Biff

Retired but not dead. TRUMP 2024!! Not here for DMs.

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@MarindaVannoy1 And MANY more.......

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@ClayTravis Volleyball is right up there.

[Art @ZarkFiles]

The E. Jean Carroll case against President Trump is one of the strangest civil cases in American history. The foundational problem is this: Carroll could not identify when the alleged incident occurred — not even the year with any precision.
That should have killed the case as dead as a skunk on the road right there.
Without a temporal anchor, no defendant — regardless of guilt or innocence — can mount an alibi defense. Trump, who has maintained detailed calendars and staff records for decades, was denied the most basic tool of self-defense: the ability to establish where he was. That is not a technicality. It is a due process violation at the constitutional level.
Then Carroll produced the one piece of physical evidence she claimed corroborated her account — the dress she wore during the alleged incident. It was subsequently established that the dress was designed after the incident could have occurred. The sole corroborating evidence falsified her timeline.
The case proceeded anyway.
The resulting verdict was then weaponized in a defamation suit — where Trump was held liable for denying the allegation, while being procedurally barred from defending against it, because it was already "proven" in another court, regardless how flawed the procedure was. He was punished, in effect, for asserting his own innocence.
Compounding everything: coordinated professional and physical threats so thoroughly intimidated the legal community that attorneys refused these cases regardless of available fees. When you systematically destroy a defendant's ability to retain counsel of choice, you forfeit the right to a legitimate verdict.
An allegation is not evidence. Process without substance is not law. And a verdict produced under these conditions carries no legitimate authority — whatever its formal status.

Not only is it the right move to investigate Carroll, but every other person involved as well. Trump is owed serious damages here, and there may be a few people who belong in prison for their roles in the case.

[Flopping Aces @FloppingAces]

Man, you could practically hear the collective groan in every newsroom across America.

For about 12 glorious hours, the San Diego mosque shooting was absolute catnip for cable news. Two teenage white boys attack a mosque, three innocent people dead ... the “right-wing domestic terrorism” script wrote itself. Chyrons blazing, panels booked, every anti-MAGA hack already sharpening their knives.

Then the manifesto dropped.

And everything went dead quiet.

Turns out Cain Clark and Caleb Vazquez weren’t exactly card-carrying conservatives. These two pathetic Jew-obsessed incel weirdos titled their murder diary “Sons of Tarrant” and filled it with deranged pages of “IT’S THE JEWS” on endless repeat. They weren’t right-wing, weren’t MAGA, weren’t Trump fans ... nah, they proudly called themselves Third Positionists who worshipped Nationalist Socialism and Eco Fascism.

One was autistic and marinating in online poison. The other got force-fed mandatory “ethnic studies” classes that spent the first two weeks hammering “whiteness” and “white privilege” until he started hating himself and his own mixed-race family.

Oh, and the system had been warned for over a year: FBI knew about Vazquez, 5150 psych hold, gun seizure attempt, the works. Mom was blowing up police phones for two straight hours while short-staffed cops treated it like a runaway kid case.

But once the full, messy, politically inconvenient picture hit the internet?

The 24/7 coverage didn’t just slow down. It died.

Nothing kills a beautiful partisan morality play faster than facts that refuse to cooperate. The media isn’t in the truth business ... they’re in the narrative enforcement business. And this one didn’t confirm shit.
(article below)

[Phantom II @Phantom2Phlyer]

OK, here's why the Democrats got kicked in the groin by the Virginia Supreme Court.

The people of Virginia, in trying to protect against momentary democratic (small 'd') emotions of the day, put into their Constitution that, in order to amend it, there had to be two things happen.

First, any proposal to amend their Constitution required that two legislatures, separated by an election (and there's the big part), vote to put the amendment before the people.

The Virginia Democrats didn't do that. They stuck the first reading into a special budgetary session, and the next reading into a general session.

While the resolution passed both times, there wasn't an election in between the two votes. So there was no election that separated the legislature who voted in a special session, and the legislature that voted for the amendment in the general session.

Moreover, the Virginia Constitution required that the votes be taken in two general legislature sessions. The special session that was called was not a general session.

So this action violated the Virginia Constitution in two separate ways. Which is why the Virginia Supreme Court shot it down.

So when you see the Democrats whining because 'democracy was overturned,' they're right. Because we're not a democracy, and neither is Virginia. We're a republic, and so is Virginia. We're ruled by the Constitution and the rule of law, not by mob rule, which the Democrats prefer.

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

Alright. I need everyone to look at this.

Not skim it. LOOK AT IT.

Because what happened in the last 24 hours on this platform is one of the most breathtaking displays of coordinated dishonesty I have ever seen from elected officials -- and I have been watching these people for a long time. I am a science teacher. I grade papers for a living. I know when someone copied.

They ALL copied.

Let me show you exactly what I mean.

@SenWarren: "safe and effective" @PattyMurray: "safe and effective" @RonWyden: "safe, full stop" @RepJohnLarson: "safe and effective. Full stop." @RepBeccaB: "safe and effective" @RepDelBene: "safe & effective" @RepGregStanton: "safe and effective" @SenatorHassan: "safely used for years" @SenatorHick: "safe and FDA approved" @TeamPelosi: "access to mifepristone" SenatorCantwell: "safe medication" SenMarkey: "SAFE and LEGAL" repdeliaramirez: "safe and reliable"

That is not a coincidence. That is a MEMO. Someone in the DNC wrote those words, sent them to every caucus member, and these supposed independent representatives of the American people just... pasted it in. Changed a word here. Added an exclamation point there. Slapped their name on it.

And then had the audacity to call YOU their constituent.
Here is the part that should make your blood boil regardless of where you stand on abortion: these people are telling you -- openly, demonstrably, provably -- that they either did not read the court ruling, are not smart enough to understand what they read, or are perfectly fine lying to your face because they think you are too stupid to check.

Pick one. Those are the only options.

Here is what the ruling ACTUALLY says -- you know, the document none of them apparently opened:

The Fifth Circuit issued a TEMPORARY STAY of the 2023 FDA rule change that allowed mifepristone to be mailed without any in-person medical visit. The drug is NOT BANNED. Not restricted from in-person dispensing. Not removed from any shelf anywhere. It is back to the rule that existed for TWENTY YEARS from 2000 to 2023 -- a rule that nobody called a "nationwide abortion ban" at the time because it was not one then and it is not one now.

The ruling was triggered by the FDA's OWN ADMISSION that the 2023 rule had "procedural deficits" and a "lack of adequate consideration." Biden's Autopen's own agency admitted it FAILED to adequately study whether mailing the drug without in-person oversight is safe. The court held the FDA to its own documented standards. That is not extremism. That is administrative law.

But sure. Tell your constituents it is a nationwide abortion ban. His dog's trying to teach him new tricks and getting nowhere.

Now. Let me go through the highlight reel.

@PattyMurray and @SenatorHassan and @RepGregStanton. Oh boy. Sen. Murray wrote "This ruling is an attack on every woman's right to make her own health care decisions, and it must not stand." Sen. Hassan wrote "This ruling is an attack on every woman's right to make her own health care decisions, and it must not stand." Rep. Stanton wrote -- I want you to read this carefully -- "This ruling is an attack on every woman's right to make her own health care decisions, and it must not stand."

WORD. FOR. WORD.

Three separate officials. Three separate states. One brain between them and they are sharing it on a rotating schedule. Isn't it dangerous to use your whole vocabulary in one sentence? Because apparently they only have the one.

@SenWarren decided that "a conservative court packed with Trump-appointed judges" was the headline -- except, Senator, one of the three judges on that panel is a George W. Bush appointee. That is a fact available to anyone who spent thirty seconds on the first page of the ruling. You did not spend thirty seconds. You spent zero seconds. And then reported to your constituents anyway. Running on dial-up in a fiber-optic world and mad at the court for having internet.

@RonWyden called it "a nationwide abortion ban." Full stop. Thirty years in the Senate. The man has been in that chamber since 1996. He has seen more legislation than most people have had hot meals. And his contribution to this moment is a tweet calling a mailing rule stay "a nationwide abortion ban." Thirty years of accumulated nothing. I could eat a bowl of alphabet soup and poop out a more accurate legal summary than that.

@repdeliaramirez called for making "#RoeVWade the law of the land." In response to an Administrative Procedure Act ruling about an FDA mailing regulation. These are DIFFERENT CASES. Different courts. Different legal questions. Different decades. She does not even know what she is commenting on. More confused than a chameleon in a bag of Skittles and still found a way to get 2,000 retweets on it.

@RepBeccaB actually said -- and I quote -- "Whether it's taken at home or in a medical setting has no impact on that fact." No impact. The FDA's own label reports 2.9 to 4.6 percent of women prescribed mifepristone IN PERSON require emergency care. The court record explicitly states mailing without oversight INCREASES those risks. The setting has a documented, quantified, FDA-certified IMPACT on patient safety outcomes. She told her constituents the exact opposite of what the FDA's own documentation states. That is not a misunderstanding. That is a lie with a congressional letterhead.

@SenMarkey said "blocking access to it isn't about safety -- it's about control." Senator. The court's ENTIRE analysis -- all 18 pages -- was about safety. Specifically the FDA's own admission that it never adequately studied the mailing safety. The court cited the FDA's documented safety failures. You told Massachusetts the court ruling about safety is not about safety. I genuinely do not know what your problem is, but I am guessing it is hard to pronounce.

@TeamPelosi -- the former Speaker of the House of Representatives -- said Republicans "don't like birth control." Mifepristone is not a birth control medication. Birth control PREVENTS pregnancy. Mifepristone terminates an EXISTING pregnancy. These are pharmacologically and legally distinct categories that a Speaker of the House should be able to distinguish. The pilgarlic performance from someone who once wielded the Speaker's gavel is genuinely something to behold.

@amyklobuchar -- to be fair -- was the ONLY one who got close to accurate. She said "by mail" instead of inventing a ban. She gets half a point for basic literacy. The bar is subterranean and she barely cleared it but she cleared it. You bring everyone so much joy, Senator. You know, when you leave the room. But still.

@CAgovernor Gavin Newsom joined the party. Not a member of Congress -- a governor. But same talking points, same memo, same lies. Newsom is the same guy who apparently once said Governor Greg Abbott "doesn't have the backbone." Governor Abbott, for anyone who does not know, is paralyzed from the waist down due to a severed spine from a 1984 accident. Newsom has more nerve than spine, which is apparently the qualification for running California into the ground.

Here is the thing that keeps me up at night. Not the politics. The PATTERN.

If a CITIZEN lies to a member of Congress, that is a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001. Up to FIVE YEARS in federal prison. Substantial fines. That is what happens when YOU lie to THEM.

If a member of Congress lies to 335 MILLION citizens?

That is just a Friday.

And that Friday apparently comes with a DNC memo and a coordinated social media rollout and zero accountability whatsoever.

Trying to reason with some of these folks is like trying to baptize a cat. But I am going to keep doing it anyway -- because SOMEBODY has to drag these lies into the light, and I have tenure, a science background, and nothing but time.

@RepPressley @SenWarren @RoKhanna @PattyMurray @RonWyden @SenatorCantwell @SenatorHassan @RepJohnLarson @RepBeccaB @RepDelBene @RepGregStanton @amyklobuchar @repdeliaramirez @SenMarkey @SenatorHick @TeamPelosi @CAgovernor

You are all on record. Every lie. Every talking point. Every copy-pasted word.

And I am just getting started.

America was founded by geniuses. These people are proof the trend did not hold.

But what do I know -- I am only a science teacher and Army combat medic who read the 18-page ruling, can define arbitrary and capricious agency action, knows the difference between a mailing rule and an abortion ban, and understands that when fifteen elected officials post the SAME WORDS on the SAME DAY about a ruling NONE OF THEM CITED -- that is not democracy. That is a poltroon parade dressed up as representation.

IF THIS MADE YOU THINK: LIKE this post so the algorithm shows it to people who need to read it. SHARE this -- every single share matters. There is someone on your timeline right now being lied to by one of these names. COMMENT "YES" below if you want me to keep calling them out by name. One by one. With receipts. Because I have all of them.

JOIN Bski's Classroom community on X or YouTube. Subscribe to my account -- about the cost of a cup of coffee a month. Your support keeps this classroom open. And I promise I will never run out of material as long as the left keeps trying to out-dumb itself.

@JoJoFromJerz @GuntherEagleman @catturd2

#MAGA #Veterans #Trump

Let me add one more thing. And yes, I am going to repeat it. Because it is THAT important and some things deserve to be said twice.

Quinn's Law Number One: "Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent."

Read that again.

Every. Single. Time.

These fifteen officials told you they are fighting FOR women. They told you they are protecting women's health. They told you this ruling puts women's lives at risk.

But here is what they did not tell you -- because not one of them read the ruling.

The FDA's OWN safety label states that 2.9 to 4.6 percent of women prescribed mifepristone IN PERSON require emergency care. The court record -- the 18 pages none of them opened -- explicitly documents that mailing the drug WITHOUT in-person medical oversight INCREASES those emergency care risks. Louisiana showed $92,000 in Medicaid costs from real women who ended up in real emergency rooms from mifepristone complications in 2025 alone. Nearly 1,000 cases per month.

The court reinstated in-person oversight BECAUSE women were being harmed.

Let that land.

The ruling these members of Congress are calling an "attack on women" was issued BECAUSE women were getting hurt WITHOUT proper medical supervision. The in-person requirement they are screaming about EXISTS to make sure a doctor is present when complications occur. Reinstating it is not a war on women. It is a basic medical safety standard that these officials -- in their coordinated, memo-driven, copy-pasted outrage -- are actively fighting to REMOVE.

Quinn's Law Number One. They say they are protecting women. Their position, if it succeeded, would result in MORE women in emergency rooms with NO doctor present. The exact opposite of their stated intent. Every single time. Without exception. You could set a watch by it.

I want to say that one more time for the people in the back who are still reading the talking points memo instead of the court document.

THEY. ARE. FIGHTING. TO. REMOVE. MEDICAL. OVERSIGHT.

FOR WOMEN.

While telling you they are protecting women.

And here is the part that should stop you cold. Not one -- NOT ONE -- of the fifteen names I tagged in this post can tell you what a woman IS. Their party spent years insisting that only a biologist can define a woman. Well. I am a science teacher. I will do it for free.

A woman is an adult human female -- the sex of an organism that produces large gametes, organized around ovarian development and the reproductive anatomy that supports gestation. That definition comes from developmental biology, evolutionary biology, endocrinology, and medicine. It is in the textbooks. It is not controversial in any field that studies living organisms.

But ask @SenWarren. Ask @PattyMurray. Ask @RoKhanna. Ask @repdeliaramirez -- who cannot even identify which court case she is commenting on, let alone which biological category she is defending.

They cannot define a woman.

They cannot tell you what a woman is.

But they are absolutely certain -- CERTAIN -- that they know what is best for women's bodies, women's healthcare, and women's lives.

And they know it so thoroughly, so completely, so confidently, that they do not need to read the ruling. They do not need to check the FDA's own safety data. They do not need to acknowledge the real women in Louisiana emergency rooms. They do not need to define their terms. They just need the memo. Paste it in. Hit send. Collect the fundraising email donations that go out twenty minutes later.

That is not advocacy. That is not protection. That is not fighting for anyone.

That is using women as a political prop by people who cannot even name what a woman is -- while simultaneously fighting to strip away the medical supervision that exists specifically to keep women safe.

Quinn's Law Number One. The exact opposite. Every time.

I am a science teacher. I have spent my career explaining how the natural world actually works rather than how people wish it worked. Reality does not care about your talking points. Biology does not care about your memo. And the women in those Louisiana emergency rooms do not care about your fundraising email.

The truth is the truth whether or not fifteen members of Congress choose to read it.

But what do I know -- I am only a science teacher who can define a woman, read a court brief, interpret FDA safety data, and identify when the people claiming to protect someone are actively making the situation more dangerous for that someone. Apparently a rare combination on Capitol Hill.

Comment YES below if you want me to keep going. Because I have more names, more lies, and more receipts than they have talking points.

@JoJoFromJerz @GuntherEagleman @catturd2

#MAGA #Veterans #Trump

[Peter Girnus 🦅 @gothburz]

I have two stacks on my desk. The left stack is financial disclosure forms from members of Congress. The right stack is waivers for members who filed their financial disclosures late.

The right stack is always taller.

On Wednesday morning, I watched a soldier get arrested on CNN.

I am a Disclosure Analyst for the House Ethics Committee. I have held this position for eleven years. My job is to receive the forms, verify their completeness, and file them. I do not investigate. I do not flag. I do not refer. I file. I have a lanyard. The lanyard says ETHICS.

The soldier's name is Gannon Ken Van Dyke. He is thirty-eight years old. He was stationed at Fort Bragg. He was Special Forces. In December, he created an account on a prediction market called Polymarket. On January 2nd, he bet $32,500 that the president of Venezuela would be removed from power. On January 3rd, he helped remove the president of Venezuela from power. He collected $409,881.

He has been charged with five federal crimes. Commodities fraud. Wire fraud. Unlawful use of confidential government information. Theft of nonpublic government information. Unlawful monetary transaction. The Department of Justice called it "the first-ever insider trading prosecution on event contracts."

I watched this on the television in our break room. Then I walked back to my desk and processed a late financial disclosure from a member of the House Financial Services Committee who purchased $250,000 in bank stocks eleven days before his subcommittee held a closed-door hearing on proposed capital reserve changes.

The filing was forty-seven days late. The STOCK Act requires disclosure within forty-five days. The penalty for late filing is $200.

I waived it.

I waive most of them. In 2021, fifty-four members of Congress and senior staff violated the reporting rules. The fines were minimal. Most were waived. I have a form for the waiver. The form has a box that says "Reason." I write "administrative delay." In ethics, "administrative delay" means the member's office forgot and then remembered when a reporter called. My approval rate is one hundred percent. In any other field, that number would trigger an audit. In mine, it is called thoroughness.

Let me show you what I processed this year.

January. A senator on the Armed Services Committee sold defense contractor shares worth $1.2 million. Three days later, his committee received a classified briefing that the Iran campaign had exceeded its projected cost by 340%. The stock dropped 8%. He filed the disclosure sixty-one days late. I calculated the fine. $200. His chief of staff asked if it could be waived. He did not ask what the senator traded on. Nobody asks that. The form does not have a field for it. I waived the fine. The senator's portfolio returned 23.4% in 2025. The S&P 500 returned 16.8%.

February. A representative on the Energy and Commerce Committee bought pharmaceutical stocks worth $400,000. Two weeks later, her committee advanced a bill that would extend patent exclusivity for the exact drug class she purchased. The stocks rose 14%. She filed on time. There was no fine. There was no investigation. There was nothing to investigate because buying stocks in companies regulated by your own committee is not illegal. It is legal. The STOCK Act made it legal by making it disclosed. In Congress, disclosed means legal. In my office, legal means filed.

March. A member whose spouse manages a portfolio worth $9.2 million reported forty-three separate transactions in a single quarter. Twelve of them were in sectors directly affected by legislation the member co-sponsored. The timing on eight of those twelve was within a two-week window of committee action. I logged all forty-three. None were flagged. We do not flag. We file.

I asked my supervisor once what would happen if I flagged a filing. She said we do not have a form for that. I never asked again.

In 2020, I processed 847 disclosures. In 2023, 1,211. In 2025, 1,614. The number of enforcement actions in each of those years was zero. The numerator changes. The denominator does not.

I want to tell you about the soldier again.

He made $409,881. He tried to delete his Polymarket account by calling customer service and saying he lost access to his email. He moved his profits into a foreign cryptocurrency vault and then into a new brokerage account. He used his real identity. He placed thirteen bets. Every single one was connected to an operation he personally participated in.

In my eleven years, I have processed disclosures from members of Congress who traded on:

Pending FDA approvals they learned about in committee.
Defense appropriations they voted on.
Trade policy they negotiated.
Pandemic response measures they drafted.
Interest rate decisions they were briefed on before the public.

None of them have been charged. None of them have been investigated by the Department of Justice. None of them have been referred to the SEC. The STOCK Act has produced zero prosecutions since it was signed on April 4th, 2012.

Fourteen years. Five hundred and thirty-five members. $635 million in trades last year alone. Zero cases.

My daughter asked me once what happens when someone breaks the rules. I told her we write it down. She asked what happens after that. I said it depends. She was nine. She is twenty now. It does not depend. Nothing happens after that.

The soldier made $409,881 and faces decades in prison. Nancy Pelosi entered Congress in 1987 with a portfolio worth approximately $785,000. It is now worth $133.7 million. That is a return of 16,930%. The Dow Jones returned 2,300% over the same period. Professional fund managers who beat the market for three consecutive years are considered exceptional. She has beaten it for thirty-seven. If a hedge fund produced those returns, the SEC would subpoena the records on a Thursday. She produced them from a building with a chapel and a gift shop.

She announced her retirement last year. No investigation was opened. No disclosure was flagged. Her filings were on time. In my office, on time means compliant. Compliant means closed.

I want to tell you about the fine.

$200. That is the maximum penalty for violating the STOCK Act's disclosure requirements. $200 for a member of Congress whose portfolio gained $4.7 million in a single quarter. I calculated what $200 represents as a percentage of $4.7 million. It is 0.004%. I could not find a comparison that made it meaningful. It is less than the price of the parking pass in the Rayburn garage. It is less than lunch at the members' dining room if you order the crab cakes, which I am told are excellent though I eat at my desk.

Since 2012, thirty-one bills have been introduced to restrict congressional trading. I keep a list. The list is longer than the STOCK Act itself.

On March 5th, 2026, a representative from Michigan introduced the thirty-second. He called it the "No Getting Rich in Congress Act." The bill would prohibit the President, Vice President, members of Congress, and their spouses from trading individual stocks, cryptocurrency, futures, and commodities while in office.

The bill was referred to committee. The committee has not scheduled a hearing. The committee is chaired by a member whose spouse executed $2.1 million in trades last year.

The bill will be reviewed. In my office, reviewed means read. Read means acknowledged. Acknowledged means a status has been assigned. A status is the absence of an action that has been given a name so it looks like one.

The soldier used classified information to make $409,881 on a prediction market. He has been charged with five federal crimes. The Department of Justice announced the case on the same day I processed three disclosures from members who traded on committee knowledge worth a combined $3.8 million.

The difference between the soldier and the members is not what they did. It is the building they did it in. He did it from Fort Bragg. They did it from the Capitol. He used a prediction market. They used the New York Stock Exchange. He bet on a military operation. They bet on the legislation they write.

He did not write the law. They did. They wrote the STOCK Act. Then they funded its enforcement at zero dollars. Then they set its maximum penalty at $200. Then they gave my office the authority to waive it. Then they traded $635 million.

The soldier flew to Caracas. He breached a compound. He put his body between a mission and a bullet. The people who ordered the operation were in a building with a credenza and sparkling water. They did not go to Caracas. They went to their brokerage accounts. The soldier made $409,881 and is now in federal custody. The people who knew what he was going to do before he did it made more and filed less. His prosecution is not a failure of the system. It is the system. One conviction per decade, at the lowest level, so the briefing slides can say enforcement exists. The $409,881 is not the crime. It is the cost of making $635 million look supervised.

In my field, we call this self-regulation.

The soldier's Polymarket account has been frozen. His military career is over. He will spend years in federal prison. My office will process every congressional disclosure filed this year. Every trade logged. Every $200 fine calculated and waived. The system is immaculate.

Fourteen years. Zero prosecutions. $635 million a year. A 16,930% return.

I have not leaked a document. I have not filed a complaint. I have not deviated from the process one single time. The process was written by the people whose forms I process.

As long as the disclosures go up and the cases don't, my performance review says I am meeting expectations.

My lanyard still says ETHICS. In eleven years, nobody has asked me to define the word.

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@kim33024 @atensnut That was ACTUALLY my first as well!!

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@atensnut 2

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@SaltyGoat17 @Athena5776 💯💯💯

[DK🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸 @1Nicdar]

Pay attention now!

Joe legal works in construction, has a Social Security number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted.

Jose illegal also works in construction has no Social Security number and makes $15.00 per hour cash, under the table.

Ready?... now pay attention....

Joe legal: $25.00 per hour × 40 hours = $1,000.00 per week or $52,000.00 per year. Now, take 31% away for State and Federal taxes. Joe legal now has $31,231.00.

Jose illegal: $15.00 an hour × 40 hours = $600.00 per week or $31,200.00 per year. Jose illegal pays no taxes. Jose illegal now has $31,200.00.

Joe legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Joe legal now has $24,031.00.

Jose illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the State and local clinics and emergency hospitals at a cost of $0.00 per year. Jose illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. Joe legal spends $500.00 per month for food or $6,000.00 per year. Joe legal now has $18,031.00.

Jose illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps, WIC and welfare. Jose illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe legal pays rent of 1,200.00 per month or $14,400.00 per year. Joe legal now has $9,631.00.

Jose illegal receives $500.00 per month Federal rent subsidy. Jose illegal pays out that $500.00 per month or $6,000.00 per year. Jose illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe legal pays $200.00 per month or $2,400.00 per year for car insurance. Some of that is uninsured motorist insurance. Joe legal now has $7,231.00.

Jose illegal says, "We don't need no stinkin' insurance."... and still has $31,000.00.

Joe legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline.. etc.

Jose illegal has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline and what he sends out of the country every month....

Joe legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

Jose illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

Joe legal's and Jose illegal's children both attend the same elementary school.

Joe legal pays for his children's lunches while...

Jose illegal's children get a government-sponsored lunch.

Jose illegal's children have an after school ESL program.

Joe legal's children go home.

Now, when they reach college age...

Joe legal's kids may not get into a State school and may not qualify for scholarships, grants or other tuition help, even though Joe has been paying for State schools through his taxes, while...

Jose illegal's kids go to the, 'head of the class' because they are a minority.

Joe legal and Jose illegal both benefit from the same police and fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not.

Do you get it, now?

If we vote for or support any politician that supports illegal aliens,... we are part of the problem.

It’s way PAST time to take a stand for America and Americans!

- Lisa Weaver

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@MarindaVannoy1 Never take ANY of them.
I wake up at 530 every day ready to roll!!

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@MarindaVannoy1 Beats the alternative!!

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@NUCLRGOLF 8 iron

[Bob Lonsberry @BobLonsberry]

THE POPE IS WRONG

The pope is wrong.

I'm not talking about the pissing match between him and Trump, an embarrassment arising from two men with problem egos.

I'm talking about the gospel. He's wrong about that.

On Palm Sunday, presiding at the altar, dressed in his vestments and regalia, standing above the body and blood of Christ, proclaiming as the bishop of Rome the gospel, he said, "Jesus does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war -- but rejects them."

Let that sink in.

"Jesus does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war -- but rejects them."

That is preposterous, and conflicts directly with the Bible, the teachings and history of his own Roman Catholic Church, and the very nature of the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the Bible, there are six separates Psalms written as prayers by David while he was waging war. In these prayers he asked God to bless his efforts and defeat his enemies.

Does the pope want us to believe that the Lord ignored those prayers and rejected David as he offered them? Should those Psalms be removed from the Bible canonized by his own church four times over more than a thousand years?

What about Jehoshaphat, Elisha, Joshua and Hezekiah -- as well as the entire tribes of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh -- who all while waging war prayed fervently to God to deliver them and subdue their enemies?

God ignored them, too, and rejected them?

That's a little hard to swallow given that each one of them was blessed with success in battle and rejoicingly thanked the Lord for it.

That's what the Bible says.

As far as the doctrinally authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church, the church declares the principle of "just war" -- based on the teachings of saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas -- and Catholic tradition specifically calls on those waging war to ask for victory in justice and protection for Catholic troops.

And what of the Catholic chaplains in our Armed Forces? Should they tell young men and women waging war in their country's service that their prayers are pointless, as they will be ignored and rejected by their Savior? Isn't that what the Holy Father said?

Finally, there is the matter of Constantine as he prepared for the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. A pagan who was about to wage war, he asked God to bless him with victory. At that point, he saw a cross in the sky and words that told him to march under its banner. That led to his conversion, the embrace of Christianity by the Roman Empire, the Nicaean Creed, and the official governmental sponsorship that made the Catholic Church one of the most powerful and wealthy institutions in the western world.

Is the pope saying that the Lord turned a deaf ear to Constantine? Was that all a mistake or misunderstanding? Should we still be worshipping the sun god?

Of course not.

But this isn't about history or doctrine, soldiers or even the Bible.

It's about Jesus Christ.

"Jesus does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war -- but rejects them."

Nothing could be further from the truth. Jesus listens to everyone's prayers, and Jesus rejects no one.

The Lord loves us all, no matter who we are, no matter what we have done, no matter how far we have fallen. God loves us all, and waits like the adoring Heavenly Father he is for us to reach out to him. He rejoices when we pray, he embraces us when we pray, he pours out his blessings upon us when we pray.

Even if we are waging war.

Even if we are in the depths of sin. Maybe especially if we are in the depths of sin.

"The Lord is near to all who call upon him," David said. And that is true, no matter what Leo said.

God always loves us, God is always there for us, God will always hear our prayers.

It's unfortunate the vicar of Christ seems confused on that point.

[LHGrey™️ @grey4626]

Iran doesn’t get it.

Not yet.

They’re still circling the wreckage of Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan like vultures picking at their own corpse, convinced the game is still theirs to play.

They’re wrong.

Dead fucking wrong…

They’re staring down the barrel of the single most lethal strategic mind to occupy the Oval Office in a century. Donald J. Trump doesn’t do reactive.

He doesn’t do “measured responses.”

He architects collapse…methodically, relentlessly, ten moves ahead while the mullahs are still arguing over which ayatollah gets the last virgin goat in paradise.

This naval blockade isn’t a threat.

It’s a garrote.

Every tanker denied insurance, every supertanker turned away, every barrel of Iranian crude left rotting in the holds…that’s not pressure. That’s economic exsanguination.

Iran’s entire regime floats on oil revenue the way a junkie floats on the next fix. Cut the jugular and watch the body politic convulse.

Trump knows it.

He’s counted every drop, every dollar, every desperate wire transfer to Hezbollah and the Houthis that just got severed.

Precision asphyxiation, executed with the cold elegance of a grandmaster tightening the noose.

Psychologically? Masterclass.

He’s weaponized their own paranoia against them.

The regime’s survival is built on the myth of inevitability…the divine right of the Supreme Leader, the eternal resistance axis.

Trump just shattered the myth with twelve days of fire and steel, then walked away smiling, daring them to test the next layer.

Now he floods the theater with tankers, refuelers, and carrier strike groups…not because he wants the fight, but because he wants them to know he’s already won it.

The psychology of the predator:

make the prey feel the shadow before the teeth close.

Geopolitically, the board is his.

Russia’s bleeding out in the east, China’s staring at its own demographic cliff and a
Taiwan clock that’s ticking louder every quarter.

Neither patron has the bandwidth or the balls to bleed for Tehran when the American Navy owns the Strait of Hormuz and the skies above it.

The Europeans?

They’ll whimper about “de-escalation” while quietly cheering every percentage point drop in Brent crude that doesn’t come from their own stranded assets.

Trump reads the map the way a wolf reads the herd:

he isolates, he starves, he waits for the weak to break.

And the philosophy beneath it all?

Simple, ancient, merciless.

Power is not negotiated. Power is demonstrated.

The weak pray for mercy; the strong dictate the terms of surrender.

Iran still believes it can haggle with history. Trump already rewrote the chapter.

He’s not offering talks…he’s offering a choice between dignified capitulation and the slow, televised strangulation of their entire revolutionary project.

So let the mullahs keep tweeting their hollow defiance. Let them posture for the cameras while their economy flatlines and their proxies starve for ammunition.

The master strategist already sees the endgame: a nuclear program in ruins, buried stockpiles surrendered or vaporized, and a regime forced to choose between survival and suicide.

Iran, you’re not dealing with another cautious Western leader who fears the headlines. You’re dealing with the man who turns headlines into body bags.

He’s ten steps ahead.

You’re still trying to find the board…

Checkmate is coming.

And it’s going to taste like oil and ashes.

💀⚔️⚖️

[Mike Bales 🫡🇺🇸 @MikeBales]

This is worth repeating:

I never cared that you were gay until you started shoving it down my throat, and I never cared what color you were until you started blaming me for your problems.

I never cared about your political affiliation until you started condemning me for mine.

I really never even cared where you were born until you wanted to erase my history and blame my ancestors for your problems.

I never even cared if your beliefs were different from mine until you said my beliefs were wrong.

But now I care. My patience and tolerance are gone, and I am not alone in feeling like this. There are millions of us who feel like this.

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@NUCLRGOLF Get up
Sit
Go
Stop
Stop hooking
Stop fading
F......k
Misread it
Faster than it looked
Slower than it looked
What was the yardage?
I'm taking a week off
Who's in for tomorrow?

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@kraigkann But he's right!!!

[Biff @BiffBorowitz77]

@Top100Rick Worst ever