_The Revolution Starts Once You Gain the Power to Say ‘No’_
_Shocking UFO Footage Released, US Hellfire Missile Bounces Off UAP_
The left does not want to debate reality. It wants to create a fictional version of it that supports its narratives.
https://x.com/DrewPavlou/status/1965202949044593037
The left does not want to debate reality. It wants to create a fictional version of it that supports its narratives.
https://x.com/Grummz/status/1965239608264073471
_Leftists Are Trying To Cover Up Murder of Ukrainian Refugee, Delete Story From Wikipedia_
The left does not want to debate reality. It wants to create a fictional version of it that supports its narratives.
"It wasn't 'criminal'! There was no law on the books against it!" ~ Some random troll
Slavery was criminal, even when it was legal.
Not just because it was against the law in one jurisdiction, but legal in another, but because criminality is not determined solely by what nominal laws are officially "on the books" in a particular jurisdiction, but by ethical principles.
That principle was the entire premise of the Nuremberg trials, and also of the very existence of "international law."
Best visual depiction of what we programmers know and love [sic] as "spaghetti code."
_No Doubt Left: Russiagate Was a Cover-Up_
"The most infuriatingly complex scandal of all time has just been reduced to a page or two, thanks to another declassified release"
https://www.racket.news/p/no-doubt-left-russiagate-was-a-cover
_NPR, PBS Funder to Shut Down Following Trump Cuts_
Both PBS and NPR have defended their receipt of federal funding by emphasizing that it constitutes a relatively small portion of their overall budgets.
But it's apparently enough to be a deciding factor for whether or not they can afford to operate.
They can't have it both ways. And even if they could, it wouldn't change the fact that they have NO RIGHT to taxpayer funds—even were it not the case that such a huge number of taxpayers do not want to pay for their services.
More fundamentally, the Federal government has NO BUSINESS funding ANY source of news and/or opinion. for the same reason it has no business funding churches and/or religions.
FTA: Public broadcasting may fade away in January after federal budget cuts snapped its government handout.
Last month, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting saw its $500 million federal subsidy end as Congress approved a recissions package that originated with President Donald Trump.
As a result, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting said that in January, NPR, PBS, and local public radio and TV stations are at risk of going dark.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/08/breaking-npr-pbs-funder-shut-following-trump-cuts/
_New Evidence Ties Soros Foundation to Russiagate, Top Official Actively Involved - Report_
FTA: A new report based on a formerly classified document says that a top player on the George Soros network knew about the Russiagate hoax in its infancy.
On Thursday, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa released a declassified version of an appendix to a report written by former special counsel John Durham, who investigated the shadowy beginnings of the debunked narrative that Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign was colluding with Russia.
The website Just the News dug into the pages to glean that Leonard Benardo, an official with George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, and Julianne Smith, a foreign policy adviser to 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, were knee-deep in the developing stage of smearing Trump, with one communication appearing to acknowledge that the FBI was there to help.
_Gabbard: We Have the Evidence to Indict and Prosecute Those Responsible for Coup, Russia Hoax_
This is a hill they're willing to die on: It's highly unlikely that they're bluffing.
What would be the point? They either have "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt" (as a likely jury would conclude,) or they don't.
https://www.westernjournal.com/gabbard-evidence-indict-prosecute-responsible-coup-russia-hoax/
_“Treasonous Conspiracy” – Tulsi Gabbard Calls for Prosecution of Barack Obama, Jim Comey, John Brennan and Others – Sends Newly Declassified Trump-Russia Hoax Docs to Justice Department_
A government-funded source of news and opinion is just as anti-American as a government-funded church—and for the same reasons. And that's true REGARDLESS of the religion, or of the political views of the organization(s) being funded.
https://x.com/thackerpd/status/1945612834903318914
_Supreme Court allows Trump admin to deport illegal immigrants to countries they are not from_
Not a final holding.
Even economic sanctions are acts of war. Just ask Japan in 1941.
No clause of the Constitution says anything that can fairly be interpreted as equivalent to "The United States shall not commit any acts of war without pre-approval by Congress."
Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 grants Congress the sole power to “declare War,” but the Constitution does not define “war” or specify if all hostile, aggressive or violent military actions qualify as acts requiring pre-approval by Congress.
Historical precedent shows that Presidents have authorized military strikes without congressional declaration, such as Jefferson’s 1801 Barbary War actions and Reagan’s 1986 Libya strike—among many others.
Massie should put his money where his mouth is, and get Congress to vote against war with Iran, or at least sue the administration based on his interpretation of the Constitution (of course, he wouldn't have standing to sue, unless and until Congress votes no.)
https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1936722005451010479
Your logical fallacies are 1) guilt by association, and 2) fallacy of the excluded middle.
Race and/or ethnicity are not what matter.
It's ethical principles, and political philosophy, that do. And those are what should form the basis for political alignment, not surface features.
_BREAKING: “Big Win: Court Rules Pfizer Can Be Sued for DECEPTION”_
"A federal judge ruled this week that the State of Kansas may proceed with its consumer protection lawsuit against Pfizer in state court..."
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/breaking-big-win-court-rules-pfizer
I respond herein to your statements on property rights, but not to your assertions regarding Fascism (I will do so in a separate reply):
First, a synopsis of my full response: On property: Property is objectively necessary in order to minimize conflict over physical things for which consumption/use is necessarily rivalrous. That's why socialists don't even try to eliminate the ownership of property, but instead seek to collectivize it. The only difference between one cult of socialism and another is how the line is drawn between the property that's OK for an individual to own privately versus that which must be owned collectively.
Collective ownership politicizes the management of the property, which means that the behaviors of those in control of the collective, and/or of its property, will necessarily result in exactly the issues that arise with collective control over a society (corruption, mismanagement, unethical rule making, dishonest / partisan enforcement of the rules, and specious rulings rendered by courts.)
Hierarchical power structures can have only one result: giving effective ownership to the rich and powerful, and denying it to everyone else. Any collective entity with a monopoly of either societal power in general, or of the ownership of whatever property, is a single point of failure, and a high-value target of corruption. Rich, powerful and evil people will _always_ end up in control of it. Always.
"When under the pretext of fraternity, the legal code imposes mutual sacrifices on the citizens, human nature is not thereby abrogated. Everyone will then direct his efforts toward contributing little to, and taking much from, the common fund of sacrifices. Now, is it the most unfortunate who gains from this struggle? Certainly not, but rather the most influential and calculating." ~ Frederic Bastiat
The "Iron Law of Oligarchy" cannot be mocked, Nor can the "Economic Calculation Problem" be solved in any other way than by private ownership and a free market.
Also, to deny anyone else the right to own anything physical (and which can only be consumed/used rivalrously) is the exercise of ownership of it by a socialist collective. That means that denying others the right to own something is a logical contradiction--as demonstrated by the fact that whatever collective ownership agent socialists advocate will, in fact, not allow me--or any other propertarian, whether as an individual or any other collective ownership agent--to freely consume/use whatever property it claims to own.
You cannot simultaneously disavow the rightfulness of property while also insisting that what others have should be shared with you. That argument contradicts itself, because it is a claim of title to property currently in the physical possession of others.
Finally, there is no principle of logic that can assign an objectively-valid value--larger than 1--to the minimum number of people in a collective ownership group who may "rightfully" own anything collectively: If N people can rightfully own whatever, then why can't N-1 people also rightfully do so? Values less than 1 are the only logically-supportable answer to that question—because it's logically impossible zero or fewer entities to "own" anything at all.
And, given the fact that a corporation is a totally valid example of collective ownership (and it's even totally consensual!), why do socialists oppose them so adamantly?
My full response can be seen in the conversation I had with Grok on the topic (a long series of questions by and and responses by Grok) => https://x.com/i/grok/share/6rNezAdsnogcsuD4mLBXpVhTa
_Hidden UN App Preinstalled on Samsung Phones: Your Tax Dollars at Work_
_BlueSky Is A DISASTER, Leftist Cesspit Is OBSESSED With Death Threats & Adult Material_