nobody's_hero
Member

They'll release a headline and then on page six the next week they'll put a correction (if at all, usually not) in fine print. By then the damage is done.

I kinda agree though? TPTB would love an opportunity to re-do Jan 6th since it's becoming revealed that they blew it the first time. I'm starting to wonder if it isn't better to just let the dems keep throwing themselves against the wall. The MSM still has a bit way too much credibility (still the #1 threat to our freedom, IMO). I wouldn't protest this. I'd let the dems make fools of themselves (again) with another witch hunt, and then ask if people are ready to stop believing the news. (they won't be, but I doubt a protest would convince them otherwise anyway, protests are really only good for letting you know that you aren't alone (which is nice in itself, don't get me wrong), but it's pretty rare that they cause any real changes) You know what, I take it back. I don't agree with the premise that they want people to 'sit down and shut up'. I think they want to spark something so they can 'put the rabid dog down.' They need a Reichstag fire.

In my best TheTexan impersonation: He will be elected president again though, just to be clear on that.

I would say at the very least Tucker understands blowback with regard to foreign policy, which is probably more palatable than 'jet fuel can't melt steel'. You'll never get most people to agree that 9/11 was an inside job but you might at this point get many to agree that our government tends to swat at hornet nests until someone gets stung. (which is precisely what they're doing in Ukraine atm)

Well, we've made progress. Even theCount admits Trump is the president.

This goes here:

I mean it's still pretty evident that Fox has no qualms about quickly calling elections in favor of liberals. That probably pisses off Fox viewers more than anything else. And it's most likely because they would rather side with the leftist establishment, if it can in any way help preserve what's left of the right's establishment. Pick any issue of substance and Fox will fail you when it matters most. What's funny is that the leftists can't (or won't) differentiate between Tucker and the water-carrying neocons on Fox. They also intend to preserve the establishment if it means crushing alternative viewpoints (whether sincere or not). (which is why I wish the democrats wouldn't even comment on what goes on in the right, because basically their interference in the debate amounts to nothing more than "noise". Like, 'fk off, NPCs; trying to have an adult conversation here. Go play in the street or something.')

Saw it tagged on Greenwald's twitter feed. Greenwald seems to think it's sincere.

My mother has an account with Truist. I've been trying to get her to close her accounts and join a credit union for ages. When their predecessor Suntrust got a bailout in the '08 fiasco, that was when I joined a credit union. I told the associate at Suntrust (not that she had anything to do with it) that if they could get a bailout, then they obviously didn't need my deposits.

Well it wasn't Biden or Obama.

Thought this was kinda interesting today, while scrolling through GG's twitter feed: 1636473094830190593

I wonder who helped change it?

That's pretty awesome to watch I must admit. Here we are marking targets for Ukraine with our drones, and Russia is coming up with creative ways to try to take our drone down without using weapons. IMO Putin has shown incredible restraint in the face of NATO's antics. If he wanted to expand this war he's had numerous opportunities to do so.

Let's gooooooo! 1636010504719155200

I think you can edit your own titles if you click 'go advanced' when editing.

Might be about to find out the difference between two administrations handling the same situation here:

Pretty sure if you invest in whatever Pelosi is investing in, it won't fail. Just make sure you take the money out whenever she does also. It's like she has some sort of savvy crystal ball about what's gonna happen in the future. It's like the woman is some investment wizard or something, lol. /s

I saw that one and burst out laughing.

I think it's both. Sounds like they were kinda reckless with new-age get-rich-(and broke)-quick schemes like crypto but perhaps thought the bonds would give them flexibility. But somehow they had $15 billion in unrealized losses floating around.

Continued at link: https://mises.org/power-market/id-buy-dollar

Good 'ol Massie. Look at the 7 million views. 1635074378454147074

Michael Burry: 'We Found Our Enron' https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/big-short-michael-burry-warns-of-another-major-bank-collapse/ar-AA18wQF5?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=ba53b9b854774825812ffcc119e501bc&ei=60 1635065081263423488

If SVB is that solvent, wouldn't it be appetizing to someone else wanting to buy it out? Kinda like when the major mortgage lenders got propped up in 2008. (not exactly the same, but bear with me) When someone who fails gets propped up, doesn't it cause a missed opportunity for competitors who might have a had an opportunity to 'buy in'? I feel like we're dancing the 'too big to fail' dance again. Seems what we really mean is: 'too big to be bought out by a competitor who could manage things better.' And conversely, if SVB is just downright toxic and no one wants to buy it, that in itself is a red flag, and it makes you wonder if there shouldn't perhaps be more stipulations if a bank is going to be FDIC insured. If some yokel starts up a bank tomorrow does he just automatically get FDIC insured? (asking honestly, I don't know how it all works)

I think Trump had his reservations, but again, listened to the wrong people.

Maybe a drop in the bucket but seems there's been some wokety wokeness going on: 1634742388324470786 Not saying there's a direct correlation but. . . I dunno. Your job as a company executive is supposed to be making money. Not pushing a personal agenda. If I saw my bank doing this, I'd think they probably went for the 'inclusivity over competence' route, and my money would be withdrawn yesterday.

The Bidens have too much invested in Ukraine for that to happen I think.

agreed.

I'm content to let the dems go all-in on adopting marxist authoritarianism while conservatives continue to push the rockefeller low-carb liberals back to the left from whence they came. Let the dividing lines be drawn clearly. To fully succeed in that, we're going to need someone with the aggression of Trump and the principles of Ron Paul. Such a person has yet to surface.

Ah yeah I kinda just glanced at it. Brought to you by the people who think cow farts are going to destroy the planet. Thanks for saving me the time reading it in detail later.

I guess it really just depends on how close we are to nuclear annihilation next year. Trump's restraint has been tested, there's evidence that he can tell his generals 'no war today' (and they hate him for it), DeSantis on the other hand . . . Feels like we're pretty close now, though, with the fools they installed, so maybe it'll be a moot point next year. I do think that, regardless, if the democrats think they'll lose, they're going to provoke Russia more than Obama did in the interim between the 2016 election and inauguration day 2017. Probably try to spark off a war and let it land in whomever's lap that follows.