"Concede is a French word. What are you, French?"
only registered users can see external links

The Palm Beach Jet Crash: How Could a Learjet 60 with a Flawless Cruise Record Drop Like a Bomb?

Facts That Support the Suspicion that Trump's air defense is responsible:

• Extreme Proximity and Timing: The Learjet 60 crashed a mere 7 to 9 miles from Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump’s private residence. The impact occurred approximately one hour after Trump departed the immediate area aboard Air Force One.

• Unprecedented Military Activation: In the weeks directly leading up to the crash, the Secret Service and the Pentagon had officially deployed advanced short-range air defense systems and electronic countermeasures around the Mar-a-Lago perimeter to counter drone threats.

• Anomaly in Aircraft Safety Record: Proponents of this theory point out that in the entire operational history of the Learjet 60, no aircraft of this model has ever suffered a spontaneous, catastrophic mid-flight structural failure or an unrecoverable vertical plunge while cruising at 35,000 feet under normal operations.

• Abrupt and Violent Flight Path: The aircraft experienced an immediate, catastrophic departure from controlled flight, transitioning instantly into a near-vertical dive with terminal descent rates accelerating from 10,000 to over 22,000 feet per minute.

• Witness and Authority Descriptions: First-hand eyewitnesses and official state updates described the aircraft's final trajectory as looking "like a missile going down," matches the visual profile of a kinetic intercept or total control surface locking.

• Midair Disintegration: Physical debris was scattered across a wide area before the main impact, with initial findings confirming the airframe began breaking apart at high altitude, a characteristic shared with catastrophic external impacts or sudden explosive decompression.

Tell me why ALL of the news outlets are dismissing this as conspiracy theories, while this list of hard, verified facts points to a scenario that is mathematically and physically far too unlikely to be a simple stroke of bad luck.

So here is a challenge to you: provide me with a list of verifiable facts, just like mine,
for any one of the things that you believe the governments and media are lying about.

Pick any theory you firmly believe in, and I disagree with, and give me at least four hard, undisputed, globally documented physical facts that directly connect the dots. No hearsay, no 'someone said on a podcast,' and no screenshots of anonymous social media posts. Just pure, verifiable anomalies. I bet that you cannot find anything close to what I just provided on this 'accident'. That means that you should not believe that this jet just dropped out of the sky.

Your government just murdered nine innocent people, just to be on the safe side,
and protect your corrupt, criminal, dying, demented, treasonous, ped0phile president.

OMG the projection is stunning; Trump is the biggest crook in your political history.
He is openly breaking the law and pissing on The Constitution.

That's certainly an interesting collection of allegations, but I noticed something:
where is the independently verifiable evidence?

The article relies heavily on unnamed sources, family friends, Facebook connections
and photographs. It produces a British marriage certificate, but that document, even if authentic, doesn't independently establish that the father named on it was Ilhan Omar's father.

And even if all the alleged family relationships were true, how exactly does that establish that Omar is an illegal immigrant?

The article doesn't provide ANY evidence that she entered the United States illegally, committed immigration fraud or obtained citizenship unlawfully.

There is a difference between a sensational story, an allegation and a proven fact.
If someone wants to accuse a person of immigration fraud, they need evidence of immigration fraud.

You're just confusing an intriguing family mystery with proof of a crime.

The article relies on the connection between these names:
Nur Omar Mohamed - Name used in US reporting and his obituary
Nur Said - Name used in Somali community accounts
Nur Said Elmi - Name appearing on the alleged British marriage certificate

These name combinations are very common in the Middle East.
More than 24.5 million people named Mohamed.
More than 3.4 million named Omar.
More than 1.6 million named Said.
More than 3.3 million named Nur.
About 137,618 people named Elmi as a surname, but there is no evidence to tie that name or that British marriage certificate to Ilhan Omar's father.

Always the same nonsense. Without evidence that the judge made the right or wrong call, their political affiliation says NOTHING to me. The fact that they are not being transparent is more evidence of meddling than the politics of a judge.

When I e.g. call Aileen Cannon partial to Trump, I have REASONS. You don't.
Her conduct was Highly irregular, Legally flawed and Obstructive.

Similarly, there is still no LEGAL justification provided for why that judge signed the search warrant. Trump's DOJ, Todd Blanche, is refusing to release the warrant application and supporting affidavit. I think that says enough.

Old:
There are three important facts:
1. Wisconsin Elections Commission administrator Meagan Wolfe announced on October 1, 2020, that no Wisconsin absentee ballots were among the recovered mail.
2. One of the photographs released later appeared to show a Minnesota ballot.
3. Subsequent reporting connected the discarded mail to two men from Minnesota who had stolen mail in a postal crime spree. They were subsequently prosecuted.
The distinction matters: the original reports described absentee ballots among the mail, but there was no evidence that Wisconsin voters' ballots had been lost or deliberately targeted.
Potential impact What the evidence shows
Wisconsin votes lost: No Wisconsin ballots were involved, according to the state election administrator.
Election results changed: No evidence that this incident changed any election result.
Voter fraud: No evidence of a politically motivated scheme.
Public perception: Yes. The incident was widely amplified and used to question mail-in voting.
Political campaigning: Yes. President Trump publicly referred to discarded ballots during the 2020 campaign.

New:
- 92 undelivered mail-in ballots were found in a dumpster near Golden Gardens Park, close to Seattle.
- These were ballots that had been mailed to registered voters but had not reached them.
- King County election officials reported the discovery to Seattle police and the U.S. Postal Service.
- All 92 ballots were invalidated.
- Replacement ballots were issued to the affected voters.
- These were unreturned ballots, not completed votes that had been removed from the count.
- A person finding or possessing a blank ballot cannot simply submit it as a valid vote.
- Returned ballots undergo voter-registration checks, duplicate-vote screening and signature verification.

Risks of in-person Election Day voting:
• Long queues and congestion: Heavy turnout can cause delays and, in extreme cases, prevent people from voting before polls close.
• Equipment failures: Electronic voting machines, ballot scanners and electronic poll books can malfunction.
• Human error: Poll workers can make mistakes checking registration, issuing ballots or recording voter information.
• Voter intimidation: People may encounter intimidation or improper campaigning near polling stations.
• Accessibility: Illness, disability, transport problems or work commitments can prevent people from reaching polling stations.
• Physical security: Polling locations and election workers may face threats or disruptions.
• Voter-roll purging and incorrect registration removals: Eligible voters may be wrongly removed from voter registration lists, sometimes without their knowledge or adequate notification. They may only discover this when they arrive at the polling station on Election Day. Correcting the error can be difficult, time-consuming or impossible before polls close, potentially resulting in their legitimate vote not being counted.

Republicans have tried to make in-person Election Day voting for voters in blue areas
as difficult as possible. That's why masses of people voted early and checked that their ballots have been received and accepted.

Present that paperwork then.

You have no defense of Trump other than attacking the messenger. WEAK!

Direct quotes by Trump:

1. About Jeffrey Epstein (2002)
"I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."
— New York Magazine, 2002.

2. About entering beauty pageant dressing rooms (2005)
"I'll go backstage before a show, and everyone's getting dressed and ready and everything else, and you know, no men are anywhere, and I'm allowed to go in because I'm the owner of the pageant and therefore I'm inspecting it."
"They're standing there with no clothes. And you see these incredible-looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that."
— Howard Stern Show, April 2005.

3. About his 17-year-old daughter Ivanka (1999)
"She's 17 and doing great — Ivanka. She made me promise, swear to her that I would never date a girl younger than her. So as she grows older, the field is getting very limited."
— Howard Stern Show.

4. About Ivanka's appearance (2004)
"Yeah."
— Trump's response when Howard Stern asked whether Ivanka could be described as a "piece of ass."

5. About Ivanka's breasts (2006)
"She's actually always been very voluptuous. She's tall, she's almost 6 feet tall, and she's been, she's an amazing beauty."
— Howard Stern Show.

6. About dating 21-year-olds (2002)
"Over the past couple of years, I'd go out with somebody and she's like 21, and she's talking about, you know, 'What are you doing?' and she's studying algebra."
— Howard Stern Show.

7. About women aged 24 (2006)
"Oh, absolutely. I'd have no trouble."
— Trump responding to Stern asking whether he could be dating 24-year-olds.

8. About Lindsay Lohan (2004)
"She's probably deeply troubled, and therefore great in bed."
— Howard Stern Show, discussing Lindsay Lohan, who was 18.

9. About women and sexual entitlement (2005 recording, released 2016)
"I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait."
"When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything."
"Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
— Access Hollywood recording.

10. About two 14-year-old girls (1992)
"Wow! Just think — in a couple of years I'll be dating you."
— Reported remark to two 14-year-old girls, attributed to Trump by contemporary newspaper reporting.

Your side called Biden a ped0, for supposedly smelling a girl's hair.
Trump's behavior is much much worse. These are JUST his own WORDS.

She is fighting for healthcare, education, housing and food programs,
and you call he 'evil'. She is the literal representation of ALTRUISM.

OMG, you're sounding like a mentally ill homeless guy.

No she didn't, she became a US citizen as a teen, because her father became a US citizen.

The specific law that allows foreign-born children to automatically become U.S. citizens when their parents naturalize is the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 (CCA), which is codified under Section 320 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

She could have lied about her age, but this (above) is what happened.
That's even the official story of your Trump regime. The rest is bullshit.
I expect this case to crumble, like most of Trump's cases.

Anyone of you following his case against the BBC?
"A Florida federal court recently issued a stern warning that the entire case could be dismissed due to his legal team's failure to cooperate with the discovery process." That's because in discovery, all evidence that Jack Smith collected about Trump's attempt to steal the election would be added to the case. That's all evidence that the BBC didn't engage in defamation, because their representation of his actions are entirely based on reality, even if they edited the video. It didn't impact Trump's reputation, because that's all on him.

Because accountability is important for protecting democracy.

You answered your own question: "It has no cash value".

A mail carrier or a thief cannot buy a sandwich or pay their rent with a ballot, because it has no cash value. Stealing one ballot has almost zero benefit to the person doing it.

• Ballots are strictly tracked: Mail-in ballots use specific barcodes (like tracking a package). Voters can look up exactly where their ballot is online, from the moment it is mailed out to the moment it is received and counted by election officials.

• Tamper-evident envelopes: Ballots are sent in heavy, official envelopes. If someone opens it or messes with it, it is immediately obvious to the election workers who receive it.

• Signature verification: Even if someone did manage to steal a ballot, they cannot just fill it out and send it in. Election officials verify the signature on the outside of the envelope against the voter's signature on file. If they do not match, the ballot is flagged and rejected.

• It is a federal crime: Stealing or tampering with mail is a felony, but tampering with an election carries even harsher federal prison sentences and massive fines.

Here are the key points to list that explain exactly how the system prevents and catches mass ballot theft:

• Unique, Localized Designs: You can't just print fake ballots in bulk. Every single county—and often individual precincts—uses highly specific ballot layouts, paper weights, colors, and exact dimensions. A machine will immediately reject an outside or duplicated ballot.

• The Envelope is a Security Device: Ballots must be returned in official government-issued envelopes. They feature specialized logos, strict design standards, and high-visibility identifiers (like the USPS Official Election Mail Logo). A random stack of plain envelopes would be instantly flagged.

• Individualized Barcodes: Every outbound and return ballot envelope features a unique Intelligent Mail barcode (IMb). If a criminal stole 100 ballots from a neighborhood, the moment they tried to submit them, the system would flag them because the individual barcode must match a specific registered voter on the state enrollment list.

• Immediate Deactivation: Because voters can track their ballots online, if a voter realizes their ballot never arrived, they report it. The election office instantly deactivates the stolen barcode and issues a new one. Even if the thief tries to mail the stolen one in later, it’s already dead in the system.

• The Signature Bottleneck: To steal ballots in large numbers, a criminal would have to successfully forge the unique signature of hundreds of different people. Election offices use automated and bipartisan human review teams to check every single signature against the voter's official file (like a driver's license signature). Massive batches of forged signatures are incredibly easy to spot.

In short: Stealing one ballot is useless, and trying to steal a thousand triggers an overwhelming amount of digital and physical alarms.

Republicans are spreading this message, that is objectively not true, for political reasons;
it allows them to take actions like cutting early voting periods, reducing the number of polling places or drop boxes, and implementing stricter ID requirements.
These restrictions disproportionately impact specific groups of voters (such as hourly workers, students, and minorities), making it physically or logistically impossible for some citizens to cast their ballots. By creating barriers that successfully block eligible citizens from participating, these actions fit the definition of preventing people from voting for their chosen representatives.

It's not even benefiting Republicans anymore. But they drilled that idea into your head,
and now they can't take it out, especially not with Trump attaching his entire identity to election fraud.

It also gives Trump the ultimate fallback: he can claim the Democrats cheated if he loses, while framing any of his own rule-bending as just preventing them from cheating.

Legally and constitutionally, Canada cannot become a full member of the European Union under the bloc's current framework, nor does it desire to do so.

• Canada is on the wrong continent: To join the EU, a country must be located in Europe. Canada is completely in North America. They are separated by the Atlantic Ocean, which instantly disqualifies Canada based on geography.

• Canada doesn't want to follow Europe's rules: Joining the EU means letting leaders
in Europe make a lot of your laws. Canada would have to change its laws to match Europe’s rules on things like courts, taxes, and trade. Canada is an independent country and has zero interest in giving up its power to European politicians.

• The "Open Borders" problem: Full EU members must allow citizens from any other EU country to move in, live, and work without a visa. Canada wants to keep control over its own immigration laws and borders rather than opening them up to all of Europe.

• The EU is not accepting new members easily: Changing the rules to let a non-European country join would require all 27 EU countries to vote "yes." Many European countries (like Germany and France) already blocked the mere idea of calling Canada an "associate member" because they didn't want to complicate their system.

If Democrats even stop things turning worse, that is progress.
It's impossible for them to do a worse job than Trump.

Anyway, I hope that they will spend lots of time on REVENGE.
It's justified, because Trump has used his presidency to keep him out of prison.
But unlike Republicans, they actually have plans to make things better.
You just don't like those things. You are very clear that you want life to suck.

'Bimbo Harris' is completely made up to justify voting for PED0PHILE TRUMP.

My evidence for calling Trump a ped0phile: Trump sues the shit out of everyone,
except the people who call him a ped0phile. That's because in discovery he has to release the remaining Epstein files, where his name occurs more often than Jesus
in the bible. The remaining files should be called the 'Trump files'.

Ted Nugent: Buyer’s Remorse?
only registered users can see external links

Maybe people checked TWO boxes?

Yes, corporate media! Which party destroyed all public and independent media, and gave all media a profit incentive? Which party did it's best to provide objective media, without a profit incentive, but with a system that supports journalistic integrity as much as possible?

AOC is NOT a millionaire and Nancy Pelosi is FAR from being a socialist. Pelosi is a corporate centrist Democrat, who takes lost of campaign donations from the wealthy. She hates progressives, leftists and socialists just as much as any Republican, because they are a threat to her wealth, that is based on corruption.
Just don't think that Pelosi's corruption is worse than any Republican's.

"Change is supposed to come from the top"? Who told you that? In history, change has almost always been fought, bled and died over. The only time you could say something like that was when your founding fathers wrote The Constitution, but don't think that the working class had nothing to do with that. People were fed-up with a ruling class sending them off to die in wars, and the elites were afraid to end up at the end of a pitchfork.

I am not against the EU in principle, but I am very much against how it is organized to favor the wealthy and corporations. The Socialist Party is also
not against European cooperation, but we fight against the EU power grab constantly, and fight for countries to retain their sovereignty and self-determination.

You are right about people's selfish nature. So, what makes people give up
their "what's in it for me?" reasoning, when they want to give up all their rights
as workers, their pension, their social safety net, to further enrich some wealthy assholes who think that they deserve everything they take, and YOU deserve nothing?

You might be smarter than you think, because you ask better questions than most. Your thoughts are very anti-establishment. I can relate to that, but why do you think that AOC is the establishment? She was despised by both parties, when voters made her a representative. Remember how she was dismissed as a stupid waitress? They spat on her as a peasant. And now she has some money, she is the establishment? Who told you this nonsense?

Let's say AOC will keep her current function for the next 40 years. Elon Musk makes the same money in 7 minutes and 46 seconds. And he went on stage
with a chainsaw joking about cutting government money. Since then, he got
$38 BILLION in total government funding, loans, subsidies, and tax credits.
AOC would need to keep her function for 218,391 years to earn that.

Your people are trapped by poverty, that is impossible to escape.
Your ideas are keeping lots of people in a state of survival, instead of a state of thriving. That doesn't just hurt them, it hurts your country. Poor people don't create wealth for your country and they don't consume a lot. The products that they do consume are mostly low quality, unhealthy food, which only benefits some producers and resellers, but those don't add much to your economy either.

This doesn't just make something more expensive when you go outside of the US.
It will make every product more expensive that isn't made in the US, or that was made with raw materials from outside of the US.

On top of that your president added the tariffs. It can be a good idea for products that you want to make in the US, but there are so many raw materials and products that you just don't have. That is hurting consumers and it is hurting manufacturing. It's making American products more expensive, which is impacting your export.

Republicans; free money for billionaires.

Humans would have been long extinct, if we hadn't worked together.
Our strength lies in solidarity. It's what makes us human.

First of all, Turning Point doesn't agree with you that high turnout is good for you. Turning Point's leadership has explicitly stated that their data shows general, untargeted high turnout is unpredictable. Instead, their entire multi-million dollar midterm strategy is focused on low-propensity voters.

Turning Point Action does not release formal statistical probability models. They are 100% an opinion based medium. They don't predict the election with percentages,
they are framing the midterms as an 'absolute emergency' for the MAGA movement.
That means that they are very worried.

That is completely the opposite of all historical data. Republicans always benefit
from low turnout and Democrats always benefit from high turnout.
That's why Republicans always try to limit voter turnout, by:
1. Limiting Mail-In and Absentee Voting
2. Implementation of Strict Photo ID and Citizenship Mandates
3. Aggressive Voter Roll Purges
4. Adjustments to Polling Access

Trump is now polling around 32% approval and 65% disapproval.
Traders place the probability of Democrats winning the House at 90%.
There is a 63% probability of a total Democratic Sweep.
Trump has a roughly 9% to 22% chance of keeping his full majority.

Inflation isn't the only mechanism at play in the loss of value of the dollar.
Besides inflation, there is also 'depreciation'; loss of value against other currencies.
Inflation means that you can buy less for your dollar in the US.
Depreciation means that you can buy less for your dollar outside of the US.
The dollar lost more than 10% of value against a broad basket of major global currencies since President Trump took office for his second term on January 20, 2025.

Yes, activism helps. Not a lot on a global scale all at once, but a lot of small changes make a massive difference to real people. I see this firsthand as a member of a small party here; we punch way above our weight because we actually mobilize people.

Everything you said about the IMF, debt traps, and the global economy has truth
to it. But treating it like an unchangeable 'death cult' means giving up before the fight even starts. Change has never come from the top down; it’s always pushed from the outside. The labor rights we have, environmental regulations, local consumer protections, none of that was handed down by benevolent bankers.
It was clawed back by cynical, tired voters who still chose to do something rather than shrug and say 'it's all a cartel.' Cynicism feels smart because it's never wrong about how bad things are, but it never built anything better either.

If they didn't think that your opinion matters, and they had it all in the bag, they wouldn't spend so much money on campaign ads for Republicans and corporate Democrats. They also wouldn't have the corporate media attack the left constantly. There's a good reason why the left is their enemy, and it's not to defend the rights of working people.

And why did you vote for Trump then, if everything better is impossible?
Trump promised to change EVERYTHING. If you really believed that nothing will help, why did that message resonate with you?

Or was it only that Trump shows his hate for all the people you hate?

You think that the government needs to spend NOTHING on average people and give the billionaires full control over everything, to punish people, if they
are not working hard enough. Where does that leave YOU?

Is that the MAGA spirit? "We cannot do it, it costs money!"
Well, make you billionaires do it then. That's what you say you have them for.

So, you just accept this as a force of nature.
That's exactly what they want you to believe.
Then you don't hold them accountable.

It's not just imported food. Your food manufactures have been processing garbage
for decades. Your country allows chemicals and processes for your food that other countries are mortified about. That's because it makes the manufactures more profit.
That is more important than your health. Don't act like this is something new.

Everyone who doesn't have a little soil to do so, is shit out of luck then.

That's you just repeating people who want you to believe that there aren't any choices.
You have choices. The choices of voters got you where you are now,
and the choices of voters can turn you back on a better track too.

Lots of politicians on the the left do not take corporate money and there are more of them now. Some libertarians also do not take corporate money, but they are a dying breed. Overturning Citizens United isn't easy, but they got it in too.

A week after the first billionaire who makes money of 3D-printed food bribes Trump,
all of MAGA is going to accept it, eat it and defend it.

MAGA loves an immigrant billionaire who makes his money from electric cars
and space shit, paid for with your tax-dollars, because he turned Twitter
into the source for their daily rage-bait.

And then what? How many educated people will they still need?

Will it come with the same poop bacteria and parasites that are in your food now?

Gas prices are important for you, I understand, but why fight for pennies
at the pump, if you have to sell your car to pay for your health?

You are cheerleading a system that is actively costing you everything.
Can you actually afford your (next) life-saving medical procedure(s)?
Healthcare should be a service that you have already paid for with your
decades of hard labor and tax dollars. Yet, it is deeply tragic to see you
willing to face financial ruin (and possibly death) to keep away the very
protection that you earned.

I just hope the billionaires you defend turn out to be just as loyal to your health
as you have been to their bank accounts.

SURVIVAL MARKETS for the masses: When you destroy regulatory agencies
to boost corporate profits, you create a deadly food system for the poor, while
the rich remain completely untouched.

The Trump administration and HHS Secretary RFK Jr. actively gutted the system by firing thousands of FDA employees, cutting the number of food safety inspectors in half, and defunding disease surveillance. The result is a massive, record-breaking outbreak of Cyclospora parasites from human fecal contamination in the country's mass-market lettuce supply, alongside rolled-back meat safety checks.

Donald Trump, RFK Jr., and the corporate elites who lobbied for these cuts aren't eating that poop-contaminated lettuce or parasite-ridden meat. The ultra-rich don’t shop at regular grocery stores or eat mass-produced food affected by these supply chain collapses. They buy from exclusive, hyper-expensive organic boutiques that source from private, highly verified farms, or they have personal chefs who vet their food.

The elites use their political power to eliminate the regulations that keep your food safe just to grow their stock portfolios. Then, they use that extra profit to buy their way out of the toxic reality they just created for everyone else. They privatize the safety and socialize the poison.

You are imagining a fantasy world where perfect market competition instantly forces corporations to drop their prices to pennies the second wages go down.
In the real world, without labor leverage, you don't get cheap goods, you get a Dual Economy. (An economy split between luxury production for the ultra-rich
and survival markets for the impoverished)

When you strip workers of all buying power, corporations simply stop making products for the masses. Why build millions of affordable cars or houses if the workers can't buy them anyway? Instead, the entire economy shifts to service
the only people who still have money: the hyper-wealthy elites.

Industries stop competing for your pennies and start competing for the billions
at the top. The economy shifts its resources entirely toward:
1. Luxury production: Yachts, mansions, private security, and high-end tech.
2. Asset hoarding: Buying up all the land, housing, and resources, and renting them back to the impoverished workers.

Mass-market products don't become "cheaper" to match your crashed wages; they just become lower quality, while basic needs like housing remain as expensive as possible, because you must have them to survive.

So, this completely contradicts your economic arguments, but it doesn't contradict your personal opinions.

IF you are actually perfectly fine with a system where a handful of billionaires exploit the rest of humanity like modern-day slaves, just say so.
Stop trying to twist the laws of economics to justify it. Once you admit that,
we can finally have a discussion about what this is really about: why on earth
do you want a world like that?

The average property tax in the US:

"The average effective property tax rate in the United States is approximately 0.8%
to 1.1% of a home's assessed or market value (with a national median rate hovering around 0.9% to 1.02%)"

Funny how you switched an uncommented image with the quote
"Normality is a paved road: It’s comfortable to walk, but no flowers grow",
that was attributed to Vincent van Gogh in your picture, to your Zionist propaganda.

Funny and a good trick. A RAT MOVE, but you tricked me.
It just shows that you cannot be trusted on ANYTHING.

I’m actually quite flattered that you want to honor our respected Dutch artist
with this beautiful quote! However, I have to correct you: Van Gogh unfortunately
never said or wrote this.

The misconception started around 2009, when a museum in Basel used this phrase
on the flap jacket of a Van Gogh exhibition catalog without a proper source. The internet did the rest, permanently gluing his name to it. In reality, the metaphor is much closer
to a line from the 19th-century French writer Émile Zola.

The underlying sentiment does resonate with my philosophy on life. For me, walking off the paved road means refusing to adopt off-the-shelf opinions or blindly follow a crowd.
My views and thoughts are entirely my own, shaped by careful reflection rather than consensus. It requires independent thought, but I can highly recommend it.

Wow, Donald Trump’s new White House press secretary,
Katie Zacharia, really is the craziest deranged cretin,
of the whole line of bodged Barbie clones, I have ever seen.

only registered users can see external links

only registered users can see external links

only registered users can see external links

only registered users can see external links

only registered users can see external links

The Vatican? Who is talking about the Vatican?

Anyway, since you have no counter arguments, that settles it.

Character attacks are your only 'argument', bozo.

The judge’s political background is a cheap political talking point, not a legal defense. Under the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant is trash unless there is actual probable cause of a live, unexpired crime. Signing off as a registered Democrat means nothing.

For all we know, this Hillary Clinton donor is a corporate, centrist Democrat, a faction that despises progressives like Ilhan Omar just as much as any Republican does. Judges make errors and get misled by ambitious prosecutors all the time. Since the affidavit is sealed, this article has zero facts and relies entirely on political spin to ignore constitutional law.

"The director of the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library noted that they originally listed 1981 simply because it was "widely available" on Wikipedia at the time, and they had published the date without official documentation."

Even IF she did become a citizen with false papers, the statute of limitations for that is 5 to 10 years. That means that a judge cannot legally issue a search warrant, because the only underlying crime is entirely expired.

If she did that, she could loose her citizenship, but that would be a civil lawsuit,
not a criminal lawsuit. A judge is ONLY allowed to issue a search warrant for that, if prosecutors can convince the judge that a live, unexpired crime is actively occurring. You only have presented a weak case for an expired crime from 26 years ago.

Even IF they have probable cause for this, the judge has still broken the law by issuing this search warrant. The official process is that the Department of Justice (DOJ) must file a civil lawsuit against her in a US District Court. The government faces an exceptionally high evidentiary bar. Under Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 340(a), they must present "clear, convincing, and unequivocal" evidence that citizenship was obtained illegally, or via the concealment of a material fact or willful misrepresentation. A federal judge, not an immigration agency, must evaluate the evidence and make the final ruling. If the judge rules in favor of the government, the individual's naturalization is revoked, usually reverting their status back to a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) or making them subject to deportation proceedings.

If the judge broke the law by signing the search warrant without a valid, unexpired criminal basis, the government would have severely damaged, if not completely destroyed, their criminal case against her. In an unlawful search, the "exclusionary rule" applies. Any evidence obtained during an illegal search, including the physical boxes of documents agents removed from her home on October 12, 2026, becomes completely inadmissible in court. If the government's primary evidence is thrown out, prosecutors usually have to drop the charges because they no longer have a case.

No, because the wealthy would own everything and would
only allow you the absolute minimum you need to survive.
Do you know anything about the time of lords and serfs?

You claim Europe is 'destroyed,' yet European countries consistently rank highest globally for quality of life, healthcare, and safety.

You claim Europe didn't help Ukraine or support a ceasefire, when Europe has given tens of billions in military aid to Ukraine and European leaders have repeatedly negotiated for peace and hostages.

You claim Trump tried to 'protect the people of Europe,' but your clown is actively frustrating the resistance to Russia, by bowing to Putin's wishes and buying diesel from him. You are literally funding the adversary you claim to oppose.

We had the Iran nuclear threat completely covered and locked down. Your 90% panic is just repeating the most obvious Netanyahu lie ever invented. Trump is the one who unilaterally destroyed the deal, and now your clown expects us to jump into his stupid war just to distract people from his massive failures at home.

Trump has achieved absolutely NOTHING. Iran completely embarrassed him.
The very citizens he claimed he wanted to 'liberate', now hate the US even more.
His reckless approach left the world with zero guarantees that Iran won't or can't build nuclear weapons, while his 'genius' strategy only succeeded in pushing them straight into a tighter cooperation with China and Russia.

Trump acts like he can just demand a 'better deal' whenever he wants, but why
would they ever trust the paper the US signs again? The US showed the world it is completely untrustworthy and backward. Europe is now the only one left to clean up his mess and drive actual diplomacy.

Your claim that 'the Euro created a monopoly' makes no sense either, a currency
isn't a business, it's a medium of exchange. It is economically illiterate to call a
shared currency a monopoly.

You claim Putin wants 'communism' back, showing you don't even know what communism is, Putin is an ultra-capitalist oligarch, not a Soviet Marxist.

As for the 'communist totality' in the US, you are cheering for a leader who openly talks about being a dictator on day one, suspending parts of the Constitution, and using the military against American citizens. You are terrified of a fictional globalist boogeyman, while actively begging for actual authoritarian rule at home. Wake up!

Oh, so the fact that he signed off on warrants is proof
that the judge determined probable cause.
THAT HOLDS TRUE IN EVERY CASE AGAINST TRUMP TOO, I ASSUME.
DUMBASS!!!

French workers DO work, and when they do, they invest their time, health, and labor into the economy. That is their investment. Why should corporate elites be entitled to record profits off that labor, while the workers are 'entitled to nothing'?
You're literally bragging about your own exploitation.

If everyone had your submissive mindset, we’d still be working 16-hour days
in coal mines for pennies.