Biden Cartel Censorship Commentary Corruption COVID Links from other news sources. Medicine Science

What’s this tell us? Last year 17% of the population got the jab. This year so far 7%

Visits: 31

What’s this tell us? Last year 17% of the population got the jab. This year so far 7%. So Reuters is reporting. I actually thought that last years numbers were much higher. It’s obvious that a lot changed after Musk bought Twitter and we found out how the administration was asking the social media to lie for them.

U.S. public health officials have been optimistic that Americans will get the new vaccines and have recommended that everyone ages 6 months and older receive one.

But demand has dropped sharply since 2021, when the shots were first introduced at the height of the pandemic.

About 17% of the U.S. population, or 56.5 million people, ultimately received last year’s version of the vaccines.


Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Censorship Commentary Corruption Government Overreach How sick is this? Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

New evidence may destroy Biden’s defense in his classified documents case.

Visits: 20

New evidence may destroy Biden’s defense in his classified documents case.

This month, the sudden appearance of Special Counsel Robert Hur caused as much of a stir as Bigfoot suddenly appearing on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Unlike his counterpart, Special Counsel Jack Smith, who has been aggressively prosecuting former president Donald Trump, Hur has virtually disappeared since his appointment to investigate President Joe Biden. Hur surfaced to interview Biden over his possession of classified documents, including some that go back to his time as a U.S. senator.

I have referred to Hur as a “neutron prosecutor” — a special counsel with no possible charge, under Justice Department policy barring the indictment of a sitting president. If that was not enough of a problem, Hur may have growing evidence that accounts offered by the White House over the discovery of the documents are false.

The new evidence could prove transformative, not only for the criminal but the impeachment investigation of the president.

This week, the House Oversight Committee released a new timeline on the discovery of classified documents in various locations associated with Biden. From the outset, many of us flagged problems with the account that had been given by Biden, who insisted that he had no knowledge or involvement in the removal or use of the documents.

The most glaring problem is that, after they were removed at the end of his term as vice president, the documents were repeatedly moved and divided up. Some were found in the Penn Center office used by Biden in Washington, D.C. Others were found in his garage and reportedly in his library.

Biden made clear from the beginning that he expected the investigation to be perfunctory and brief. He publicly declared that he has “no regrets” over his own conduct and told the public that the documents investigation would soon peter out when it determined that “there is no ‘there’ there.”

Now, however, it appears that a critical claim by the White House in the scandal may not only be false, but was knowingly false at the time it was made. The White House and Biden’s counsel have long maintained that, as soon as documents were discovered in the D.C. office, they notified the national archives. Many asked why they did not call the FBI, but the White House has at least maintained that, unlike Trump, they took immediate action to notify authorities.

However, it now appears that this was not true. One of the closest aides to Biden and a close friend to Hunter Biden is Annie Tomasini. She referred to Hunter as her “brother” and signed off messages with “LY” or “love you.”

Tomasini was once a senior aide to Joe Biden and, according to the Oversight Committee, inspected the classified material on March 18, 2021, two months after Biden took office — nearly 20 months before they were said to be found by the Biden team.

The committee now alleges that the White House “omitted months of communications, planning, and coordinating among multiple White House officials, [Kathy] Chung, Penn Biden Center employees, and President Biden’s personal attorneys to retrieve the boxes containing classified materials. The timeline also omitted multiple visits from at least five White House employees, including Dana Remus, Anthony Bernal, Ashley Williams, Annie Tomasini, and an unknown staffer.”

If true, the evidence demolishes the timeline long maintained by the Biden team. That could have an immediate impact on both the criminal and impeachment investigations.

The timeline has been a critical distinction drawn by the White House in distinguishing this matter from the Trump indictment, in which Smith charged the former president with 37 counts, including retaining classified information, obstructing justice and making false statements, and other charges.

Biden insisted that he was entirely “surprised” by the discovery of the documents in Nov. 2021. He echoed the narrative of both his lawyers and the media at large: “And they did what they should have done,” he said. “They immediately called the Archives — immediately called the Archives, turned them over to the Archives, and I was briefed about this discovery.”

In reality, Biden’s counsel and associates conducted repeated searches and declared repeatedly that no further classified documents were found. That was repeatedly found to be untrue.

Moreover, the concern is that Biden’s lawyers, in the course of these private searches, may have consolidated material and contaminated the scene by the time FBI agents conducted their searches. This includes changing how documents were originally stored and whether classified markings were visible to anyone working around the Biden home or garage.

Now it appears that the discovery had actually been made months earlier. The timeline would now more closely mirror Trump’s timeline in the knowing retention of classified material, the failure to turn over all of the classified material despite assurances from counsel, and alleged false accounts about the document’s discovery.

It is not clear what Hur can do if he finds either from witnesses or forensic testing (including perhaps fingerprints on the documents) that President Biden lied.

I have long disagreed with the policy that the Justice Department has long held, that prosecutors should not indict a sitting president. Were he to seek an indictment, Hur would have to ask for reconsideration of the policy based on a decades-old memo issued by the Office of Legal Counsel under President Bill Clinton, who at the time faced calls for an indictment for perjury.

The DOJ policy will also put pressure on the House in its ongoing impeachment inquiry. In my recent testimony at the first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing, I mapped out four possible articles of impeachment. They included obstruction and abuse of power.

If this new timeline is accurate, the question is whether Biden knew that the account being put forward by his staff and counsel was false. It also raises the question of whether the president knowingly possessed classified documents and lied about their removal, use, and discovery. Finally, if Biden repeated his public denials to Hur, there could be added allegations of false statements to federal investigators, another commonly-charged federal crime.

We still have to see if there is evidence to support such crimes, but what is clear is that the past narrative may no longer suffice.

In his press conference announcing the criminal charges against Trump, Smith declared, “We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone….Nothing more, nothing less.”

The question for Hur is whether they can also apply to a sitting president. Likewise, if these allegations are true and Biden knowingly committed these crimes, the question for Congress could be whether he should remain as president.

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.


Biden Cartel Censorship Commentary Corruption Links from other news sources. Media Woke Opinion Politics

Winning. MSNBC loses 33% of their audience first week of Hamas attack on Israel.

Visits: 13

Winning. MSNBC loses 33% of their audience first week of Hamas attack on Israel. Some on MSNBC decided to take Hamas’s side on the attack of Israel. Well the first weeks numbers are in and it wasn’t pretty.

They lost 33% of their prime time viewers. FOX grew 42% and even CNN gained 17%.


Woke MSNBC DESTROYED! Loses 33% of viewers for WOKE coverage of Israel Hamas war! – YouTube

MSNBC Down, Fox News and CNN Up in Ratings Since Start of Israel-Hamas War (


NewsNation host and Mediaite owner Dan Abrams slammed the network for its coverage, accusing hosts Ayman MohyeldinMehdi Hasan, and Ali Velshi of turning the blame on the political decisions of Israel and the United States and shifting the focus on to Palestinians, away from the Israelis victimized by Hamas.

Meanwhile, NewsNation saw its ratings increase by 48 percent.

On Monday, Jonathan Greenblatt, the director of the Anti-Defamation League, appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe and lambasted the network on camera, unloading on anchor Jonathan Lemire over the coverage and asking “[W]ho’s writing the scripts? Hamas?”


Censorship How funny is this? Leftist Virtue(!) Stupid things people say or do. Un documented. WOKE

“You Can’t Say That!”: 18 Time-Honored Sayings Woke Culture Wants to Erase from History

Visits: 69

Story by Elliot Peters for Man and Home 10-11-23

Wokism: A growing cultural consciousness that makes us think twice before using certain phrases. Our words shape our world, and while some old-school sayings might bring nostalgia, they can also encourage outdated or offensive views. So, let’s walk down memory lane and explore how some classic expressions have been reshaped – for better or for worse!

Hitting a Blind Spot and Not Just on the Road.

People often used the term “blind spot” in driving jargon, indicating that little area that mirrors just couldn’t capture. But when used metaphorically, it raised eyebrows. Connecting “blind” to “ignorance” can offend the visually impaired community. As society becomes more conscious of such subtleties, shifting from potentially insensitive idioms becomes key.

(Raises WHOSE eyebrows? I’m “visually impaired,” and I don’t have a problem with it,)

Indian Giver Is More Than Just a Take-Back

The term “Indian Giver” paints a misleading image of Native Americans, suggesting a tendency to retract gifts. Given the profound respect Native Americans have for giving and community, this phrase is a glaring misrepresentation. Today’s informed society is moving away from such misnomers, embracing accuracy and respect.

(Again, I have to take issue with this reasoning, since anyone with the least bit of American History know that the term at its core refers to Americans (usually the government) who gave Natives things then took them back. Every single Treaty the US Government made, they broke.)


While “addict” may have been tossed around easily in the past, it’s a narrow lens to view someone through. Addiction is a complex issue, and pigeonholing someone’s identity based solely on it is reductive. So, the world now leans towards more empathetic terms like “person with an addiction,” which better reflects the reality of the situation.

(Another indication of wanting to use more words to obscure a simple fact, like changing “homeless person” or” the homeless” to “person experiencing homelessness.” Seriously, are they going to start referring to abandoned or feral cats as “Felines experiencing homelessness” next?)

Lame Language? Time for an Upgrade!

Once, we wouldn’t think twice before labeling that less-than-thrilling movie as “lame.” But did you know this term originally described those with physical challenges? It’s high time we jazz up our vocabulary, don’t you think? There’s a whole world of words out there, from “mundane” to “uninspiring,” waiting to be used.


Man Up? Let’s Think Bigger!

“Man up” – it might’ve been your coach’s favorite pep talk. Yet, it subtly hints that bravery is a man’s game. Newsflash! With our evolving understanding of gender fluidity and emotional strength, shouldn’t our idioms grow, too? Bravery isn’t just for one of the genders. Let’s cheer each other on in more inclusive ways.

(Yeah, let’s bring in woke concepts like “gender fluidity” instead.)

Decoding the Policeman Conundrum

In the past, “Hurry up! Get the policeman!” was a staple line from the movies. But with the increasing number of dedicated women in blue, that phrase can feel out of place, right? The term “police officer” bridges this gap. It’s unbiased, forward-thinking, and gives a nod of respect to every individual serving in the force, irrespective of their gender.

(Using “police officer” is okay, but again the ‘logic’ is misleading You’re much more likely to have heard “Call the Cops!” or “Call the police!” than “Hurry up! Get the policeman!” )

Hey, Guys! Or is it… Everyone?

Who hasn’t just called out, “Hey, guys!” upon entering a gathering? It was the ultimate casual greeting. However, on closer examination, “guys” might be boxing us into gender corners. With society’s expanding views on gender and inclusivity, it’s about time our everyday greetings got an upgrade. “Hello, folks” or “Hey, crew” has a fresh, inclusive ring to it, right?

(Oh, dear! “gender AND inclusivity?” What a crock!)

Don’t Be So Hysterical

Using “hysterical” to describe something extremely funny or exaggerated became second nature for many. However, a peek into the past reveals its association with women, suggesting an exaggerated emotional state. In our journey towards embracing gender fairness and shedding stereotypes, sidelining such terms feels right.

(Feels trump everything, right?”

Grandfathered Is a Term with Deep Roots .

On the surface, “grandfathered” shows a sense of legacy and timelessness. However, its historical roots connect it to policies that, unfortunately, sidelined Black communities during the post-Civil War period. As conversations around racial justice become louder, reassessing and recontextualizing some of our age-old terms seems the best option.

(What juvenile BS!)

Real Man, Real Woman? Let’s Rethink That! .

Ever wondered who came up with the criteria for a “real” man or woman? These phrases press people into molds they may not fit into. Instead of sticking to narrow definitions, it’s high time we acknowledged and celebrated every person’s individuality. After all, every person’s journey and identity are real and valid, regardless of societal expectations.

(I can’t decide whether the OP is being satirical or serious. For 99% of humans you’re either XX -female- or XY -male- and surgical mutilation does not change that. [I’m excluding the extremely rare hermaphrodites.)

Mastering a New Bedroom Terminology

Historically, the term “Master bedroom” sounded fancy. But dig a little deeper, and you uncover undertones of slavery and hierarchical dominance. As societies become more conscious and sensitive, many advocate for a terminology shift. “Primary bedroom” or “main suite” not only sounds contemporary but also lacks the baggage of the past.

(More regurgitated crap. Some snowflake’s feels might get hurt.)

Seeing Beyond ‘Colorblind’

In the past, proclaiming, “I’m colorblind” was a well-intended remark to show you were impartial about race. However, in today’s more nuanced world, this phrase might be seen as a way to gloss over individual racial experiences and challenges. It’s not about being blind to color but understanding and appreciating the stories each color tells.

(This stupidity needs no further comment.)

From Mankind to Humankind: An Inclusive Shift.

Once upon a time, “mankind” was a common phrase, representing all of humanity. But as our understanding of gender becomes more sophisticated and inclusive, this term feels a tad exclusive. The shift towards “humankind” is more than just linguistic. It’s a nod towards a future where everyone feels seen and acknowledged.

(There’s already a term for that: HUMANITY, FFS.)

The Whitelist Conundrum.

The term “Whitelist” was traditionally used to describe approved or safe items. However, against a backdrop of racial sensitivities, words that unconsciously encourage color biases are being reevaluated. So, it’s no surprise that “allow list” is gaining traction, emphasizing function over potentially problematic connotations.

(Has anyone ever seen “allow list” before? Or “disallow list”?)

Steering Clear of ‘Gyp’

To “gyp” someone out of something meant that you deceived them. But what many might not realize is that it’s rooted in stereotypes against the Romani people. With a broader understanding of cultural sensitivities, it’s only right that we retire such phrases and opt for words that don’t allow for such biases.

(This one I can agree with, but what’s next? Eliminate “con” because it offends people convicted of a crime?)

Humanizing Undocumented Individuals

Terms matter, especially when they concern human beings. Labeling someone as an “illegal alien” feels cold and strips them of their humanity. As conversations around immigration grow more compassionate, “undocumented individuals” emerges as a term that’s both accurate and respectful.

(They’re still here illegally, bunky.)

I’ can’t hear you! Nah nah nah nah nah I can’t hear you!

The ‘Crazy’ and ‘Insane’ Evolution

Calling an unexpected event “crazy” or “insane” was commonplace. But as society becomes more aware of the realities and challenges of mental health, such casual use can feel dismissive. When used out of context, these terms can trivialize genuine mental health issues. It reflects a society that’s growing more empathetic by the day.

(So, calling the Hamas 2023 mass murders “Insane” is inaccurate?)

Moving Away from Troubled Waters

Historically, the expression “sold down the river” was used casually to indicate betrayal. However, its origins trace back to the dark times of American slavery, where slaves were often literally sold down the Mississippi River. Today, with an emphasis on sensitivity and historical accuracy, it’s better to opt for alternatives like “betrayed” or “deceived.”

(Uhm, historically, it would have been UP the Mississippi. New Orleans was the port of entry, not someplace in Iowa or Illinois. Yet another woke distortion.)

As I said above, I’m not sure if the OP is being satirical or serious. Unfortunately, I think he’s serious.


Biden Cartel Biden Pandemic Censorship Corruption COVID Links from other news sources. Medicine Science

How do you defeat COVID misinformation from the left? You take them to court.

Visits: 24

How do you defeat COVID misinformation from the left? You take them to court. It started back in 2020. Between March 2020 and July 2022, there were more than 1,000 court rulings on challenges to government orders and regulations designed to control the spread of Covid, according to Public Health Law Watch.

This from Politico.

Early in the pandemic, the Supreme Court blocked California and New York’s restrictions on religious gatherings to reduce Covid-19 transmission, as well as the CDC’s moratorium on evictions. In 2022, it stayed OSHA’s order that large companies require employees to be vaccinated or regularly tested for the virus. Federal courts have ruled against Biden’s Covid-19 vaccine requirement for federal employees and stopped the CDC’s mask mandate on public transportation. On March 31, a federal judge in Texas struck down the administration’s requirement that employees of Head Start programs be vaccinated.


But not just any court. Medical freedom activists have already started enjoying some successes in front of conservative judges. At the local level, several have sided with plaintiffs who’ve sued hospitals for refusing to give patients ivermectin. But it’s been on the federal level, with Trump-appointed judges, where they’ve enjoyed some of their most significant successes. In 2021, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the Biden administration over a proposed policy that would have required Covid vaccinations for all Head Start employees. In March 2023, Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas, a Trump appointee, struck down the proposed policy. In January 2022, a group of government workers sued the Biden Administration over the president’s vaccination requirements for all federal employees; in 2022, Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown, whom Trump appointed in 2019, ruled in their favor. That ruling was briefly overturned, but in 2023, the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld it; the opinion was written by Trump appointee Judge Andrew Oldham.

In August 2022, a group of physicians sued the Biden Administration over its efforts to hold social media companies accountable for platforming physicians who spread misinformation about Covid. The plaintiffs, two of whom created the 2020 Great Barrington Declaration to oppose pandemic protections, accused the federal government of violating their First Amendment rights. “The US government used its vast power over social media and big tech to censor legitimate scientific and policy discussion about Covid during the pandemic,” Jay Bhattacharya wrote in a statement. That case is still ongoing, but in March, Trump-appointed judge Terry Doughty, in the Western District of Louisiana, denied a motion to dismiss it.



America's Heartland Back Door Power Grab Censorship Child Abuse Commentary Corruption Crime Education Government Overreach Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. The Courts The Law Transgender

Winning. Wisconsin mother hopeful after court ruling in favor of parents’ rights to know about child’s transition.

Visits: 13

Winning. Wisconsin mother hopeful after court ruling in favor of parents’ rights to know about child’s transition. So here’s another case of where a school felt that they knew what’s best for a child when it comes to their gender.

Parents sued the Kettle Moraine School District outside Milwaukee, Wisconsin, over its policy that enabled and supported students’ transitions to different gender identities at school without informing or receiving consent from a child’s parents.

Judge Michael Maxwell ruled in the Waukesha County Circuit Court that the policy “violates parents’ constitutional right to determine the appropriate medical and healthcare for their children.” Going forward, the judge said the district is no longer permitted to allow or require “staff to refer to students using a name or pronouns at odds with the student’s biological sex, while at school, without express parental consent.”


Biden Cartel Black Supremacy Censorship Commentary Economy Education Elections Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

Trump, Kennedy, and Biden. The Black vote.

Visits: 17

Trump, Kennedy, and Biden. The Black vote.

By Tom Tillison

Fox News host Jesse Watters stated the obvious on Monday’s edition of “The Five,” which is that Donald Trump “is not winning the black vote.”

The popular show’s quintet was discussing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. potentially being a spoiler candidate by running as an independent when Watters opined on who would be hurt more.

“It hurts Biden more than it hurts Trump,” he said. “I looked at some videos for the RFK rallies. You will not see Trump-looking voters at RFK rallies. It is college students and Black Americans. OK? That’s not what I’d consider the Trump base, OK?”

Cohost Jessica Tarlov, the token liberal at the table, chimed in: “At least you’re admitting now that black people don’t like Donald Trump.”

“I’m talking demographically, Jessica. Or did that go over your head?” Watters countered. “Trust me, they don’t vote for Trump, they vote for Democrats.”

“I thought they voted for Trump in bigger numbers than any prior candidate. He keeps banking on the fact that he’ll get more and more black voters,” cohost Martha MacCallum interjected.

“Trump is not winning the black vote!” Watters insisted. “He’ll do better than last time. But when you see a crowd of black people and a crowd of college students, you do not say, ‘That is a Trump rally!’ I mean, come on, people! Are we stupid here? Are we Jamaal Bowman here? What’s going on?”

(U.S. Rep. Jamaal Bowman is the Democratic lawmaker from New York who claimed he pulled a fire alarm because he thought it would open a locked door.)

Watters proceeded to paint a hypothetical involving northeastern voters.

“Let’s just say New Hampshire — critical vote electorally. You see Trump’s name, you see Biden’s name and you see Kennedy,” he explained. “Kennedy is synonymous with Democrat. Everybody in New Hampshire used to live in Massachusetts. They’re all Boston transplants. This guy has Boston coming out of his pores.”

“Who has a firmer grip on their base? Joe Biden or Donald Trump? Donald Trump does. Donald Trump absolutely does,” Watters continued. “Have you ever met a Trump voter that’s like, ‘You know what, I’m really considering voting for Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, who, if you go on his website, wants to stop mining, logging, and oil exploration. If you go on his website, RFK Jr., who I like, also wants government-run daycare. He is pro-choice! I’m not saying Trump people wouldn’t consider voting for him. I’m saying, overwhelmingly, this pulls from Biden.”

Jesse Watters: ‘Trump is not winning the black vote’ (


Biden Cartel Biden Pandemic Censorship Commentary COVID Faked news Government Overreach Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Medicine Reprints from others. Science The Courts The Law

Newsom repeals CA law that ‘censored’ doctors giving COVID-19 care.

Visits: 11

Newsom repeals CA law that ‘censored’ doctors giving COVID-19 care.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to repeal a Democrat-backed initiative that guided how medical professionals could talk about the coronavirus to avoid what one critic called “humiliation” in court.

California Assembly Bill (AB) 2098, passed in September 2022, authorized the revocation of the licenses of any medical professional if they “disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”

A group of doctors, represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), sued Newsom and the state in court, leading to a judge imposing a preliminary injunction in the case.

NCLA says Newsom and Democrats saw “the writing on the wall,” and moved to repeal the law.


California Gov. Gavin Newsom

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has been the subject of criticism from both sides of the aisle for his handling of the pandemic. (MediaNews Group/East Bay Times via Getty Images)

“Governor Newsom and the state legislature saw the writing on the wall after Judge Shubb’s grant of a preliminary injunction in January,” said Jenin Younes, counsel at NCLA.

“Rather than suffer further humiliation in federal court, and implicitly conceding the unconstitutionality of AB 2098, the State of California has taken the unusual step of repealing a law that hasn’t even been in effect for a year,” said Younes, calling the repeal “a significant victory.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, while imposing strict social distancing and mask mandates statewide, was on multiple occasions caught violating his own rules. (AP Photo/José Luis Villegas, File)

Greg Dolin, a senior litigator at NCLA, said it was “sad that it took a full year and a federal court ruling to reaffirm a 250-year-old fundamental truth — in this country, ‘no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in… matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.'”

NCLA said that the law violated the doctors’ First Amendment rights to free speech and their 14th Amendment rights to due process of law.

“It interfered with the ability of doctors and their patients to freely communicate, serving as a weapon to intimidate and punish doctors who dissented from mainstream views,” the group said.

According to NCLA, physicians and individuals on social media threatened several of the group’s clients with using AB 2098 to take their licenses away, which they claimed was evidence that the law’s insidious intent was always to silence doctors who depart from state orthodoxy on COVID-19.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and family

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, accompanied by his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom and their children, delivers remarks after winning his second term in office in Sacramento, California, on Nov. 8, 2022. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)

Newsom has been the subject of criticism from both sides of the aisle for his handling of the pandemic, which mounted to an unsuccessful bid to have him recalled.

Newsom, while imposing strict social distancing and mask mandates statewide, was on multiple occasions caught violating his own rules. In 2020, he was spotted at the French Laundry restaurant in Napa Valley socializing with a large group of people from outside his household while not wearing a mask.

Last year, Newsom and other Democratic California leaders were spotted maskless at a San Francisco 49ers-Los Angeles Rams game despite the state’s universal indoor mask mandate.

A representative for Newsom did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.


Biden Cartel Censorship Commentary Corruption Faked news Government Overreach Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. MSM Opinion Politics Social Venues-Twitter White Progressive Supremacy WOKE

Joey Boy is upset that X is now allowing Conservative and real doctors to post facts.

Visits: 27

Joey Boy is upset that X is now allowing Conservative and real doctors to post facts.John Hardwood interviewed Biden and as usual Joe told one falsehood after another. But what I found interesting was his bull about X since Musk bought them.

Before Musk when it was Twitter, one lie after another from the cultists on the left was allowed to go unchallenged.

After the purchase, more Conservatives were able to voice their opinion and use facts instead of MSM talking points.

We also got shown the proof where real doctors were shadow banned or outright banned. Plus Musk revealed how the Biden administration cabinet members were asking for Conservative thought to be deleted. Biden is now upset because those on the left are finally getting the truth.………


Biden Cartel Biden Pandemic Censorship Commentary Corruption COVID Crime Faked news Government Overreach Links from other news sources.

Joey Boy loses it again cause folks don’t believe the latest jab info.

Visits: 19

Joey Boy loses it again cause folks don’t believe the latest jab info. I guess he was in San Francisco crying about folks saying no to another jab. At least folks who did the research.

He wants more money from the government to go to private research for science. I think they’re doing just fine without government strings attached.


Verified by MonsterInsights