Satire roundup
Want a helping of gender ideology with your school lunch? If not, no lunch money from the Feds. Take that you poor kids.
As Biden promised to do while campaigning, his administration is pushing sexual confusion on as many institutions as it can.
Under this new demand, establishments that accept any federal food funding, including food stamps, must also allow males who claim to be female to access female private spaces, such as showers, bathrooms, and sleeping areas. Such organizations must also follow protocols such as requiring staff to use inaccurate pronouns to describe transgender people and allowing male staff to dress as women while on the job.
So it appears with this demand, just like with the Biden administration’s so-called vaccine mandate, the administration is slow-walking the legal procedures required. That delays inevitable lawsuits, which themselves take years to work out. This process effectively imposes unpopular, extremist gender policies extra-legally, through fiat and intimidation
3 Likes
This one is fine. People should wear what they find comfortable, and I’d have no issue with that example being set for students of any age. But it’s the “dressed as a woman” stereotype that is being challenged/broken down, the claim that “it makes him a woman” is counterproductive and sheer lunacy and goes against the principles of every civil rights fight ever undertaken. That male who dresses as a woman is still a male.
As for allowing boys into the girls bathrooms - sure, as long as you also allow volunteer dads to stand guard in those same bathrooms. If you want to be tolerant of what a few students are comfortable with, you must be tolerant of what all students are comfortable with. So obviously, the only fair solution is to ensure everyone is uncomfortable - everyone is safe, but everyone is uncomfortable.
Booked and jailed, now out on bail. Wife Nancy was in Rhode Island, not personally involved in this incident.
Paul was driving his Porsche, so @pattyb53 had better watch it if she drives in the vicinity of Napa. 
Please shin, don’t put me in his category. I’m not a drug user, never have/never will.
Nancy says, don’t mix my private/ public life. Why not!
1 Like
Typical. Sounds like we’re following the standard playbook, blaming the reason we got busted while sweeping aside the fact we are guilty. A jeep hit him, that’s the only reason there is a story to report.
American mainstream media RUNNING away from this story
Only God knows how many lives this woman saved . . . because she was “packing heat”.
This woman is a genuine American hero . . . . . who will never receive a scintilla of credit from the filthy American mainstream media liars. When an event does not fit their template, they cover it up by simply not reporting it.
1 Like
Sadly, this is going to be glossed over by the mainstream media with help from the Durham investigation because it is likely that Sussman will be found not guilty. The media will use the not guilty verdict to discredit Durham, but they will be purveying disinformation in the process. If Sussman is found not guilty, it will be for one main reason and possibly a second reason that can never really be proven. The man reasons is because his lie to the FBI will be considered immaterial by the jury. To be clear, there is almost NO QUESTION he lied to the FBI in order to get this bogus investigation in order to get the media to report on non-existant, Clinton concocted, Russian collusion. Durham has proved beyond a reasonable doubt Sussman lied. BUT, because of how partisan the FBI is, it is likely that Sussman’s lie actually didn’t have any bearing on whether or not they would have investigated Trump. The jury can point to that as a way to find him not guilty. The second reason is that this case is being heard by an Obama appointed judge in front of a DC jury in which the judge has said political donations by jurors isn’t disqualifying.
Biden adheres to familiar pattern . . . . .
. . . . of audacious lying
Biden does not believe in doing things halfway. His frequent lies are bold as hell.
It’s 2022. Biden’s plagiarism episode in 1987 is recalled today only by us older folks. Many who were aware are already dead so were unable to vote against Biden in 2020. Too many younger Americans either don’t know or do not care.
But the Biden lies today come quickly and easily as ever. It’s difficult to keep up. This guy should never have become leader of our country. Want proof? Just look at the current condition of America. There is your proof!!
1 Like
Ya got that right
2 Likes
It’s because it boils down to nothing more than a he said/he said argument - did he deny he was representing a client or not. And unless the jury finds a compelling reason to distrust either man, an acquital is all but certain simply due to reasonable doubt. Even you said, “there is almost no question he lied”, acknowledging there in fact remains some level of uncertainty. The verdict isnt “not guilty”, it’s “not proven guilty”.
I know such investigations/prosecutions start around the fringe and build up to the big fish, but I’m rather surprised this case was prosecuted at all, let alone as the first case. Seems pretty trivial and wholly inconsequential.
The compelling reason for me was the text message. But, I do agree with you that with no notes taken during the meeting, it is surprising the case was brought. I think the statute of limitations almost running out was a big factor in the indictment, but I am surprised Durham followed through before he got the text message.
The Post calls it like it really is!
Sussmann argued that no matter what he actually said, the FBI knew he was a partisan actor. Everyone was aware he was working for the Clintons, and that this wasn’t an unbiased tip-off. And indeed his legal team introduced evidence that showed the FBI obscuring Sussmann’s involvement. Higher-ups told agents that the tip had come from an anonymous informant, or even the Department of Justice, giving it far more credence than it deserved. Why? Because they were frantic to tar Trump. FBI Director James Comey and others “cheered” on the investigation, the trial revealed.
So by professing his innocence, Sussmann proved the FBI’s guilt. The nation’s highest investigative agency acted as a partisan weapon during the 2016 campaign, using the flimsiest of dirty tricks from the Clinton campaign — the Steele dossier and the server story — to conduct wiretaps, interview Trump campaign staff and, most importantly, leak it all to the press.
The FBI’s behavior here was shameful. But — like the jury — the liberal media will see no evil. And everyone gets away with it.
1 Like
Trump threatens Pulitzer committee with lawsuit
Pulitzers awarded prize for stories on phony stuff that never happened.
They should have called it the Pulitzer Propaganda Prize. The awarded stories were pure, made up, propaganda.
“Together with the publications that have obsessively promulgated disgustingly false attacks against me, you have done all you can to destroy my reputation,” Trump said, asking, “how do I get my reputation back?”
And yet if I recall correctly, it was a pro-Trump revelation made relatively close to the election, which elicited a lot of criticism for Comey/the FBI, that helped put Trump over the top.
There certainly are partisan actors embedded within such agencies. But I have a hard time believing that the institutions themselves are bias, and tend to lean more towards blaming a general arrogance, compulsiveness, and old fashioned idiocy. Way too much focus on being trained for various jobs, rather than focusing on being good at those jobs.
The anti-Trump bias was solely within the FBI leadership team and “front office”. Those swamp dwellers, together with many other members of the Washington establishment, recognized early the threat Trump posed to their gravy train. After all, he never made a secret of his disdain for them.
It was a war. And Trump lost.
My bet is today’s jury verdict came as no surprise to Trump. But such a verdict as this would have shocked him in 2015 or in 2016.
Trump was naive as hell about the ways of the government bureaucracy. He had to learn from bitter experience.
1 Like
Canada - more drugs, less guns?
This was the guy Reuters fired for noticing their BLM coverage was factually wrong / biased.
Here’s his discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against them for their racially hostile workplace. We’ll see whether MA believes that racism is fine as long as it’s against whites.
TR admits to actively encouraging conversations about “racial justice” issues. These conversations were monitored by TR on The Hub, and TR had a process for removing content it deemed subjectively “offensive.”. Despite this process, TR permitted hundreds of racially charged messages — including promotion of racial stereotypes and insults — to proliferate on their company network. Examples are listed in the complaint…
It is hard to imagine that TR would not itself shudder with paroxysms of “anti- racism” had employees and their supervisors posted the same messages with “white” replaced by “black.” The difference, of course, is that TR condones and promotes a hostile work environment based on race, so long as the race is identified as “white.”
2 Likes
Rule changes for government legal settlements to be paid to favorite progressive “charities”. Bringing back the Chicago Way, as championed by his mentor.
2 Likes
Sure. Ya gotta remember that in Canada you find three liberal political parties and just a single center Conservative party.
-
Canadian liberals are, or course, liberal
-
The NDP in Canada is even more liberal than the liberals
-
The Parti Quebecois is a bunch of French wannabees who might be the most liberal of all
And I’m not even gonna focus on the Green Party of Canada. They lost seats in the last election, but they are as liberal as hell.
Bottom line, people who cherish freedom and liberty had best not move to Canada.
I’ve been a fan for years of the Canadian maritime provinces, ex New Brunswick. How nice it would be to have some sort of base there; but out of the question. All four of the maritimes are socialist as hell.
At least in Newfoundland you can climb aboard a ferry and, in short order, be out of Canada and instead on French territory - sadly also wildly socialist. What’s the use. 