The
October before the election, America PAC began offering $47, then later
$100, to voters in seven swing states who agreed to sign a petition
pledging “support for the First and Second Amendments,” according to a social media post
about the offer. Participants who referred other registered voters to
sign the petition were also offered money for each additional signee
they referred.
The
three plaintiffs allege America PAC failed to fulfill its contract
obligations by not paying petition-signers in full, according to court filings obtained by Fortune
through Court Watch. The plaintiffs expect more than “100 class
members” to join the lawsuit, owed collectively more than $5 million,
the filing said.
“This
case is about a broken promise: Elon Musk promised supporters that they
would be paid for signing a petition and referring others to do the
same,” Shannon Liss-Riordan, of Lichten & Liss-Riordan, the law firm
representing the plaintiffs, told Fortune in an email. “Our
clients relied on that promise because they believed in Elon, but
unfortunately, that promise was not kept. It appears the promise was
broken for many others as well.”
He was repeatedly accused of buying votes. It often turned out, however, that he shop lifted them -- he never really paid for them. Was he just stingy or was his vast wealth inflated? If it was inflated, even a little, that has to be rough for him now because his net worth has fallen as a result of him getting into be with Chump:
Tesla is no longer the most coveted vehicle on the market. Long gone
are the days when Redditors gushed about every single move Elon Musk
made, and aspired to own a Tesla Model 3. Now, rabid fans of Musk have
fled the very social platform were they once praised the controversial billionaire nonstop.
Without Elon Musk popularity among certain communities, Tesla’s market share has plummeted everywhere. According to figures from Jato Dynamics, Volkswagen has already outpaced Tesla in electric vehicle sales across the Old Continent during the first quarter of 2025.
Tesla’s stocks and sales are both feeling the pressure
As of now, Tesla’s stock has taken a hit of just over 20% since the
start of the year. And with European sales figures looking grim, this
news isn’t exactly going to cheer up investors.
In the first three months of 2025, Tesla sold 53,237 cars. On paper,
that number might not sound too shabby, but in reality, it reflects a
sharp 38% plunge compared to the same period in 2024.
And this isn’t their first stumble: Tesla had already faced a 45% drop
in European sales during the first quarter of 2023, making it two years
in a row of disappointing results on Europe.
Friday, May 16, 2025. Chump disgraces the country in his Middle East Whore, Walmart's announcement will effect more than just Walmart, Pete Hegseth may need to visit the Clinique counter for a new make over, and much more.
President Donald Trump's tariffs may affect your daily grocery trips.
Walmart says it must raise prices due to tariff costs after posting solid first quarter sales, the Associated Press reported. In the quarter one earnings call Thursday, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said that even at reduced levels, higher tariffs will result in higher prices.
I half-watched a report on this last night. I wasn't impressed with the report which basically just stated what the above does and then moved on.
Maybe they assumed everyone gets how important the above is? I don't think everyone does.
Walmart isn't just a minor store that a few states have. It is global. But let's just focus on the US aspect because it's all over the United States with an estimated 95% of Americans shopping there at least twice a year. Let's note DEMANDSTAGE's stats:
Walmart Statistics 2025: Top Highlights
Walmart attracts 255 million customer visits each week.
Walmart has 10,660 stores globally.
The U.S. has 4,606 Walmart stores and 600 Sam’s Club locations.
Walmart operates 5,454 stores internationally.
Walmart’s revenue reached $500.4 billion in the first three quarters of fiscal year 2025.
Walmart employs around 2.1 million people worldwide.
How Many Customers Does Walmart Have?
Walmart sees 255 million customer visits each week across its global network.
This is a notable increase from 2023, when 240 million customers visited weekly, reflecting a rise of 15 million visits between January 2023 and January 2024.
The following table displays the number of weekly customer visits to Walmart stores worldwide over the years.
Here are some additional statistics about Walmart Customers:
Nearly 19 out of 20 Americans visit Walmart at least twice a year.
The average Walmart shopper makes 67 trips annually, including visits to Sam’s Club.
On average, Walmart shoppers spend $54 on 13 items per trip.
The typical Walmart customer is a white baby boomer with an annual income of less than $80,000.
Walmart earns over $1.56 billion daily by serving millions of customers.
Every second customer worldwide spends an average of $15,288 at Walmart.
Does that impress upon you how many people this is going to impact?
We're not done.
People shop at Walmart because its cheap.
Walmart increasing prices does not mean people are going to go elsewhere for cheaper groceries.
That's not how it works.
When Walmart increases their prices, every one else will be following.
That's how it works.
There are a lot of liars in advertising -- and doing paid content as well. You'll see, for example, the lie that Aldi is cheaper than the other grocery stores. No, it actually isn't. I'm sure there are some Mom and Pop grocery stores that haven't closed yet that may have cheaper specials each week, but Walmart is cheaper than all the other chains. Go to InstaCart and use Walmart+ at the same time and look up the items and grasp that Aldi is not cheaper.
Walmart is the national store that's the cheapest and if it goes up everyone will have to follow.
Groceries are something people cannot do without. In addition, Walmart carries many other products. Some, like food, most people are going to need at some point -- that might be motor oil, that might be socks, underwear, what have you.
So Walmart all by itself increasing prices means a lot of Americans are going to be out of a lot more money even if they shop solely at Walmart. It also means that Kroger will go up, Albertsons will go up, they all will go up.
Mainly it means that Donald Chump screwed up our economy.
He railed against Joe Biden on the campaign trail. He trashed the economy.
And dumb people went along with him.
Those who actually knew about the economy were well aware that Chump and the pandemic wrecked it from 2017 through 2021. Joe came in at the start of 2021 and had the task of addressing the economy which he did. That's why we had a strong economy post-pandemic, one that was the envy of all the world.
Our economy was recovering, it had rebounded. If Joe had gotten a second term or if Kamala had been elected last November, we would have seen continued improvement.
Instead, a con artist lied repeatedly and was allowed to get away with it. Isn't that what the debates were about? Miss Sassy JD Vance basically hissed at the moderators of his debate, "I was told there would be no fact checking."
That was the first clue that the team had problems.
Our economy is in the toilet now.
That's not Joe Biden's fault.
Donald Chump is Tariff Queen. He has wrecked our economy.
Walmart's press release is nothing but a roll out, advance notice, from what's going to happen across the country at one retail outlet after another.
This is not a one-off story. This is not something minor. This is very serious and it's going to impact a lot of people -- the majority of Americans.
We're going to take a pause to deal with e-mails for a second.
'You didn't note so and so and they're my favorite and wah wah wah.'
One of those e-mailers is referring to a segment done by a YOUTUBER who we regularly note. That e-mailer is upset because the YOUTUBER had a member of Congress on and they did not get noted.
I wouldn't piss on that woman if she was on fire.
I'm the one stuck writing the bulk of what goes up here.
I can draw the line and I do.
A member of Congress should never applaud physical violence. Never.
The witch (I'm being kind) did. She applauded a public attack.
I question her sanity and values.
But what gets her banned forever?
That was an attack against my friend: Chris Rock.
If Karen Hunter's off on one of her I-Hate-Chris-Rock tears, we don't highlight that Karen video. That's my right. But I never heard Karen applaud the attack.
This member of Congress did the night of the attack. Now, yes, baldie realized she was wrong. She didn't apologize. She just deleted the Tweet.
Her name may pop up here in a press release we note where she's one of 20 other Democrats calling for something but I don't type her name and I don't highlight her.
I think that would be true of any member of Congress who applauded physical violence. But it is certainly true of her who not only applauded it but also applauded it against a friend of mine.
She didn't have the character to apologize for it but she knew it was wrong and that's why she deleted her Tweet.
I don't care that you're bald, I don't care if it was by choice because you shaved it, I don't care if it was by disease, I don't care if it was -- as is usually the case -- you being too cheap to get a good weave and all those pennies you saved did was destroy your hairline. I don't care what the reason is. You're bald and nothing's changing it. Someone makes a joke? That doesn't give anyone the right for a physical attack.
Simon Rosenberg. Slimey Simon was one of the first we called out when this site started. I think it went Victoria Nuland, Dexter Filkins and then Simon. And we called him out for a reason and I stand by everything I said. But that was 20 years ago and people can change. I am viewing videos that people forward. He does seem wiser now and I don't think he would now attack reproductive choice or the LGBTQIA+ community. He hasn't in many years. People can change, people can grow. We will probably be working him in at some point.
At present, I'm still a little leery. But give it two or so more weeks and we'll probably be noting him again.
A number of e-mails are about how I didn't call out this or I didn't call out that.
Yesterday, I noted a small list of people I thought were qualified for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2028. That wasn't a full list. I also noted I'd vote in the general election for whomever got the nomination. If the election were this year, those might be the nominees, however, the election is many years off and other names will emerge. On this topic, the best e-mail was asking about people who aren't in Congress or are not governors.
That's my go-to pool always. They have the experience.
No offense to Oprah, but I wouldn't say she should run. Michael Moore's made a fool of himself since 2004 insisting she should. I'm not big on celebrity as a skill or educator for politics.
But of non-elected politicians, there is one person I would gladly support.
2024 was an important year for one person politically in my opinion: Michelle Obama.
Michelle found her voice.
She gave more rousing speeches than her husband -- someone many consider to be the best speaker of this century.
Michelle Obama spoke to and for our country.
People have suggested her before and I've always rolled my eyes.
She was basically put on restrictions in 2008 because she made a remark that upset people (for the first time in my life --). After that the handlers were all over her about how to dress and how to speak. And that was a mistake. If someone was actually offended by the remark, not upset in the moment or not pretend upset, letting Michelle speak in her true voice would have been great because people would have seen, "Oh, that's just how she speaks. There's no ill will there."
Instead, they hijacked her and it limited her.
Like all of us, she's also grown.
Michelle is something to be reckoned with.
2024 was her year and she demonstrated that.
She is a known person -- known completely, there's no baggage that'll emerge. We know her, the whole country. She's an attorney who understands the law. She's worked on many boards and charities. She knows the campaign trail. If she wanted to run, I don't think anyone else would get my support in the primaries. In the general, I'd vote for whomever got the nomination but if Michelle ran? I'd speak anywhere at anytime to get the word out on her campaign and how great she could be for our country.
I do find it telling -- sexism is all over the left -- that we keep analyzing 2024 (without ever getting honest about how 'uncommitted' was a DSA movement that lost interest in Gaza after they helped defeat Kamala) and no one else outside of this community makes the observation about how Michelle became a heavy hitter and someone who could really deliver in 2024. She really is the success story of last year.
Instead of noting that, we just get sexism.
Joe Biden.
There's a book about him. I've not read it. I'm supposedly covering up for him by not mentioning it, I'm supposedly someone who knew about his decline, I'm also somehow in league with Jake Tapper and this and that and it's this circular beast of rumors in the e-mails to the public account.
Jake Tapper. Jake's fair. He can be wrong. But he's fair.
He also is someone that if you tell him, "This was wrong," he's going to look at it. He may agree with you after he considers it, he may not. But he does take in criticism and weigh it.
I like Jake Tapper. He's not God. I'm not a groupie. But I like him and I like his work because he does try to be fair. Don't give me all your Gaza-works-the-refs nonsense, I'm not in the mood. You don't know him and you really don't know his work.
I don't think I'd like the book. I'm not interested in it. It's all been covered before. I'm sure he and his co-author go deeper and good for them but it's not something I'm focused on. Joe's not running again. We're dealing with Donald Chump now who's destroying our country. If I did read it and did a review with Ava or by myself, it probably wouldn't be a good review. I don't give A+. If you get a C for your book from me, you've gotten a good grade. If I'm going to take the time to write about a book, that means addressing its errors -- and far too many books are not being fact checked these days -- that means wrestling with the text, the conclusions, all of it.
We may at some point read it, Ava and I, and do a piece on it at THIRD or I might do it here.
But right now? It has no practical use for me. Joe is out of office. Joe is not running again. We are under threat right now from Chump.
I'm not highlighting any articles or YOUTUBE videos on the book. Our house is on fire, that's my focus.
I did not know Joe was in that kind of decline. I even was okay with the debate. Go back to the archives here, I defended him. I defended him with Ava at THIRD. A week later, Joe did his ABC interview with George. This is covered at other sites. We watched that at my house, Mike, Elaine, Betty and others were present.
As soon as the interview ended, Ava and I caught each other's eye and walked out of the room. We then discussed what we had just seen and knew we had to write about it. That was a Friday night and Sunday, at THIRD, we called for Joe to step down: "Media: It's Time For Joe To Go."
That was because the media had imposed the narrative and it was not going to go away. Joe made that happen in the ABC interview. That's where the decline was obvious. He couldn't take the topic (the debate) and spin it to another topic. Joe's done that for years. Instead, George kept asking (that's his job, I'm not slamming George and we didn't in our piece at THIRD) and Joe kept responding to the same question over and over and over.
I'm the one who thought Joe wouldn't make it to the general, yes. That's why in 2023, I said I'd vote for the nominee whomever it was. That's why as late as June 2024, I was still saying that here. I thought it was going to be a health issue like his heart that was going to make him step aside. But I never thought Joe was going to make it to the 2024 general election.
Sexism.
We need to talk about Jill Biden.
WTF?
Sam Seder did a segment entitled that.
No, we don't.
We don't need to talk about Joe Biden, we have more important things to focus on right now.
But we never need to talk about Jill.
I don't care if she did everything in the world to keep Joe's presidency alive. She's his wife, so back the hell off. She wasn't president. She held no elected office.
Her obligation was to Joe Biden, her husband.
I find it very sexist of Sam to do that segment.
I find if very off putting in terms of race as well.
We need to talk about?
That's a phrase popularized by the Black community -- a community under represented on Sam Seder's MAJORITY REPORT. So I do find it off putting that he can steal language from our culture but really can't bring us on to actually speak.
That's an example of things I don't write about immediately. I do wait to see if someone else is going to address it. Usually, they don't.
It's a funny kind of circle jerk that keeps them all indebted to one another.
Indebted and silent.
There are so many things on any given day that we could cover and there are so many more things that I do not know about. If you feel something's being missed, feel free to say so. But I'm never going to be able to cover everything and I'm not interested in 2024. I'm tried of being honest while others get to lie. I'm tired of being attacked repeatedly for telling the truth but making the mistake of doing so several weeks before the truth has caught up with the general public.
And while Trump continues to sell out his country, it isn’t the entire story. It certainly isn’t the most egregious part of the story.
Donald Trump stood up in Saudi Arabia and lavished praise on Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He called him “an incredible man” and a “great guy” and declared that he liked him “too much.”
MBS, sitting in the first row of attendees while Trump made his speech, smiled and waved. Let the record show that the CIA named MBS as the mastermind behind the murder of Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi. Joe Biden wouldn’t meet with the man, but Trump is making deals right and left with the guy he likes “too much.” The press? We’ve pretty much ignored that unsettling fact. Almost like we’ve been cowered into submission by Der Leader.
So much for free speech and the right to dissent. Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller (who some in the White House refer to as “Pee Wee German”) told us last week the administration is eliminating the Department of Education so we can teach young American children the right way to think. No one is talking about Khashoggi’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, however. He’s dead, buried and apparently forgotten.
Presidential Pep Secretary Karoline Leavitt, meanwhile, suffered her latest humiliation as she talked herself into a knot trying to defend Trump’s yard sale. Sure, she said, “The president is abiding by all conflict of interest laws,” but he’s obviously not. She can say that it’s “ridiculous” to suggest that “President Trump is doing anything for his own benefit,” but that’s obviously his first concern. He’s leveraging the Middle East to pad his own pocket. The question remains: Will he change U.S. policy to favor his bottom line? It’s not a question that requires a lot of deep thought. Trump has spent a lifetime in his narcissistic pursuit of doing what’s best for him at the expense of everyone else.
There’s plenty of evidence to show us what the yard sale is doing for Trump.
Within the last month, Eric Trump announced plans for an 80-story Trump Tower in Dubai, the UAE’s largest city. He also attended a recent cryptocurrency conference there with Zach Witkoff, a founder of the Trump family crypto company, World Liberty Financial, and son of Trump’s envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff.
He was a public disgrace. He broke bread with terrorists, with murders and did so to line his own pockets. In a review of what was and wasn't accomplished by Chump and his trip, Shahram Akbarzadeh (NATIONAL SECURITY JOURNAL) notes:
Trump skirted the ongoing tragedy in Gaza and offered no plans for a diplomatic solution to the war, which drags on with no end in sight.
The president did note his desire to see a normalisation of relations between Arab states and Israel, without acknowledging the key stumbling block.
While Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates have no love for Hamas, the Gaza war and the misery inflicted on the Palestinians have made it impossible for them to overlook the issue. They cannot simply leapfrog Gaza to normalise relations with Israel.
In his first term, Trump hoped the Palestinian issue could be pushed aside to achieve normalisation of relations between Arab states and Israel. This was partially achieved with the Abraham Accords, which saw the UAE and three other Muslim-majority nations normalise relations with Israel.
Trump no doubt believed the Israel-Hamas ceasefire agreed to just before his inauguration would stick – he promised as much during the US election campaign.
But after Israel unilaterally broke the ceasefire in March, vowing to press on with its indiscriminate bombing of Gaza, he’s learned the hard way the Palestinian question cannot easily be solved or brushed under the carpet.
The Palestinian aspiration for statehood needs to be addressed as an indispensable step towards a lasting peace and regional stability.
On a trip to Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, President Donald Trump heaped praise on Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, years after the U.S. intelligence community found that the prince ordered the assassination and dismemberment of a Washington Post journalist.
At the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum held at the Ritz-Carlton in Riyadh, many of the world’s powerful CEOs, like Tesla’s (and presidential advisor) Elon Musk, Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and BlackRock‘s Larry Fink, were in attendance, CNBC reported.
Trump walked onstage while Len Greenwood’s “Proud to be an American” played on. The president then began a 50-minute speech focused on domestic affairs and his friendship with the crown prince, the network wrote. Trump called him Saudi Arabia’s “greatest representative.”
“Mohammed, do you sleep at night?” Trump at one point asked. “How do you sleep? Critics doubted that it was possible, what you’ve done, but over the past eight years, Saudi Arabia has proved the critics totally wrong.”
In response, Bin Salman smiled and placed his hand over his heart, CNBC wrote.
“And if I didn’t like him, I’d get out of here so fast,” Trump continued. “You know that, don’t you? He knows me well. I do — I like him a lot. I like him too much. That’s why we give so much, you know? Too much. I like you too much."
The man Chump's praising ordered the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Who? BBC NEWS:
For more than two weeks, Saudi Arabia consistently denied any knowledge of Khashoggi's fate.
Prince Mohammed told Bloomberg News that the journalist had left the consulate "after a few minutes or one hour". "We have nothing to hide," he added.
But in a change of tune on 20 October, the Saudi government said a preliminary investigation by prosecutors had concluded that the journalist died during a "fight" after resisting attempts to return him to Saudi Arabia. Later, a Saudi official attributed the death to a chokehold.
[. . .]
What does Turkey say happened?
Turkish officials said that a team of 15 Saudi agents, assisted by three intelligence officers, arrived in Istanbul in the days before the murder, and that the group removed the security cameras and surveillance footage from the consulate before Khashoggi's arrival.
Istanbul's chief prosecutor, Irfan Fidan, said on 31 October 2018 that the journalist was suffocated almost as soon as entered the consulate, and that his body was dismembered and destroyed.
Writing in the Washington Post on 2 November, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared it had been established that Khashoggi "was killed in cold blood by a death squad" and "that his murder was premeditated".
"Yet there are other, no less significant questions whose answers will contribute to our understanding of this deplorable act" he added. "Where is Khashoggi's body? Who is the 'local collaborator' to whom Saudi officials claimed to have handed over Khashoggi's remains? Who gave the order to kill this kind soul? Unfortunately, the Saudi authorities have refused to answer those questions."
That is who Chump praised, the man who ordered Khashoggi's murder.
Chump is a disgrace, a money grubbing whore with no ethics. He disgraced the country on the international stage and left the impression that, like him, we are all for sale to the highest bidder.
Several Democratic senators are questioning Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over President Trump’s acceptance of a jet from Qatar, stressing in a letter the national security risks and counterintelligence concerns inherent in such a transaction.
“The American people deserve to understand this administration’s plans for securing this aircraft, the vulnerabilities its use will present to our national security and the price tag they will be asked to pay for President Trump’s decision to integrate this aircraft into our most sensitive fleet,” the group of lawmakers, led by Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) wrote in the letter dated Wednesday.
Earlier this week, Trump said he would accept a luxury Boeing 747-8 jet from the Qatari government. The aircraft would be received by the Defense Department in what the president described as a “very public and transparent transaction.”
But the move has been met with criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike.
Democrats, in the letter, deemed it “unconstitutional” and expressed concerns about threats to the president’s safety. The group of lawmakers argued it “provides a dangerous opportunity to exploit for foreign intelligence agencies and adversaries seeking to do harm to the United States.”
“An unsecure and unprotected Air Force One presents clear dangers to our national security,” the lawmakers continued.
Pete Hegseth is being slammed online after telling American troops at an air base in Qatar that they're "in the business of warfighting" despite the U.S. not currently being directly involved in any active conflicts around the world.
He took the opportunity to rail against diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives as well as political correctness and climate change as he told troops they should only be focusing on four things — "accountability, standards, warriors and lethality."
He went on to screech, "We're restoring the warrior ethos!" How he thinks he's doing that wearing more make up than Tammy Faye and Boy George combined is a mystery. Maybe it's hypocrisy? Maybe it's Maybelline?
House Republicans’ radical new budget planproposes requiring states to implement Medicaid work reporting requirements for adults enrolled through the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) Medicaid expansion. Under this proposal, nonpregnant, nondisabled, noncaregiver adults ages 19 to 64 would be required to document at least 80 hours per month of work or qualifying activities (such as volunteering) in order to maintain their Medicaid coverage. Otherwise, they would need to seek approval for a qualifying exemption.
Nearly everyone with Medicaid coverage who is able to work already is. Data from KFF shows that 92 percent of adult Medicaid enrollees in 2023 were either working; in school; serving as a caregiver; or unable to work due to illness or disability. As a result, evidence from prior state-level implementations show that bureaucratic paperwork requirements do not increase employment but do result in large-scale coverage losses—even among those who are working or should be exempt from the requirements. Work reporting requirements would have an outsized impact on women, the vast majority of whom work full- or part-time or have caregiving responsibilities that should allow them to be exempt.
The consequences of such coverage losses, however, are not just administrative: For thousands of Americans, they would be deadly. New estimates from the Center for American Progress show that 6.9 million people losing coverage by 2034 as a result of congressional Republicans’ proposed paperwork requirements would lead to more than 21,600 avoidable deaths nationally each year. This translates to lives lost in every congressional district with Medicaid expansion enrollees. In some districts, such as Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District and New York’s 11th Congressional District, the annual death toll could reach into the hundreds as a result of House Republicans’ proposed Medicaid work reporting requirements.
According to estimates from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), if Congress imposes paperwork requirements for Medicaid expansion enrollees ages 19 to 64*, 6.9 million people across Medicaid expansion states would lose coverage by 2034. CBPP based these estimates on Arkansas’ experience implementing paperwork requirements and assumed that 72 percent of expansion enrollees not automatically exempted would lose coverage due to the policy. CBPP’s analysis also assumes that parents would be exempt.
A 2017 study by health economist Benjamin D. Sommers found that Medicaid expansion was associated with “one life saved annually for every 239 to 316 adults gaining insurance.” Applying the more conservative end of Sommers’ range to CBPP’s coverage loss projections, CAP estimates that imposing work reporting requirements as proposed by the House Energy and Commerce bill would lead to avoidable deaths in each congressional district with Medicaid expansion enrollees—as many as hundreds in some. For example, each year, 212 avoidable deaths would occur in Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District; 187 avoidable deaths would occur in Delaware’s only congressional district; and 130 avoidable deaths would occur in New York’s 11th Congressional District.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is the official organization of the Democratic Party, and the vice chairs are essentially the leadership team. If the DNC’s chair is the CEO, then the vice chairs are the board members. Hogg serves alongside Artie Blanco, a Latina, and 34-year-old Malcolm Kenyatta, the first openly gay Black man elected to the Pennsylvania legislature.
After taking his seat, Hogg was asked to sign a “neutrality pledge.” Basically, anyone in a leadership role is supposed to remain neutral on the party’s political candidates. If two Democrats seek the same seat, the party is not supposed to put its thumb on the scale. While neutrality is antithetical to Hogg’s entire mission, it's not like he was forced to serve as vice chair because he was a first-round pick in the Democratic Party draft lottery; he volunteered for the role.
But while he is not related to Boss Hogg, he is white, so the rules don’t apply to him.
Hogg refused.
What does it have to do with Jim Clyburn?
The Democrats’ new, young, diverse leadership team signaled a change from old-head Democratic power brokers like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. However, during a recent appearance on HBO’s Real Time With Bill Maher, Hogg angered many Black Democratic voters.
Apparently intoxicated from inhaling white, liberal, know-it-all secondhand smugness from Bill Maher, Hogg mentioned a few Democrats who need to “get over themselves” and retire from public service.
Second, Anthony Conwright. He made an important video and in a comment I left yesterday, I noted that I'd note it here.
I made a video about David Hogg @davidhogg.bsky.social @malcolmkenyatta.bsky.social and the vote for DNC Vice Chair. First video outlines rules that were violated. Full video below.
FIRST, FRANCE WAS OCCUPIED. AND STILL UNDER OCCUPATION IS RESISTED. IF RESISTANCE IN FRANCE IS DIFFICULT FOR CHUMP TO UNDERSTAND, HE MIGHT TAKE A LOOK AT THE LARGE RESISTANCE TO HIM HERE IN THE UNITED STATES.
SECOND . . . "WE"?
STOLEN VALOR CHUMP CERTAINLY DID NOT SERVE IN WWII.
IF HE HAD, HE WOULD HAVE MOST LIKE SERVED FOR NAZI GERMANY.
BUT BONE SPURS CHUMP NEVER SERVED. A CHILD DURING WWII, HE COULDN'T SERVE. AN ADULT DURING VIETNAM, HE REFUSED TO SERVE AND INVENTED A BONE SPUR ISSUE THAT MIRACUOUSLY DISAPPEARED WHEN THE MILITARY DRAFT DID.
"WE"? THE COWARD DIDN'T DO ANYTHING. HE DIDN'T OPPOSE THE WAR IN VIETNAM AND HE DIDN'T SERVE. HE JUST HID FROM THE DRAFT BOARD WITH A FAKE 'INJURY.'
Now let's dive in the cesspool that is Chump Land. We know who's ruining the country but can someone figure out who's running it?
9/11 was an awful day. A tragedy. And it could happen again. That was the whole point of the 9/11 commission and it was the point of various reforms.
So when Chump refuses to take part in intelligence briefings because he wants to watch porn on his cellphone or when he appoints people to security posts who are not qualified to those posts, he puts us all at risk. Pete Hegseth is not qualified to be Secretary of Defense and his Singal chats have demonstrated he does not grasp that classified information must be kept secret. Tulsi Gabbard was put into the post of Director of Intelligence. Not only is she unqualified but it's also true that this post was created after 9/11 because it was felt that it was sorely needed to prevent another 9/11.
As NBC News reported last week, a declassified memo drafted by the National Intelligence Council — the top entity for analyzing classified intelligence and providing secret assessments to policymakers — explained that Nicolás Maduro’s Venezuelan regime is not orchestrating Tren de Aragua’s operations in the United States. (The document came to light by way of a Freedom of Information Act request by the Freedom of the Press Foundation, a nonprofit organization.)
A week later, as The Washington Post reported, Trump’s highly controversial and wildly unqualified national intelligence director decided to fire the leaders of the National Intelligence Council — the office that dared to tell the White House what it didn’t want to hear.
The official line from Gabbard is that she’s combatting the “politicization” of the intelligence community, a conspiratorial line embraced by partisans who disapprove of the extent to which intelligence agencies have presented evidence the president doesn’t like.
Indeed, as the Post noted, Gabbard has actually “removed or sidelined officials perceived to not support Trump’s political agenda.”
Or put another way, if anyone is “politicizing” U.S. intelligence, it’s Gabbard and her Team Trump colleagues. What’s more, the DNI’s latest purge sends a dangerous signal to intelligence officials throughout the government: Produce reports that make the president happy, regardless of the facts, or you might be next.
National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard fired two senior officials at the National Intelligence Council after it released a report concluding the Venezuelan government is unlikely to be directing the activities of Tren de Aragua, in sharp contrast to President Donald Trump’s countless claims to the contrary.
Trump has repeatedly asserted, while offering no evidence, that Venezuela is somehow guiding the actions of the street gang. Trump also invoked Tren de Aragua to justify invoking the Alien Enemies Act shortly after taking office, leaning on the 1798 law to deport people without due process.
Michael Collins, the acting chair of the National Intelligence Council, and deputy Maria Langan-Riekhof were fired Tuesday, a source told CNN. It’s unclear what role, if any, Collins and Langan-Riekhof played in producing the analysis.
The firings come a week after an intelligence assessment produced by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence found Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s government probably isn’t involved in Tren de Aragua’s operations in the U.S.
Do you grasp what that unqualified stooge did?
She did not like the intelligence and the assessment so she fired them. No, that is not how it's supposed to go. She has now made clear to the people she pretends to supervise that if they want to keep their jobs then they better tell her what she wants to hear. That's no way for intel to be run. She was never qualified.
If and when there's another attack, it needs to be noted that Chump let our intel chain rot and did so knowingly and willingly.
And Trashy Garbage -- as Trina's dubbed Tulsi -- was never qualified to head anything, let alone to be over the nation's national security. Her latest move proves it. Intel is not an area where you want yes-people who just tell you what you want to hear. I cant imagine any area of work that would benefit from just yes-people but intel is supposed to be following everything, analyzing it all, offering possible outcomes, etc. You need various opinions being expressed and someone at the top capable of taking it all in and making the call regarding what's being offered, what's the most pertinent and how do we need to proceed.
Tulsi has failed at her job.
She better pray that there's not another 9/11 because if there is? Her head and Chump's head are going to be the first the American people are going to be calling for.
She is not up to the job. She never was. The United States is in danger while incompetents like her remain over intel.
We should all be alarmed.
Bruce Springsteen is in on tour. He made a public call to let freedom ring this week.
