Saturday, June 13, 2026

DAVID FRIEDBERG: there is nothing illegal or fraudulent going on. In fact, the system is operating exactly as intended it has been set up, structured anyway that with the right construct you can get an individual appointed, not elected, but appointed to a particular role in government under a "free election" in California.

David Friedberg leads this discussion.

2:03.  And, Nick if you'll just pull up the map which is I think worth taking a look at, basically the concentrations of incremental votes that Nithya Raman got came around the Skid Row area in Los Angeles.  And look I'm not an election denier.  I'm not someone who's historically believed the idea that elections are fraud and people have stolen votes. But when you look at the basic statistics of what happened in-person, mail-in before and after Election Day, it becomes a real statistical quagmire on how did this sort of social political shift happen in such a way that it did?

Friedberg continues, 

Now, there was a report published, Nick, if you could pull this up, by the US House of Representatives Committee on House Administration.  This was published in May of 2020 and they highlighted the 2018 California midterm elections and the challenges they saw arise in that midterm elections because of some of the legislative changes that were made.  First, California Assembly Bill 1921 legalized the practice of unlimited ballot harvesting in the state this was passed around 2018 around the midterms is that any individual has the right to go and collect ballots from any other individuals regardless of relationship, fill them out, and send them in. California 2 years later, 18 months later also passed a law that made it permanent that every person registered in the state of California would get a ballot.  So tens of millions of ballots then get mailed out.  Then there was another series of laws that were passed that said anyone can register to vote.  You don't need to prove your citizenship.  You can use a gym membership card as an example.  So anyone can register to vote. There is no proof of ID when you get a ballot.  There is no demonstration at the person who fills out has anything to do with the individual who is supposed to be voting that ballot.  And it is legal for an individual to go out and collect hundreds or thousands of ballots, ship them in, and they will all qualify in these kind of mail-in ballot voting procedures. So there is nothing illegal or fraudulent going on in fact the system is operating exactly as intended it has been set up, structured anyway that with the right construct you can get an individual appointed Not Elected but appointed to a particular role in government under a "free election" in California.  This is a foundational destruction of our rights to vote for people in a free democracy I feel it's been eroded slowly over time to such an extent now and I'm not some crazy MAGA mfer or whatever people want to classify me as for pointing this out but you can go down the list they are all written out in this document every one of these laws that were passed in California overtime that in aggregate create the environment and the construction for elections to become appointments and no longer free Democratic elections where the principal very importantly the principal should be: one individual, one vote.  And if you opt to not vote, your vote should not be counted.  So I think that there is no fraud yeah I think this is not the way the laws are set up. 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

GB UKJ0N GB: Following the horrific stabbing of a 17-year-old girl in Brierfield. Alex Phillips has a powerful message for Keir Starmer.

They will deploy the Army against the population that continues to object to their own destruction.  There will be no voting their way out of this, our Gov'ts won't let us.  Folks should embrace the horror and get to work. --Linuxhippie

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

LINUXHIPPIE: Next up, they will deploy the Army against the population that continues to object to their own destruction. There will be no voting their way out of this, our Gov'ts won't let us. Folks should embrace the horror and get to work.

7 min interview w/ former head of MI5. No mention of immigration, no mention of Marxism, no mention of Islam. Neither mention foreigners that the British Gov't imported to do exactly what those foreigners ARE doing to British Subjects. It's always the external threat. Does not mention the obvious "ongoing" threat to the British people from their own leadership that has "prioritized" the replacement of British subjects with Islam. Reduces current leadership to the level of "student activists" (completely under-inclusive to the threat they are) and refers to this a "left wing of the Labour Party" dispute (as if the entire Labour isn't Marxist). This is the UK Counter-State completing the opposite side of the dialectic. Close the circle to churn the British population into non-existence. He knows exactly what he's doing and his language was carefully chosen (al la Discourse Theory praxis) to close the circle of allowable opinion in order to paint those citizens who seek to defend themselves from annihilation by their own Gov't as "extreme". Next up, they will deploy the Army against the population that continues to object to their own destruction. Remember the SPLC case? It's happening in the Ireland / UK right now. If the people don't commit, go all in, they will be crushed and doomed to the fate their King has set for them. There will be no voting their way out of this, our Gov'ts won't let us. Folks should embrace the horror and get to work. US Politicians do the same thing see slides below.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

MJ MURPHY: That's the technique because most arguments aren't actually arguments, they're collisions. They're collisions between different definitions.

I have spent years studying psychology, NLP, persuasion, influence, and the most powerful debate technique I have ever found isn't it a comeback, it isn't a fact, it isn't an argument.  It's a question. The most powerful debate technique ever is a question. And the funny thing is almost nobody uses it because it doesn't feel as satisfying as attacking someone.  It doesn't feel as satisfying as proving someone wrong.  And it definitely doesn't feel as satisfying as winning.  The most powerful debate technique is this, I'm going to tell you.  Ask people to define their terms.  That's it. That's the technique because most arguments aren't actually arguments, they're collisions.  They're collisions between different definitions.  Take almost any controversial issue that people spend hours arguing, days arguing, years arguing, and then eventually you discover they are using the same word to mean completely different things.  Words like freedom, justice, equality, rights, violence, man, woman, harm.  Nobody stops to ask, "What exactly do you mean by that?"  And until you answer that question, the debate can't even begin.  One person is playing chess and the other person person is playing checkers.  And both think they're winning.  The reason this technique is so powerful is because definitions expose assumptions.  They expose assumptions the moment someone defines a word. They reveal the hidden beliefs underneath it. Suddenly you're no longer arguing about conclusions, you're examining the foundation those conclusions were built on.  And sometimes something amazing happens.  You discover that you don't actually disagree about the facts; you disagree about the meaning of a single word.  So most people think debate is about having better answers.  I think great debate is about asking better questions.  And one of the best questions you can ever ask is "What do you mean by that?"  Because clarity is Kryptonite to manipulation.  If you're trying to think more clearly in a world full of propaganda, persuasion, and psychological manipulation, check out my guide, Breaking the Spell.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Friday, June 12, 2026

ANDREW BRANCA: A world-class Medical examiner in [Zimmerman] trial testified that the beating was "absolutely likely to inflict death or serious bodily injury." That makes it a deadly force attack, justifying Zimmerman's deadly force defense.

from Andrew Branca.

He's like, oh, let's look at all these poor black victims. Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman was acquitted.

Tamir Rice: no indictment. Michael Brown: no indictment.

Philando Castile: officer was acquitted.

Freddie Gray: officers were acquitted or charges dropped.

Terrence Crutcher: officer was acquitted.

Sylville Smith: officer acquitted. 

Chikei "Rick" Chao was found not guilty after the shooting death of 14-year-old Cyrus Carmack-Belton in South Carolina.

The "returning wallet" case could not be verified, but many people confuse it with Ralph Yarl, the black teen shot after going to the wrong house.  In that case, the shooter later pleaded guilty, so it was not a not-guilty verdict.

00:31.  And it's a mystery to her.  The reason these people were not convicted or sentenced must be racism.  It has to be racism.  All these poor black boys.  All these poor black boys.  It must be racism.  Well, let's take a look, shall we, Genius?

Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman was acquitted. George Zimmerman went to trial on a charge of malice murder.  Here is what he looked like at the scene. Trayvon Martin was trying to murder him to beat his head through a sidewalk.  Those are pictures of George Zimmerman's face.  His nose is broken sideways on his face.  The back of his head was against the sidewalk, so every punch was actually two blows: the punch to the front of his face with Trayvon Martin mounted on top of him, and then the blow of the back of his skull against the sidewalk.  George Zimmerman's face and the back of his head immediately after Trayvon Martin stopped trying to beat Zimmerman to death by beating Zimmerman's skull through a concrete sidewalk stopped Trayvon Martin was stopped only because of a 9 millimeter round shot by Zimmerman through Martin's demonic little heart murderous, little heart.  Zimmerman's nose was broken sideways on his face.  By the way, when the media printed these photos for the public, did you know they printed them in black and white, so you wouldn't know what you were seeing was blood?  Contemptible eyewitness testimony describe Trayvon Martin mounted on top of a fallen Zimmerman, beating him viciously.  The witness testified, "MMA ground and pound style."  Testified Zimmerman was screaming for his life, for help that never came.  A world-class Medical examiner in the trial testified that the beating was "absolutely likely to inflict death or serious bodily injury."  That makes it a deadly force attack, justifying Zimmerman's deadly force defense.  

Did Karmelo Anthony suffer a beating like this or anything everyone is testifying to the contact of Austin Metcalf to Carmelo characterized it as a "soft push."  And they were not in the dark alone they were surrounded by dozens of people including many black people we're supposed to believe we're supposed to believe that Carmelo Anthony had a reasonable belief that Austin Metcalf and Hunter Metcalf we're going to be allowed to be him to death in front of all those black people?

What about Tamir Rice?  Tamir Rice was a 12-year-old in Cleveland shot dead by police.  And you might be thinking to yourself, "Oh my God!  That sounds . . . how could police officers do that?  And there wasn't even an indictment?"  They shot a 12-year-old black boy, a little child . . .

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

STEPHEN COUGHLIN: What if the EU leadership does know, and that's why they did it? Because the do and they did.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

MJ MURPHY: Every persuasion campaign has a conversion testimony

And there it is: soft intellectual optimism at the end.  It ends on openness rather than certainty, and that makes the whole discussion sound thoughtful, compassionate, exploratory, instead of ideological, and that lowers resistance dramatically. --MJ Murphy

The two women on the panel under review are Monica Lewinsky on the left, commenting about her interview with Dylan Mulvaney on her show called Reclaiming, and Lena Dunham on the right.   

The #MeToo movement was such a complicated moment where women . . . 

TRANSLATION:  let me begin in the safest possible moral territory so nobody questions me this is a classic credibility setup 

And we're not only confronting men but also confronting each other . . . 

All right, this is a sneaky pivot.  We started with male misconduct, and now somehow women disagreeing with women is the real emotional issue.

The way that they had failed each other and then we moved past that . . .

We moved past that.  So the translation here is the enlightened people evolved.  Keep up.  Progress.  Nobody wants to sound left behind.  

And what's interesting now is these conversations about now we have more conversations than ever about what gender is . . .

Notice how she just skips proving any of it.  We go straight from "gender identity exists" to "let's discuss the complexities." That's the NLP bypass.  Skip the foundation, start at the conclusion.  

But also this sort of tease every internet word gatekeeping of what being female is which is . . .

Calling biological definitions "gatekeeping" is hilarious. Women defining womanhood is now apparently running security at the nightclub.

This is kind of you know we know the word turf like what it is to say if you haven't been female in this extremely specific way that it is involves biology . . .

"extremely specific way involving biology" is such a funny way to describe being female.  Say that to the women in Afghanistan. "That's like calling gravity a very rigid falling preference."

And you are not welcome at this party . . .

And there it is.  There it is again.  Boundaries become cruelty disagreement becomes exclusion policy becomes Mean Girls behavior. 

I had Dylan Mulvaney on recently . . .

Celebrity emotional shield activated.  Once a likable personality enters the story disagreeing suddenly feels socially dangerous.

And you know it's it's an amazing her story is amazing . . .

Now we're going to do the gratuitous "she" and "her" pronouns.  This is just emotional preloading.  You are being told what to feel before you think.  

I think what she's . . . 

. . . she's incredible and what she experienced . . .

. . . also publicly 

. . . publicly . . . and she did so elegantly...

He, him.  We are not dissociating from reality, ladies.  We are not doing it. Dylan Mulvaney is a little faggot.  Yeah, I said it.  He's a little faggot.  If someone is polished enough, audiences confuse presentation with truth.  A TED Talk voice can hypnotize half the internet.  

And as someone who . . .

But not without a cost.

I'm pretty sure he cashed in pretty good.  But disagreeing now sounds like we're hurting vulnerable people.  This is emotional armor plating.  

Not without a cost.  And you know, as someone who has, you know, has multiple nuclear trans family members . . .

Oh yes the rhetorical infinity stone I know people personally now Chris is him feels like attacking Thanksgiving dinner.

It's been a big, a big education for me . . .

TRANSLATION: I evolved. Maybe you should too.  Every persuasion campaign has a conversion testimony. 

For me, to see, to be around that, I think, you know, I got to go speak at Trans Day of Visibility in DC last year with this amazing group called The Christopher Street Project, and the thing I expressed was just how having a trans sibling, having trans people in my life, has really opened up in this most expansive way.  It's like, I feel like I see in 4D now.  

This is spiritually hilarious.  We went from discussing public policy to "I have ascended dimensions." Disagreement now sounds spiritually unevolved.

About the possibilities of what . . . all of us hold this incredibly complicated . . . each of us have our own specific gender.

No we don't.  Once every person has their own personal custom gender, the category means literally nothing anymore.  We are basically at Build-A-Bear identity theory.

. . . That has to do with our experiences.  It has to do with how we felt as little kids.  It has to do with how we see ourselves, how we see other people, how we want to interact.  And so I think it's interesting.  Right now, feminism has never been more multifaceted and nuanced . . .

Notice the coding.  Notice the coding.  Expansive equals good.  Nuanced equals smart.  Biology equals mean and narrow. The language does all the work emotionally before the argument even starts.

Expansive but it's also deeply under threat...

And there's our threat framing.  Very common persuasion move.  Expand the emotional stakes until disagreement feels dangerous.

And we are having these conversations yet can't seem to dictate actual laws that affect our bodies . . .

Interesting switch.  Five minutes ago "womanhood was a floating metaphysical energy field," and now, suddenly, "our bodies."  The rhetoric toggles between identity and biology depending on which helps emotionally in the moment.

So it's a really, really, it's always a complicated time to be a woman . . .

Yeah, after redefining Womanhood beyond recognition, we circle back to good old female solidarity again.  It's rhetorical jazz.  

It's a very I think a very complicated but has a real rich vein of possibility at least for dialogue I'm curious how you feel.

And there it is: soft intellectual optimism at the end.  It ends on openness rather than certainty, and that makes the whole discussion sound thoughtful, compassionate, exploratory, instead of ideological, and that lowers resistance dramatically. 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

The year is 1949.

The Nobel Prize in Medicine has just gone to the man who invented the lobotomy. Your doctor suggests one for your sister, who has not been herself since the baby came. It is the most celebrated advance in psychiatry of the age, and he is simply current. By the time the prize curdles into an embarrassment, close to twenty thousand Americans have had the operation, and proportionally more here in Britain. The year is 1956. Lay the baby down on his front, the doctor says. So does the most trusted childcare book ever written, the one on every new mother's shelf. On his back he might choke, the reasoning goes. Millions obey. The advice holds for nearly thirty years, long after the evidence has quietly turned, and a generation of cot deaths is counted before anyone thinks to roll the babies over. The year is 1966. A bestselling book informs your wife that menopause is a disease, that she is, in the author's word, a castrate, and that a small daily pill will keep her youthful and tolerable to live with. Her doctor agrees. The drug becomes one of the most prescribed in the country. Nobody mentions that the author sat on the payroll of the company that made it. That detail surfaces decades later, in the same year the landmark trial is halted early for raising rates of breast cancer, stroke and clots. The year is 1979. Your ulcer is caused by stress and sharp food, the doctor explains. Calm down, drink milk, take the antacid that happens to be the best-selling medicine on earth. Two Australians are about to prove that most ulcers are caused by a bacterium and cured by a fortnight of antibiotics. The profession laughs. One of them eventually drinks a beaker of the stuff to settle the matter. The establishment takes the better part of twenty years to stop laughing. The Nobel lands in 2005. The year is 1985. Butter is dangerous, the doctor says. Switch to margarine, it is modern, it is heart-healthy, the experts are united. The spread he nudges you toward is loaded with trans fats, which the next decade will identify as the genuinely dangerous one, and which will eventually be banned outright. The butter goes quietly back in the fridge. No correction is ever printed at the volume of the original warning. The year is 1992. There is a pyramid on the surgery wall, and the very same one in your grandchild's classroom. Bread, cereal, rice and pasta form the broad virtuous base, up to eleven servings a day. Fat is exiled to the tiny tip. The chart was reportedly held back a year while the relevant industries had their say. It is wrong at the bottom and wrong at the top. Now it is today. Your doctor has new guidelines, new studies, a fresh consensus, delivered with precisely the steady confidence of every guideline above. He believes it, and he has good reason to. So did every doctor in this thread. None of them were villains. Each was sincere, most were kind, and all were certain, reading from a map that somebody else had drawn and handed them. That is the part worth sitting with. So when the man in the white coat tells you what to eat, what to fear, and what to swallow every morning for the rest of your life, you are allowed to ask. Who paid for the study. What the evidence says beneath the headline. What he was just as certain about thirty years ago, and where that advice sits now. Then make up your own mind. Call it scepticism, or call it whatever your grandmother called it when she ignored the advert, kept the butter where it was, and lived to ninety-one. It has outlasted every consensus on this list. It will outlast this one too.
Posted by at No comments:

TOM LUONGO: Iran's fundamental mistake is thinking they are the real target of Trump's hostilities.

Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, June 11, 2026

What Happens When Reality Becomes Negotiable?

What happens when reality becomes socially negotiable let's talk about that let's talk about what happens when reality stops being something we discover and starts being something that we negotiate most people hear that question and they think this is just a philosophical question but it's not it's not this is practical because the moment of society decides that reality is determined by consensus their feelings status or social pressure rather than observation and evidence everything becomes unstable.  And we've seen this this happened before.  We've seen this happen. 

So, Step 1: Reality doesn't care what we think.  Gravity doesn't care about your opinion.  A broken bone doesn't care about your opinion.  Your age doesn't care about your opinion. Your sex doesn't care about your opinion.  Reality exists independently of our beliefs about it.  This sounds obvious but it's actually one of the most important principles civilization is built upon.  Because if reality changes based on what people prefer to be true then what happens truth itself truth itself disappears.

And then Step 2: we shift from observation to declaration.  Historically people looked at reality and they described it now we are increasingly asked to start with declarations and then reinterpret reality around them.  Notice the difference.  The old model was, "I observe X, therefore I conclude X."  The new model is, "I declare X, therefore you must interpret reality through X."  That's a profound shift because observation can be tested, and declarations cannot.  

Step 3: The Social Enforcement Stage.  So here's where things get interesting.  Most people don't actually change their beliefs first, they change their behavior first.  They repeat things publicly.  They avoid asking questions.  They stay silent.  They use language they don't fully understand not because they're convinced but because they want to avoid conflict and consequences, and this is where that spiral of Silence that I was talking about begins.  People stop saying what they think, then they stop hearing what others think.  Then they start believing they are alone.

Then Step 4 comes in: a False Consensus.  When enough people stay quiet something strange happens: a small number of voices can create the appearance, the appearance of universal agreement. Everyone looks around and sees everyone else complying, so everyone assumes everyone else believes even when they don't.  And this is called pluralistic ignorance.  People privately disagree while publicly conforming, and eventually the appearance of belief become more powerful than the belief itself. 

Step 5:  rolls right in.  Reality starts fighting back, right, because the problem with socially negotiated reality is that reality eventually sends invoices.  If you can negotiate language, you can.  You can negotiate policies.  You can negotiate social norms you cannot negotiate consequences reality always has the final vote the bridge either stands or collapses the medicine either works or it doesn't the statistics either predict outcomes or they don't the body either responds biologically or it doesn't reality keeps score even when people stop acknowledging it.

Step 6:  The cost to the individual.  Living in contradiction creates stress. People begin saying things they don't believe.  They begin ignoring things they can plainly see and they suppress questions and they perform agreement. They monitor their speech. They monitor their thoughts, and eventually they become disconnected from their own perceptions. And that's where a lot of confusion comes in.  Not because people can't see reality, because they've been trained not to trust themselves, right?  My friend Sousa talks about, and this is why independent thought matters.

Step 7:  Because independent thought isn't the ability to disagree with everyone; it's the ability to remain connected to observations even when disagreement becomes uncomfortable.  It's being willing to say, "I understand that's the popular opinion.  I understand that questioning may have consequences.  But I still have to start with what is true.  I just got to.  That's how science works.  That's how critical thinking works.  That's how progress works.  So reality isn't cruel, all right.  Reality isn't political.  Reality isn't left-wing or right-wing.  Reality simply is and every society eventually has to decide will we build our beliefs around reality or will we attempt to build reality around our beliefs?  Because one of those approaches leads to clarity, and the other leads to confusion, contradiction, and eventually collapse.  Reality can't be ignored.  It can't be denied.  It can be punished but it cannot be negotiated with.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,
Microbe function on balance.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

WHITE TIGER KNOWS: History Is Watching the Collaborators Who Told Their People to Stop Complaining About Being Murdered


from the Belfast Live press conference outside a government building, L-R, are:

Deirdre Hargey, Sinn Fein MLA, South Belfast.

Rois-Maire Donnelly, Lord Mayor of Belfast/Belfast City Council, and 

Michelle O'Neill, First Minister of Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein.

They discuss the Belfast stabbing incident, threats to the Lord Mayor, and blame figures like Tommy Robinson and Elon Musk for stirring tensions. The video is from a recent press event addressing the unrest.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Every Marine is expected to know about the Battle of Chapultepec, and the associated lore around the "blood stripe" on dress blue trousers, especially corporals and above.

The United States Marine Corps was formally established as a permanent military branch on July 11, 1798.

1917–1919 marks early publication, but 1929 is the “official birthday” of the hymn as we know it.
The Battle of Chapultepec was a pivotal engagement in the Mexican-American War, 1846–1848. It took place on September 12–13, 1847, at Chapultepec Castle on the outskirts of Mexico City.

Chapultepec Castle sat atop a 200-foot (61 m) rocky hill, serving as a natural fortress overlooking the approaches to Mexico City. Originally built in the late 18th century and later converted into a military academy, it was the last major defensive position before the Mexican capital.

U.S. forces under General Winfield Scott (about 7,200 troops) advanced after victories at earlier battles like Cerro Gordo. Mexican General Antonio LΓ³pez de Santa Anna commanded roughly 25,000 men overall, but the castle itself was defended by General NicolΓ‘s Bravo with around 800–1,000 troops (including ~50 military cadets from the academy).

SEPTEMBER 12, 1847
U.S. artillery bombarded the castle.

SEPTEMBER 13, 1847
American troops attacked from multiple directions. Divisions under Generals Gideon Pillow and John Quitman led the assault, scaling walls with ladders amid heavy fire. Marines and soldiers played key roles in the storming of the hill and castle.

The fighting was intense and bloody. U.S. forces suffered significant casualties but overwhelmed the defenders. The castle fell by around 9:30 a.m. on the 13th, opening the gates to Mexico City, which U.S. troops entered shortly after. 
General Winnfred Scott Defeats Mexican General Santa Anna at the Battle of Chapultepec in the Mexican-American War, 1847.

Every Marine is expected to know about the Battle of Chapultepec, and the associated lore around the "blood stripe" on dress blue trousers, especially corporals and above.

The scarlet (red) stripe on the outer seam of the Marine Corps dress blue trousers — wider for officers (2 inches) and narrower for NCOs (about 1.5 inches for corporals and up) — is officially called the

Marine Corps lore and tradition strongly tie it to the heavy casualties, especially among officers and NCOs, suffered during the storming of Chapultepec Castle on September 13, 1847. The idea is that it commemorates the blood shed by those leaders in one of the Corps' most famous battles, which is also referenced in the opening line of the Marines' Hymn ("From the Halls of Montezuma").


This story is deeply embedded in Marine culture. Many units even hold formal "blood stripe ceremonies" when a Marine is promoted to corporal (entering the NCO ranks) and earns the right to wear it.

This story is deeply embedded in Marine culture. Many units even hold formal "blood stripe ceremonies" when a Marine is promoted to corporal (entering the NCO ranks) and earns the right to wear it.

Historical records show the red trouser stripe was introduced in the late 1830s (as early as 1837–1840), several years before the Mexican-American War and Chapultepec. It started as a uniform distinction (influenced by Army artillery styles and jacket facings) and evolved into its current form. The Chapultepec connection is a popular, enduring legend that the Corps embraces for its motivational and historical value, even if not strictly factual.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

BUMBADUM: Illegals were getting 2% interest rate covid FHA mortgages with 0 down payment backed by the US Government. That's why we cant afford a fucking house.

And you wonder why I've been saying that Obama and London Stole Fannie and Freddie in 2008? This is what they were ultimately doing under the hood. And they stole this from Americans, using Lehman as cover for the theft. Answer these questions and you'll see what I'm getting at: Why was Lehman liquidated/executed by Hank Paulson?
Why was AIG (London-based reinsurer) bailed out multiple times? Why did all of this happen 7 days after a 'report' said Fannie/Freddie were insolvent and nationalized? 2008 was 9/11 for the US mortgage industry times 12.

HOPE and CHANGE MY FAT HAIRY ASS. 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

KUNG FU (@CHART_FU): The Petro-Eurodollar refers to the offshore dollar funding and credit creation system that financed much of that trade. Born in London in the 1950s, it grew into a massive global network of dollar deposits and loans existing outside the US regulatory system.

The Petrodollar vs. Petro-Eurodollar: Two Very Different Systems Most people blur these terms, but separating them is essential for clean mapping. The Petrodollar is the pricing and settlement layer: the vast majority of global oil is still sold and settled in US dollars. This core remains structurally strong and gives America enduring demand for its currency. The Petro-Eurodollar refers to the offshore dollar funding and credit creation system that financed much of that trade. Born in London in the 1950s, it grew into a massive global network of dollar deposits and loans existing outside the US regulatory system. London was the historic heart and still the largest single hub, but the system is distributed across other centers like Singapore, Hong Kong, the Cayman Islands, and Dubai. For decades the two worked in tandem: oil priced in dollars + London (and offshore) financing the flows. That combination powered global dollar liquidity and let the US run large deficits. What’s happening now is the deliberate replumbing of the eurodollar funding side. Bilateral energy deals, WTI pricing migration at Cushing, Gulf swap lines, and new permanent funding centers are replacing the old London-heavy intermediation. The transactional funding layer is being rerouted while the core petrodollar settlement dominance is being protected and modernized. This distinction matters. Critics who say “the petrodollar is dying” are usually watching eurodollar funding stress and missing that the US is actively replacing the fragile old plumbing rather than clinging to a collapsing system.

The mercantilist transition isn’t abandoning dollar primacy — it’s upgrading the architecture underneath it. Same dollar, different (and more controllable) pipes. 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

MORAL SUPERIORITY OF THE SOUTH

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

SAMA HOOLE: Week 26: "Pricing up half a cow and a chest freezer." Week 30: "Considering whether the garden could support a heifer." Week 36: "Naming the heifer."

The label reading evolution: Week 1: "I'll cut sunflower oil from the cupboard. Done." Week 2: "Why is rapeseed oil in the bread." Week 3: "Why is sunflower oil in the hummus." Week 4: "Why is canola oil in the pesto." Week 6: "The shop is now taking ninety minutes." Week 8: "There's seed oil in the tinned tomatoes." Week 10: "The 'olive oil mayonnaise' is 96% rapeseed." Week 14: "Asking waiters what they fry the chips in. Nobody knows." Week 18: "Bringing a small bottle of tallow to dinner parties." Week 22: "Rendering my own dripping on a Sunday." Week 26: "Pricing up half a cow and a chest freezer." Week 30: "Considering whether the garden could support a heifer." Week 36: "Naming the heifer."

The descent into paranoia is just pattern recognition arriving in real time.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

LINUXHIPPIE: That's why he's in charge.....to make it go away. It's what the GOPe does. It's why they won't pass the SAVE Act or didn't repeal Obamacare and allowed the obvious fabrications of Russia Russua.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Wednesday, June 10, 2026

Karmelo Anthony's Trial Exposed A Black Supremacist Hatred Towards White People

One of the longer-term consequences of this trial has been the degree to which it just exposed the level of delusion estrogenically, emotional, irrational, unreason, racist black supremacist hatred of white people, and our Judicial System is the fairest in the world by such a large swath of the black population.  

Now, not all.  

I've got a bunch of tabs I'm going to share with you of perfectly reasonable black people out there on social media.  

I have a lot of black people who are my friends. They're rational people.  My dream Supreme Court is 9 Clarence Thomas's.  If you don't know, he happens to be black.  

Some of my personal Heroes are people like Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams.  

So it's certainly not all, but it's a substantial chunk, and they are and they are crazy and they are explicitly anti-white racist and pro-black racist.  No facts or reason will compel them to act against their race, no matter how guilty the defendant who happens to be black.  We had a number of prospective jurors for this trial who were black and when asked by the court, "Listen, we'd like to seat you as a juror, all you need to do is tell us that you can be unbiased and impartial, and they said, "I can't. I can't do it to him.  I can't do it to a black boy."  That's why those weren't seated.  

Now there are a few other prospective black jurors who were not seated for other reasons.  I'm laughing because once again I'm talking about Robert Barnes.  I can't believe it, but what he's doing with respect to this case is so funny to me.  But we'll get to Robert later.  But these people are completely delusional, utterly delusional.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)