biden regime--tend to do things the way they've always done 'em.  "Cuz dat beez in our manual of procedures!  An' yew don' evah wanna deviate frum ouah approved procedures!"

So...sometimes when technology changes, the "procedures manual" takes a year or two (or more) to grasp that however the agency used to do things may not work now.

You'd think that as much as they pay those incredibly smaht pipo, dey wouldn' have dis problem, eh?  

Hahahahahahahaha!  Problem is, even when young, tech-savvy staffers discover a new twist that makes the old system not work, very often the top assholes don't listen to 'em!  Seriously!

There's a solid psychological explanation for this:  "We're older and smahtah den yew, so duh thing yew jus' tol' us can't be a problem...because if it was, we would nevah have written the procedure the way we wrote it, right?  So thanks, now go away."

If you think that's crazy-talk, nonsense, horseshit, you're too damn naive to reproduce.  Want an example?  Remember way WAY back when NASA selected "the first teacher in space"?

Unless you're old, you don't, cuz that was 38 damn years ago, way back in January of 1986.  NASA launched a crew of seven aboard the "space shuttle" Challenger.  That mission lasted just over a minute:  Seventy-three seconds after liftoff the thing blew up, killing all seven crewmembers--including "the first teacher in space."

Turned out the disaster was caused by cold temperatures causing a seal to leak.  Hey, stuff happens, eh?  Except...the night before the launch, an engineer with the company that made the big solid-fuel "booster rockets" called the launch site to warn 'em of EXACTLY the problem that caused the disaster.  He warned 'em not to launch until the seals had warmed up.

Betcha can't guess what happened, eh?

NASA shithead: "Thanks li'l buddy, but we're a LOT smahtah den yew, cuz we beez here an' yew ain't.  If yew wuz impo'tant yew'd be here.  But yew aren't, so...thanks, li'l buddy, but we adults have dis all under control, so don't worry bout it."

And 14 hours later the thing blew up and killed seven...including...

Everyone should have been fired.  But of course no one was.  So...people at the top rarely listen to warnings from younger people down the organizational chart.

So how is this relevant?  Well...before a) the internet; and b) tens of thousands of talented Americans having cheap, capable video-editing software, you never would have seen the clip I'm about to show ya.  It's a compilation of maybe 50 TV "talking heads" looking earnestly--"convincingly"--into the camera--something they practice doing, and are very good at--and reading the exact same line, saying some media sites are putting out information not approved by duh regime.

The line is "This is extremely dangerous to our democracy!"

The weird part is, these are local stations from all the different networks.  What are the odds that every network would tell all their "local affiliates" to read this line within the same two-day window, eh?

Democrat voter, and the regime:  "Dis jus' coincidence!"

Really?  Watch the video.  

Now: before the internet, unless you worked for the Media you could only watch maybe two local nightly newscasts a day.  And you had no way at all of seeing newscasts from other cities.   So if you did see two local evening newscasts, and heard talking heads on those two saying exactly the same thing, you'd think "coincidence."

But if you were somehow able to see 50 or 100 local newscasts, in which the talking head read exactly the same line, would you think it's still just coincidence?

No.  This was all ordered by someone, at an agency with LOTS of power, like the CIA or the White House.  Once you realize that only a powerful agency of the government could get all the networks to issue the order at the same time, there's no real need to slice it any finer.

Now, the internet has been around in essentially its current form for 24 years or so.  And with local stations all being on the Net, every American can get video from any local station.  And low-cost video-editing software has been available for the same time.  All that remained was for a talented conservative to a) grab 50 local newscasts and find the same lines; and b) create a compilation video and synchronize it, so you see and hear all the talking heads saying exactly the same thing, in the same cadence.

Are you starting to understand how you're being manipulated yet?

Nah, if you're a Democrat, you aren't.  

Eleven-minute clip shows you how they were all lying to scare you into taking the jab

Unless you paid close attention from the day the FDA and CDC approved Pfizer's so-called "vaccine," you've forgotten what a relentless avalanche of screaming, hateful propaganda was unleashed on Americans to get them to take the jab.

This for a "vaccine" the CDC and FDA and Pfizer--and biden's handlers--already knew was so ineffective at preventing the "vaccinated" from getting the Chyna virus that the CDC literally wrote a new definition for "vaccine" to get it to qualify!  And yet they NEVER stopped screaming at you that "this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated."  And "If you get vaccinated you canNOT get covid!"

SO...for the sake of your kids (or future kids) you need to watch this absolutely masterful eleven-minute compilation of every damn talking head on the alphabet nets, and every lying sack of shit in government, screaming at you that if you didn't take the ineffective jab you should be denied all medical care--and lots worse.  Every late-night talk-show host joined in the screaming condemnation.  Those two utter lying pieces of shit Don Lemon and bill gates were particularly bad.

Hell, they were all total Nazis--and utterly wrong about EVERYTHING.  They lied, innocent Americans died.  The Left's idol--that dumb-as-a-rock Democrat governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo ALONE killed 15,000 by ordering nursing homes to take infected people.  And yet no one was fired or went to prison, no one was executed.

All it cost Americans was our freedom, our businesses, the lives of loved ones who were prevented from getting approved drugs that cured the thing in two days, and thus died when they could SO EASILY have lived.

The key from the tyrants' standpoint was to scream that if you didn't obey 'em, you'd DIE, along with your loved ones.  So it was essentially the same as the Democrats are doing with Globull Worming: "Unless you do exactly as we order, ALL LIFE ON EARTH WILL BE DESTROYED BY RUNAWAY WARMING!"

SO...did you learn your lesson from the covid panic?  The "plandemic"?

No, most of you didn't.  The regime claims about 70% of Americans took the jab, even though 40% were essentially forced to by biden's ORDER that they'd be fired if they didn't.  And half the public (Democrats) think the Dem regime did nothing wrong AT ALL.  Hmmm....

Source. 

https://citizenfreepress.com/column-2/the-unvaccinated-nobody-is-safe/

Second source, unless YouTube takes it down. 

https://youtu.be/zI3yU5Z2adI

Check the large number of empty seats in Scranton yesterday to hear Porridgebrain

Yesterday the alleged preznit, Porridgebrain, spoke in his hometown, Scranton PA.  SO...since he's not just a REEEally popular preznit but also dis hiz hometown, errybudy in Scranton loves him, so he should have drawn huge crowd, right?  

Well...unless the Mainstream Media is lying to Americans.  So this is the "crowd" minutes before biden was scheduled to appear.  Take a look:

Notice anything?  Like, tons of empty seats?

Compare this half-empty room to the huge crowd outside the bodega Trump visited yesterday.

And yet all the polls show the *nationwide vote* for prez tied.  That's because places like California and New York are overwhelmingly Democrat.  But all that has to happen is for the polls to say it's "close" for the Dems to pull of a plausible steal in November.

And the Dems and the Media will laugh their asses off.

In 1984 a KGB defector exposed the Soviet plan to make the U.S. fail--without firing a shot

“America's continued success depends on its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” – Joseph Stalin

All Americans who love this nation should read  the 1984 interview with Yuri Alexandrovich Bezhmenov, a member of the USSR's KGB who defected.  https://youtu.be/QuyYG4sDMV4

Bezhmenov described a four stage plan that would result in the U.S. falling to communism without having to fire a shot:

1. Demoralization
2. Destabilization
3. Crisis
4. Normalization

Keep in mind that he gave this interview 40 years ago:

The demoralization process in the United States is already complete:  Young Americans are being taught nothing about the nation's founding principles, but instead that their country was founded on racism, lies and theft.  No society can survive when its children believe those things.
   Demoralization was the process that took the most time because we had to totally change the schools, by taking over school boards and changing what the boards ordered taught.

“The next stage is destabilization. This happens fast--just 2 to 5 years to destabilize a nation.  We paralyze your economy and foreign relations, and introduce waste and laziness in your armed forces.”

“The third stage is crisis.  Given a suitably deadly crisis it only takes a few weeks to get your politicians to take away your rights--"for your own good," of course.  And of course you never get them back.  After the purported crisis is over, the power structure will have radically changed.  Your leaders will have shut down your economy, and will only slowly and grudgingly re-open it.

"The last stage is normalization:  Your media and politicians assure you that the conditions you're now living under are just as they've always been--that nothing has changed.  Of course that's a lie, but people have no way to be sure.  Politicians then promise their supporters a huge amount of free goodies, which sink your government further into debt and fuel inflation.
  They eliminate free market competition, instead pouring tax dollars into corrupt companies while honest ones are penalized.  "Hate speech" becomes a crime punished by prison.  And of course only the government determines what's considered "hate speech."
   Your leftists--all these professors and self-styled "civil rights defenders" and U.N. supporters--are instrumental in this process.”

In countries where we tested this subversion, millions died.  The lucky ones were able to flee to Western countries hoping to find peace, only to find that same subversion plan--the same road to destruction--is now being followed here.

In particular, the vaunted UN is full of corrupt vultures eager to grab their share of the West's wealth.

 Wow.  He gave that interview 40 years ago.

NPR has a new CEO--who totally dismisses criticism that her network is biased

I used to listen to NPR.  My siblings and friends still do.  I eventually learned that they're liars who are committed to socialism and the Democrat party and will say and do literally anything to protect Democrats and hurt conservatives and Republicans (which are NOT the same thing!).

SOooo......two weeks before the 2020 election the New York Post broke a story about Hunty biden's abandoned laptop, which contained tens of thousands of pics of Hunty doing drugs and cavorting with hookers.  But hey, dat not a big deal cuz he not an elected official, right?

Right.  But then there were 35,000 texts and emails showing that Hunty had been the bagman for his dad and family.  For young Americans, "bagman" means the guy who collects the bribes and payoffs fo' da boss--or as hunty put it, "the big guy."  Gee, wonder what he meant by that phrase, eh?

It's a mystery, eh?

Now: this was likely the biggest news in decades: the fucking """preznit""" caught taking obvious bribes from the Chinese Communist Party--admittedly through the "cutout" of his crackhead son.  So you'd think the Media would have reported it, eh?

Hahahahahahaha!  Pardon me while I catch my breath from laughing.

The leftist media--which is to say all of 'em--sneered that the laptop story was a fake: either there WAS no laptop, or if there was, it was a Russian plant!  "A "disinformation operation," sneered the elites, with every single outlet parroting one or more of those Democrat talking points.

The sneer and coverup was so obvious, because no Media org bothered to actually ask the Post for details that might verify their story.  They didn't WANT to investigate, so they didn't.  Social media even deleted all posts that commented on the story. 

So it's no surprise that good ol' communist NPR was right up there with the pack.  But the so-called "public editor" at NPR--a lying socialist shithead named Terrence Samuels--went further than the Washington Post and New York Times and Associated Press, since he felt the need to *explain why his Dem propagandists spiked the story.  (For young Americans, "spiked" means killed it.)

Here's the "public editor's" very revealing excuse for spiking the story:

 

As you see, they didn't say "We investigated and found that the NY Post story was false," because they didn't do a single bit of investigating.  Instead they just parroted the Democrat talking points.

This is how the Democrats (the Left) control what you read and see: they put out the Party Line--the talking points; the Narrative--and every mainstream media outlet parrots it.

Next, one of the major networks broadcast a long one-on-one interview with Hunty, and one of the questions was "Is the laptop yours?"  Hunty replied "I honestly don't know.  It could be."  So...Dem talking point reinforced.

But later, in sworn court filings Hunty's attorneys sued the owner of the repair shop and the NY Post for revealing his personal communications from the laptop.

Wait...I though a week ago you said you weren't sure if this was your laptop.  And if it isn't, under what legal theory can you sue people for revealing your personal information if it's not your laptop, eh?   

Of course the FBI knew from day one that the laptop did belong to hunty, and was authentic.  They knew that because...wait for it...they had seized the laptop from the computer shop in December of 2019--ten months before the NY Post broke the story.

The bastards still have the thing, but refuse to either confirm or deny--and if congress says "You must give us the thing" the FBI just laughs.  Cuz dat where we are now, citizen:  Duh regime breaks the law anytime it wants, and no one can make them obey it. 

Finally, six months after the stolen election--after it was too late--both the WaPo and the NY Times had forensic analysts examine a copy of the laptop's hard drive, and admitted the obvious: the drive was authentic.

SO...the Media covered up the biggest story in decades to protect biden, to help him win the "official" vote.  And yet you didn't know fuck-all about it, because you're like mushrooms: you're kept in the dark and fed shit by the Media.

Now: obviously that's all "old news:" too late to do anything--past can't be changed, eh?  I write this because the leftists who run NPR just named a new (liberal, female) CEO.  And a few days later a 25-year veteran of NPR wrote a long op-ed admitting that the organization is totally dedicated to supporting the Democrat party.  Totally biased.

The new female CEO replied NOT by rebutting the author's points, but by essentially accusing the author of racism.

SO...if you're one of the millions of Democrat voters who continue to get your "news" from NPR, be aware that you're not getting real "news," but just Democrat talking points.  Of course if you're a Democrat that's perfectly fine: you don't want to know what's really happening, because it's barely possible that some of what's really happening would upset you.  Not the ten million illegals biden has allowed in in just three years, of course.  You're fine with that.

You're also not critical of the million lethal doses of fentanyl carried in by the illegals every year, since your kids don't do drugs, eh?

Not forcing every American to buy EVs by 2028--you're fine with that cuz your top priority is climate change, and even the EPA admits forcing all new cars to be EVs by 2028 is likely to produce a global temperature 0.01 degrees cooler than otherwise.

Not banning the use of coal and gas to make electricity, cuz "global worming" again.  So you're fine with that.  No, the key for Democrats is that it's better to listen to the soothing, dulcet tones of NPR's talent and not worry about anything.  Yeah, dat's it.

Source.

https://twitter.com/NPRpubliceditor/status/1319281101223940096

THIS is what guns are good for

THIS is what guns are good for:  Thug--armed with a gun, but no more lethal than a knife or club--walks up to a group of women and kids, clearly reaching to grab one of the women.

Without hesitating, one of the women draws and fires, downing the thug.

Suddenly the big bad thug, who moments ago was having his way, is on the ground crying, hands up near his face in that "Please don't shoot me again" whine.

The woman picks up his gun and then--keeping the muzzle of hers pointed at him--uses her foot to roll him onto his stomach.

Now pay attention: You liberals will NEVER eliminate thugs.  Never.  If any of you cutesy purple-haired snowflakes wants to argue with that, I'll be delighted.

And if you disarm everyone--as you have clearly said, many times, you want to do--then we get to the situation in the U.K., where killings by "knifemen" have become common.

(You won't believe this, but the stupid Brit government actually announced a program where you could bring in your kitchen knives and the regime would helpfully *grind off the pointy end so it couldn't stab.*  Seriously.)  

So...thug males will be with us always.  The beauty of guns is that they allow a smaller, weaker woman to level the playing field...IF the woman has a gun.

Imagine if every woman in the U.S. had a gun in her purse.  Imagine thugs might think twice before being thugs if they knew there was a good chance of being shot from the side by another female?  

And for thugs too stupid to think it through, if they get cut down in a hail of bullets, is society better off?  You're damn right it is.

Ever hear the phrase "An armed society is a polite society"?  If you're a Democrat you probably haven't.

But I don't know why I bother warning you.  You don't listen, don't know history, and Democrats believe if we just make it illegal for citizens to own guns, the thugs will be disarmed.  Wow, talk about dumb.

I'd love to debate any Democrat, on-stage, who'll take the position that if the Dems ban guns, thugs won't have any.

Source.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1779348493490131392 

Taxpayers will pay for Democrat get-out-the-vote drives again this year

U.S. law limits donations to political parties and candidates, but allows unlimited donations to supposedly non-partisan organizations that say they want to register voters.  And, donations to these organizations are tax-deductible, meaning donors pay lower taxes.

So these supposedly non-partisan organizations are raking in over half a BILLION dollars this year.  Nice, eh?

The organizations send their workers door to door with pre-filled registration and ballot-requesting forms.  All they need is the voter's signature.  Ballot is delivered, and it's now legal for organization workers to pick up those ballots and drop them off in unmonitored drop-boxes.

The big restriction is that by law, non-partisan registration organizations must be non-partisan--they're not allowed to only register voters who want to vote Democrat, for example.

But as Democrats always do, they've found an easy way around the above restriction: they simply focus their efforts on low-income census districts, since low-income people are far more likely to vote Democrat.

"We're not targeting Democrats! We're just trying to register 150% of the black population of blue cities in battleground states!!"

In other words, the full Detroit.

After the 2020 election Time magazine ran a long piece describing a "well-funded cabal of powerful people" who had worked behind the scenes in 2020  "to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information" to defeat Trump and other Republicans.  Time gushed that these "shadow campaigners were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it."

The biggest single donor was Mark Zuckerberg, whose wealthy foundation donated $400 MILLION to do exactly what was described above.  "Fortify the election."

That Orwellian phrase "fortifying the election became a dark joke after that.

This year the all-Democrat voter registration effort has even more money, and their scripts are better.  By contrast, the Republicans have no comparable effort.

Democrats have also found yet another loophole:  Tax law prohibits wealthy foundations from engaging in partisan political activity.  But there's no limit to how much a wealthy foundation can give to one of these so-called "non-partisan" registration outfits.  Hence Zuckerberg's $400 MILLION.

During the 2020 election an organization called the "Voter Participation Center" solicited millions of ballot applications in swing states -- many of them prefilled for residents.  The Center readily admits it isn't seeking out all potential voters but just "young people, people of color and single women"--likely Democrat voters.

And that effort continues this year, with half a billion dollars being spent to turn out Democrat voters.

And the donors get a tax break for it.

We're not ahead; we are desperately behind.

Plus: In states that require citizens to declare a party when registering to vote, what happens if a voter, visited at home and asked what party they'd like to register as, says "Republican"?  What are the odds that the signed registration and/or ballot request will be submitted?

If not submitted by the organization, no ballot would arrive in the mail, greatly reducing the chances of that person voting.  Hmmm...

Wait...that couldn't happen, because that would be fraud.  And we know the Dems would nevah consider such a thing.

Source.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2024/04/10/how_taxpayers_will_heavily_subsidize_democrat_boots_on_the_ground_this_election_1023475.html?mc_cid=824cd3fa38

Jane Fonda bleats "The climate crisis is a manifestation of misogyny, racism and the patriarchy!"

Jane Fonda is a fruitcake, which naturally means all liberals and Democrats love her.

Recently Fonda has been appearing at posh fundraisers held by Democrat "climate activists," who claim humans burning oil, gas and coal are dangerously warming the planet.

Fonda delighted the crowd by bleating,

"The climate crisis is a manifestation of racism, misogyny and patriarchy. It’s a mindset."

Notice that first sentence: In just 11 words Fonda managed to include three of the Media's current hot buzzwords:  raacism, misogyny and patriarchy.  If she'd just pushed a tiny bit more she could have added "homophobia," "transphobia" and "anti-immigrant" to win the buzzword olympics.

Assuming for a moment that there was a "climate crisis" it's not clear how that alleged "crisis" is "a manifestation of misogyny," as Fonda bleats, let alone how it's linked to the other two claims.  Women have reaped huge benefits from oil and gas, and their lives are immeasurably easier today than 150 years ago.

Also, for someone like Hanoi Jane who's been all over the world, that was only made practical because of either jet fuel or diesel.  Fonda is  surely smart enough (?) to know this, but that's the beauty of being a Democrat, whether a Hollywood star or a Media newsreader: no reporter or fan (voter) expects logic or consistency from liberals and Democrats.  

Liberal "star": "It's just AWFUL that you people drive your big SUVs and pickup trucks!  You should listen carefully to the speech I'll be giving at the climate conference in Cannes tomorrow!"

Reporter: "We'll be sure to watch.  By the way, how are you getting there?"

Fonda:  "One of my friends has offered his G-5 or some such.  I don't really know."

Reporter: "Ah, that beautiful, fast private jet.  How does the amount of CO2 emitted per passenger-mile compare with a fully-loaded commercial airliner?"

Fonda: "Whut?  Wow, look at the time!  I've gotta go!"

Of course no reporter would EVAH ask Hanoi Jane if people who cause FAR more CO2 to be emitted than the world average should be punished or penalized, eh?

Jane was right about one thing though: The folks screaming that carbon is causing Global Worming do have a mindset.  

Source.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jane-fonda-decries-inaction-climate-apologizes-young-sorry-weve-created-issue-you

Memphis: Officer fatally shot by perp who'd been released w/o bond weeks earlier

Yesterday in the ghastly shithole of Memphis, two police officers were walking up to a parked car when the two occupants of the car opened fire.

One of the officers was killed, as was one of the two occupants--an 18-year-old male.  The other shooter--17--was also shot but is expected to survive.

In 2023 the jungle that is Memphis today saw a record-breaking 398 homicides.

Now at this point in Dem-ruled cities this is "a day ending in 'Y' story"– young blacks in certain cities are killing police officers almost every week.  The twist here is that the dead  18-year-old had been arrested just a few weeks earlier for possessing two stolen cars, an illegal weapon and an electronic device used to steal cars.

Back in the old days he'd either have to post bail, or remain jailed until trial, meaning he wouldn't have been on the street to kill the officer.

But in accordance with the new rules of Democrat-ruled cities he was released without having to post a single dollar as bond.

Neither of the perps was named or pictured, in accordance with the Mainstream Media's policy of not naming minority killers nor publishing their photos.  That's especially goofy since naming the dead perp won't put him in any danger, eh?

The female chief of police noted that weeks earlier the now-dead perp had been arrested in a stolen vehicle, armed with a gun modified to be fully automatic--often termed a "machinegun."  In civilized cities stealing a car is considered a felony, eh?

The perp was also charged with having two stolen vehicles and having a programming device commonly used to steal cars.  BUT as you already guessed, he was still released without bond.

Equity, folks.  And really, citizen, a few thousand more stolen cars and a hundred or so dead police officers are a small price to pay for "equity," right?

Source.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/memphis-police-officer-killed-shootout-teens-one-whom-recently-released