Bill Maher's Unexpected Rant Targets A Crisis Ignored By The Media Bill Maher's Unexpected Rant Targets A Crisis Ignored By The Media Via  , Something terrible is happening in Nigeria, and too few Americans, even Republicans, know it exists. image For years, Nigeria has been one of the most dangerous countries in the world to be a Christian. Radical groups like Boko Haram and Fulani militants have waged relentless campaigns of terror, massacring villages, kidnapping women and children, and destroying churches. According to leading human rights groups,  , tens of thousands killed, and more than 19,000 churches burned to the ground. Survivors describe a systematic attempt to erase Christianity from vast regions of the country. Despite these staggering numbers, the story rarely breaks into Western headlines, and the silence has left millions unaware of the scale of the crisis. However, that chilling reality got exposed on  . , a proud atheist, had a surprising moment on air when he called out this slaughter of Christians that the media ignores. Bill Maher delivers a surprising moment on air as he calls out the slaughter of CHRISTIANS in Nigeria that the media refuses to cover. “If you don’t know what’s going on in Nigeria, your media sources SUCK,” Maher said. “You are in a BUBBLE. I’m not a Christian, but they are… — Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) “If you don’t know what’s going on in Nigeria, your media sources SUCK,”   said bluntly. “You are in a BUBBLE. I’m not a Christian, but they are systematically killing the Christians in Nigeria,” he continued. “They’ve killed over 100,000 since 2009. They’ve burned 18,000 churches… They are literally attempting to wipe out the Christian population of an entire country.” Pointing to the focus on Gaza,   asked, “Where are the kids protesting this?” His diatribe drew a huge applause from the crowd, and a big thank you from   (R – South Carolina) for putting a spotlight on the crisis. “Absolutely,”   responded. For once, this story got the attention it deserved. And it took a classic liberal like Bill Maher — not the media — to put a spotlight on one of the greatest humanitarian crises of our time. Mon, 09/29/2025 - 07:20
If Socialists Actually Understood Socialism... If Socialists Actually Understood Socialism... Authored by Emric Egbert via https://mises.org/mises-wire/if-socialists-actually-understood-socialism-0 , In light of recent developments in New York City, specifically on the recent primary elections and the emergence of self-described democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani as a potential mayoral candidate, as well as the increasingly aggressive public engagement of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in their tour around the United States, and the fact that AOC’s   of becoming the 2028 Democratic presidential nominee have doubled within one week, it has become clear to me that socialist rhetoric is gaining momentum in American political discourse. image This trend is further reflected in survey data from the Pew Research Center, which   that approximately 36 percent of U.S. adults aged 18 to 29 now view socialism positively. In response to these developments, it is imperative to contribute to the proper education and clarification of what these socialists are actually advocating for, or even what true socialism truly advocates for. Friedrich von Hayek, Nobel laureate and one of the most influential economists and political philosophers of the 20th century, once remarked, “If socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be socialists.” Building on his erudition, I would add: If socialists understood socialism, they wouldn’t be socialists. The true definition of socialism is a social and economic doctrine that advocates for public, rather than private, ownership or control of property and natural resources—the means of production. It is both a political and economic system in which the means of production are owned and controlled collectively by the community or the state, rather than by private individuals. In other words, in practice, the means of production are controlled by a minority political elite. Now, no matter whether an economic system is capitalist, socialist, or any other, it is important to note that the system itself is not a utopia or an end in and of itself, but a means to an end. Economic systems ration scarce resources, goods, and services, and each one does this through either a private or a social decision-making process, but only individuals can truly make decisions. Modern money economies operate on prices which reflect the value assigned by either individuals or groups, as well as supply and demand. However, who gets to decide what is supplied and what is demanded differs across these systems. Socialism claims that shared ownership will foster broader participation, leading to everyone sharing in the benefits. Although this is impossible, it remains the foundational argument. Many socialists have bypassed the foundational principle of collective ownership of production and have instead jumped straight to demands for ownership or redistribution of the output of production. Production is seemingly taken for granted. This conceptual shortcut makes socialism seem like a dream economic system by avoiding what socialism really is. Therefore, although many public and political arguments are made in the name of socialism, what is often advocated for is not true socialism. In reality, the debate has rarely centered on collective ownership of the means of production—such as the factories, tools, land, and capital that make production possible—but instead on ownership or control of the outputs of production (goods and services). Simply put, many self-identified socialists are less interested in owning the means of production and more interested in claiming entitlement to what is currently being produced or the production that someone else already owns. Thus, the economic system debate is rarely about who controls the means of production itself but rather about the redistribution of final goods and services. This desire for control over what is produced—rather than the means of production itself—is evident in many policies, programs, and agendas often associated with socialism. These initiatives frequently call for “free” goods and services (although, in reality, nothing is ever truly free, as someone always bears the cost and goods must be produced). Examples of such policies include socialized healthcare, public housing, state-owned utilities, welfare and unemployment benefits, rent control, and progressive taxation aimed at being provided by the redistribution of wealth. What these policies have in common is a focus, not on who owns or manages production, but on how the final outputs are distributed. This raises an important question: Are socialists really interested in the means of production? The application and results of these socialist policies have proven otherwise. These so-called socialist policies do not truly advocate for the collective ownership of the means of production, but rather for control over the final products of production. The only “means” of production that is regularly targeted for redistribution is capital in the form of money, but even this is not desired for its own sake. What people ultimately seek is not money itself, but the actual outputs of production, or, put more plainly, the goods and services that money can buy. In this sense, many modern redistributive policies function, not by socializing production, but by reallocating its results. A common argument made in defense of modern socialist policies is that there are too many multi-billionaires, and then there are the rest of us. The implication is that no one needs that much wealth and that it should be redistributed, often without regard for how that wealth was earned. Many have concluded that they somehow have an inherent personal right to someone else’s wealth. But I ask the same question Thomas Sowell asked many years ago: What is your “fair share” of what someone else has worked for? Further, Sowell has also said, “I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you have earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.” In any case, let us entertain the socialist argument that wealth should be distributed. It is often framed as a moral critique of the “haves” and the “have-nots”—that those who have simply have too much, and that if only the have-nots had what the haves have, they too could be successful or “rich.” A common example involves a single parent struggling to meet basic needs, or a poor college student or recent graduate trying to get started, which is a sympathetic and often-used illustration of inequality. (Of course, this overlooks the universal reality that everyone has unmet needs to varying degrees, and that such needs are inherently subjective.) Let us ask a more precise question: Do these single parents or recent college graduates want ownership of the means of production—the land, machinery, raw materials, and complex processes involved in creating goods and services? Or do they simply want more of the outputs—more goods, more services, more income—ideally provided at someone else’s expense? This is the crucial distinction. The socialist argument is not about democratizing production—it’s about redistributing consumption. And that is a fundamentally different conversation from what traditional socialism proposed initially. Even when the argument shifts to wealth, the esteemed economist Thomas Sowell challenges its underlying premise, stating: “There is a crucial question as to whether the redistribution of income or wealth can actually be done, in any comprehensive and sustainable sense.” Sowell cites the expulsion of the Jews from Spain near the end of the 15th century. As often happens when a group is forcibly removed, the Jews were not allowed to take their material wealth with them. However, they carried with them something far more valuable—their skills, knowledge, and cultural capital. Over time, many of these Jewish communities rebuilt their lives and raised their standard of living wherever they resettled, particularly in the Netherlands. While Spain may have once benefited from the wealth that was left behind, it now lags behind most of its Western European peers in both GDP per capita and productivity. This historical example illustrates a critical economic principle: you can redistribute existing wealth, but not necessarily the capacity to create wealth. Sowell also references a case study in Detroit, where policy and regulatory changes led to the departure of a significant portion of the city’s skilled population. Despite the factories, machines, and infrastructure being left behind, those who remained lacked the know-how to operate or maintain them effectively. As a result, the inherited wealth deteriorated. Sowell’s conclusion is clear: confiscated wealth eventually wears out, and those who inherit it without the capacity to use or sustain it will struggle to preserve it, let alone grow it. This is because redistributive efforts deter future innovation by signaling to potential wealth creators that they may not be allowed to retain the fruits of their labor. This is what happens when people confuse money itself with capital—treating it as the part of production that can be redistributed—without recognizing that money only has value when there is something on the other side of the transaction to purchase. Wealth only has long-term value when it is combined with the entrepreneur’s knowledge, skills, time, risk-taking, and coordination. It is not money alone that drives production and wealth, but rather the combination of numerous other factors. Mon, 09/29/2025 - 06:30
These Are The 5 Largest Gold-Producing Countries These Are The 5 Largest Gold-Producing Countries Global demand for gold has remained strong over the last decade, driven by central bank reserves, investment demand, and jewelry consumption. This infographic tracks the five largest gold-producing countries from 2010 to 2024, highlighting shifts in output and global rankings. While some nations have ramped up production significantly, others have seen notable declines. image The data for this visualization comes from the  . China Holds the Top Spot China has been the world’s leading gold producer for over a decade. In 2024, the country produced 380 tonnes of the yellow metal, up just 8% from 351 tonnes in 2010. Despite the modest growth, its dominance reflects long-term investments in domestic mining and refining infrastructure. China’s state-supported mining industry also helps insulate it from global volatility. image Russia and Canada Gain Ground Russia has boosted its gold output by 63% since 2010, reaching 330 tonnes in 2024. This growth is driven by increased investment in mining projects and a strategic focus on building national reserves. Canada saw the most dramatic increase among the top five, with a 98% jump in production. From just 102 tonnes in 2010, it now produces 202 tonnes. U.S. Gold Production Declines Sharply The U.S. is the only country in the top five to post a decline. In 2024, it produced 158 tonnes, down from 231 tonnes in 2010—a 32% drop. Environmental regulations, lower ore grades, and the closure of key mines have all contributed to this decline, pushing the U.S. to fifth place globally. If you enjoyed today’s post, check out   on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist. Mon, 09/29/2025 - 05:45
Despite Warnings, Germany's Merz Says Billions In Russian Assets Can Be Tapped To Force Putin To Accept Peace Despite Warnings, Germany's Merz Says Billions In Russian Assets Can Be Tapped To Force Putin To Accept Peace German Chancellor Friedrich Merz is now positive that the European Union has the proper legal basis to “unblock” up to €140 billion in Russian assets and use them to finance Ukraine’s military operations.  image Beyond the legal questions surrounding the confiscation of Russian assets, not to mention the precarious precedent it would set, Paris, Brussels, and Berlin have so far argued that profits from frozen assets are already being allocated to aid Ukraine. Of key concern is also the risk of discouraging foreign investment in the EU, in particular, scaring away the Chinese. However, Merz is now suggesting that Russian assets could continue to be frozen — and used as a loan to Ukraine — until Moscow pays Ukraine reparations for war damages. According to Merz, this would address the lack of a legal basis for such action, avoid infringing on Russian property rights, all by using the money to provide Ukraine with an interest-free loan. The loan to Ukraine would be guaranteed by EU member states and then backed by the EU’s long-term budget from 2028. “We need a new impetus to change Russia’s calculations,” Merz wrote in an article for the FT, cited by  . “The time has come to apply effective leverage that will break the Russian president’s cynical game of gaining time and force him to negotiate.” The politician noted that the loan would have to be repaid once Russia committed to paying reparations for damages inflicted on Ukraine during the war. Payments would be transferred to Kyiv in tranches, and decisions regarding arms purchases would have to be made jointly by Ukraine and EU member states. Merz hopes to pursue this option at the European Council meeting on October 23-24.  Some $300 billion worth of Russian assets is currently frozen across the EU, with a whopping €210 billion held in cash and bonds by the Belgian clearing house Euroclear. Belgian Prime Minister Bart de Wever has recently pushed back against tapping these funds, saying, it’s not as simple as politicians saying, “When money owned by another country’s central bank is used by another country, it will have consequences.” Deputy PM Radoslaw Sikorski is one of the parties also putting pressure on Belgium to release these funds and rallying member states to help insure it against potential Russian suits,   “Poland is ready to participate in such insurance for Belgium, but not everyone is ready for it yet.” Mon, 09/29/2025 - 05:00
Have You Checked Used Rolex Prices? Have You Checked Used Rolex Prices?  The Bloomberg Subdial Watch Index, which tracks prices for the 50 most-traded watches by value on the secondary market, bottomed in late January and has since been rising in a "V-shaped" fashion, rebounding from a low of $31,535 to $34,001 as of last Thursday, or about a 7.8% increase from the trough. image Used Rolex prices also bottomed out in late January at around $10,964 and have since climbed to $11,882 - a jump of about 17.2% from the trough. image Used Patek prices bottomed around $88,379 and have since risen to $95,829 - or about 8.4%.  image Critical research for broader watch industry: Fun reads: Rolex prices on the secondary market appear to have finally bottomed.  Mon, 09/29/2025 - 04:15
Assessing Reports That Ukraine Is Preparing A False Flag Drone Provocation Against NATO Assessing Reports That Ukraine Is Preparing A False Flag Drone Provocation Against NATO Having captured Russian drones bomb NATO logistics hubs in Poland and Romania via a modern-day “Gleiwitz incident” could achieve Ukraine’s goal of sparking a hot NATO-Russian war... image Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova raised global awareness of Hungarian media reports about a planned Ukrainian false flag drone provocation against NATO in  , a little more than two hours after they published their editorial. It ended by citing unspecified Telegram posts about Ukraine’s plans to bomb logistics hubs in Poland and Romania with captured Russian drones and then blame Moscow. Accordingly, there’s no solid intelligence about this, just social media reports that were picked up by the Russian Foreign Ministry and amplified by their spokeswoman. Nevertheless, this doesn’t mean that such a scenario isn’t credible, especially given the larger context. Trump just greenlit NATO downing Russian jets that violate the bloc’s airspace, which could   some members to attempt this on false pretexts, thus risking a major escalation of NATO-Russian tensions exactly as Ukraine wants. Likewise, if the most zealously anti-Russian ones along the alliance’s eastern frontier ultimately get cold feet after fearing that Trump might hang them out to dry, Ukraine could nudge them in the direction of offensive operations against Russia disguised as “reciprocal retaliation” via this false flag plot. The essence is similar to what Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service warned about   over the summer regarding joint British-Ukrainian plots to stage false flag provocations in the Baltic Sea. According to their sources, this would involve Ukrainian-transferred Soviet/Russian torpedoes hitting a US ship there or at least exploding in close proximity to it and/or fishing up Ukrainian-transferred Soviet/Russian mines, either of which could suffice for pulling Trump into mission creep. They could also falsely justify offensive actions on the grounds of “reciprocal retaliation”, albeit at sea in these scenarios, while the latest one that Zakharova warned about could include drones, airstrikes, and/or a no-fly zone. Russia continues to gradually gain ground in the   to that end. It’s only through such a dramatic development that the abovementioned dynamics could possibly be altered to at the very least  , which Ukraine and the West have demanded of Russia to no avail since that would leave unmet many of its goals in the conflict, ergo Ukraine’s false flag motives. Having captured Russian drones bomb NATO logistics hubs in Poland and Romania via a modern-day “Gleiwitz incident” as Zakharova described Ukraine’s reported plans to be might easily achieve that. Therefore, while there’s no proof in support of the claim that Ukraine is preparing a false flag drone provocation against NATO, it still can’t be ruled out. Zakharova’s post was meant to expose this plot and thus deter Ukraine, but in the event that it still happens, Trump shouldn’t let himself be   by involving the US in NATO’s faux “reciprocal retaliation” or pledging to defend the bloc ahead of Russia likely teaching it an unforgettably painful lesson afterwards. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge. Mon, 09/29/2025 - 03:30
Paralympic Body Finally Lifts Suspension Of Russia & Belarus Paralympic Body Finally Lifts Suspension Of Russia & Belarus Recall that in the opening months of the Russia-Ukraine war, authorities in Europe and the US began canceling all things Russian. Everything from famous Russian musical compositions, to Russian athletes' appearances in world competitions, to even great authors like Fyodor Dostoevsky and Leo Tolstoy were basically banned from Western institutions and public mention. Xenophobia was all the rage among Western liberals, and even Russian tea rooms in American cities were vandalized. Innocent individuals faced discrimination for mere Russian ethnicity or Russian-sounding names. Absurdly, alongside banning Russian teams under the Russian flag at the Olympics - something which never happened to team USA even as Bush invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, killing some one million people according to some estimates - even Russia's Paralympic teams were barred. That's right, not even Russia's disabled athletes could participate in world sports under their flag. Finally, this harsh and unnecessary measure has been reversed, as the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) has voted to lift Russia's partial suspension, along with Belarus, finally allowing disabled athletes from the countries to participate under their national flags. image As Russian media describes Saturday, the Paralympic ban is : The IPC said in a statement on Saturday that its members at the organization’s General Assembly in Seoul, South Korea have voted not to maintain the partial suspension of the Russian Paralympic Committee (RPC). In the final stage of the vote, 91 delegates supported lifting all restrictions on Moscow, with 77 being against it and eight abstaining. “This decision means NPC (national Paralympic committee) Russia now regain their full rights and privileges of IPC membership... The IPC will work with NPC Russia to put practical arrangements in place for this as soon as reasonably possible,” the statement read. The ban on Russia and Belarus went back to 2022, though exceptions were later made which allowed some individual athletes to compete under a neutral flag. Next, Moscow is going to lobby for a lifting of all of its athletes to compete under the national flag. Many viewers of the Summer and Winter Olympic games all over the globe have observed that the games have suffered in both quality and excitement of competition as a result of the Russian team remaining out. Of course, Ukraine is furious, and wants the IPC to repeal its latest move. Ukraine’s Sports Minister Matviy Bidnyi has called it a betrayal of "conscience and the Olympic values." Kremlin officials celebrate the major decision in Russia's favor... Paralympic Committee lifting Russia’s partial suspension 'LANDMARK event for world sport' Sports Minister Degtyarev says it highlights 'illegality, perfidy and STUPIDITY' of sanctions on Russian athletes — RT (@RT_com) "We call on our European partners, who will host the upcoming Winter Paralympic Games, not to allow the flag of the aggressor state to be raised over the free and democratic space while the war of aggression continues," he said. He suggested that Ukraine itself could mull dropping its participation in the games as form of protest. It would certainly be ironic if Ukrainian athletes didn't show up to compete, and the Russians did. Mon, 09/29/2025 - 02:45
What's Behind Microsoft's Drastic Move To Cancel Services To Israeli Intelligence? What's Behind Microsoft's Drastic Move To Cancel Services To Israeli Intelligence? Microsoft has restricted access to certain technologies for Israel's military intelligence Unit 8200 - an elite unit responsible for clandestine operations, especially collecting signal intelligence (SIGINT), along with counterintelligence, cyberwarfare, and surveillance. It is often also referred to as the Central Collection Unit of the Intelligence Corps Reports emerged that the IDF unit violated the company's terms of service by using Microsoft's Azure cloud platform to collect and store mass surveillance data on Palestinians, according to The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, and other prominent publications. image A sophisticated surveillance system was erected by Israeli intelligence reportedly using Microsoft's infrastructure to collect data from millions of phone calls made daily by Palestinians across the West Bank and Gaza. "We do not provide technology to support mass surveillance of civilians. This principle has guided our actions globally for over 20 years," Microsoft President and Vice Chair Brad Smith stated in an internal email to employees. Microsoft has also since notified Israel’s Ministry of Defense that it will terminate and deactivate specific subscriptions and services used by the military. This is said to include access to certain cloud storage, AI tools, and related technologies. Smith had further described the company took this drastic action due to its "longstanding protection of privacy as a fundamental right." According to WSJ, it was initial media scrutiny which spurred on Microsoft's own investigation https://www.wsj.com/tech/microsoft-cuts-back-work-with-israels-defense-ministry-bd4fae2a?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAhqefL0wewzJwZUMiuqGB04eZGim8J4HDYnpoS_Qq1oiFRXG9JoBMzu8meRv-Y%3D&gaa_ts=68d8a644&gaa_sig=Og1ZptP8NPsKdF6RncnIXJpZNLtM9z6FAMj7hdc25McbEsHfSXA15AeY_-UL8-OkchSkzPwfcabP9biezxL2dA%3D%3D : The company looked into the matter again following the Guardian article. Law firm Covington & Burling, Smith’s former employer and a longtime Microsoft legal resource, has been investigating the matter. The company, which shared few details of its findings, said its policies prohibit its technology’s use to facilitate mass surveillance of civilians. It said it had found evidence that “elements of the Guardian’s reporting” were true. Current and former https://www.wsj.com/tech/first-google-now-microsoft-tech-staff-are-in-revolt-over-gaza-44352d18?mod=article_inline  the company’s relationship with Israel. Organizers have disrupted company conferences by shouting during keynote speeches and hung Palestinian flags and banners around the Microsoft corporate campus in Redmond, Wash. Microsoft said that it had found key elements of the public investigative reporting to be true. It comes amid growing international outrage at the soaring Palestinian death toll in Gaza, and as PM Netanyahu has vowed to fully take over Gaza City. Watch: Given this was likely known about or at least suspected for a long time, what's behind Microsoft's move? Pressure has been mounting among Microsoft's own employees for the powerful company to take more action since the Gaza war began. However, the company has made clear that it will continue to support Israel's cyber-defense efforts and other services which don't involve mass surveillance.  Sun, 09/28/2025 - 22:45
Chinese Oil Import Port Targets Shadow Fleet Tankers Chinese Oil Import Port Targets Shadow Fleet Tankers By Charles Kennedy of image Several terminal operators in China’s Shandong province plan to ban entry to old vessels and such with fake or suspicious certificates in a move that appeared to be aimed at the shadow fleet, Reuters https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/china-oil-port-set-introduce-measures-ban-shadow-fleet-2025-09-26/ on Friday, quoting a notice from the operators it has reviewed. The terminal operators Qingdao Haiye Oil Terminal Co, Qingdao Shihua Crude Oil Terminal Co, Qingdao Gangxin Oil Products Co, and Qingdao Lixing Logistics Co, last week issued an official notice for the Huangdao Port. The communication, seen by Reuters, will ban – effective November 1 – tankers operating for 31 years or more and vessels using fake International Maritime Organization (IMO) identification numbers from docking at the terminals of the Huangdao Port, which is part of the greater Qingdao port area. Qingdao is the key entry point of Iranian oil into China, which continues to be the main customer of Iran, purchasing more than 90% of its oil exports. The terminal operators at Huangdao Port will also ban tankers with invalid or expired certificates from international certification and regulatory bodies. Vessels with a record of accidents or pollution for the prior three years will also be denied entry, per the notice reviewed by Reuters. The notice comes a month after the U.S. sanctioned two Chinese crude oil terminals and storage operators as the Treasury took additional actions to and the shadow fleet enabling them. The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated a China-based crude oil terminal and storage operator in the Dongjiakou Port Area in Shandong. Dongjiakou and Huangdao are both part of the greater Qingdao port area. But the measures of the Huangdao port operators may not have much effect on flows, as Huangdao has a minor role in handling shadow fleet compared to other ports in the Qingdao area, Emma Li, China analyst at tanker tracker Vortexa Analytics, told Reuters. “The new tanker risk-rating rules appear to be a precautionary step driven by environmental concerns and rising U.S. sanctions pressure, even though the latter is not explicitly mentioned in the notice,” Li told Reuters. Iran, meanwhile, appears unfazed by the prospect of UN snapback sanctions coming into effect this weekend, saying that it to its biggest and nearly only buyer, China. Fri, 09/26/2025 - 18:05
Democrats Gaslight The Nation As Their Midterm Election Prospects Fade Democrats Gaslight The Nation As Their Midterm Election Prospects Fade The process of gaslighting is not limited to abusive personal relationships, it can also happen between groups of people within the same society.  For the past decade at least, the progressive movement and the Democrats have consistently abused the American public to the verge of rebellion, then, they pull back just enough to defuse tensions. They did it with the BLM and Antifa riots, dealing out around $2 billion in property damage in cities across the US, injuring thousands of police officers and killing dozens of innocent bystanders.  Conservatives and moderates stood back, for the most part, until the Kyle Rittenhouse incident in August of 2020.  When leftists sought to prosecute the young man for defending himself from a mob that was trying to murder him - When they falsely labeled him a "racist" and a "terrorist", the line was crossed.  Those who track BLM and Antifa will note a steep drop off in activity after August of 2020 (just before the elections).  Democrats then claimed that the protests were not violent at all.  They were "Fiery but mostly peaceful", and anyone who opposed them must be a racist.  image They did it during the pandemic lockdowns, relentlessly driving forward with the idea of perpetual mandates and calling for the government to with vaccinations using vaccine passports, economic leverage and even legal repercussions.  They accused conservatives as "domestic terrorists threatening Democracy".  They joyfully cancelled numerous conservative and moderate commentators, erasing them from social media.  They cheered for the silencing and censorship, using Covid as an excuse to silence their political opponents.  image Once again, as talk of civil war began to spread like wildfire across the web and it became clear that many Americans were not going to continue down the path of censorship and medical tyranny, suddenly the Democrats backed away.  Then they claimed conservatives were "exaggerating" the circumstances of the mandates.  In other words, the abuses of power "never happened".   In recent months there has been a string of politically motivated mass shootings all perpetrated by leftist assailants, and once again the public is being gaslit.  Democrats made these attacks possible after ten years of carefully crafted hysteria.  The constant lies about conservative "fascism" have created a generation of mental patients organized and weaponized by the Democrat Party and Antifa related groups. The same people widely and openly celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk, are now calling for a "tone shift" from Donald Trump and Republicans.  They say, Trump's rhetoric is irresponsible and that what the country needs now is to "unify". But is it possible to unify with people that want to destroy you and everything you believe in?  Though perhaps half-joking, Trump's speech at the Charlie Kirk memorial injected somber reality in the face of calls for peace and Kumbaya.  Trump went so hard at Charlie Kirk’s memorial. “He did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry.” — RAW EGG NATIONALIST (@Babygravy9) It's important to remember that a majority of Democrats in congress rejecting political violence, and Democrats refused to allow a moment of silence in congress just after Kirk's death.  The left has long used violence to push the Overton Window to their side of the political spectrum, and each time the populace reacts with anger and calls for a response, the left slinks back to the shadows and accuses people of "perpetuating division".  CNN recently noted in their polling that Democrats are facing serious headwinds in the midterm elections (maybe cheering for the death of Charlie Kirk is not the best idea if they hope to take Congress in 2026).  Republicans lead in every major category despite assertions that Trump's approval rating is "underwater". However, as with all progressive media outlets, CNN follows the revelation with propaganda, arguing that it's Trump's job to unify the public and beg for peace.  It is, in fact, the Democrats job to beg for peace, since they created the atmosphere of violence in the first place.  It is also their job to cool the rhetoric and pursue a calmer discourse since it is their party that is desperate for a win in 2026.   They have not done this.  They puff up like peacocks instead and pretend as if they're the good guys.   Trump didn't create division in the US, it was already there and has grown exponentially since the woke movement began.  There can be no reconciliation until the political left decides to stop gaslighting and take responsibility for their trespasses.  It is their job to repair the divide, not Trump's.         Tue, 09/23/2025 - 22:10