Yet another illegal alien invader allowed in by bribem assaults American mother

Three weeks ago (Feb 4) in Louisville, Kentucky a criminal illegal alien from Cuba--Yordan Basilio Diaz Vera--was driving for Lyft.  A mother of 4 had requested a ride from the service.

The illegal picked her up, drove her to a secluded spot, pulled a gun and sexually assaulted her.

The illegal assailant was allowed into the U.S. in November of 2022 by the bribem regime.

The assault was reported on several conservative websites, but of course the Media ignored it cuz it would have made a few thousand voters re-think their support for Democrat treason.

As you could have predicted, within minutes of the details of the sexual assault being posted on conservative websites, Democrat commenters jumped in bleating "Dis FAKE NEWS!  Dis not happen!  The faaabulous Alejandro Mayorkas absolutely assured us dat duh southern border was, like, *totally* secure!"

Really, sparky?  Here's the official release from DHS.  Eat shit and die, stupid Democrats.

Yet another illegal alien sexual assaults an American mother

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2026/02/25/louisville-lyft-rapist-ice-asks-kentucky-authorities-not-release-criminal-illegal 

bribem and mayorkas allowed convicted rapists to board flights by showing their conviction papers as ID

Breanna Morello is one of the good guys (girls):

Back when bribem ruled, did you ever wonder who ordered the TSA to allow hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to board commercial flights without a SINGLE ID--while every American had to have one to board?

Breanna sued TSA to find out--and discovered that bribem’s corrupt "Department of Homeland Security" (headed by the total Cuban communist Alejandro Mayorkas) allowed CONVICTED sex offenders to board flights by...wait for it...showing their sex offender paperwork.

Yes, the bribem regime allowed convicted rapists to not just cross the border, but to be flown--at your expense--to any city in the U.S.  All they had to do was promise to attend "sexual deviancy counseling" and register as sex offenders.

And of course we all know illegal aliens will promise anything to get into the U.S, since they know no one will ever check to ensure they did as they promised.

Breanna sued TSA under FOIA and won.  The agency confirmed her suspicions.  And the comments to her post are fabulous!  A dozen or so are below.

The Democrat party is so totally, utterly corrupt that in a just world, they'd never be able to win another election.  But with Media air cover they can continue to lie merrily.  "Undocumented Americans commit fewer crimes than U.S. citizens!"  "We NEED undocumented American workers to be prosperous!"  Lies on top of lies.

So why would the Media lie to your face?  Because it benefits their Democrat masters.

* It irritated me to see illegal aliens had a special line at Newark Airport, breezing thru with no docs, meanwhile I had to show ID, take off my shoes, and submit to a full body scan.

* So Mayorkas was aware he was letting convicted sex offenders into our country!  They had an official policy to accommodate them!  Let that sink in.

* To Democrats there is no such thing as a "sexual deviant."  Democrats see pedophile rapists as heroes to march and fight for.

* I recall seeing signs in airports telling illegals that their arrest paperwork would suffice to get through security.  They didn't go through any medical screening either.  While your grandmother was getting cavity searched, all illegals were waved thru with no security.

* Never forget that Democrat "leaders" got together in a room and discussed this, then decided it was a good idea to import convicted sex offenders.  Why did they think that was good for the U.S? Insane.

* Wonder if that same paperwork would allow them to register to vote?

* Ghastly abuse of the American people by the Biden-Harris administration, leading to the rape of your wives and daughters.  Leftist judges who constantly block deportation of predators.  Mayorkas and Kamala should be in prison for life!

* Biden and his lackeys deliberately flew illegal- alien sex predators into our communities on a large scale in exchange for them *promising* to attended “counseling” class. The betrayal is almost unimaginable.

* Why would Democrats deliberately allow convicted rapists into the US?  [Good question.]

* You'd think Democrats would never be able to win another election.  But the Media won't publiish it, so Dems will continue to claim "Dis FAKE news!"

* Democrats are the party of importing foreign criminals and paying them to stay and vote Democrat forever.

Source.

https://x.com/BreannaMorello/status/2026465853970043229?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw  

What happens when politicians reverse "natural selection"?

Evolutionary biologists long ago identified a process called "natural selection," in which smarter, stronger creatures better adapted to survive reproduced in greater numbers, passing those traits to their offspring.  

But starting in the 1960s socialist/Democrat politicians began to interfere with that process for humans, by giving money, food, housing and other goodies--your tax dollars--to those unable to work.  This was fine.

Actually it was more than fine, as the socialist pols realized the people they gave freebies to would vote for 'em.  So they vastly expanded the giveaways to stupid or lazy people, enabling the stupid and lazy to live comfortably without having to work.  

This won even more votes, so the socialist politicians went on to pass laws that gave indigent women more money for each additional child--which, to the surprise of no one, resulted in a huge increase in the number of children born to the stupid or merely lazy.

Because the recipients didn't have to work, and got money for each child, they had the time and energy to have more children.  So in just a few decades the percentage of the population that was either lazy, less competent or both skyrocketed.

And naturally all the people who got freebies from the government continued to vote for politicians who promised them the most free shit.  And thus  the process which had once favored a slow but steady increase in human intelligence and creativity was replaced with one in which stupid or lazy people slowly became the majority.  

And at that point all politicians began pandering to them, since without their votes no pol could get elected.

Before this happened, most science fiction of the time had predicted the population would slowly grow more intelligent and civilized over time.  But thanks to the politicians replacing "natural selection" with "free stuff," as the years passed, things seemed to be heading in the opposite direction:  The population seemed to be getting dumber.  But it happened so gradually that only a few noticed--and anyone who pointed out the obvious was quickly shouted down by the mob demanding more freebies.

When one group has five children per female and the other averages 1.4, then if you start with equal numbers of each group, after just 50 years the first group will comprise 98% of the total population.  So more quickly than anyone ever imagined, much faster breeding by the group supported by taxpayers made the vast majority of the population just like their parents, leaving the slower-breeding group to become a tiny minority that could never win any elections.

This result was no accident, but was carefully planned by socialists who hated America.  One was Saul Alinsky (the communist about whom Hilliary Clinton wrote her capstone thesis).  But perhaps better known were two university professors, Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven--both socialists.  In 1966 the duo totally mapped out a strategy to bankrupt America by pushing ever-growing welfare programs and signing up every poor person for benefits.  They flew around the country pitching this faaabulous plan at universities, to rave reviews.

The goal was to destroy the U.S. without having to fire a shot.  And it's working. 

Tranny hangs trans flag on El Capitan in Yosemite, gets fired, sues

Defacing a national park is a crime.  If someone hung a pro-Trump or anti-Chinese flag on a popular and highly visible attraction in a national park, that person would be fined.

Well, unless the person is a member of a group beloved and protected by leftist judges, like a tranny who worked as a "ranger" at Yosemite National Park who hung a tranny flag on El Capitan. 

The person wasn't fined, but was fired--and has now sued the Department of the Interior, alleging that being fired for hanging a flag on one of the most prominent attractions in the park violated their freedom of speech. 

The lawsuit--filed in the notoriously left-wing DC district court--claims the firing violated the tranny’s First Amendment and Privacy Act rights. Joslin asked to get their job at Yosemite back, and for a guarantee that the right to free speech would be upheld in Yosemite. 

Yes, citizen, if this lawsuit succeeds, ALL citizens will have the right to hang signs and flags on public property without penalty.

The tranny told the Media that the Trump administration "wants to take away basic constitutional rights and ruin the lives of people who think or are different from them.”

If the tranny mafia get away with this, I suspect other "special" groups will sue for the right to spray-paint any public space without penalty--since that's a type of "speech," eh?

Source.

https://www.sfgate.com/national-parks/article/yosemite-national-park-ranger-sues-21884924.php 

Ex-CEO of homeless agency in California charged with "misappropriating" $1.2 million

 
The homeless–industrial complex is a lucrative target for professional grifters.  National Review reports that Gwendolyn Westbrook, former CEO of the United Council of Human Services--a San Francisco-based homelessness nonprofit--was charged Monday with nine felony counts for allegedly misappropriating more than $1.2 million in public funds.

In addition to the $1.2 million, court documents show that other large amounts of money are also missing from UCHS accounts.

This is likely just the tip of an iceberg:  The Democrat-ruled state of California spent $24 billion from 2019 to 2024 on "the homeless," but officials don't know how the money was spent, according to a state audit released last year, which found that no systems were in place to track spending.

Of course there weren't!  Cuz that would have made any theft easier to find, eh?  Can't have THAT, comrade.  

From the viewpoint of Gavin Newsom and his merry band of thieving Democrats in the state Assembly this is success--because it allows 'em to bleat that they need even more tax dollars to "continue to help the homeless," eh?

Laughing all the way to the bank

Hilliary Clinton says she had no "links" to either Epstein or Ghislaine. Wait...

BREAKING: Hillary Clinton insists she had "no links" to either Jeffrey Epstein or to Ghislaine Maxwell, his girlfriend who recruited minor girls to his island, 

Hilliary claims she never even met Epstein--yet her name appears in the Epstein files over 1,000 times.  Also, Maxwell has testified: "I went to the [Clinton] house in Chappaqua a few times...as a friend."

Wait...Hilliary says she had "no links" to either one.  That contradicts Maxwell's testimony.  Gosh, wonder who's telling the truth? 

Democrats refuse to stand for victims, Medal of Honor winners or hockey team

At the State of the Union address last night, almost all Democrats refused to stand for... 

• two Medal of Honor recipients 
• the statement "Stand if you agree that the first duty of government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens."  Not a single Democrat stood up.
• when Trump introduced the mother of murdered 23-year-old refugee Iryna, stabbed in the throat from behind--in a totally unprovoked attack--by a schizophrenic career criminal who should never have been free on the streets, but was released repeatedly by Dem judges in Charlotte, NC.  Trump added "How can you not stand?"  The Dems remained seated.
• Dalilah Coleman, a 7-year-old in the gallery who overcame devastating injuries from a car wreck caused by an illegal immigrant driving a semi-truck after being given a California commercial license despite not speaking or reading English.  
• when Trump noted that the southern border was now closed, after bribem said that couldn't be done without congress passing a new law;  
• the U.S. gold-medal Olympic hockey team 

 

Trump baited the Democrats, giving 'em the chance to stand for American citizens.  He knew they wouldn’t--and sure enough, they didn't.  And now every American voter in the country knows that the only people Democrats stand for are illegal immigrants.  But the Mainstream Media will bury this, claiming the Dems won the night by showing their disapproval of Trump's "America First" policy.

And the creature below seems to be the best the Dems have to offer?  Wow. 

 

xx 

Instant classic! West coast liberal female "flees" to Canada, discovers...

Truly an instant classic--funniest video I've seen in ages:  Liberal female iz "oppressed" by how awful life is in the U.S.--everything costs WAY more than here!  Food, housing, medical care, all just AWFUL!  Plus under Orange Hitler our government is "erasing" trans pipo!  An' lesbians!  An' gays--except those who are members of Trump's cabinet, eh?  Hmmm, sounds like Trump may not be anti-gay at ALL, eh?  But...but...but duh MEDIA told us he wuz!!  An' duh Media nevah lies, right?

SO...she and her partner "flee" to Canada to escape duh eeeebil Orange Hitler, and generally awful conditions in deez oppressive United States!  She'll show dat eeeebil Trumpie an' all doze awful Rethuglicans!   

 

So how'd that work out for ya, cupcake?  Oooohh, maybe not quite duh way ya thought, eh?

Specifically:  She finds prices of everything in Vancouver are way higher than here.  In the U.S, BY LAW, hospitals must treat everyone, regardless of whether they can pay.  Canada?  Beats me, but she complains that they can't get medical care cuz they aren't Canadian citizens.

She wails that housing is astronomically high, and they can't afford to live as they like.  Hmmm...  Say, you don't think the socialist government has any role in that, do ya, princess?

This is SO classic!  Like naive, stupid young Americans who've been absolutely assured by the Lying Mainstream Media and their college professors that America is awful, while foreign countries are SO advanced, paradises by comparison!  Then they go there and find...ooohhh, it's not at ALL like the Media and my professors said!

I have to admit I was laughing out loud.  I really wish there was a way to revoke her American citizenship so she couldn't come back.  

Here's what I'd like to hear from her:

"I was wrong. The United States is a fabulous, amazing country and I'm incredibly lucky to have been born here.  The Democrat party, the Media and my liberal professors misled all of us about the world, and I'll never believe their bullshit again.  I have a new appreciation for my country!  Keep America great!"

Of course she won't ever have the epiphany, cuz she's been totally propagandized. 

Who runs the Mexican government? Answer: the drug cartels

The female president of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, was put into office by the drug cartels.  They financed her campaign, so she's protecting them.  

A female senator from Mexico went on a U.S. network--live--and told the truth.  

    * The president of Mexico is funded by the drug cartels;
    * Not just the president, but an entire group of Mexico politicians--the "narco politicians"--are being paid by the cartels;
    * As a result, Mexico is effectively being run by the cartels;
    * An entire political party--the Morenos--is financed by the cartels, which is how they get elected;
    * Once installed in office they protect the cartels

Now use your damn head: Why would this woman risk her life to tell the truth, that the president of her country is working for the cartels, eh?

The president of Mehico--Sheinbaum--said on video that she won't allow her government to go to war on the cartels "because terrorists have human rights."  She literally said fighting the drug cartels would be unlawful because it would violate their human rights, and that using the government to fight them is "outside the framework of the law."

This is such obvious horseshit: either the government opposes drug cartels or it supports 'em.  She's trying to come up with plausible-sounding reasons NOT to take on the cartels.

Immediately, pro-cartel shitheads began to flood the comments with bullshit like "Ooohh, if the Mexican government goes to war with the cartels their economy will collapse, leaving a cartel state as our neighbor."  Wait, isn't that what we have now?  Of course. 

Another pro-drug, anti-Trump Dem commenter says "Sheinbaum's approval is 70%, Trump is at 36%."  Ahh, got it!  Cuz, see, approval ratings--even if lies--should govern a nation's policies, eh?

Another Democrat shithead bleats, "Trump is just looking for an excuse to invade Mexico."  Ahh, so billions of dollars worth of illegal, addictive, deadly drugs being smuggled into the U.S. every year doesn't bother you Democrat shitheads, eh?  Tens of thousands of Americans dying every year from overdosing on illegal drugs smuggled in from Mehico is just a nothing.  How utterly predictable.

The cartels make literally billions of dollars a year from selling drugs to moronic, addicted U.S. druggies, and obviously will do anything to keep those billions flowing.  And if you don't think so, you're too damn stupid to breathe.

The best investment the cartels ever made was to give Mexican pols money to get elected--all perfectly legal, of course, just as it is here in the U.S.  Campaign contributions, citizen!

Leftist shithead liberals at HuffPost wailing about U.S. olympians and pride

A "senior writer" for the leftist cesspool rag The Huffington Post--a charmless, hateful bitch named Monica Torres--wrote a piece with this lede:

 

And you wouldn't believe what happened next:  American readers unloaded on 'em.  Thousands of comments--all negative.  Glorious!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finally someone finds senorita Monica's background: 

 

And finally, the rest of the staff and management.  This explains everything. 

 

 

 

 

Man fatally shot by Secret Service at Mar-a-Largo. Dems respond

SO...a 21-year-old male is fatally shot by Secret Service after breaking into Trump's Florida home, carrying a shotgun and a container of gasoline. 

Trump supporters are claiming it's yet another assassination attempt, but Democrat elites and their Mainstream Media supporters say that's nonsense.  "Nothing of the sort!"

Chuck Schumer: "This poor young man was no threat at all!  He was headed to what he thought was a beach party and simply got lost."

Hakeem Jeffries: "We must abolish ICE!  I mean...the Secret Service, because like Trump's secret police--ICE--the SS is killing innocent citizens who pose no threat to anyone!"

AOC: "Trump has ordered his SS thugs to shoot innocent American citizens on sight merely for using their cherished right to protest.  This poor young man was simply protesting against the cruel Trump tariffs that are harming all Americans!"

Jasmine Crockett: "Trump's SS only shot this po' man cuz it was dark an' he look black!  If dey'd seen him in daylight dey wudn't have shot, cuz 'white privilege'!"

Ilhan Omar: "In my home country dis po' man would have been welcomed by our brave Muslim leaders and invited to discuss his complaints.  That's because Islam is far superior to your system of kings here.  In Islam we don't have kings!  Well, except for Saudi Arabia, where they're loved."

Joy Reid: "Argle bargle mumble bullshit bullshit No Kangs!"  

Brandon Johnson: "The brutal murder of this brave comrade proves yet again that oppressed people cannot negotiate with our oppressors!  Revolution is the only way!"  

 Okay, maybe some of those transmissions were a bit garbled.  But not very much!

Citizen fined $750,000 for questioning gender identity. Seriously!

"Human Rights Commissions" are utter totalitarian shit.  Bullies.  Tyrants.  They've gotten the gruberment to pay 'em a lavish salary for being Nazis--meaning they rule absolutely, with no avenue of appeal for whatever fines they ORDER.

Like most U.S. states (and many Dem-ruled cities), every province in Canada has one of these, and they've been fining Canadian citizens for...questioning the government's ORDER that trannies must be obeyed.  And yeah, it's Canada, but if you don't think the Dems are already imposing that here, you're naive.

If you think I'm kidding about a fine of $750,000 on a "normal" citizen, read on.

We'll start with the trivial case first: a fine of just $500.  Barely worth noticing, eh?

A "non-binary activist" walked into a hair salon to find a price list for "men's and women's haircuts."  Wailed that "it" had been totally traumatized to find only two sexes listed, instead of a custom list for "non-binary."  Claimed mental breakdown so severe it couldn't go to work!  

See, dere wuzn't a third price list for "non-binary."  Oh, the horror!

The "non-binary" complainant wailed that seeing a price list for men’s and women’s haircuts--but not for "non-binary" snowflakes--caused it to have a mental breakdown causing it to miss work.

Naturally the tyrants on the Human Rights Tribunal jumped into action, ordering the salon to pay $500 to the fucked-up drama queen for having the gall to only list prices for men and women.  How dare they?
 
The ORDER used the typical bullshit language of Nazis everywhere, bleating that the salon's price list “imposes a distinction based on gender identity, and this distinction excludes non-binary people.” 

So, $500.  Trivial, eh?  No big deal, right?  But that same day another "Human Rights Tribunal" fined a citizen $750,000 for publicly questioning the DEMAND by the LBGTQ mafia that everyone agree that "gender is a social construct.”

The dictators on this HRC ruled that questioning this tranny bullshit claim was “dehumanizing,” “delegitimizing” and “extremely serious and damaging,” and ordered the defendant to pay $750,000.

In another case a citizen was fined $10,000 by one of the endless "Human Rights Tribunals" for expressing concerns to a friend about her upcoming double-mastectomy.  Normally you'd think expressing concerns to a friend about surgery would be something friends often do, eh?  But in this case the surgery was part of the female's "transition" to male, so the tribunal RULED the comments against the law.

The HRC's written opinion included this gem: “Statement suggesting that gender-affirming surgery is unnecessary or inherently harmful reinforce stigma against transgender people.”

What crap.  

See, 14 years ago "wokie" Canadian politicians in Ontario passed laws ORDERING that everyone in that woefully "woke" province must "affirm and accommodate" the delusion that a male who *claims* to be a woman is actually female, and vice-versa.

This got so much slobbering, fellating praise from the corrupt Media that all the other pols in Canadistan jumped on the woke bandwagon, and within five years every province--and the national government--had passed similar laws.

In 2016 Canada's woke House of Commons, with substantial Conservative support, voted to add “gender identity” and “gender expression” as protected categories in both the Canadian Human Rights Act and the criminal code.

The result continues to be an endless barrage of sometimes outrageously high fines for anyone who even remotely questions the idea that people can change their gender.

The most common charge and fine is for failing to use someone's "chosen personal pronouns," or voicing an opinion that gender is binary--male or female.  Or in the case of the hair salon, offering a list of services saying "For Men" and "For Women," omitting "Non-binary."  And after the salon adds that column, the next alleged crime will be failing to include "Two-spirit" (the term used by tribes for gays) or "Asexual" or "Pansexual."  The list of demands to "accommodate" is endless.

In the case of the $750,000 "offense" the "human rights tribunal" wrote that it's a crime for anyone to "fail to accommodate the concept of self-selected gender identity."  The term "accommodate" isn't defined or limited, so there are essentially no limits to what a mentally-ill snowflake can claim offended him, her or it.

The 143-page RULING cited a comment by the defendant calling for “educators to stop affirming the gender identities of students,” after the school rulers ordered the opposite, regardless of age, and that schools must conceal a student's preferred new "gender" from parents upon request.

The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal described the defendant as “advocating the erasure of trans people."  Of course he did no such thing, just said the government shouldn't "affirm" or "accommodate" mental illness.  Totally different. 

Democrat: "Dis beez silly, cuz all dis happened in Canada!  We don' have dat here!"

Really, snowflake?  "We" most certainly do have that here, just so far only in Dem-ruled cities and states.  School boards are the worst, with many telling teachers to push kids to go trans, and not to tell the parents.

Back when bribem was installed, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced a bill to amend Title IX of the Civil Rights Act so its use of "sex" as a protected class would also include "gender"--which would have had exactly the same effect as Canada's crap law.  She never brought it up for a floor vote because she knew the Dems didn't have the votes--reps from conservative states were scared to vote for it.
   But if you think the Democrats won't pass the same "human rights laws" when they get back in the White House, you're naive.

Source.

https://archive.is/tD9U1 

WSJ piece on mass school shooting in Canada buries the trans angle

Eleven days ago a teenage male in Canada went on a shooting spree, killing eight and wounding 25.

Today the Wall Street Journal published an article about the fact that last June--over seven months before the shooting--employees at OpenAI supervising the company's ChatGPT chatbot detected numerous posts from the perp talking about killing people in a mass shooting.  The shooter even created a video game about shooting people. 

Company execs agreed that the posts showed mental illness but decided not to alert authorities, cuz...mumble mumble bullshit bullshit.

The short WSJ article uses "she" 12 times, and "her" or "herself" 12 times.  

Not until the 14th paragraph does the "journalist" tell readers that the mass killer was a tranny.

This is one of the many problems with the Mainstream Media: either they leave out things we need to know, or else bury that info deep in the article, knowing full well that few readers read past the first half-dozen 'grafs.

Liberal editor: "Duh fact dat duh killer wuz transgender is totally irrelevant to the story!  Has no bearing on anything!  Besides, school shootings are 'local interest only,' deplorable!  Well, unless they're done by a white male, in which case you need to know every detail so you can stay alert around males.  But transgenders are cute and harmless!"

Source: The Wall Street Journal

https://archive.is/ECYCH 

How the entire western world got to this point

How it started: 

* Muslims:  "We want to pray in your park."
   Americans: "Of course.  The park is for everyone to enjoy, and in our country anyone is allowed to pray anywhere.

* Muslims: "Our religion says dogs are unclean, so dogs in the park would prevent us from praying there--which you admitted is our absolute right.  So would you keep your dogs at home during our prayers?
   Americans:  Okay, I guess we can walk our dogs somewhere else or at different times.

* Muslims: "Our religion says women of all ages are beautiful, and we're sure you wouldn't dispute that!  We are attracted to all women--including pre-teens.  So would you tell your women not to walk alone, and your daughters not to play in the park?"
   Americans:  "Uhh...I guess so, though that seems to be quite a reach because it means you demand that American women defer to your religion.  This seems to be getting out of hand."
   Democrats: "Ignore the stupid deplorables.  Do whatever your religion says, because we liberals LOVE religion!  Well, unless it's Christianity."

* Muslims: "The park is too far away for some of our pipo, so we want to pray on your sidewalk."
   Americans:  "Well its only for a few minutes so i guess its okay."

* Muslims:  "Our religion is so popular that we need more space than the sidewalk, so we will be praying in the street for half an hour or so.  And you must allow that because 'Freedom of religion'!"
   Americans:  "No.  'Freedom of religion' doesn't give you the right to block streets!  You have mosques large enough for all your followers."
   Democrats: "Ignore the deplorable.  We run the city and we say that's totally fine, because 'Freedom of religion' is right there in the Constitution!  We Democrats luuuve religion!  Except Christianity, of course, becuz lotsa Christians don't support sex-change surgery for 13-year-olds."

* Muslims: "Our religion requires us to pray five specific times a day, and sometimes we're in airports or public buildings at those times.  So we demand that you give us prayer rooms in every public building, including universities. 
   Americans: "Our Constitution doesn't allow the government to use public funds just for one religion, but I guess as long as the rooms are open to ALL religions, we can provide those."
 
* Muslims:  "We've built a faaabulous 'Islamic cultural center' that explains our religion, so we'd like all your schools to spend a day every semester visiting our center, so your students will learn the joys of Islam.  Our center will show men and women praying together, to show that Islam supports the total equality of the sexes.  
   Americans:  "But that's a lie!  In your religion it takes the testimony of four women to equal the testimony of one man.  Islam demands that women cover their hair, and often their entire face.  Some Islamic branches don't allow women to leave the home unless a male relative is with them.
   Muslims:  "If you refuse our 'request' we will tell the Media you're Islamaphobic.  You don't want that, right?"
   Liberal Americans:  "Ignore the deplorables!  American children need to learn about ALL the great religions of the world (except one, of course), so we will bring them to your Cultural Center every semester to ensure they learn the wonders of Islam.
   Americans: "So will you Dems--who run the school boards--also bring students to day-long visits to great cathedrals?"
   Liberal Americans:  "You're kidding, right?"

* Muslims:  "Your tyrannical Orange King has banned Muslims from seven nations from entering the U.S.  Obviously this is both Islamophobic and intolerable!  Freedom demands that everyone in the world has the absolute right to visit the U.S.  It's right there in your Constitution!  So we've ordered our supporters in congress to pass a law overturning this.  After all, one of the favorite sayings of one of your political parties is 'No kings!," right?
   If that fails we'll use our judges (like Boasberg, Sotomayor, Kagan or Ketanji Brown-Jackson) to overturn it.  Because any anti-Muslim order must be overturned.  It's only fair, citizen.
   Americans:  "Wait...EVERY other nation controls who is allowed to enter.  But you don't want to allow the U.S. to have that same right, and instead to allow people from uneducated nations, whose cultures believe in sexualizing children, abusing women and animals and supporting violent revolution ("jihad") and lying ("taqiyya") to enter the U.S?   Sounds like you're a lying, two-faced, hypocrital shithead!"
   Liberal Dem: "Ignore the deplorables, beloved members of a different but totally equal religion!  We will do whatever you ask, because unlike the deplorable conservatives, we liberal Democrat are 'woke'!  When members of your wonderful faith come here we will support them and allow them to build mosques wherever they want, because we need to take back the country from doze awful Christians!  
  We will give 'em free housing, food, medical care and college tuition.  We'll get our Media friends to publish 'Opinion pieces' in prestigious magazines like the Atlantic and NYT Magazine claiming Jesus was Muslim."

This is where the U.S. and all western nations are today.  Democrats have chosen to support Islam, after quietly (for the most part) opposing Christianity for decades. 

WHY do Democrats so strongly support both Islam and illegal immigrants?  See any pattern there? 

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

Another attempted murder of a U.S. woman by an illegal--and he thought he'd killed her

A week ago an American woman was walking along a popular Florida beach at night.  A man passed her walking the other way.

A few minutes later the man walked up behind her, struck her, grabbed her by the throat, dragged her into the ocean and held her underwater, trying to drown her.

The attacker held her underwater until she lost consciousness.  Thinking she was dead, he released her and walked away.  To repeat: he only released her because he thought he'd succeeded in killing her.

When the woman regained consciousness she was half in and half out of the water.  She then walked over a mile to nearby Stuart beach where she found a sheriff’s deputy. 

Two days later (Feb 15), after someone reported a male claiming to have killed someone on a local beach, officers arrested a 26-year-old Venezuelan national, Said Alexander Hernandez Gonzalez.

The attacker--unprovoked attempted murder: Venezuelan illegal

Unprovoked murders or attempted murders of innocent American women by illegal alien invaders happen several times a week in the U.S.  You just almost never hear about it--and never on the alphabet networks or in the NY Times, WaPo or any of the other shit-liberal, Democrat-fellating rags that infest this country.

This isn't an accident.  It's intentional.  They never tell you about any of the murders because they don't want to arouse Americans to anger.  It's not that the Media and "elites" oppose deportations--as long as they were done by Emperor Hussein Obozo, who deported three MILLION illegals, and bragged about it.  The shit-lib Media only started screaming that deportations were AWFUL after Trump made it a priority after closing the border--which bribem had said he couldn't do without congress passing a law.

Like every other issue, the Mainstream Media decides what to scream about based on whether it helps the Dem party and hurts the GOP.  And finally you start thinking, Why does the Mainstream Media love the Democrat party so much?

I think it's because the Media and "elites" wanna destroy the U.S. as we've known it.  I don't know whether they're just consumed by anti-white hate, or guilt, or if they're all communist agents.  But they're sure one-sided as hell.

Source.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/illegal-immigrant-allegedly-ambushed-woman-florida-beach-random-attempted-drowning-attack-police 

 

Mexican immigrant sneers at the U.S.--"just here for the money"

You need to see this short video.  It's a Mexican woman who hates the U.S., but came here for the money.  She trashes the U.S. with every word. 

Is this the kind of person we should want here?  Sneers at the U.S.  Do you think she'll vote based on what's BEST for this country, or for what's likely to destroy the nation we've known so her race can take over?  

 

https://x.com/i/status/2023970731906736267 

Beautiful memorial to a white girl murdered by...[ ]...is vandalized by thugs

The average American has a memory span of about two days.  The Lying Mainstream Media and the Democrat party count on that, cuz that's what allows 'em to lie so brazenly.

(It worked even better for the liars before everyone had the Internet, cuz back then the good guys had no way at ALL to post videos showing the lying rat-bastards were lying.)

Of course you're not average.  You're WAY above average, so surely you remember Iryna Zarutska, right?

Sure: pretty 23-year-old blonde refugee from Ukraine, sitting on a light-rail tram in a Democrat-ruled city, looking at her phone, minding her own business, when a black career criminal sitting behind her stood up and stabbed her in her neck three times, striking so hard it knocked off her hat.

It was caught on surveillance video, in high resolution, and there's a photo of her curled up in her seat, her hand to her mouth, trying to understand what just happened.

She bled to death in two minutes.

Of course you remember, right?  Cuz it was on all the alphabet new broadcasts.

Oh wait...it wasn't, because the producers of those propaganda events decided "Hey, what's one more murder of a white girl by a black career criminal?  'Local interest only!'"  So no one outside city government has seen the actual video.  

And you only saw the photo on the handful of conservative websites on the Net--cuz the big Dem-run sites like CNN, MS-DNC and the alphabet nets didn't want you to see it...cuz it undermined their Narrative.

So with that background: A couple of wealthy guys believed Iryna needed a memorial, so they commissioned artists to paint 4 or so on the sides of buildings in NYC and LA.  They were well done and just paintings of her face, with no slogans.  Cuz anyone who knew the story, knew.

The mural bore no slogans like "Get tough on crime" or "Liberal judges did this."  But clearly the mere presence of the face of the innocent murder victim angered the shithead thugs of NYC, as one piece of shit so-called "human" spray-painted "Please vandalize this" over her face.  

These sub-humans are so evil, so consumed with hate, that they refused to permit a beautiful memorial to a beautiful, innocent murder victim.  To shithead leftists, even the face of a young, innocent victim of a black killer was somehow offensive. 

 

 

This is how residents of Democrat-ruled cities think.  And these shitheads are the voting base of the Dem party. 

Yet another tranny murderer: trans "dad" shoots wife and child at a hockey game

If you don't think trannies are mentally ill, check out this killer. 

Tranny mafia: "NOOooo, dis FAKE NEWS!  See, your link iz to duh Daily Mail, which is in London!  If dis had reeeeally happened, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MS-SHIT et al wudda tol' ya.  But did yew see a single word about dis on any of 'em?  NO yew did NOT!  So it must not have happened!  So shut up, h8ter!"

This is how the Mainstream Media controls what you see, hear, and think you know is true:  They hide things they don't want you to see, and lie about things they want you to believe that are utter bullshit.  For example, here's what ABC broadcast a day or two after the murders, meaning they had time to know the shooter was a tranny.  They never mention the word, instead near the end calling the murders simply a "family dispute."

See, they don't want to mention the killer was tranny cuz that would make people wonder if trannies were maybe...oh, a bit mentally off or somethin'.

In Dem-world, up is down, evil is good, sweet is sour, murder is loving, on and on.  Okay, not all Dems support this, but they all vote Dem regardless, so...

The murderous tranny: 

 

Predictably, the New York Times avoided any mention that the alleged murderer at the Rhode Island hockey rink shooting was a tranny.

For years the leftist, Dem-fellating Media has been shoving tranny supremacy down our throats, but when trannies murder innocent victims, the Mainstream Media is ruthless in NOT telling viewers and readers the truth.

Many TV stations--including Fox affiliates--called the shooting a "family dispute." No mention that the perp was a transgender lunatic.

You can't hate the media enough. 

Dem-ruled states introducing bills to charge you for miles driven

Democrats have been fighting to outlaw gasoline-powered cars for years, passing laws ORDERING that no more gas-powered cars could be sold in their dictatorial states after a specified date.

But banning gas-powered cars was only the "nose of the camel:"  The eventual goal was to replace all private cars with dat faaabulous public transit!  Cuz ebrybuddy luuvvves dat public transit, right? 

Of course the kingly pols would still have their state cars (and state-paid drivers), cuz dey iz way too impo'tant to have to travel by dat faaaabulous public transit, right?  You, on the other hand...

But an unexpected thing happened: even after the Democrats rammed thru a LAW paying car makers $7,500 per EV (thus lowering the price buyers would have to pay), most car buyers told the gummint to shove EVs up their ass.  Now billions of dollars worth of EVs sit un-sold on dealers' lots.  Plus, the batteries rarely last over five years, and replacing 'em costs a fortune.

Something else happened: we elected a Republican president and congress, and they stopped forcing taxpayers to pay car makers the $7,500 subsidy.  So now EVs got less attractive.

Democrats (i.e. leftists, socialists, communists) hated all the above, so Democrat-ruled states immediately started plotting to make ownership of gas-powered vehicles way more expensive...by taxing residents on how many miles they drive each year.

Rational adults quickly ask "How the hell would they know?"  Easy: the electronics in modern cars report damn near *everything* to the makers, so it would be easy for the Dems to order the car makers to give the gummint those numbers.

For example, a bill in Massachusetts--introduced by Democratic state senator Cynthia Stone Creem--would require state bureaucrats to set "goals" to reduce the total number of miles driven statewide.

And how, you may ask?  Simple: ORDER a limit to miles each person drives, and tax every mile over that.  And how much?  Whatever dictatorial Democrat rat-bastards ORDER, eh?

Because this is such an unpopular idea, Democrat politicians in Massachusetts are trying to fool voters by naming this bill the “Freedom to Move Act.” 

"SEE, citizen? Dis faaaabulous bill would GIBS yew 'freedom' to drive anywhere yew want!  Dere izn't a single mention of "tax" or "penalty" in dis bill at ALL, deplorable!  Nope nope nope!  Dis bill beez all about FWEEDOM!"

"Of course as you'd expect, there are a few minor...details.  Obviously.  For example, low-income groups wouldn't have to pay the penalty, cuz dat wud be unfair!" 

Voter: "What's the cutoff for 'low income'?

Democrats:  "Well that will depend on if you're a member of a 'historically disadvantaged group.'  Cuz dat wud only be FAIR, comr...citizen." 

Meanwhile in Democrat-ruled California--where EVERY state-wide officer is a Democrat (literally)--the state Assembly (legislature) has now approved a bill to “study the implementation of a mileage tax." 

The bill--introduced by a Democrat Assemblymember--creates a study of "pricing programs" [taxing schemes], *and whether certain groups should be given exemptions.

Starting to see the pattern yet?

The NBC propaganda outlet in San Diego found a “transportation expert” who suggested the mileage tax might even be progressive, providing an opportunity for redistribution of wealth: “Maybe, based on people’s income, there would be ways for the state to give them some money to compensate them partly for the extra driving they have to do. So we just need to be more creative and to address equity problems as they arise.”

Of course good liberals in Cali are totally giddy about dis great plan!  ORDER a tax of say, 50 cents per mile for every mile you drive over 8,000 per year.  Since the average now is 15,000 miles per year, most people would cut way down.  But if you drove just 12,000 per year and weren't a member of a "favored group, you'd have to pay an extra $2,000 in "use tax."

And yet the dumb voters in Cal keep voting for these rat-bastard Democrats.

Source.

https://spectator.org/blue-states-are-moving-legislation-forward-to-restrict-how-much-you-can-drive/ 

Did the Dems steal the 2020 election? New evidence

In 2020, bribem was officially deemed to have won Georgia by 11,779 votes.

Georgia was one of the many states where election officials mailed absentee ballots to EVERY registered voter.  Problem is, many of the addressees had moved, so some ballots likely ended up in other hands.

More damning is that many "absentee ballots" that were scanned lacked any creases from folds.  For the terminally stupid, mail-in ballots are sent in envelopes smaller than the ballot, so must be folded to fit in the envelopes.  Same for when they're mailed back--unless they were put in illegal "drop boxes." (Georgia law didn't provide for those, but they somehow appeared all over Democrat cities.)  But even then, the ballots would have been creased to fit in the envelopes when mailed TO registered voters, eh?

Now a court case in Fulton County, GA, claims 150,000 mail-in ballots in that county were likely "fake" because they had no creases.  Also, they didn't appear to have been marked by hand.

By the official count, bribem got over 70 percent of the votes in Fulton county--the first Dem since the hugely more popular Franklin Roosevelt did it in 1944. 

Meanwhile Democrats are blocking all efforts to investigate.  New York congresswhore Dan Goldman has filed an amendment to block the Trump administration from investigating election records, ballot boxes and voting machines in any state in the country. 

In most states, elections are run by the Secretary of State.  In Georgia that's Brad Raffensburger. Cleta Mitchell, who advised President Trump when he contested the Georgia election results, noted that on the morning of election day, 2020, Raffensperger announced that Trump was ahead by 103,000 votes with only 94,000 ballots left to count.  And since his job was to run the election, you'd think he'd know.  

Yet somehow, four days after declaring that only 94,000 ballots remained to be counted, Raffensberger NOW claimed there were over 300,000 more ballots to count--including 148,000 absentee ballots from Fulton County alone. Hmm...

Investigators found that over 133,000 ballot images--which by law had to be saved--had been deleted.  NONE of 148 Fulton County tabulators had the required verification tapes.  Nearly 7,000 fake ballots were accepted as genuine, and Fulton County election officials just smiled.

Finally: According to Grand Jury testimony just unsealed, Kemp told the chief of Georgia Bureau of Investigation not to investigate allegations of fraud in the 2020 election.  Saying he was a "team player," the chief of the GBI stopped investigating.

Now: bribem officially won the 2020 election by 306 to 232 electoral votes--a margin of 74, so a swing of 37 would have tied the election, and 38 would have reversed the result.  Georgia has 16 electoral votes, so putting just that state into the Trump column obviously wouldn't be enough to change the result.  

But in four other states--Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, with elections run by Democrats, bribem's alleged margin of victory was so close that it could easily have been due to fraud.  Here's the official margin for bribem in each:
                       margin         EVs
   Arizona         10,500         11 
   Georgia        11,779         16 
   Wisconsin     20,682         10
   Nevada         33,000          6
   Pennsylvania 81,660        20 

As the investigation into Georgia's results shows, all these margins are well within the likely number of fraudulent votes in Fulton County, Georgia alone. 

Recall that moving 37 electoral votes into Trump's column would have produced a tie (sending the decision to the House), while 38 would have reversed the outome.  The top three states above, alone, would change 37 EVs.  So the question is, is it *plausible* for the Dems to have created enough fake votes to match the totals for the first 3 states above. 

The Lying Mainstream Media has constantly bleated that in every case where the GOP sued for election fraud in the 2020 election, judges heard all the evidence and ruled against the GOP.  That's horseshit--a flat, blatant, brazen lie.  The truth is that 99% of the lawsuits filed were dismissed by leftist judges on the grounds that the judges RULED that the plaintiffs lacked "standing"--a recognizable legal interest--to sue for election fraud.

This is absurd: If a candidate can't sue for obvious vote fraud, *no one could.*  Yet the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media always bleated that judges had examined all these facts and allegations and found them meritless. 

That's a brazen lie.  Leftist judges dismissed all the lawsuits without ever examining the allegations, on the grounds of alleged "lack of legal standing to sue" or similar bullshit.

Then three weeks ago a funny thing happened: the Supreme Court ruled (7-2) that candidates in elections DO have legal standing to sue for fraud--
like absentee ballots either not having required signatures, or those signatures not being checked to see if they matched the sig on file; or signatures clearly NOT matching the one on file--indicating fraud.

(If you're curious, the two dissenting votes were from bribem-appointed moron Katanji Brown-Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor (who proclaimed herself a "wise Latina.")

So at least the next time the Democrats try to steal a presidential election, the SC has ruled that the conservative candidate can sue.