What happens when you don’t do your job? Fired.
A security guard who’s job was to work the entrance of a store left his post to video ICE agents arresting an illegal. Left not once, but twice. Below is his termination letter.
Category: Poetic Justice
Another good shoot. Man trying to hijack a car. Off duty deputy responds.
In a Houston suburb, a man allegedly tried to hijack a car. ABC 13 noted that “the deputy had just placed his young child in a car seat in the back of a pickup truck when the suspect approached and attempted to enter the passenger’s side of the vehicle.”
The deputy then opened fire after fearing for the life of his child. All ends well. Suspect is dead.
Pass it on.
Trump and Vance take to Bluesky.
For those who don’t know, it’s a mostly white progressive supremacist copycat of X (twitter). Many who post there are X rejects who are banned or folks who wore out their welcome. Some Conservatives, and yes I do post our articles there.
The White House officially joined the liberal-leaning social media platform Bluesky on Friday with a gleeful post of President Donald Trump’s “greatest hits.”
In its first post, the Trump administration appeared to poke fun at the platform’s liberal users, many of whom joined the site to escape conservative voices. Many once-prominent users of Twitter, now known as X since Elon Musk bought it, solely post on Bluesky.
“What’s up, Bluesky? We thought you might’ve missed some of our greatest hits, so we put this together for you,” the post read, featuring a reel of the administration’s top-performing memes.
Pass it on.
Short and sweet. Trump supporter wins Nobel Peace Prize.
Who would have thought that we had a MAGA Trump supporter in Venezuela? Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, awarded with the Nobel Peace Price on Friday morning. Machado dedicated her award to the people of Venezuela and to President Donald Trump for his “decisive” support of the Venezuelan cause.
Pass it on.
Sorry Virginia, what you call paybacks I call Justice being served.
The fanatics on the left are crying about what’s happening in the courts and how the DOJ is being used. They claim paybacks. So if that’s the case, does that mean you acknowledge that you did wrong?
What did the left do? Let’s use James as an example. Targeted Prosecution, use a victimless crime, storming Mar-aLargo, Secret White House meetings with Biden lawyers, using a criminal trial for a civil court, Election interference, etc., etc.
Pass it on.
Santa Claus came early for Newsmax as ratings for Tuesday showed Newsmax beat competitor CNN for four consecutive hours.
On Christmas Eve Nielsen reported Newsmax scored decisive wins against CNN from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. ET.
Newsmax shows went head-to-head with CNN and their special holiday programming winning each time in “P2” or total audience for all viewers.
Here were Tuesday’s Nielsen’s:
- 4 p.m. ET: Newsmax’s “Chris Salcedo Show” drew 321,000 viewers to CNN’s 296,000.
- 5 p.m. ET: “Carl Higbie FRONTLINE” with Lidia Curanaj substituting drew 324,000 viewers to CNN’s 251,000.
- 6 p.m. ET: “Greta Van Susteren’s Christmas Special” drew 234,000 viewers to CNN’s 191,000.
- 7 p.m. ET: “Rob Schmitt Tonight” with Bob Brooks substituting drew 297,000 viewers to CNN’s 205,000.
The recent Newsmax ratings wins are not unusual.
“Rob Schmitt Tonight” has been winning against CNN during prime access regularly, with other Newsmax shows winning or coming close.
CNN is in about 10 million more homes than Newsmax, making the network ratings wins even more impressive on a proportionate basis.
Nielsen said Newsmax’s audience Tuesday in prime access was so large it beat the combined ratings of Fox Business, CNBC, and liberal NewsNation.
Newsmax continues to take a big chunk of Fox News’ audience, pulling nearly 20% of the network’s total audience number for total day.
Between its non-rated streaming channel, N2, and its cable channel, Newsmax estimates it draws about 30% of Fox’s total audience.
“Newsmax had a remarkable ratings year in 2024 and we’re excited about 2025,” Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy said.
In June, the Reuters Institute said Newsmax was one of the top 12 U.S. news brands.
And a recent Pew study found Newsmax was a top source of news for Americans during the 2024 election, ranking with CBS, NBC, The New York Times, AP, and X, among others.
Pass it on.
Karma’s a B*tch, Ain’t It, Fani?
A Georgia appeals court has disqualified Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from her election-related criminal case against President-elect Donald Trump, although the indictment still stands.
Willis’s office charged Trump and his codefendants in 2023 for what they alleged was a scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia illegally. They pleaded not guilty.
However, Willis’s case hit a snag in early 2024 after it was revealed that she had a romantic relationship with the case’s then-special prosecutor, Nathan Wade. A Fulton County judge in March ruled that Willis could remain as prosecutor if Wade resigned, which he later did.
Trump and multiple codefendants appealed the judge’s decision to the Georgia Court of Appeals, which rendered its decision on Willis Thursday morning.
“After carefully considering the trial court’s findings in its order, we conclude that it erred by failing to disqualify DA Willis and her office,” the Georgia Court of Appeals’s majority wrote in its decision.
The court added that a “remedy crafted by the trial court to prevent an ongoing appearance of impropriety did nothing to address the appearance of impropriety that existed at times when DA Willis was exercising her broad pretrial discretion about who to prosecute and what charges to bring.”
Earlier this year, Trump codefendant Michael Roman alleged in court papers that Willis and Wade were in a romantic relationship.
During a court hearing weeks later, both Wade and Willis admitted to being romantically involved, although the pair denied allegations that either of them benefited financially from the arrangement. They also disputed claims that their relationship started after Wade was hired as a special prosecutor and ended in the summer of 2023.
In rendering a decision to allow Willis to stay on the case, Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee wrote that an “odor of mendacity” persisted in light of the allegations against the district attorney and Wade.
McAfee also admonished Willis for the “unprofessional manner” in how she conducted herself during the evidentiary hearing and showed a “lapse in judgment.” He also chided her for what he described as racially charged statements she made at a church in Atlanta after Roman made the allegations against her.
However, the judge said he was not able to conclusively establish that there was a conflict of interest.
Throughout the court battle, Willis has defended her own conduct and Wade’s qualifications. During a CNN interview earlier this year, Willis said she believes the appeals court proceedings were only an attempt to slow down the case.
“I do think that there are efforts to slow down the train, but the train is coming,” Willis said at the time, adding that she does not believe her relationship with Wade impacted the case.
The case against Trump and the others, including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, had been stalled for months as the appeals court considered the Willis removal petition.
The ruling Thursday now means that the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia will have to find another prosecutor to take over the case and decide whether to pursue it, though that could be delayed if Willis appeals to higher courts.
It appears unlikely that prosecution against Trump will continue as he prepares to be president for the next four years. But 14 other defendants still face charges.
Prosecutors dropped two federal criminal cases against Trump since he won the presidency in November.
Meanwhile, a judge in New York has said he would not throw out Trump’s conviction in May on the case alleging 34 counts of falsifying business records, though the future of that case is uncertain.
Pass it on.
So who’s next? MSM in a panic over ABC CAVE IN?
Now that ABC and George settled, we’re hearing that MSM is going over all their Anchors comments about accusing Trump of crimes. CNN, and MSNBC most likely are the biggest worriers.
You can say nasty stuff and have 1st Amendment protection. But when you make false claims saying someone committed crimes and is a criminal, you are in very dangerous water.
Yes, calling someone a “criminal” without proof can be considered slander, as it is a false statement that could significantly damage their reputation and is generally considered a defamatory statement per se, meaning it is automatically harmful and does not require additional proof of damage to be actionable in court.
Key points to remember:
- Slander is spoken defamation:When a false statement damaging someone’s reputation is spoken, it is considered slander.
- Defamation per se:Certain types of statements, like accusing someone of committing a crime, are considered “defamation per se” because they are inherently harmful and do not require additional proof of damage.
- Proof required:To successfully sue for slander, you must prove that the statement was false, published to a third party, made with at least a negligent mental state, and caused actual harm to the person’s reputation.
Pass it on.
What happens when you mask up, and get six jabs? You get COVID again, again, and again. Tony the Fauch.
So after six jabs, and numerous times of masking up, what does the Fauch say you should do? Get jabbed again and continue to mask up.
Scientific evidence has shown that vaccinated people are contracting COVID far more often than those not vaccinated against the disease and make up the majority of COVID-19 deaths. Double and tripled-vaxxed individuals have the highest rate.
The good news? More and more parents aren’t vaccinating their children for COVID. If in our lifetime, there is another COVID type pandemic, let’s hope folks like Tony the Fauch aren’t used as a go to medical expert.
Pass it on.
Nothing about the vice president’s sudden elevation felt organic.
How ironic is it that the muscle of the Democratic party has turned on them?
Black Lives Matter, the insidious Marxist organization Democrats used to foment violence during the race-mongering madness of 2020, has issued a public objection to party leaders’ swift coronation of Vice President Kamala Harris as their 2024 presidential nominee.
“Following the primary where millions of black voters weighed in, after one poor debate performance, the DNC Party elites and billionaire donors bullied Joe Biden out of the race,” BLM said in a statement to Reuters.
Sunday on X, President Joe Biden (supposedly) announced that he would withdraw from the 2024 presidential race.
The announcement came under unusual and perhaps suspicious circumstances. Since his dreadful debate performance on June 27, Biden had faced mounting pressure to quit the race from fellow Democrats. He had refused.
Announcing the decision on X, where one might reasonably doubt that the octogenarian president has ever posted on his own behalf, only heightened suspicions of a Democratic Party coup.
For the past two days, Democrats — including Biden himself in a dubious endorsement made via speaker phone — have rallied around Harris. Still, nothing about the vice president’s sudden elevation has felt organic.
Notwithstanding these strange developments, Democrats have clearly tried to depict their party as united behind Harris.
BLM’s public objection, therefore, constitutes the first major internal demand that Democrats pump the brakes on the Harris 2024 train.
“We call for the Rules Committee to create a process that allows for public participation in the nomination process, not just a nomination by party delegates,” the BLM statement read.
Indeed, it appears that Democrats — the so-called “party of democracy” — have failed to pull the proverbial wool over BLM’s eyes.
“The current political landscape is unprecedented, with President Biden stepping aside in a manner never seen before. This moment calls for decisive action to protect the integrity of our democracy and the voices of black voters,” the statement said.
To its credit, BLM called out party leaders’ apparent coup against Biden.
“Now, Democratic Party elites and billionaire donors are attempting to manipulate black voters by anointing Kamala Harris and an unknown vice president as the new Democratic ticket without a primary vote by the public,” the statement continued.
Also to its credit, BLM appeared unmoved by the argument that race and gender should take precedence over other factors.
“We have no idea where Kamala Harris stands on the issues, now that she has assumed Joe Biden’s place, and we have no idea of the record of her potential vice president because we don’t even know who it is yet,” the statement read.
Apart from its nauseating emphasis on skin color, the BLM statement contained nothing to which reasonable Americans should object.
On balance, of course, BLM has not exactly earned the benefit of the doubt from conservative or right-leaning voters.
Perhaps, therefore, it is best to take direction from the late former President Herbert Hoover.
On Sept. 16, 1941 — nearly three months after Adolf Hitler stabbed fellow tyrant Joseph Stalin in the back by ordering German forces to attack the Soviet Union — Hoover urged his fellow Americans to stay out of the European conflict.
“The fratricidal war between Hitler and Stalin is daily weakening both dictators,” Hoover argued.
That pre-Pearl Harbor assessment from a former president contained wisdom applicable to present circumstances. And conservatives should heed that wisdom.
After all, if BLM launches a civil war against fellow tyrants in the Democratic Party leadership, then who could complain? In that case, conservatives must stand aside and allow the conflict to weaken everyone involved.
While it would be fun to see happen, more BLM/Antifa violence and destruction will simply cost all of us more money. –TPR
